JOHANNESBURG, March 23 (Xinhua) -- South Africa's deputy foreign minister Aziz Pahad on Friday defended Pretoria's policy towards Zimbabwe, reiterating that only "constructive dialogue" is the solution to that country's crisis.

    He also emphasized the need for a stop to violence in order to allow such a dialogue to take place.

    "It was evident that many of the parties and civil society (in Zimbabwe) had welcomed the call of dialogue and national reconciliation and the violence in the last week must not be allowed to stop this process," Pahad told a media briefing in Pretoria.

    The South African government has been criticized by opposition parties and human rights groups at home and by the West for failing to openly condemn Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, who has been repeatedly accused of cracking down on the political opposition.

    But South Africa, like the majority of African countries, insist that political crisis in Zimbabwe could not be solved through intervention of outside force.

    Pahad emphasized South Africa's position that the only solution for Zimbabwe was constructive dialogue between the parties.

    He said the current crisis in Zimbabwe could have been avoided if Africa, Europe and the United States had adopted a common approach to assist Zimbabwe.

    "If we could have worked together to deal with the situation in Zimbabwe the door would not have been shut," he said. The deputy minister said South Africa had, individually and through the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the African Union (AU) initiatives, been working tirelessly to assist Zimbabweans to find a lasting and peaceful solution. "We want Zimbabweans to work to come up with a roadmap (to peace) that South Africa, the SADC and the AU can assist to implement," he said.

    SADC's 14 member states including Zimbabwe is due to meet in Tanzania next week to discuss the Zimbabwean situation.

    Pahad's opinion was echoed by the South African government's spokesman Themba Maseko during his briefing on Tuesday. "We do not agree with the view that says the time for dialogue is past. In fact, the time for dialogue is now more than ever before," he said.