Land reform in Zimbabwe
|
|
In Zimbabwe, the question of land distribution and redistribution is perhaps the most crucial and the most bitterly contested political issue today.
| Contents |
History
The white farmer population had largely come to Southern Rhodesia in the century since the establishment of the British colony, which was named after British financier Cecil Rhodes, whose company, the British South Africa Company, violently seized the land from the indigenous Ndebele and Shona people in the 1890s. Many members of the white community had supported the Unilateral Declaration of Independence regime of Ian Smith, which had taken over the government in the mid-1960s and broke with Britain over proposals for eventual black majority rule.
There was a marked racial imbalance in the ownership and distribution of land. Zimbabwean whites, although making up less than 1% of the population, owned more than 70% of the arable land, and the best land at that. Since then, of the 4,500 white farmers, only 300 remain on farms. The rest lost their farms to confiscation, making 600,000 farmers, their families and workers lose their livelihood.
Lancaster House Agreement
After the Lancaster House Agreement paved the way for majority rule, and elections were won by Robert Mugabe in late February, 1980. The three-month long Lancaster House conference nearly failed over Land issues. However, the British agreed to fund reform, on a Willing buyer, Willing seller principle, where farmers who were unwilling to stay in Zimbabwe would be bought out by funds provided by the British through the Zimbabwe government.
1981
In 1981 the British were instrumental in setting up the Zimbabwe conference on reconstruction and development. At that conference, more than £630 million of aid was pledged.
In 1981 The Communal Land Act changed the Tribal Trust Lands into Communal Areas, and shifted land authority from traditional rulers to local authorities.
1985
In 1985 - The Land Acquisition Act, though drawn in the spirit of the 1979 Lancaster House "willing seller, willing buyer" clause (which could not be changed for 10 years), the Act gave the government the first right to purchase excess land for redistribution to the landless. The Act, however, had a limited impact largely because the government did not have the money to pay compensation to landowners. In addition, white farmers mounted a vigorous opposition to the Act. Because of the "willing seller, willing buyer" clause, the government was powerless in the face of the farmers' resistance. As a result, between 1980 and 1990 only 71,000 families out of a target of 162,000 were resettled.
1992
1992 - The Land Acquisition Act was enacted to speed up the land reform process by removing the "willing seller, willing buyer" clause. The Act empowered the government to buy land compulsorily for redistribution, and a fair compensation was to be paid for land acquired. Landowners were given the right to go to court if they did not agree to the price set by the acquiring authority. Opposition by landowners increased throughout the period 1992-1997.
Thus some land was purchased by the land fund, but few peasants were resettled while hundreds of abandoned and expropriated white farms ended up in the hands of cabinet ministers, senior government officials and wealthy indigenous businessmen. The British and Americans cut their losses and money, alleging widespread corruption. To date, the elites have the land and fewer than 70,000 peasants have been resettled, most without the necessary infrastructure to work the huge commercial farms from the 12 hectare plots they have been allocated.
Britain withdrew aid to the land reform programme, accusing Mugabe of giving the land to his "cronies". (London now claims to have contributed £44m, but Timothy Stamp, Zimbabwe's finance minister, says £17m).
By that time, British claimed contribution in terms of aid to Zimbabwe stood at a half billion pounds in support since independence. Furthermore, £47 million of that was specifically targeted for land reform and approximately £100 million was budgetary support which could have been used for land reform.
1997
November 1997 - As part of the implementation of the 1992 Land Acquisition Act, the government published a list of 1,471 farmlands it intended to buy compulsorily for redistribution. The list came out of a nationwide land identification exercise undertaken throughout the year. Landowners were given 30 days (as the 1992 Act demanded) to submit written objections.
1998
June 1998 - The government published its "policy framework" on the Land Reform and Resettlement Programme Phase II (LRRP II) which envisaged the compulsory purchase over five years of 50,000 km² from the 112,000 km² owned by commercial farmers (both black and white), parastatal corporations, churches, NGOs and multi-national companies. Broken down, the 50,000 km² meant that every year (between 1998 and 2003), the government intended to purchase 10,000 km² for redistribution.
September 1998 - The government called a donors conference in Harare on land reform (LRRP II); 48 countries and international organisations attended. The objective was to inform and involve the donor community in the programme. The donors unanimously endorsed the land programme, saying it was essential for poverty reduction, political stability and economic growth. They particularly appreciated the political imperative and urgency of the land reform, and agreed that the "inception phase" covering 24 months should start immediately.
