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

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 HARARE 001713 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR AF, A/S KANSTEINER AND PDAS SNYDER; ALSO FOR 
AF/S, RAYNOR 
PLEASE PASS USAID FOR ADMINISTRATOR NATSIOS, AA/AFR NEWMAN, 
AA/DCHA WINTER, AND FFP, LANDIS 
NSC FOR SENIOR DIRECTOR FRAZER 
ROME FOR FODAG 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/28/2008 
TAGS: EAID PGOV PREL EAGR PHUM ZI
SUBJECT: WFP/UNDP REPORT A FOOD-FIGHT IN THE OFFING 
 
REF: HARARE 1712 
 
Classified By: DCM REWHITEHEAD DUE TO 1.5 (b) and (d). 
 
¶1.  (c) Summary.  In a somber August 28 meeting, UNDP resrep 
Victor Angelo commented on the accelerating downward spiral 
of the Zimbabwean economy and increasingly difficult UN/NGO 
relations with the GOZ.  The WFP Regional Director described 
a discouraging exchange with President Mugabe on NGO 
involvement in food distribution.  Although there was no GOZ 
representative present to listen, donors hewed to the common 
position that GOZ demands to cede food recipient selection 
and physical distribution to local councils and headmen 
(reftel) is unacceptable, both for WFP-controlled and 
bilateral food pipelines.  Angelo telephoned DCM after the 
meeting to say that he was expecting some difficult 
negotiations on a renewed MOU that would permit food 
distribution to continue and counted on strong U.S. support. 
We think that letting the UNDP take the lead at this moment 
is the correct approach, although this may need to be 
reviewed if the GOZ does not back away from unreasonable 
demands. It is our view that if they will not yield to 
reason, we must draw a line in the sand and halt further U.S. 
contributions until they agree to a status quo approach that 
will not politicize and fatally taint humanitarian food 
donations.  End summary. 
 
-------------------------- 
Gloom and Doom in the Room 
-------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (u) An unusually restrained Victor Angelo kicked off the 
meeting by reciting a list of dismal statistics about the 
Zimbabwean economy, none of these news to those in attendance. 
 
-- GDP was down one-third since 1999 and stood to plunge at 
least another 20 percent in 2003. 
 
-- Zimbabwe was 550,000 MT short of fertilizer for the 
upcoming agricultural season, with an equally serious seed 
shortages looming. 
 
-- There would be little if any irrigated tobacco production 
during the coming cropping year. 
 
-- Foot and mouth disease had enveloped Harare and moved 
north to the Norton/Chinhoyi areas.  The GOZ had procured 
some HMD vaccine and taken other measures, such as decreeing 
that all buffalo on game farms and conservancies would be 
moved to national parks.  How the latter might be 
accomplished is a mystery. 
 
-- In the past three weeks, the GOZ had listed for seizure 
375 additional farms to include plantations, export producing 
operations, and even some indigenous-owned farms. 
 
-- The formal economy was withering. 
 
-- The GMB claimed that it had procured 150,000 MT from the 
last harvest, a dubious figure.  (Angelo told us last week 
that GMB probably had acquired no more than 40,000 MT.)  The 
GMB also claimed that they would import another 340,000 MT, 
another questionable figure given the paucity of forex. 
 
-- The brain drain continued apace. 
 
--------------------- 
Moving the Goal Posts 
--------------------- 
 
¶3.  (sbu) Angelo said that there appeared to be a hardening 
of attitude by the GOZ toward the UN and cooperating partners 
involved in humanitarian feeding.  The most obvious 
manifestation was the August 14 promulgation of new GOZ rules 
that shunted the NGOs aside and ceded food beneficiary 
selection and physical food distribution to local councils 
and headmen, most of whom are in ZANU-PF's pocket.  In an 
August 20 meeting with Minister of Labor and Social Welfare 
July Moyo, Angelo said that he had warned that there was a 
low level of donor response to the UN EMOP (for Zimbabwe) to 
date -- pushing ahead with the new rules would make it very 
difficult for UNDP/WFP to enlist sufficient donor support to 
meet the appeal.  He said that Moyo had backtracked, stating 
that the new rules did not signify a meaningful change from 
existing procedures.  Angelo said that this line ran counter 
to reports he had received of Moyo and other ministers 
meeting with NGOs in the provinces, where they stressed that 
the new rules would go into force.  Minister of Information 
Jonathan Moyo, according to one press report, went so far as 
to say that NGOs that did not cooperate "would be cut off at 
the knees."  Angelo said that negotiations were underway for 
a renewed one-year MOU between the UNDP/WFP and GOZ on 
modalities for humanitarian food operations for 2003 and 
¶2004.  The outcome of these negotiations would be critical to 
assuring sufficient and timely donor response. 
 
