ABSTRACT
The profound and extensive nature of difficulties in Zimbabwean current affairs raises a moral
dilemma for South Africa: should it intervene in some way, or respect Zimbabwean sovereignty?
Is there a plausible ‘middle ground’ theory to resolves this dilemma?
This paper argues that there may well be. It further argues that such a ‘middle ground’ account is
consistent with at least one version of ubuntu, an indigenous sub-Saharan African philosophy.
What does ubuntu have to say about the right (or perhaps even the obligation) of the South
African government to have intervened in Zimbabwean affairs? Does it vindicate South Africa
for its failure to intervene? This project, whilst not providing a decisive answer to the question of
whether intervention in Zimbabwe by South Africa is legitimate on this African world-view,
provides one possible approach to evaluating the dilemma from an ubuntu-informed perspective
