Tsvangirai - I am not advocating military intervention in Zimbabwe by the UN?

[seemslikeadream]

Morgan Tsvangirai is the 'western' supported opposition leader in Zimbabwe who runs against Robert Mugawe.

Yesterday the British Guardian published an op-ed by Tsvangirai which called for military intervention. That op-ed has since been taken down from the Guardian website.
http://74.125.39.104/search?q=cache:wp0Kad1KLHYJ:www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/25/

Today the Guardian publishes a letter by Tsvangirai, that delegitimizes yesterdays comment which is still available via the Google cache:

Why I am not running

Morgan Tsvangirai

My people are at breaking point. World leaders' bold rhetoric must be backed with military force

...
Our call now for intervention seeks to challenge standard procedure in international diplomacy.
...
We envision a more energetic and, indeed, activist strategy. Our proposal is one that aims to remove the often debilitating barriers of state sovereignty, which rests on a centuries-old foundation of the sanctity of governments, even those which have proven themselves illegitimate and decrepit.
...
We do not want armed conflict, but the people of Zimbabwe need the words of indignation from global leaders to be backed by the moral rectitude of military force. Such a force would be in the role of peacekeepers, not trouble-makers. They would separate the people from their oppressors and cast the protective shield around the democratic process for which Zimbabwe yearns.
...

The op-ed also spits with hate towards Mugawe calling him "a power-crazed despot." Picking from the above comment, the 'western' media repeated the call for military intervention.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/25/AR2008062500142.html

Today there is a full retraction of the above. In his letter to the Guardian Morgan Tsvangirai now writes:

An article that appeared in my name, published in the Guardian (Why I am not running, June 25), did not reflect my position or opinions regarding solutions to the Zimbabwean crisis. Although the Guardian was given assurances from credible sources that I had approved the article this was not the case.
...
By way of clarification I would like to state the following: I am not advocating military intervention in Zimbabwe by the UN or any other organisation.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/26/zimbabwe1

I find no editorial explanation on the Guardian website on what happened here.

* How did the Guardian get the first piece?
* Who assured the Guardian that the piece was written or at least authorized by Morgan Tsvangirai?
* How did the Guardian check the claim that its was authorized?

Conspiracy minded people will smells an 'Information Operation' campaign by some USuk group that forgot to make sure that they really held the strings of their puppet. There may be other non-nefarious explanations. The Guardian urgently needs to tell why and how this happened.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/

[ananda]

1. Tsvangirai did NOT approve the article..

.. means that he has been pressured and intimidated
into saying that he didn't.

What this enquiring mind wants to know is where
Mugabe's international leverage is coming from..
what is its basis?

I mean, he's not sitting on oil or threatening
to conduct trade relations in euros.

Sue

[11cents]

2. What "leverage?"

The fact that there's no will or strong motivation to remove isn't indicative of leverage on his part; almost the opposite. The US and Europe don't have enough of a strategic interest to act forcefully, although of course there's been an embargo on the country for years.