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

170948Z Sep 03

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HARARE 001880 
 
SIPDIS 
 
AID FOR DCHA/FFP LANDIS, CRUMBLY, MUTAMBA, PETERSEN 
DCHA/OFDA FOR PRATT, BARTON, MENGHETTI, BORNS 
HALMRAST-SANCHEZ, MCCONNELL 
AFR/SA FOR FLEURET, COPSON, BAKER, MACNAIRN 
STATE/AF FOR RAYNOR, DELISI 
PRETORIA FOR DIJKERMAN, HELM, DISKIN, HALE 
NAIROBI FOR DEPREZ, RILEY 
LILONGWE FOR RUBEY, SINK 
LUSAKA FOR GUNTHER, NIELSON 
MAPUTO FOR POLAND, BLISS 
MASERU FOR AMB LOFTIS 
MBABANE FOR KENNA 
GABORONE FOR THOMAS, MULLINS AND DORMAN 
ROME FOR FODAG FOR LAVELLE, DAVIS 
 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAID PREL US ZI
SUBJECT:  UN Coordination Meeting with GOZ and 
Donors 
 
 
¶1.  Summary.  On September 15th, the UN held its first 
coordination meeting on the humanitarian crisis, after a 
hiatus of many months, with the Government of Zimbabwe 
(GOZ) and donors.  Overall, despite the GOZ's attempt to 
try and reassure the donors and encourage them to 
respond favorably to the humanitarian appeal, the 
meeting was not useful in addressing the concerns donors 
have raised regarding the apparent attempts by the GOZ 
to exert greater control over the international food 
relief process.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.  On September 15th, UN Resident Representative, 
Victor Angelo, called the first coordination meeting on 
the humanitarian crisis, after a hiatus of many months. 
The meeting was held at the request of the GOZ.  In 
attendance were more than 50 persons, including 
representatives of the GOZ, donor countries, UN agencies 
and a select group of NGOs.  July Moyo, the Minister of 
Public Service, Labor and Social Welfare, headed the GOZ 
delegation.  After introductory remarks by Victor Angelo 
noting that both the GOZ appeal and the UN's 
Consolidated Appeal have been formally issued and 
stressing the need to discuss the different sectors 
covered in the appeal, Angelo turned the floor over to 
Minister Moyo. 
 
¶3.  Moyo began by summarizing the GOZ's appeal, which 
covers food, non-food (health, HIV/AIDS) and 
agricultural recovery assistance.  Moyo emphasized that 
the lessons learned from last year highlighted the need 
for improved coordination among the GOZ, the UN 
agencies, donors and NGOs in responding to the 
humanitarian crisis.  Moyo acknowledged that donors had 
expressed concerns over the GOZ's recently issued 
"Policy on Operations of Non-Governmental Organisations 
in Humanitarian and Development Assistance in Zimbabwe." 
He stated that the policy was intended to be a statement 
of lessons learned and not designed to change the 
existing procedures and practices, but expressed his 
willingness to respond to questions and provide further 
explanations.  Moyo also stated that the GOZ was willing 
to continue these coordination meetings as frequently as 
every two weeks, if acceptable to the UN and donors, in 
order to further coordination. 
 
¶4.  When the floor was opened for questioning, 
Ambassador Sullivan began by expressing the broad donor 
concern that the GOZ's policy was being taken by 
officials at local levels as a significant change from 
the beneficiary selection and food distribution 
procedures that had worked effectively over the past 
year.  Sullivan stressed the need for the GOZ to 
communicate publicly and in writing to all levels of 
government that the past procedures would continue 
unaffected and the role of NGOs in the beneficiary 
selection and food distribution process would remain 
unchanged.  The Canadian Charge asked about the status 
of the MOU being negotiated between the GOZ and WFP, and 
specifically inquired whether the MOU or the GOZ's 
policy would take precedence in the event of a conflict. 
The Dutch Charge asked about the rationale behind the 
GOZ's closure of the field offices of the UN's Relief 
and Recovery Unit (RRU), and when such offices might be 
reopened. 
 
¶5.  In addressing these inquiries, Minister Moyo did not 
specifically respond to the comment about the need for a 
public written statement from the GOZ.  Rather, Moyo 
only provided general assurances to the assembled donors 
that nothing in the GOZ's documents suggests that the 
role of NGOs would be different than last year.  Moyo 
promised that if any problems or misinterpretations 
arise, the GOZ would deal with them on the ground 
swiftly.  Moyo also stated that he will personally be 
travelling around the country, primarily to discuss the 
GOZ's agricultural input scheme, but he will "clarify" 
the policy to local structures.  Regarding the question 
about precedence between the WFP MOU and the GOZ's 
policy, Moyo effectively avoided the issue, explaining 
in general terms that many things take precedence over 
policy in light of the legal framework the GOZ operates 
under.  Concering the RRU offices, once again, Moyo 
declined to address the specific issue.  He responded 
that the issue of monitoring food distribution by the 
RRU had been raised by the UN Special Envoy, James 
Morris, with President Mugabe and, therefore, is a 
matter of foreign affairs which should properly be 
addressed to the Foreign Ministry. 
 
¶6.  Comment.  The NGO policy was clearly another attempt 
by a beleagured government to exert increased control 
over international humanitarian assistance resources. 
The donor response was swift and emphatic, with WFP 
reporting no new aid pledges since August 14th, the date 
the policy was launched.  The government's request for 
this meeting suggests its concern over the negative 
impact on the international response to its aid appeal. 
Despite Minister Moyo's best effort to assuage donor 
concerns, however, his failure to adequately address the 
major issues raised at the meeting was largely self- 
defeating, leaving continuing unease within the donor 
community.  Because donors have maintained a united 
stance opposing the GOZ's attempt to usurp control over 
food aid resources, distributions on the ground have 
been implemented with virtually no change.  Nonetheless, 
the GOZ is clearly resisting pressure to publicly 
retract its policy statement. Post will continue to 
monitor events closely and report on any incidents that 
might impact on our on-going food relief program in 
Zimbabwe.  Until the issues in country are finally 
resolved, it is important for USAID/FFP to refrain from 
making any new pledges of food assistance without prior 
concurrence from post. Sullivan