This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS HARARE 000627 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR AF/S 
NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR JFRAZER 
 
¶E. O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ECON EAGR PGOV ZI
SUBJECT:  DIVERGENT COMMERCIAL FARMER GROUPS ATTEMPT TO FIND 
COMMON GROUND 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED.  NOT FOR INTERNET POSTING. 
 
¶1. (SBU)  Laboff attended a meeting called by the Commercial 
Farmers Union (CFU) intended to address the needs of 
displaced farmers; the meeting actually ended up addressing 
divisions between its supporters and supporters of the hard- 
line farmers' group Justice for Agriculture (JAG).  Although 
the two groups represent the same constituency, a split 
occurred last July when the CFU elected to continue seeking 
dialogue with the GOZ, while JAG elected to pursue court 
challenges and international publication of corruption and 
irregularities associated with the land resettlement 
program.  Subsequent conversations with CFU president Colin 
Cloete  revealed that the "split" was actually a carefully 
conceived strategy which would enable divergent factions to 
pursue separate agendas on behalf of the group as a whole. 
However, since most supporters of CFU are still attempting 
to remain on their farms while most supporters of JAG are 
completely dispossessed, the two-track approach dissolved 
and the two groups have reverted to factionalism, acrimony, 
and name-calling. 
 
¶2. (SBU)  Both factions, with a few individual exceptions, 
agreed that the best way to confront the continuing seizure 
of farms and resulting chaos on the ground was to present a 
united front.  Cloete reported that Masipula Sithole, a 
prominent political analyst, opines that the GOZ has no 
coherent plan for the future of agriculture, but rather is 
progressing on a "crisis management" basis.  Cloete affirmed 
that his organization was attempting to craft a suitable 
response to the demand that it sign a one-sided and heavily 
GOZ-weighted Memorandum of Understanding.  Although still 
being drafted, this response reportedly will be presented to 
the GOZ when "the time is right," presumably within the next 
few weeks.  Cloete also raised publicly the possibility that 
many farmers' only relief might lie in compensation, and 
that full and fair compensation might not materialize until 
the next generation. 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
¶3. (SBU)  It would obviously best serve the two publicly 
warring factions to present a united front to the GOZ, and 
many participants at this meeting indicated the groups' 
agreement with that strategy.  Although the chances for all 
commercial farmers to return to their properties are 
practically nonexistent, there are moderate factions within 
the GOZ that have admitted that returning some farmers to 
productive endeavors is critical for the country's food 
security.  Whether those forces can prevail is uncertain, 
but infighting and backbiting between farmers only serves to 
make them easier targets for the hardline forces.  The CFU 
seems eager for support and recognition by the USG, and 
Cloete twice asked Laboff to comment on the current 
situation -- in relation to eventual compensation for 
dispossessed farmers, and in relation to food aid for 
dispossessed farm workers.   Although Laboff could offer 
little in the way of solution, she did point out that few, 
if any, bilateral donors would consider discussing with the 
GOZ assistance for land reform under the current political 
climate, and that international food aid donors are aware of 
the desperation of displaced farm workers and attempting to 
address their critical needs.  Although commercial farmers 
seem determined to try and retain something from their 
ruined legacy, the awareness is dawning that help will not 
arrive from the outside, but that they must somehow find the 
means to help themselves -- and each other. 
 
Whitehead