Good point, but South Africa is in a somewhat unique position vis a vis Zimbabwe. It seems to me Zimbabwe would be far more likely to respond to pressure from South Africa than from more distant countries or organizations. Least of all the U.S. Colonialism and paternalism are not distant memories in Africa.

>Isn't that sort-of like telling South Africa (and not the UN) that they need to intervene (interfere) with the automony of the individual countries on the same continent? Sort-of like telling the U.S. that unless they resolve the human rights issues of Cuba (who is is a signatory to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and its constitution and has a section outlining the "fundamental rights, duties and guarantees" of the Cuban people but has many complaints of human rights violations), we will be cut-off?
>
>
>>Nothing like a little big power intervention for really screwing things up.
>>
>>Solution to Zimbabwe is simple. tell South Africa unless they get serious no world cup in 2010.