GOZ LAND REFORM BRIEFING: THE MASK COMES OFF

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