Africa, high on the agenda for last week’s overrated-and-underperforming G8 summit of leading industrial nations, got renewed aid pledges, renewed condemnation of the Darfur tragedy, and a recycled commitment of aid to fight HIV and malaria. Meanwhile German Chancellor and EU President Angela Merkel pledged that a planned EU-Africa summit will proceed even if Zimbabwe’s notorious Robert Mugabe attends. Apparently, Mugabe’s Zimbabwe—a place that has 80% unemployment, inflation approaching 4,000%, and official assaults on political dissent—is no pariah to the G8.

This is particularly so, now that Tony Blair has officially washed his hands of this other African tragedy, calling publicly for an “African solution” and handing off responsibility wholly to South Africa. Indeed, Chancellor Merkel has echoed those sentiments, making for a remarkably unified European stance.

Zimbabwe, like all of Southern Africa, has been counting on big economic and goodwill gains from the 2010 Cup to be hosted by South Africa

South Africa has much at stake. As a prosperous neighbor with a long contiguous border, it receives the bulk of the exodus of those Zimbabweans who can leave. Still, no one who has observed President Mbeki’s tepid jawboning and tut-tutting of Mugabe’s disastrous rule expects anything more than a continuing charade from this non-dynamic duo.

Western sanctions—principally travel bans on Zimbabwean public officials allied to Mugabe and the suspension of most aid programs—have done nothing for Zimbabwe’s politics other than giving its pernicious leader a handy “foreign devil” to frame for his own misdeeds. The World Bank suspended all aid to Mugabe’s kleptocracy, with little effect (thanks in part to Chinese willingness to step in with loans), and at any rate, it did so not for geopolitical reasons, but because Zimbabwe wasn’t making good on its outstanding debts. Even now Zimbabwe remains eligible for “technical assistance” and civil service reform advice from the bank.

Meanwhile, back at the UN, Zimbabwe has been awarded chairmanship of its Commission on Sustainable Development, a bit of irony that drives the Village Voice’s Nat Hentoff to say that for the United States, “it makes more sense to walk away from the United Nations itself, period.” Mr. Hentoff’s passion is understandable and admirable, but there is a certain dark truth to the UN elevation of Mugabeism—what kind of development is more sustainable than total economic collapse? The fear-the-future crowd that elevates “sustainability” over human progress may have stumbled unto a bit of truth here.

Is there no force, persuasion, sanction, or pressure—short of warfare—that can bring Mugabe to heel? Maybe not, but hope should not be abandoned. Where the World Bank has proved feckless, the World Cup may step in to fill the breach.

Zimbabwe, like all of southern Africa, has been counting on big economic and goodwill gains from the 2010 Cup to be hosted by South Africa. It wants to host teams for training, lure in tourists, and get a waiver from FIFA, the global governing body for football, to allow teams to live on-site in Zimbabwe, even during the competition. In fact, with South African support, Zimbabwean football has been assuming the waiver would be granted.

Too presumptuous, maybe: FIFA said earlier this month that no waiver decision has been made, putting a damper on plans to build two entirely new stadiums in Zimbabwe and renovate older ones.

Indeed, FIFA might want to hold that thought, and take it a step further. Already it’s clear that FIFA’s decisions matter more to Zimbabwe than anything the IMF or the G8 might do. The critical pressure point again is South Africa, which has been quite accommodating of Mr. Mugabe. If President Mbeki truly is expected to carry the ball for Tony Blair here, let him work with FIFA and the African Union to keep the World Cup goodies away from Zimbabwe altogether, so long as Mugabe rules. Here at least is a form of pressure that may begin to bite.

FIFA, fortunately, can still help some Zimbabwean workers even if it does act to harm the regime. Zimbabwean construction workers are earning true living wages (denominated in US dollars, not Zimbabwe dollars) by crossing into South Africa to work World Cup construction projects. That’s a lot more effective than western hand-wringing.

George A. Pieler is Senior Fellow with the Institute for Policy Innovation. Jens F. Laurson is Editor-at-Large of the International Affairs Forum.