How might SADC respond to Friday's "one-man" election?

Perro de Jong, reporting for Radio Netherlands Worldwide, offers an interesting interpretation from Sehlare Makgetlaneng, of the South African Institute in Pretoria, on how SADC and the AU might interpret the results of tomorrow's election:

"According to Sehlare Makgetlaneng of the South African Institute in Pretoria, the SADC in reality continues to support Mugabe. That's because few African leaders see any merit in a pro-western government such as the one planned by Tsvangirai's MDC. But, he says, due to the ever-increasing government violence against opposition supporters, the organisation must be seen to be reacting.

Nevertheless, there is a 'Plan B' that the SADC could comfortably live with, believes
Makgetlaneng. It's no longer possible to prevent Friday's election from taking place. But, once Mugabe has achieved his aim, he could then afford to enjoy the luxury of taking voluntary retirement.

"They want to see Zanu PF continue being the ruling party, but they want it to have a new leader. Because Mugabe has become a liability to Zanu to win free and fair elections. It is only the ruling party under a new leader which is capable of solving Zimbabwe's problems."

If the West and Tsvangirai complain about the validity of the election, then the SADC can always play the colonial card again. At any rate, for the time being it appears to be the only African solution on the table."

On the other hand, there seems to be less of a consensus among SADC leaders than the above view assumes. See Tichaona Sibanda, at SW Radio Africa [London] report on the boycott of the SADC emergency meeting on Zimbabwe by South African President Thabo Mbeki. Sibanda also reports that the AU is considerating appointing a mediator for Zimbabwe, possibly Nigerias' Obasanjo or Botswana's Masire.