The Zimbabwe African National Union- Patriotic Front deputy director for external affairs Itai Mach held a meeting with a political officer from the United States embassy in Harare at the party headquarters on 5 November 2003, according a cable released by Wikileaks.
The officer Win Dayton was even surprised that Mach met him alone which led Dayton to speculate that Mach was probably “carrying the water of his boss, the party’s mercurial Secretary for External Relations Didymus Mutasa.”
Mach briefed the political officer on the forthcoming party annual conference and said that the main subject was likely to be land as the party wanted to conclude that chapter.
He also asked whether the United States could waiver sanctions on some of the ZANU-PF leaders as a confidence building measure.
Full cable:
Viewing cable 03HARARE2236, VISIT TO ROTTEN ROW
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 |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 HARARE 002236
SIPDIS
AF/S FOR S. DELISI, M. RAYNOR
NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR J. FRAZER, TEITELBAUM
LONDON FOR C. GURNEY
PARIS FOR C. NEARY
NAIROBI FOR T. PFLAUMER
E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/08/2008
TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM ECON EAID EAGR ZI ZANU PF
SUBJECT: VISIT TO ROTTEN ROW
Classified By: Political Officer Win Dayton under Section 1.5 (b)(d)
¶1. (C) SUMMARY: ZANU-PF Deputy Director for External
Relations Itai Mach on November 5 told poloff that the
party’s national conference next month would likely focus
more on economic and land reform issues than
personnel/leadership matters. He suggested that informal and
personal communications across party lines were fairly
regular and increasingly cordial, but that the rank and file
in both parties were lukewarm on formal talks. He emphasized
that the ruling party still attached the highest priority to
land reform and was committed to rectify errors made in its
implementation. Mach indicated that Zimbabwe was “looking
eastward” to hedge against its ossifying relationship with
the West, even as it welcomed a role by the USG and others in
stemming its economic crisis. He inquired hypothetically
about the prospects of a waiver of travel restrictions for
senior party officials to travel to Washington for dialogue.
END SUMMARY.
December National Party Conference: Don’t Expect Much
——————————————— ——–
¶2. (C) During a meeting with poloff on November 5 at the
ruling party’s Rotten Row headquarters, Mach said that the
party had yet to circulate a formal agenda for its annual
national conference scheduled to be held in Masvingo December
4-6. He explained that national conferences generally were
regarded as interim meetings between Party Congresses, the
next of which was slated for 2005. Generally, national
conferences did not undertake significant shifts in approach
but could make new policies, subject to ratification at the
Party Congress. Notwithstanding considerable public
speculation about the conference’s implications for
leadership changes, Mach asserted it would revolve more
around economic and land issues rather than personnel
matters. Elaboration of the Utete Commission Report on Land
Reform and its recommendations were likely to be spotlighted.
The leadership would brief the membership on land reform’s
progress and plans for rectifying errors in its
implementation. There would be some opportunity for feedback
but the format was principally to be top-down.
Land Reform: Central Priority,
Work in Progress, Need for Outside Help
—————————————
¶3. (C) Mach stressed the continuing centrality of land
reform to the party’s political platform. The issue remained
an emotional one for Zimbabweans, especially among the rural
majority. He said the party recognized that there were flaws
in the implementation of “fast-track” reform and was sincere
in its desire to straighten out errors and assure fairness.
Assuring the principle of one person-one farm admittedly was
proving a challenge despite the system’s explicit
requirements. In the meantime, the shifting of farms as the
principle was implemented was disrupting productivity. (He
himself was given a small farm at the outset of land reform,
but was having to surrender it as a larger, potentially more
profitable one had become available.) Complicating the
situation was the frequent emergence of multiple claimants to
single parcels. There were processes in place to regularize
these problems but “mischievous” claimants sometimes ignored
the processes, requiring police to sort matters out on
occasion. Given the numerous claimants and large acreage
involved nationally and the “complications of colonial
legacy”, some disruptions were inevitable, Mach concluded,
but the government was devoting considerable attention and
resources to minimize them.
¶4. (C) Mach asserted that the agricultural sector needed
help from the international community. Produce was rotting
in the fields as the “new farmers” lacked essential equipment
and technology. He conceded that “fast-track” land reform
had alienated much needed foreign direct investment and the
international donor community. USG and EU sanctions on
travel and investment contributed to Zimbabwe’s
stigmatization as an investment destination. Mach urged the
USG to accept the necessity of land reform in Zimbabwean
politics; to keep the politics of rhetorical scapegoating by
both parties in perspective; and to begin engaging
constructively on Zimbabwe’s economic reconstruction. Only
if people were empowered economically could they truly become
independent actors politically.
