Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai on Thursday admitted the government cannot compensate any farmers for farms acquired in the land 'reform' programme, echoing Robert Mugabe's sentiments that the British need to foot the bill.
Tsvangirai and Mugabe were both speaking at the opening of the Investment Conference in Harare on Thursday, where the land issue and property rights dominated talks. Mugabe passionately defended his land resettlement scheme, which, since it began in 2000, has resulted in the destruction of the once prosperous agricultural sector. He was speaking in response to a question on farmers' compensation posed by the President of the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU), Trevor Gifford.
With agriculture as the key to getting Zimbabwe's economy working again, the unity government hoped the investment conference would persuade potential investors to put their money into agriculture, as well as into other sectors such as mining, manufacturing and tourism. But Mugabe did not raise investor confidence by telling Gifford that 'not necessarily' every white farm will be seized under his ongoing land 'reform' programme. He also insisted that compensation for land was not the government's responsibility.
"The responsibility of compensation rests on the shoulders of the British government and its allies," Mugabe said. "We pay compensation for developments and improvements. That's our obligation and we have honoured that."
But the fact is that full compensation has not been paid at all and only about 5% of farmers have received anything at all. No compensation has been paid for land. The CFU President told SW Radio Africa on Friday that although he wasn't surprised by Mugabe's comments, he felt disheartened that there's been so little change in attitude within the unity government. He explained that critical reform is still a long way off in Zimbabwe, and said investors at the conference will be disillusioned by this visible lack of change.
"The reality is that the investors were shocked to hear the truth," Gifford said. "This government has a lot of work to do to restore property rights and the rule of law before any investment is forthcoming."
Mugabe has openly supported the ongoing offensive to remove the remaining commercial farmers off their land, saying in a speech earlier this year that white farmers were 'not welcome' in Zimbabwe. Despite his clear animosity towards the white farming community, which has directly resulted in intensified farm attacks and seizures this year, Mugabe still told the conference delegates on Thursday; "Above all Zimbabwe upholds the sanctity of property rights."
His comments come as at least three farmers in Nyamandlovu are set to lose their farms under the pretence of the land resettlement scheme. SW Radio Africa understands that war veterans loyal to Minister of Mines Obert Mpofu, have invaded farms in the area this week. Mpofu was last year also implicated in land attacks in the area, after more than a hundred war veterans attacked a farm belong to Wayne Munro. Munro was assaulted in the attack.
Tsvangirai meanwhile echoed Mugabe's comments, telling delegates that the government could not compensate farmers for lost land, because of a lack of funds. He said that while there may be disagreement on the way the land reform was carried out, there was agreement on the need for it. Tsvangirai himself has also dismissed the ongoing land attacks as a handful of incidents that have been 'blown out of proportion'.
Discord in the so-called 'unity' formation was further exposed on Thursday when Arthur Mutambara, the Deputy Prime Minister, contradicted Mugabe on the land issue. He told the would-be investors that Zimbabwe needed property rights and security of tenure to be restored and said the "country can't keep pushing the blame" for its failures on to former colonial powers. He also called for a moratorium on the ongoing farm attacks, which, despite bearing witness to, he has done nothing about.
Mutambara, who is already at loggerheads with Tsvangirai over how to deal with the unilateral appointment of Gideon Gono and Johannes Tomana, on Thursday also openly differed with Mugabe on other fundamental issues. Mutambara spoke strongly against the stalling of the implementation of the Global Political Agreement, attempts to force the Kariba draft constitution on the people, and the state's failure to halt the breakdown of the rule of law. In a clear response to Mugabe's recent declaration during his ZANU PF Central Committee meetings that the Kariba draft would be the only reference document during the constitution-making process, Mutambara said Zimbabweans were yearning for a people-driven constitution.
Comments 1 to 5 of 46 Post a comment
I didn't think the British agree to by ALL the white commercial farms in Zimbabwe under the Lancaster Agreement! So out of almost 4200 white-owned commecial farms there will a dozen or two left? Mugabe expects the UK o buy ALL the farms? At least MT admitted it was because the Government of Zimbabwe has no money!
The money to compensate those farmers isn't coming from the "West"! Maybe claims should be filed with the AU Tribunal by the farmers who have been dispossessed? Maybe claims should be brought against the Government of Zimbabwe in the WTO?
The fact of the matter could not be more clearly stated by Trevor Gifford, "The reality is that the investors were shocked to hear the truth,"....."This government has a lot of work to do to restore property rights and the rule of law before any investment is forthcoming."
No reform, no money - apparrantly not even from the Chinese (although they will try and steal Zimbabwe's platinum).
"Total Empowerment!" - Empty rhetoric from morally bankrupt criminals.