------------------ 
The Donor Response 
------------------ 
 
¶4.  (sbu) The assembled donors responded in turn and in close 
harmony.  There was universal agreement that the new NGO 
rules as now written would be unacceptable and would 
complicate donor participation.  Policy clarity was essential 
before those present could speak definitively to their 
governments' response to the EMOP.  No one said outright that 
they would refuse to contribute to a program stage-managed by 
GOZ/ZANU-PF proxies, but no one piled grain futures on the 
table either.  The Angolan High Commissioner responded that 
there were positive signs on the political front and queried 
if a forward-leaning donor response might provide incentive 
for further progress.  The DCM pointed out that the U.S. 
bases its contributions on humanitarian need and not 
political criteria.  We seek a depoliticized program and need 
a similar commitment from whatever government we engage on 
this issue.  Policy clarity referred to food distribution 
mechanisms and food security issues, not the political 
environment. 
 
---------------------------------------- 
President Mugabe's Views/UN Counterpoint 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶5.  (sbu) After the representatives of locally based UN 
specialized agencies delivered their set pieces, visiting WFP 
Regional Director Mike Sackett and WFP Representative Kevin 
Farrell offered some worthwhile insights.  Sackett said that 
he had accompanied a visiting OPEC delegation (reportedly 
offering a package of USD 9 million for the regional appeal) 
to Zimbabwe and had participated in a meeting with President 
Mugabe.  Mugabe had heard OPEC out and then turned to Sackett 
and brusquely demanded what WFP intended to do.  Sackett had 
replied that WFP faced a "Herculean task" of sourcing 450,000 
MT of food and moving it through the pipeline expeditiously. 
The August 14 announcement on NGOs had not helped.  When 
Mugabe pled ignorance, July Moyo clarified, and Mugabe picked 
up the theme with "not encouraging" comments: 
 
-- we cannot undermine local Zimbabwean structures. 
 
-- NGOs have a political agenda. 
 
-- Many NGOs are staffed with callow foreign youth. 
 
-- Religious NGOs give food only to those of their own 
religious persuasion. 
 
-- Mugabe himself had personally assured WFP's Jim Morris 
that food distribution would be apolitical, so there was 
nothing to worry about. 
 
¶6.  (sbu) Sackett said that following the meeting WFP had 
decided to send Mugabe a strong letter from Morris, the 
afternoon of August 28, stating the following, among other 
points. 
 
--"for WFP, NGOs are crucial to distribution of food relief" 
 
-- "It would be a SERIOUS (underlined) mistake to make 
changes to established procedures." 
 
WFP's message to other parts of the GOZ were equally clear: 
WFP will tolerate no abuses and will cease all food 
distribution in areas where there are abuses.  He said that 
WFP had instructed its field staff and NGO partners to be 
especially vigilant and diligent in reporting any changes. 
He concluded by noting that he hoped that recent developments 
would not halt planning for food pledges in donor capitals, 
since this could seriously imperil the food pipeline in the 
crucial January to March 2004 time frame. 
 
¶6.  (sbu) Farrell said that he too had prepared a strong 
letter to July Moyo urging that the GOZ maintain the status 
quo.  He reported that August distributions were ongoing and 
that so far, "it is business as usual."  He concluded by 
explaining WFP policy reasons for rejecting a prescribed GOZ 
food for work program for the able bodied, since GOZ control 
of public work projects could translate into preventing those 
the GOZ does not favor from working, and thus eating. 
 
 
¶7.  (c) Angelo called DCM after the meeting to thank him and 
other donors for their solidarity and the implicit support 
this would give him as he went into further MOU negotiations 
with the GOZ.  He said that he depended on strong donor 
support, and especially from the U.S. as the largest 
contributor, as he undertook what he expected to be bruising 
negotiations.  He agreed that the EU had made a tactical 
error in publicizing significant food donations to Zimbabwe 
even before the GOZ appeal was released, thereby leading GOZ 
officials to assume that food would be forthcoming, whatever 
the prevailing climate. 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶8.  (c) The U.S. has important bilateral as well as 
multilateral interests at play here, since the outcome of the 
UNDP/WFP MOU negotiation will provide a template for our own 
C-SAFE MOUs that must also be renegotiated before the end of 
the year.  We agree that the best strategy for now is to let 
the UNDP take the lead and provide strong public and private 
support as needed/requested, both here and in Rome.  Angelo 
is clearly aware of the stakes and does not want a failed 
humanitarian relief effort on his watch.  Accordingly, he 
will not cut a deal that the donors cannot accept.  Our 
principal interests here are to see that the vulnerable are 
fed, to continue unpublicized planning for U.S. contributions 
that will keep the food pipelines intact, and not to count 
coup on the GOZ/ZANU in a public tit for tat.  If the UN does 
not prevail, however, we may still need to become directly 
involved and publicly pull back from any further food aid 
until the GOZ agrees to acceptable terms.  One thing is 
clear.  From a policy and from a humanitarian point of view, 
we cannot allow the GOZ to win a game of food relief chicken 
and replace USAID's clasped hands logo with ZANU/PF's 
clenched fist. 
SULLIVAN