US embassy cable - 03HARARE422

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 06 HARARE 000422 
 
SIPDIS 
 
LONDON FOR CGURNEY 
PARIS FOR CNEARY 
BANGKOK FOR WDAYTON 
NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR JENDAYI FRAZER 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/25/2013 
TAGS: PREL, PGOV, ZI 
SUBJECT: OBASANJO LETTER TO HOWARD:  FANTASYLAND 
 
REF: HARARE 206 
 
Classified By: political section chief Matt Harrington. 
 
1.  (U) The recent letter from President Obasanjo to 
Australian PM Howard recommending lifting of Commonwealth 
sanctions on Zimbabwe surprised many observers in Zimbabwe, 
as many of the assertions on which his recommendation is 
based have little basis in reality.  Indeed, the Nigerian 
president appears to have taken at face value a number of 
claims from President Mugabe which can most generously be 
described as disingenuous.  Much of the letter, in fact, 
reads like a press release from the office of Information 
Minister Jonathan Moyo, whose reputation for intellectual 
dishonesty and vitriolic diatribes against all those who do 
not share his views is firmly established.  We will defer to 
Embassy Abuja for an assessment of Obasanjo's motivations for 
writing such a letter but believe it is important to set the 
record straight on some of the document's more outrageous 
statements.  Ironically, conversations with Nigerian 
diplomats based in Harare, one reported reftel, show that 
they do not believe the GOZ line reflected in the Obasanjo 
letter.  The full text of the letter is contained in 
paragraph 2; our analysis is provided in paragraph 3. 
 
2.  (U) Begin Text of Obasanjo-Howard letter: 
 
Dear Prime Minister, 
 
I am writing to you at this time in continuation of our 
consultations and especially to brief you on issues on which 
we have been engaged relating to Zimbabwe.  This briefing has 
become necessary following my recent visit to South Africa 
where I had extensive discussions with President Thabo Mbeki, 
President of the Republic of South Africa, and then to 
Zimbabwe where I was engaged in very useful and constructive 
exchange of views with President Robert Mugabe.  President 
Mbeki seized the opportunity of my visit to brief me on his 
recent trip to Britain, including his discussions with Prime 
Minister Tony Blair on Zimbabwe. 
 
You may recall Mr. Prime Minister that Zimbabwe was one of 
the issues discussed at the Commonwealth Heads of Government 
Meeting in Coolum, Australia, in February 2002 as a result of 
which a troika was established to follow up on the matter. 
Soon afterwards, we had our first meeting at the Marlborough 
House in London in March 2002 to consider the report of the 
Commonwealth Observer Group on Zimbabwean elections, and it 
was also decided, among other things, that Zimbabwe should be 
suspended from the Commonwealth Councils for one year and 
that we would meet in a year to review developments during 
that one year suspension.  In spite of the one year 
stipulation for meeting, the troika still met in Abuja at 
your request.   Since then, your government has proceeded to 
impose sanctions on Zimbabwe, a decision which of course is 
your government's prerogative.  However, this unfortunate 
decision would seem to me to compromise Australia's position 
as an honest broker in the Zimbabwean crisis. 
 
Meanwhile, I am sad to note that the unhelpful media war 
between Britan and Zimbabwe has not abated, but actually 
exacerbated matters thereby worsening the already charged 
situation.  It was against this background that I concluded 
that another meeting of the Commonwealth Troika on Zimbabwe 
at this time might not serve any useful purpose.  Indeed, 
President Thabo Mbeki shares the same view.  This position is 
further reinforced by the fact of certain critical 
developments that have occurred in Zimbabwe and which he must 
acknowledged. 
 
In many of our previous meetings, it had been admitted that 
the issue of land is at the core of the current crisis in 
Zimbabwe and that an appropriate solution to this problem 
would go a long way in bringing to early conclusion other 
associated issues.  Following my recent visit to Zimbabwe, I 
have come to realize that the land issue may no longer be the 
most serious problem at this juncture as it cannot be 
compared to the situation during the Lancaster House 
Conference in 1979 or even in the last ten years.  It is now 
a matter of reality that the Fast Track Land Resettlement 
Program, adopted by the Government of Zimbabwe in order to 
address the situation that was developing in the country at 
that time, has substantially ended since 31st August 2002. 
Since then, the Land Reform Program (LRP) has continued to be 
implemented in the normal regulatory process.  I noted, in 
particular, that the land occupation by demonstrators has 
ended, while the Government of Zimbabwe has agreed to pay 
compensation for any improvement on the land acquired under 
the Fast Track Program and the LRP. 
 
