Jimmy Murwira
The recent uproar over alleged British interference in U.S. elections has revealed stark double standard by the West. While the U.S. expresses outrage at the perceived violations of its sovereignty, it has, for decades, engaged in political meddling in other nations, particularly in Africa, through organizations like the Carter Center, United States Agency for International Development (USAID),
National Democratic Institute (NDI), and a network of NGOs and civil society organizations (CSOs). The pattern reveals a consistent theme: what is unacceptable when directed at the U.S. is perfectly legitimate when applied to others.
Western nations, particularly the U.S. and its allies, have a history of active involvement in the political processes of other countries, often under the guise of promoting democracy. For decades, they have used various means, including financial aid, election monitoring, capacity-building for civil society, and even covert operations—to shape electoral outcomes in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and beyond. In Zimbabwe, organizations like the Carter Center, USAID, International Republican Institute (IRI) and NDI have played prominent roles in supporting what they call “democratic initiatives,” but these efforts have often been seen as attempts to influence electoral outcomes in favour of candidates and parties more aligned with Western interests.
For example, in the run-up to Zimbabwe’s August 2023 elections, Western-funded NGOs and CSOs were accused of stoking dissent, funding opposition parties, and attempting to sway public opinion against the ruling ZANU PF. These actions were been justified as support for “democratic processes,” but the reality is that they often represent a clear effort to promote regime change, in a country where the ruling party is seen as unfriendly to Western interests. While these initiatives claim to encourage transparency and fairness, their selective nature raises questions about the true intentions behind Western involvement in foreign elections.
Recently, reports have emerged about Britain’s LabourParty activists allegedly violating U.S. laws by engaging in activities that could be construed as interference in the ongoing American political process. The accusations have sparked outrage, with calls for strict action to protect U.S. sovereignty. The same American political establishment that has spent decades criticizing other countries for not allowing foreign NGOs and CSOs to operate freely is now demanding strict adherence to laws that prevent foreign nationals from interfering in U.S. elections.
The reaction is understandable, yet it underscores a glaring case of Western double standards. If foreign interference is wrong, it should be wrong in all contexts. However, the U.S. has not hesitated to meddle in the politics of its own allies, as seen during the Obama administration’s attempts to influence the Brexit referendum. President Obama’s public warnings to the British electorate that they would be “at the back of the queue” for trade deals if they left the EU were a clear attempt to sway voters to vote in favour of remaining in the EU. While it may not have been illegal, it was certainly a form of political pressure, one that was resented by many in the U.K. and subsequently failed.
The 2016 U.S. presidential election brought the issue of foreign interference to the forefront of American politics, with allegations of Russian meddling dominating headlines for years. U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that Russia sought to influence the election through disinformation campaigns and hacking, actions that were condemned as threats to the integrity of American democracy. Similarly, Western media has also hyped alleged Chinese and Iranian interference in the US elections through influence campaigns.
However, these accusations also highlighted a significant hypocrisy. While the U.S. decried Russian actions, it conveniently overlooked its own history of electoral meddling abroad. From Latin America to the Middle East, there are numerous instances where the U.S. has directly or indirectly supported coups, funded opposition parties, or manipulated electoral outcomes to ensure that leaders favourable to American interests come to power.
The hypocrisy becomes even more pronounced when Western-sponsored regime change forces accuse ZANU PF of interfering in elections within the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region. The claims, often unsubstantiated, have been part of a broader narrative to paint ZANU PF as undemocratic while ignoring the extensive efforts by Western powers to sway political processes across the continent. These accusations seem to serve as a smokescreen, diverting attention from the reality that it is often Western benefactors who traverse the globe trying to influence electoral outcomes, even those of their own allies.
The U.S. has every right to apply its laws to prevent foreign interference in its political processes. The recent calls for action against the Labour Party activists on U.S. soil are a testament to that right. However, the U.S. should acknowledge that this principle must apply universally. Just as it is illegal for foreign nationals to influence American elections, so should it be inappropriate for the U.S. and its Western allies to fund and influence political activities in other nations under the guise of promoting democracy.
The controversy surrounding Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign efforts further illustrates this point. Reports have surfaced suggesting that foreign nationals may be involved in activities that violate U.S. election laws. This situation echoes the concerns that the U.S. has raised in the past about foreign influence, but it also presents an opportunity for introspection. If the U.S. demands sovereignty and legal integrity within its borders, it must extend the same respect to other nations, regardless of their political alignment or strategic importance.
The Obama administration’s efforts to influence the Brexit referendum were a clear example of political interference. In the lead-up to the vote, President Obama traveled to the U.K. and issued a direct warning that Britain would face economic consequences if it chose to leave the EU. This incident highlights the ease with which the U.S. applies pressure on its allies, even while advocating against foreign interference in its own political processes.
The double standard is clear: When Western powers intervene in the political processes of other nations, it is often presented as an effort to “protect democracy.” However, when similar actions are directed at the West, they are deemed as threats to sovereignty and stability. This selective application of international relations principles erodes the credibility of the West’s pro-democracy stance and exposes a self-serving agenda.
In recent years, Western-backed entities have accused ZANU PF of interfering in the elections of neighbouring countries, painting a picture of a regional destabilizer. However, these allegations are part of a broader regime change narrative that seeks to delegitimize leaders who resist Western influence. The reality is that it is Western nations that have perfected the art of meddling through, among other strategies, from funding opposition parties and running sophisticated information campaigns aimed at discrediting unfavourable political players and propping up their surrogates. The repeated focus on ZANU PF’s alleged interference in regional elections serves as a distraction from the extensive efforts by the West to shape political outcomes in elections in Southern Africa.
If the U.S. and its allies genuinely believe in the principles of sovereignty and non-interference, it must lead by example. This means respecting the political processes of other nations, regardless of whether the outcomes align with their strategic interests. The double standards that allow Western nations to interfere in foreign elections while decrying similar actions against themselves must end. Sovereignty should be a universal right, not a privilege that Western nations can selectively apply.
The uproar over alleged British, Chinese and Iranians alleged interference in U.S. elections is a reminder that the principles of sovereignty and non-interference are not just abstract concepts; they are fundamental to the stability and legitimacy of political systems worldwide. If the U.S. wants to maintain credibility on the global stage, it must uphold these principles consistently. This would mean not only protecting its own electoral integrity but also refraining from interfering in the political processes of other nations under the guise of promoting democracy. Only then can the U.S. and its allies claim to be true advocates of global democratic values.