1999
1999 - The Commercial Farmers Union freely offered for sale to the government 15,000 km² for redistribution. Landowners once again dragged their feet. As frustration set in on both sides, the government drafted a new constitution with a clause to compulsorily acquire land for redistribution without paying compensation. The drafting stage of the constitution was largely boycotted by the opposition (supported by the landowners), claiming that Mugabe only wanted a new constitution to entrench himself politically.
2000
February 2000 - The government organised a referendum on the new constitution. If it had been approved, the new constitution would have empowered the government to acquire land compulsorily without compensation. The country's powerful landed gentry threw its weight and money behind the disparate opposition and human rights groups who formed a united front to fight against the new constitution. Calling themselves the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), the united front won 55% of the votes as against the ruling Zanu-PF's 45%. There was wild jubilation by the MDC's local and foreign supporters, prompting "End of Mugabe" headlines in the British media.
Two weeks later, the pro-Mugabe War Veterans Association organised people of like mind (not necessarily war veterans, as many of them were too young to have fought in the Liberation War) to march on white-owned farmlands, initially with drums, song and dance. They claimed to have "seized" the farmlands. A total of 110,000 km² of land was seized.
2002
Mugabe faced Morgan Tsvangirai of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in presidential elections in March 2002. The incumbents picked Land Reform as the basis of their campaign.
On July 3rd, 2004, a report [1] (http://www.theindependent.co.zw/news/2004/July/Friday16/1003.html) adopted by the African Union executive council, which comprises foreign ministers of the 53 member states, criticised the government's handling of the election.
2004
June 5, 2004 - Minister for Lands, Land Reform and Resettlement John Nkomo said that all land, from crop fields to wildlife conservancies, would soon become state property. Farmland deeds would be replaced with 99-year leases, while those for wildlife conservancies would be limited to 25 years. However, there have since been denials around this policy.
Media analysis
The scale of the drop in farm output has produced widespread claims by aid agencies of starvation and famine. However Mugabe's expulsion of the international media has prevented full analysis of the scale of the famine and the resultant deaths. What is not in dispute is that a country once so rich in agricultural produce that it was dubbed the "bread basket" of Southern Africa, is now struggling to feed its own population.
Land reform elsewhere
Many Africans view land reform as an essential component of decolonization. Land reform was an important step in achieving economic development in many Third World countries since the post-World War II period, especially in the East Asian Tigers and "Tiger Cubs" nations such as Taiwan, South Korea, and Malaysia. Since mainland China's economic reforms led by Deng Xiaoping land reforms have also played a key role in the development of the People's Republic of China. What remains controversial in Mugabe's Zimbabwe is the manner of the land reform, its haphazard nature and the widespread suspicion that it is being used to reward Mugabe supporters and attack his opponents, with others (including thousands of black Africans who worked the white owned farms and those experiencing famine) losing out.
Currently (as of 2004), Zimbabwe suffers from widespread food shortages, an inflation rate of over 600%, and a bitter political struggle turned violent between the ruling ZANU-PF party and the opposition Movement for Democratic Change which has faced imprisonment and torture. Domestic and international critics lay much of the blame for the current chaos at the feet of the land reform program. Many Zimbabwean refugees have fled to South Africa or Mozambique.
Quotes
On June 10, 2004, British embassy spokesperson Sophie Honey said:
- The UK has not reneged on commitments (made) at Lancaster House. At Lancaster House the British government made clear that the long-term requirements of land reform in Zimbabwe were beyond the capacity of any individual donor country.
- Since independence we have provided 44 million pounds for land reform in Zimbabwe and 500 million pounds in bilateral development assistance.
- The UK remains a strong advocate for effective, well managed and pro-poor land reform. Fast-track land reform has not been implemented in line with these principles and we cannot support it.
External links
- Landnet (http://www.landweb.org/features-april02-3.htm)
- House of Lords - Hansard (http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds02/text/21016-02.htm)
- Land tenure in Rural Zimbabwe (http://www.gtz.de/orboden/blume/blu2_3_3.htm)
- Article in The East African from High Commissioner of the Republic of Zimbabwe in Nairobi. (http://www.nationaudio.com/News/EastAfrican/15052000/Opinion/Otheropinion12.html)