I am informed that in the current financial year, the 
Government has actually allocated the sum of four billion 
Zimbabwe dollars ($4bn) to pay for full and fair compensation 
for whatever improvements that may have been made on the land 
being acquired.  Although this may be a far cry from adequate 
compensation, the good intention on the part of a Government 
cash-strapped should not be overlooked.  However, the 
Government still insists that compensation, for the true 
commercial value of the land, at today's prices, must be paid 
by the British Government, which did not pay anything when 
the lands were taken from the African owners during the 
colonial period.  Furthermore, the Government of Zimbabwe has 
recently been engaged in dialogue with the Commercial Farmers 
Union (CFU).  Indeed, the Government has again reiterated to 
these farmers its readiness and preparedness to provide land 
to anyone who wishes to continue farming and has so applied. 
Certainly, more work needs to be done in this process and it 
is therefore necessary that every encouragement must be given 
by all concerned.  I emphasize that Government of Zimbabwe 
should always keep open the channel of dialogue with the 
Commercial Farmers Union who felt a sense of loss in the 
exercise. 
 
The results of the Government's effort in the land 
redistribution exercise have been acclaimed a remarkable.  By 
1998, 74,000 families had been settled under the 
willing-seller/willing-buyer basis.  An additional 220,000 
communal peasant families and 54,000 indigenous commercial 
farmers were settled under the Fast Track Resettlement 
Program on 11 million hectares of land.  Ideally, full 
compensation should have been paid as the land was being 
appropriated.  This program has no doubt addressed, to some 
extent, the internal dissatisfaction arising from the skewed 
colonial land policy which remained a potential source of 
conflict in Zimbabwe.  On the other hand, it is reasonable to 
except that a major reform on this vast scale would be 
attended by some measure of corruption together with 
complaints of unfairness. 
 
In response to some of these criticisms, President Mugabe 
confirmed to me that he had in place procedures for receiving 
complaints, and that all those found guilty of malpractices 
have been brought to book. 
 
Moreover, in order to promote transparency, equity and ensure 
sustainable utilization of resettled land, as well as 
determining the level of uptake, the Government of Zimbabwe 
has instituted a land audit that aims to generate confidence 
in the whole process.  This audit will help in the 
identification of any malpractices or corruption which the 
Government of Zimbabwe has expressed its readiness to 
investigate and redress. 
 
With regard to the criticisms on land given to some officials 
but not utilized, it seems that this may not be directly 
connected with the Fast Track Program.  Generally, the 
Zimbabwean Government gave land to those who intended to 
utilize it for farming purposes.  It is also true that many 
of those allocated land need financial assistance from 
Government for optimum utilization.  Unfortunately, with 
priority being given to payment of compensation for 
improvements on the land, the Government has only been able 
to provide financial assistance to about 30 percent of this 
group.  This, I believe is an area where the international 
community can genuinely provide assistance, not to the 
Government but to those genuinely desirous of farming.  In is 
encouraging that there has been renewed international 
interest in supporting the Land Reform Program in Zimbabwe. 
Given the progress which I have outlined above, it is 
essential that we should continue to look at ways by which we 
can get more members of the international community not only 
interested but actively involved in the program, only then 
can the average Zimbabwean begin to reap the benefits of the 
exercise and the country would be helped to cope with the 
issue of scarcity of food. 
 
A major concern and perhaps criticism of the LRP by the 
international community has been the fate of former farm 
workers from neighboring states of Mozambique, Malawi and 
Zambia particularly affected by the redistribution program. 
I am informed that, of the estimated four hundred thousand 
people affected, some have been resettled, while may others 
have been re-employed on the 54,000 recently created 
commercial farms.  In fact, I am assured that the Zimbabwean 
Cabinet has taken a decision to the effect that all 
foreigners of their offspring from Sadc countries who came as 
laborers before 1980 will be entitled to Zimbabwean 
citizenship.  Accordingly, it is envisaged that by the end of 
March 2003, the problem of displaced former foreign workers 
will no longer be an issue as they will be entitled, as bona 
fide Zimbabwean citizens, to the full benefits of land reform. 
 
