US embassy cable - 04HARARE1021

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HARARE 001021 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR AF/S 
NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR JFRAZER 
USDOC FOR AMANDA HILLIGAS 
TREASURY FOR OREN WYCHE-SHAW 
PASS USTR FLORIZELLE LISER 
STATE PASS USAID FOR MARJORIE COPSON 
 
E. O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV, EAID, BTIO, EINV, ECON, PGOV, ZI, Land Reform 
SUBJECT: NATIONALIZATION FALLOUT BEGINS 
 
Ref: A) Harare 00959 
 
1. (SBU) Summary: The public debate over GOZ plans 
to nationalize most productive farmland has begun. The 
initial policy announcement was only the first salvo. 
There appears to be a growing fissure within ZANU-PF over 
nationalization. End summary. 
 
2. (SBU) Ostensibly correcting Land Minister John Nkomo's 
reported announcement that the GOZ intended to 
nationalize all land in the country (ref A), the state- 
controlled Herald's June 10 edition stated that " . . . 
[the 99-year and 25-year leases] only appl[y] to land 
acquired by the State under land reforms, and does not in 
any way invalidate or supercede other lawful forms of 
tenure . . ." A highly-placed Ndebele GOZ official told 
the Embassy that Moyo, in his quest to be the top Ndebele 
in Mugabe's inner circle, purposefully mischaracterized 
the nationalization policy to discredit Nkomo. Other 
ruling party officials have confirmed this (septel). 
 
 
3. (U) Articles in the Zimbabwe Independent and Financial 
Gazette from June 10th also state that the Cabinet 
decided to nationalize wildlife lands to allow indigenous 
firms access to these lucrative businesses.  National 
Parks officials are working out the implementation 
details. Land and legal experts have decried the 
nationalization policy, arguing that no financial 
institution would invest without collateral. The Zimbabwe 
Independent quotes constitutional law expert Lovemore 
Madhuku that the GOZ could only nationalize compulsorily 
acquired land, as the constitution guaranteed private 
property rights. 
 
4. (U) An article in the GOZ-controlled Herald's June 14 
edition attempts to justify fast track land reform and 
nationalization. The article traces the history of 
slavery in Africa and the whites' colonization of the 
most arable land.  It continues through the Lancaster 
House negotiations and Britain's broken promises, with 
GOZ patiently waiting for 20 years before deciding to do 
land reform on its own.  While acknowledging, "the 
process was not all that smooth and did not go according 
to the desired plan", the article paints an ordered 
picture where parliament passed the Land Acquisition Act 
and any problems are simply "to be expected", or 
happenstance.  Nationalization is purportedly the next 
logical step to "finally control[] all farmland just like 
what [Zimbabwe's] neighbors did years ago".  Mocking the 
anger of white farmers, the author details how whites 
moving to other African states are accepting 99-year 
leases. 
 
5. (SBU) Vitalis Chadenga, the National Parks and 
Wildlife Authority's Operations Director, told EconOff 
that only compulsorily acquired wildlife land would be 
leased for 25 years. The National Parks asked for 99-year 
leases but was overruled. Chadenga declined to say by 
whom. GOZ will require current conservancy owners to give 
up an undisclosed percentage of their land ownership 
while remaining on the land. The idea is to have current 
owners impart their knowledge and expertise about 
wildlife management to indigenous partners. The land 
would not be fenced into smaller lots. The GOZ will 
theoretically compensate (for improvements to the land 
only) any current owner who decides not to continue on 
the land. 
 
6. (SBU) Chadenga assured EmbOff that the GOZ issues and 
strictly enforces hunting licenses and permits according 
to international conventions. He expressed surprise at 
potential investor skittishness after nationalization. 
However, once challenged to explain, Chadenga admitted 
that access to investment capital could be problematic, 
since typical loan terms required leases longer than 25 
years. He ultimately admitted that investor confidence 
would be shaken and could be disrupted, but continued to 
express optimism that GOZ had learned from its farm land 
reform mistakes. 
 
7. (SBU) Chadenga claims only applicants with a 
commitment to wildlife conservation and wildlife industry 
viability would receive leases. Nationalization will not 
affect the proposed Trans Frontier Conservation Area 
(TFCA) between South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique. 
Settlers in National Parks and on private conservancies 
would be re-settled in other areas. Chadenga also opined 
that negotiated indigenization, like the proposed MOU 
between Save Conservancy and Traditions, could proceed. 
8. (SBU) Comment: The Herald's back and forth reporting 
on land nationalization confirms the party's continued 
confusion on its bread and butter land reform issue. 
Mugabe's refusal to weigh-in on this and other issues 
leaves second echelon rivals to thrash things out with 
little resolution. Moyo's aggressive and vocal posture 
reflects influence but not control over party matters. 
 
9. (SBU) Comment cont'd: Chadenga's surprise about 
investor skittishness reveals the incomplete nature of 
the policy. His belief that GOZ learned its lesson from 
land reform simply does not bear out. From school 
closures, selective anti-corruption enforcement, and the 
continuing tax on exporters, GOZ has shown no sign of 
learning from past mistakes. GOZ's willingness to give 
out private hunting concessions does not bode well for 
controlling off-take. Sweeping high-level corruption in 
the issuance of leases for hunting zones and aggressive 
grabs by senior ZANU-PF officials seeking to gain a 
monopoly on the lucrative safari trade, may well be the 
template for what is in store for conservancies that are 
currently in private (foreign) hands. It is, however, 
encouraging that private deals made between conservancies 
and indigenous groups may still be honored. 
 
Sullivan