The past century has seen astonishing progress in global living standards. More people around the world live longer, healthier, and wealthier lives than at any time in history, a testament to human innovation as well as to the work of private, public, and faith-based organizations. Yet in Zimbabwe, the clock has been turned back to medieval times, undoing most of this progress. Perhaps the most disgraceful aspect is the complicity of almost all African governments in enabling the murderous regime of President Robert Mugabe to sustain its legitimacy. At best, African governments seem indifferent to Mugabe’s tyranny. At worst, they seem to applaud it.

One of the most tragic outcomes of Mugabe’s reign has been the destruction of basic health services. While the government equips police and military forces with the batons they use to beat political opponents, it cannot finance even the most basic medical care. Public hospitals are no longer places of care and recovery, but rather caverns of death where corpses accumulate. Ambulances rust for lack of fuel, and horse-drawn wagons transport the lucky patients who can find a doctor.

At best, African governments seem indifferent to Mugabe’s tyranny. At worst, they seem to applaud it.

Zimbabwe once had an excellent malaria-control program, which now provides only haphazard protection from deadly mosquitoes. Tuberculosis cases continue to spiral upward, with patients finding grossly inadequate medicinal options. Hundreds of thousands of Zimbabweans lack any HIV/AIDS treatment at all, partly because hyperinflation has driven the cost of such treatment out of their reach. Among those lucky enough to still have a job, wages range between $8 and $16 per month. (Much of that money is used to buy bread, when it is available.)

The numbers are shocking. Overall life expectancy in Zimbabwe has fallen to about 30 years per person. Between 1999 and 2005-06, adult mortality increased by 40 percent among women and by 20 percent among men. This means that over one-third of Zimbabwean children are orphans. Even those with parents cannot depend on them for food and shelter, as 80 percent of the population lives below the poverty line. All Zimbabweans face severe government repression. It is no wonder that around a quarter of the population, mostly the young and able, have fled the country. 

Throughout the darkest days of apartheid, South Africans active in the struggle against oppression were supported and assisted not only by the Zimbabwean government but also by average citizens. Yet in Zimbabwe’s hour—make that decade—of need, the South African government of President Thabo Mbeki has turned its back on ordinary Zimbabweans. South Africa routinely treats Zimbabwean refugees as criminals, sending them back to the misery, abuse, and constant dangers of their homeland. One might expect that, having lived under apartheid, South Africans in general—and Mbeki’s African National Congress party in particular—would identify with the abused masses of Zimbabwe. Yet South Africa’s apparent indifference to their suffering is a source of shame for the so-called rainbow nation.

Overall life expectancy in Zimbabwe has fallen to about 30 years per person. Between 1999 and 2005-06, adult mortality increased by 40 percent among women and by 20 percent among men.

In March, southern African leaders met to debate the growing crisis in Zimbabwe, and Mbeki was tasked with finding a solution. He did virtually nothing. Six months later, the plight of Zimbabweans has worsened and tens of thousands of lives have been lost as the humanitarian disaster grows. Mbeki has now had seven years to support democracy and human rights in Zimbabwe, yet he continues to side with the election-stealing Mugabe regime.

Given its political and economic might, South Africa is in a unique position to agitate for reforms. It alone may have the power to force real change in Harare. But without a strong, unequivocal message from the international community, there is no reason to believe that South Africa will play that role. Mbeki seems content to wait until Mugabe (along with his country) dies. Western governments must not allow the waiting to continue.

What can they do? It may be unfair to condition outside aid to South Africa on progress in Zimbabwe. But how about an artistic or an athletic boycott? Those worked against apartheid. In 2010, much of the world will gather in South Africa for the World Cup soccer tournament. Awarding South Africa host status represented a great vote of confidence in the Mbeki regime. Yet soccer players, their fans, and their sponsors will be supporting the enablers of a brutal dictator—a government that turns a blind eye to the humanitarian disaster just over its border and that badly treats the Zimbabwean refugees living in its cities. There is still time to move the World Cup elsewhere and send a strong and clear message to Africa’s political elite.

While FIFA, the governing body of world soccer, can do its part, the United Nations must prepare to deal with a massive humanitarian problem in Zimbabwe, and in neighboring countries, as the crisis worsens. Mugabe will leave a deep and lasting scar on the African continent. But the international community can act now to treat the wound that is Zimbabwe, and at least stop the infection from spreading.

Roger Bate is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Archbishop Pius Ncube lives in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. Richard Tren is South African and directs Africa Fighting Malaria (AFM). They are the co-authors of “Tyranny and Disease,” published this week by AFM.