Another area of concern and perhaps outcry pertains to the 
"Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act 
(AIPPA)".  I am assured in this regard the Government of 
Zimbabwe continues to make genuine efforts to respond to such 
concerns.  Indeed, following challenges by the media in the 
Zimbabwean High Court, the Minister of Information has 
proposed some amendments to the Act.  I have been assured 
that his will be one of the issues to be taken as matter of 
priority when Parliament resumes later this month. 
 
On the issue of inter-party dialogue, the Government of 
Zimbabwe remains committed to resuming the talks but feels 
that this can only happen after the court's ruling on the 
petition by the opposition Movement for Democratic Change 
(MDC).  In my separate meeting with Mr. Morgan Tsvangirai of 
the MDC, I have brought to his attention the position of the 
Zimbabwean Government with regard to negotiations.  The MDC 
will now therefore have to decide on whether to withdraw the 
case from the  court so that the negotiations can resume in 
earnest or wait until the determination of the case the 
court.  There is need for Zimbabweans of all parties to 
dialogue and reach consensus on good governance, human 
rights, stability and general direction of development of 
their country. 
 
During my visit to Zimbabwe, Honorable Job Sikhala, an MP of 
MDC for St Mary's, forwarded a petition to me complaining of 
breach of fundamental human rights on the part of the 
Zimbabwean police and possibly sponsored by Government.  I 
raised the issue with President Mugabe who confirmed that the 
MP concerned had taken the case to court and that the police 
admitted with apology that the MP was assaulted.  The police 
were to take necessary disciplinary action against the 
culprit,  President Mugabe denied any Government involvement 
in such police acts.  Allowing the case to be prosecuted in 
court must convince people that Government was not behind the 
act and would not condone it.  From all accounts, it would 
appear that violence political or non-political is fairly 
pervasive in Zimbabwe.  If there are some coming from 
Government agencies, there are certainly those coming from 
non-government agencies.  All stakeholders in Zimbabwe have 
to work together to stop the reign of terror and violence. 
The Government must be in the vanguard of such efforts. 
 
With the above, it is clear to me that we must concert to 
give every assistance to Zimbabwe so that the present crisis 
may be speedily brought to an end.  It is also necessary that 
we should encourage the international community to redeem the 
pledges of financial assistance, reaffirmed in our 
Marlborough House decision, in order to expedite the land 
reform process and bring about the desired improvement in the 
standard of living of the generality of Zimbabweans.  The 
international community and organizations that have 
generously contributed to food donations to Zimbabwe must be 
commended for the humanitarian gesture which has been of 
tremendous assistance to Zimbabwe and the sub-region.  The 
earlier Zimbabwe can get out of her political crisis, 
economic difficulties and food shortage, the better it would 
be for the country, the sub-region and the continent.  It is 
important that we remain positively engaged with Zimbabwe. 
We must continue to make good offices available for mediation 
between UK and Zimbabwe, a rather unfortunate confrontation 
in which rhetoric and media warfare and tend to be 
suppressing reason and fair mindedness. 
 
From all the above, together with what I personally saw on 
the ground in Zimbabwe, I believe that the time is now 
auspicious to lift the sanctions on Zimbabwe with regard to 
her suspension from the Commonwealth Councils.  This will 
represent an appropriate development for the final resolution 
of the crisis in that country. 
I crave your indulgence to forward a copy of this letter to 
President Thabo Mbeki and another copy to the 
Secretary-General of the Commonwealth who can use it as a 
 
SIPDIS 
basis for re-establishment of contact with Zimbabwean 
authorities at all levels.  This will be made easier with 
Prime Minister Tony Blair already accepting an appeal to 
discourage media offensive against Zimbabwe from the UK side 
and President Mugabe agreeing to reciprocate in kind.  This 
should be the precursor to re-engagement between UK and 
Zimbabwe.  Copies of this letter will also be forwarded to 
President Mugabe and Prime Minister Tony Blair. 
 