Inter-Party Relations: U.S. Can Help
————————————
¶5. (C) Mach lamented that his party did not do a better job
of selling itself to the international community. He said
that MDC members were guilty of many crimes of which they
accused ZANU-PF but they had much better rapport with the
international media and diplomatic community. The MDC’s
reliance on the media and international community to advance
its agenda alienated many Zimbabweans and hardened ZANU-PF’s
view that it represented foreign interests more than national
interests. He explained that ZANU-PF’s culture was such that
the party would not complain internationally about MDC
misbehavior; to do so would appear weak and shift
responsibility away from itself as the country’s ruling
party. Instead, it preferred to address such problems
through the courts or negotiation; interparty violence was
“unavoidable at times” but not the favored route and not
always instigated by ZANU-PF in any event. MDC elements had
utilized violence and intimidation since the party’s
founding, he asserted, and some of his own friends had lost
their lives to MDC violence.
¶6. (C) Mach asserted that the rank and file of neither party
strongly supported an inter-party dialogue on transition or
power-sharing. He recognized that there could be some mutual
benefit to dialogue but confidence-building was first
necessary. From ZANU-PF’s perspective, the MDC needed to
work more for Zimbabwe and less for foreign interests. It
should be more willing to engage on issues constructively as
an opposition party, and not hold every issue hostage to a
single-minded pursuit of change in government. He urged the
USG to facilitate inter-party confidence-building by getting
the MDC to take a more constructive and flexible posture.
Echoing other party officials, Mach suggested that
elimination of the USG’s targeted “smart sanctions” would go
far in engendering good will within the party.
ZANU-PF Views of the U.S.: Suspicion and Admiration
——————————————— ——
¶7. (C) Mach recognized the constructive role historically
played by the United States in Zimbabwe and asserted that a
potentially important role remained open, notwithstanding the
animus now driving bilateral relations. He said ZANU-PF’s
leadership remembered the contributions made by the USG in
breaking the impasse at Lancaster House in the run-up to
independence and many were not as anti-American as official
rhetoric would suggest. He said even the party’s rank and
file all admired aspects of the United States and wanted to
travel there. Zimbabweans were envious of the American
political system, in which winners and losers went about
their business and respected each other even after bitterly
fought elections. Neither ZANU-PF nor the MDC were there
yet, he asserted. Aside from certain areas — posture toward
land reform and sexual orientation, he noted — Americans and
Zimbabweans shared key ideals, even if neither was able
always to meet them.
¶8. (C) Nonetheless, comments about regime change and other
rhetoric from Washington deepened suspicion about the USG
within the party and were pushing the GOZ to a “look
eastward” foreign policy, according to Mach. “Eastern”
countries were eager to build economic relations with
Zimbabwe but did not attach distasteful political conditions
to cooperation as did the West. Mach observed that the
United States had superior technology and know-how that
Zimbabwe needed, though, and the GOZ remained open to a
stronger relationship with the USG — but only on “mutually
beneficial” terms not dictated by the stronger party. USG
travel restrictions against party and government principals
remained an impediment to better relations, both because of
the negative message they sent and because they prevented the
leadership from making its case in Washington. Echoing party
colleagues, Mach urged a lifting of the restrictions as a
confidence-building measure.
“Hypothetical” Inquiry on Travel by Party Principals
——————————————— ——-
¶9. (C) Mach asked about possible flexibility in the USG’s
travel sanctions, indicating that some in the party might
want to go to Washington for dialogue with the USG or with
international financial institutions. He emphasized that he
was not asking officially but wanted to understand the
process and legal limitations in the event that somebody may
wish to make a formal request in the future.
Comment
——-
¶10. (C) Unlike most party apparatchiks, Mach was willing to
meet alone with poloff. Like those few party faithful who
are willing to meet emboffs alone, Mach followed a formula of
didactically recounting the centrality of land reform to
Zimbabwean politics before shifting to a more engaging albeit
sometimes disingenuous posture. We assume that he was
carrying the water of his boss, the party’s mercurial
Secretary for External Relations Didymus Mutasa, in inquiring
SIPDIS
about waivers of travel restrictions. The inquiry may have
reflected Mutasa’s interest in opportunities for
self-aggrandizement (he reportedly is posturing for the
vacant vice-presidential slot) more than any calculated party
effort to get principals to travel to Washington. In any
event, we do not see the internally absorbed ZANU-PF as
willing to engage meaningfully in dialogue with the MDC or
USG yet, even if some party elements favor interparty talks
and/or rapprochement with the West. We have yet to see
evidence that the government’s much ballyhooed “look
eastward” policy is finding economically significant purchase
with potential partners, although the GOZ makes domestic
political hay out of supportive rhetoric from countries like
Malaysia.
Bio notes
———
¶11. (SBU) Married with two children, Mach is from a rural
township in Mashonaland Central — ZANU-PF heartland. He
said he was lucky to have an excellent A-level teacher whose
efforts earned him a spot in the University, where he joined
ZANU-PF. A party stalwart intimately familiar with and
constrained by the party line, Mach nonetheless displayed
candor in distinguishing between “politics” and “reality”
during conversation and in placing the well-known histrionics
of his mentor, Mutasa, into context.
SULLIVAN
(88 VIEWS)
