Britain wriggles out of land issue.

The British government has rejected Zimbabwe's demands for further aid to the land resettlement programme, saying the funds so far committed have been abused.

Mr Tony Lloyd, minister of state in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, said that the British-funded land resettlement programme had so far not benefited poor blacks as had been originally intended. "We are willing to help, but only on the basis that land distribution should first of all be geared towards the poor people -- that is towards poverty alleviation," Mr Lloyd told journalists on a recent visit to Harare (7 January).

He was clearly referring to reports of senior government and party officials illegally grabbing farms bought with aid funds for resettlement. Aid to the land programme was suspended in 1995 over allegations of corruption and impropriety in the allocation of acquired land. The UK had by that time spent Z$1.2bn ([pounds]40m).

Mr Lloyd also said his administration no longer feels morally bound to support Zimbabwe's land programme, despite assertions by President Robert Mugabe that the former colonial master had a responsibility to help. "Colonisation is not something that people of my generation in Britain benefited from," he said.

The UK is upset over a recent government decision to nationalise nearly half the land owned by white commercial farmers despite an original agreement to purchase under utilised land on a willing-seller basis. President Robert Mugabe said Britain had a duty to compensate "its white children." "Politically, we must argue that because we didn't get any payments, any compensation (from the original white settlers), we have no duty to compensate any farmer who loses his land," President Mugabe said. "So we adopted the policy that we compensate the farmer for improvements and nothing more.

However the government has come under fire from commercial farmers who have now lodged objections with the Agricultural Ministry. The Commercial Farmers Union (CFU) said most of the farmers whose land was earmarked for takeover without payment had objected. "Most of them have title deeds. They bought the land and that's the basis on which people farm," said a union spokesperson.

Full impact

The full impact of the impending nationalisation of farms is still being assessed, but the plan has dealt a severe blow to Zimbabwe's otherwise successful campaign to present itself as an investor-friendly country. Mr Lloyd said that the land grab violated the Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement currently in force between the two countries and threatened to ruin the "excellent" relations between them. The agreement states that there must be no expropriation of investment.

Commercial farm output is expected to decline by one-third this year, costing the country nearly half its foreign currency earnings. Mr David Hasluck, director of the CFU, said: "In 1997, commercial farm output was Z$l4bn ($700m). If they take our farms it will be Z$8bn." Such a decline in production would be disastrous, analysts say, as agriculture is the backbone of the Zimbabwean economy, accounting for 40% of foreign currency earnings.

Mr Mugabe's government is under pressure from veterans of the country's brutal guerilla war which brought independence from Britain in 1980. The vets are demanding land in addition to the hefty pensions the government has already granted them. The war was primarily about land. The executive director of the Zimbabwe ex-Combatants Foundation, Mr John Gwitira, said the vets had bought tractors with support from the Chinese government with the intention of going into commercial agriculture. However, most of them lack training and experience.

The impact of the impending land grab is already being felt by commerce and construction. A survey conducted by the Zimbabwe National Chamber of Commerce in the rich Karoi farming district revealed that dealers in agricultural equipment bad lost roughly Z$15m or one-third of projected income due to uncertainty over the land issue.

"Political considerations are over-riding economic decision making," said Mr John Makamure, the chief economist of the chamber. He said key players in the economy had not been consulted prior to the announcement on 28 November 1997 that government wanted to nationalise 1,503 commercial farms. If they had been consulted, they would have suggested the following: that the government identify people who need land; train potential recipients of commercial farmland before settling them; market the programme to external financiers; ensure that the major objective remains to boost economic production.

Mr Richard Maarsdorp of the Construction Industry Council said the sector faces collapse due to loss of agricultural jobs. Construction of 10 big dams has been suspended.

Current impasse

The current impasse does not look as if it can be resolved easily as Zimbabwe maintains that the UK must shoulder the responsibility for compensating farmers. "Britain cannot wriggle out of the responsibility as Mr Lloyd has tried to do," commented the state-owned Herald newspaper. Agriculture minister, Mr Kumbirai Kangai said that if land was not taken now, future generations might resort to violence.

Meanwhile, Zimbabwean-Americans affected by the land takeover say they blame the US government for not taking a definite stand on the land issue. US secretary of state Madeleine Albright, who met President Mugabe, said however that her government did not want to meddle in the "internal affairs" of African countries.