Please accept, Prime Minister, the assurances of my highest 
esteem and consideration. 
 
Yours sincerely, 
 
Olusegun Obasanjo 
 
End Text of Letter. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
3.  (C) The fact that President Obasanjo spends most of his 
letter discussing the Government of Zimbabwe's fast track 
resettlement effort suggests that he has bought President 
Mugabe's contention that land is at the center of this 
country's interrelated series of political, economic, 
humanitarian, and social crises, an assertion that was also 
accepted in the September 2001 Abuja agreement.  Intense and 
widespread political repression and serious economic 
mismanagement are at the root of Zimbabwe's plight, although 
President Mugabe and his inner circle have, in some quarters, 
successfully used their chaotic land redistribution exercise 
to distract attention from their misgovernance.  Zimbabwe's 
rapid economic contraction began in 1997, three years before 
Government-orchestrated land seizures began in earnest -- 
although the seizures have certainly accelerated this 
country's economic implosion.  In addition, the overwhelming 
majority of political violence (murders, tortures, rapes, 
disappearances) is unrelated to the land seizures, but is 
sanctioned by the ruling party in an effort to extinguish any 
threat -- real or perceived -- to its iron grip on power. 
The Mugabe regime's actions are motivated overwhelmingly by 
the desire to maintain power at all costs.  The following are 
point-by-point refutations of some of the factual errors in 
Obasanjo's letter: 
 
--"the land occupation by demonstrators has ended, while the 
Government of Zimbabwe has agreed to pay compensation for any 
improvement on the land":  Land seizures continue unabated. 
Seventy-seven farms have received compulsory acquisition 
notices since January 1, 2003.  Only 126 of the 4,350 farmers 
who have received compulsory acquisition notices have 
received any amount of compensation.  Of those 126 farmers, 
the payments received are far below the appraised value of 
improvements. 
 
--"the Government has actually allocated the sum of four 
billion Zimbabwe dollars to pay for full and fair 
compensation for whatever improvements that may have been 
made on the land being acquired":  although the budget was 
approved in November 2002, not a single cent of that 
allocated amount has yet been disbursed.  Even if the GOZ 
does disburse this total sum of money, it would amount to an 
average payment of U.S.$625 to each of the 4,350 affected 
farmers.  Given that most of these properties contain large 
farmhouses, outlying buildings such as barns and tobacco 
curing facilities, roads, irrigation systems, dams, and 
expensive equipment, a payment of U.S.$625 as "full and fair 
compensation" is laughable. 
 
--"the Government of Zimbabwe has recently been engaged in 
dialogue with the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU).  Indeed, 
the Government has again reiterated its readiness and 
preparedness to provide land to anyone who wishes to continue 
farming":  The GOZ has trumpeted its new dialogue with the 
CFU as a significant breakthrough, although it has offered 
nothing of substance in these discussions.  Instead, the GOZ 
is pressuring the farmers to sell their equipment at bargain 
basement prices to the new settlers and to turn over their 
title deeds, while telling them to seek compensation from 
international donors.  Most observers have concluded that the 
apparent willingness of the GOZ to engage in dialogue with 
the CFU -- for the first time in 18 months -- was a charade 
intended to project an image of moderation during the Cricket 
World Cup and prior to an expected decision by the 
Commonwealth on whether to renew sanctions against Zimbabwe. 
On Government's repeated claims that no one will be left 
without a farm, it is important to point out that a third of 
farmers (approximately 1500) who had properties seized owned 
only one farm and have not been offered another one.  Rather 
than leave farmers with one farm, Agriculture Minister Made 
has said that dispossessed farm owners would be put on a list 
for possible allocation of another farm -- a process as 
illogical as it is nonsensical. 
 
--"An additional 220,000 communal peasant families and 54,000 
indigenous commercial farmers were settled under the Fast 
Track Resettlement Program on 11 million hectares of land": 
We have been unable to confirm these figures, which the CFU 
believes are significantly inflated.  We note that the GOZ, 
until recently, claimed to have settled 300,000 peasant 
families under the fast track program.  In any case, the 
220,000 figure is much lower than the number of farmworkers 
(estimated between 300-500,000) displaced by this program, 
suggesting a net loss for the Zimbabwean population.  It is 
also important to note that fast track has not significantly 
decongested the communal areas -- one of the program's 
objectives -- as those who have been allocated land move back 
and forth between their new plots and properties in their 
home areas. 
 
