Didymus Mutasa, who was Minister of State Security and Lands at the time, said the government was going to respect its international agreements and would compensate foreign farmers whose countries had bilateral investment protection agreements with Zimbabwe “in full and in the currency of their choice”.
Mutasa said the government had already paid out Z$400 billion (aboutUS$4 million) in compensation to date but it had few resources to compensate farmers.
Full cable:
Viewing cable 06HARARE766, GOZ LAND REFORM BRIEFING: THE MASK COMES OFF
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
|
Reference ID |
Created |
Released |
Classification |
Origin |
VZCZCXRO1932
PP RUEHMR
DE RUEHSB #0766/01 1781551
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 271551Z JUN 06
FM AMEMBASSY HARARE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0257
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
INFO RUCNSAD/SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
RUEHUJA/AMEMBASSY ABUJA 1251
RUEHAR/AMEMBASSY ACCRA 1096
RUEHDS/AMEMBASSY ADDIS ABABA 1257
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 0516
RUEHDK/AMEMBASSY DAKAR 0881
RUEHKM/AMEMBASSY KAMPALA 1309
RUEHNR/AMEMBASSY NAIROBI 3680
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 1080
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 1719
RUEKDIA/DIA WASHDC//DHO-7//
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 1466
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
RUFOADA/JAC MOLESWORTH RAF MOLESWORTH UK//DOOC/ECMO/CC/DAO/DOB/DOI//
RUEPGBA/CDR USEUCOM INTEL VAIHINGEN GE//ECJ23-CH/ECJ5M//
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 HARARE 000766
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
AF/S FOR B. NEULING
NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR C. COURVILLE
AFR/SA FOR E. LOKEN
COMMERCE FOR BECKY ERKUL
TREASURY FOR J. RALYEA AND B. CUSHMAN
COMMERCE FOR BECKY ERKUL
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/31/2011
TAGS: PGOV PREL EAGR ECON EINV ZI
SUBJECT: GOZ LAND REFORM BRIEFING: THE MASK COMES OFF
Classified By: Ambassador Christopher W. Dell under Section 1.4 b/d
——-
Summary
——-
¶1. (C) Minister for State Security, Lands, Land Reform and
Resettlement Didymus Mutasa told the diplomatic corps at a
June 21 briefing that the GOZ would honor its international
agreements and either provide compensation or return
foreign-owned farms that had been expropriated. However, he
offered no timetable and indicated that the GOZ had few
resources with which to pay compensation. At a subsequent
question and answer session, Foreign Minister Mumbengegwi
publicly insulted the Australian Ambassador. With the
exception of the Libyan dean, the diplomatic corps was
shocked and appalled by the vitriolic performance from Mutasa
and Mumbangegwi and the exposure of the real face of the
ZANU-PF regime has cooled the ardor for dialogue or
“bridge-building” of all but the most naive colleagues. In
World Cup parlance, it was a spectacular own-goal by the GOZ.
End Summary.
———————
Mutasa,s Presentation
———————
¶2. (SBU) Flanked by Minister of Agriculture Made, Minister
for Foreign Affairs Mumbengegwi and other senior officials,
Mutasa offered a familiar rehearsal of land reform’s history
that revolved around British and American reneging on
purported promises to compensate dispossessed white farmers.
Digressing beyond land reform, Mutasa castigated the West for
repeatedly “hurting the Zimbabwean people”: it condemned
Operation Murambatsvina (the GOZ’s massive slum demolition
campaign) but did nothing to help its victims; its targeted
sanctions were wrecking the economy and hurting ordinary
people. (N.B. The dissembling minister ignored substantial
international assistance to Murambatsvina victims, much of
which was obstructed by the GOZ.)
¶3. (SBU) Mutasa emphasized that the GOZ would respect its
international agreements. Specifically, foreigners whose
countries had bilateral investment protection agreements
(BIPAs) would be compensated “in full and in the currency of
their choice.” An interagency GOZ committee had assessed 181
of the 185 farms protected by bilateral agreements and would
make recommendations on which should be &acquired8 and
compensation paid for and which should be cleared of settlers
and returned to their owners.
¶4. (SBU) Mutasa claimed the GOZ had already paid Z$400B
(approx. US$4M at official exchange rate, US$1M at parallel
market rate) in compensation to date. However, he said the
GOZ had few resources with which to compensate farmers and
offered no timetable for future compensation. Mutasa added
that foreign owners protected by BIPAs would have ecourse to
the courts to contest GO action, unlike Zimbabwean owners
who had been denied court access under Amendment 17 to the
Constitution. (N.B. Mutasa mistakenly listed the United
States as one of the countries with which Zimbabwe had a
bilateral investment protection agreement.)
———————–
Q&A Session Degenerates
———————–
HARARE 00000766 002 OF 002
¶5. Following Mutasa,s presentation, there was a brief
question and answer period that turned hostile, marked
especially by an exchange between the Australian Ambassador,
who sought clarification of whether white Zimbabweans would
be accorded equal rights, and Foreign Minister Mumbengegwi.
Mumbengegwi,s response was a vitriolic attack on the
Ambassador and on Australia, which he called one of the most
racist countries in the world. All three ministers used the
closing session to castigate the EU for “following Tony
Blair’s lead”. Mutasa even unwittingly embarrassed the
Malaysian Ambassador, who inquired about bilateral investment
agreements; “don’t worry – you are our friend; we will give
you a special deal.” The Malaysian visibly cringed at this
public embrace from the regime.
——-
Comment
——-
¶6. (C) This latest installment in the GOZ,s diplomatic
charm offensive was the equivalent of an own-goal and fell
decidedly flat. The presentation itself was derided by most
in the diplomatic corps as a waste of time that broke no new
ground. Mutasa got backs up right from his opening comment
that the meeting was only taking place because “you”, i.e.
the diplomatic corps, wanted it. Even the most ardent
believers in the utility of dialogue with the the GOZ began
to squirm uncomfortably and their disillusionment only grew
as the GOZ ministers used every question (most quite
inoffensive) to lash out. Reportedly, even the African
ambassadors, none of whom was singled out for personal abuse,
were offended by this “un-African” display of incivility. In
the aftermath, most of the diplomatic corps has concluded
(finally) that dialogue with the GOZ is not realistic. That
said, a few die-hards (France) tried to put a positive spin
on what Mutasa would have said if he finished reading his
18-page statement instead of ad-libbing, while the most
ardent “dialogistas” (Canada and Sweden) have concluded that
if dialogue fails, we must engage in more dialogue about
dialogue. The most positive aspect of this session was the
stark revelation of the GOZ’s true face and the fact that the
GOZ continues to be its own worst enemy in attempting tof
break out of its international isolation.
DELL
(21 VIEWS)