Juhlman, Yes Britain is responsible for most of the payments to white farmers. In addition they are largely responsible for land distribution that favored white tiny...tiny...tin.. minority. Agreements were made and UK should have kept their word. Maybe it is true that you cannot trust an anglo white person. That is the impression they left.
White Rhodesian farmers are a liability to every Zimbabwean political leader. If you support them, you lose the elections. They also are to blame for seeking publicity abroad when they disagree with the black majority. They are a bad apple in our midst. That is the plain truth. They pretend to live in utopia. Morgan Tsvangirai will eventually abandon them as well, and he will still get my vote. Lets face the truth, not political correctness, white Zimbabwean farmers are resented and not liked by most majority Zimbabweans. Anybody is free to discuss this (and I hope not political correctness).
I see Phiri you are back to your old racist ways.
Why stop at farms, rush to homes and businesses, why not evict every white person from the country. You sure are not the solution to Zimbabwes problems. It is the mentalities like yours that are the problem in the world today. Your hate rehetorict should and needs to be consigned to the past.
Phiri, we often disagree but I would not go so far as to call you racist.
I, for one, actually do recognize the political liability that white farmers in Zimbabwe carry to ANYONE who would defend their cause. But the reality of it does NOT make it right! I agree they they might not even be popular, yet even you MUST agree that those farmers DID actually employ thousands, if not millions, of "black" Zimbabweans. Those farmers DID actually produce a surplus of agriculture that fed the nation and provided for export income.
And THAT was probably a useful place from which to BEGIN a just re-distribution of land in Zimbabwe - by taking a PORTION of the land being cultivated by white farmers (say 50-60%) and giving it to the "black" workers of those "white" farms who actually knew the land, had worked the land and knew how to grow things - not destroy things................. This would've allowed "white" farmers to continue their agricultural production (albeit on a reduced landholding) and then allowed their former employees to become successful commercial farmers in their own right! Such a course probably would not have caused such a drastic reduction in Zimbabwe's agricultural productivity while at the same time furthering the cause of land redistribution in a transparent and fair manner!
But sadly, I agree, MT will probably abandon the remaining "white" farmers for politically expediency if that's what it costs him to actually put an end to ZANU-PF's kleptocracy. His margin for error is very small................
However, you must acknowledge that the actual effect of ZANU-PF's "land redistribution" has been to destroy the agricultural productivity of Zimbabwe! How many of the "black" farm workers that formerly worked on "white" farms have received land that was "re-distributed"? Not only did these "black" Zimbabweans NOT receive land, but they also lost their jobs working on the white farms as those who had "Offer Letters" have allowed the land they received to go fallow!
On the other hand, who DID actually receive "Offer Letters"? How many MDC-T and MDC-M supporters have received them? Or, consider the agricultural productivity of the farms "re-distributed" as compared to before they were "re-distributed"?
Where is the justice in THAT!
Also, I definitely do NOT agree that the Lancaster Agreements intention was that ALL white farmers in Zimbabwe were to lose their entire farms!
I understand and am sympathetic to the redistribution of land as it pertains to what and how much was retained by the white minority following the Lancaster Agreements, but did the agreement really intend to dispossess almost the entire white minority of ALL of their land? I think not. Did the U.K. actually agree to reimburse ALL of the white farmers of Zimbabwe? What about those who purchased their land after the Lancaster Agreements were concluded? Should the U.K. be required to reimburse them as well?
Moreover, from a purely Kantian perspective, how has the land that has been "re-distributed" been tended by those that received it? If the land is not presently productive when it previously was, then isn't that a crime in and of itself when one half of Zimbabwe's population now requires foreign food aid to survive?
What is the common thread through EVERYTHING wrong in Zimbabwe since liberation? ZANU-PF/Mugabe! The "West" did not take previously productive land and turn it fallow. That would lead a reasonable person to question the manner and procedure by which the land was "re-distributed". Unfortunately, many here (not you Phiri) lack the intellect to ask such questions, they merely agree that things are bad, but retardedly conclude that it is the "West's" fault.
And NO, I will not engage in political correctness, and NO, it is NOT racist to actually discuss real issues that do exist between the races in Africa.
We disagree (as we often have), but you are one of the few I disagree with who have anything useful to contribute to the discussion here concerning Zimbabwe.
Peace Dude!
Julhmann ... l am glad and thankful for showing all posters that you are a reasonable and rational person. You are capable of contributing positive aspects to the debate to the way forward though you are limited by your failure to point out the lack of remorse for the racism and discriminatory practices of the British settlers (not the West ... lets be more specific as to who we are talking about). The rhodesians cannot pretend that they were killing their fellow country men and basically, in 1980, the lot of them were Soldiers of the losing side ... enemy soldiers and as such they should have been put in 'keeps'.
See All Comments