--"President Mugabe confirmed to me that he had in place 
procedures for receiving complaints, and that all those found 
guilty of malpractices have been brought to book":  This is 
simply untrue.  A land audit conducted by Cabinet Minister 
Flora Bhuka and recently published in "Africa Confidential" 
revealed widespread corruption in the fast track program, 
including that many prominent members of Mugabe's regime have 
obtained multiple farms.  Not a single person on that list 
has been sanctioned.  Instead, we understand that Bhuka has 
been marginalized as a result of her report. 
 
--"With regard to the criticisms on land given to some 
officials but not utilized, it seems that this may not be 
directly connected with the Fast Track Program.  Generally, 
the Zimbabwean Government gave land to those who intended to 
utilize it for farming purposes": Only about 30 percent of 
those allocated commercial farms under the A2 resettlement 
program have taken up their new properties, and only 25 
percent of the allocated A2 properties are being farmed. 
 
--"Unfortunately, with priority being given to payment of 
compensation for improvements on the land, the Government has 
only been able to provide financial assistance to about 30 
percent of this group (new settlers needing financial 
assistance)":  Since very few farmers have received any form 
of compensation, this sentence is misleading. 
 
--"I am informed that, of the estimated four hundred thousand 
(former farmworkers) affected, some have been resettled, 
while many others have been re-employed on the 54,000 
recently created commercial farms":  Fewer than 10 percent of 
former farmworkers have been allocated land under fast track. 
 While we have no reliable estimates of how many former 
farmworkers have been re-employed, the numbers are likely low 
given that crops are being cultivated on only 25 percent of 
A2 farms.  Minister of Labor July Moyo recently refused to 
authorize an increase in the minimum wage for farmworkers 
from 4500 Zimbabwean dollars (U.S.$3) a month, saying such a 
raise would make it impossible for the new settlers, 
including himself, to hire them and constitute economic 
sabotage against the government's land reform efforts. 
 
--"Another area of concern and perhaps outcry pertains to the 
Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA). 
I am assured in this regard the Government of Zimbabwe 
continues to make genuine efforts to respond to such 
concerns":  More than a dozen journalists have been arrested 
since passage of this legislation in 2002, all of them from 
the independent media.  Despite a number of documented cases 
of falsehoods published in the Government-controlled media, 
not a single journalist from the public media has been 
arrested or charged under this repressive legislation.  The 
Government-controlled Media Commission established by this 
law has failed to act on the registration applications of 
most independent journalists, which prevents them from 
covering Parliament and a range of politically-significant 
events.  We would welcome GOZ moves to ease the repressive 
effect of AIPPA but have yet to see evidence of any 
meaningful action in that direction.  Indeed, proposed 
amendments to AIPPA submitted to Parliament would increase 
its repressive nature. 
 
--"I raised the issue (of MDC MP Job Sikhala's torture) with 
President Mugabe who confirmed that the MP concerned had 
taken the case to court and that the police admitted with 
apology that the MP was assaulted.  The police were to take 
necessary disciplinary action against the culprit.  President 
Mugabe denied any Government involvement in such police 
acts": The ZANU-PF Government has used the police as an 
instrument of repression against its political opponents, so 
Mugabe's reported attempts to distinguish between Government 
and the police are without merit.  We are not aware that 
anyone has been arrested or charged in connection with the 
torture of Sikhala. 
 
--"From all accounts, it would appear that violence -- 
political or non-political -- is fairly pervasive in 
Zimbabwe.  If there are some coming from Government agencies, 
there are certainly those coming from non-government 
agencies":  Prominent human rights organizations have 
documented many incidences of human rights violations -- 
including more than 1,000 cases of torture and 58 
politically-motivated murders in 2002 alone -- and found 
that, in the preponderance of instances (more than 90 
percent), the victims were supporters of the MDC and the 
perpetrators ruling party supporters or government agents. 
SULLIVAN