UK 'has no moral duty' to compensate Zim farmers
by
30/06/2009 00:00:00
BRITAIN has no legal or moral obligation to compensate white farmers for land seized by the Zimbabwe government, the former colonial power’s outgoing ambassador has said.
Evicted white commercial farmers’ “requirement for compensation from the Zimbabwean government is probably the right legal process,” says Andrew Pocock, but “whether it has any practical impact is another matter.”
Winding down his three-year posting to Zimbabwe dominated by allegations of meddlesome diplomacy by President Robert Mugabe’s government, Pocock used an interview with SW Radio Africa to revive a decade-long debate around Zimbabwe’s controversial land reforms which played a massive part in a chill of diplomatic relations between Harare and London.
He said: “In the fairly recent past, the Zimbabwean government has said that compensation rests with the United Kingdom. Well it does not – either legally or morally.
“In Lancaster House, sovereignty was transferred to the Zimbabwean government. The disruption on the farms was not caused by anything to do with the United Kingdom, it was driven by Zimbabwean government policy … therefore we have no legal obligation for compensation. We’ve never accepted that, and we won’t.”
Pocock’s comments are a direct rejection of the position of the Zimbabwe government – chiefly that Britain agreed to fund land reform at the 1979 Lancaster House talks where the white minority rulers agreed a cessation of hostilities and a surrender of sovereignty.
At Lancaster, Britain agreed to fund land 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 Zimbabwean government.
Under the agreement, the new Zimbabwean government could not seize European-owned land for the first ten years of independence. Britain provided £44 million to the government for land resettlement projects.
In the same interview, Pocock appeared to shift slightly when he alluded to Britain’s “obligations”, while insisting that his country did not have “unlimited liability” to compensate farmers.
He said: “During the period of the 1980s, the UK spent £44 million on land reform which was a substantial sum at the time. We did it on a willing seller, willing buyer basis as had been agreed and we only stopped funds for land when it was clear that land was not being passed to the poor and the landless.
“That is not reneging, that is simply pointing to the evidence and it’s also resisting the proposition that has crept in that the UK somehow has unlimited liability forever and a duty to fund land reform in Zimbabwe. The Lancaster House never said anything like that.
“What Lancaster House said and what we undertook then was (a) to do everything we could to help with land reform (b) to contribute substantially ourselves and (c) to seek support from others in the international community. Now, we did all that, so this is really again another urban or rural myth that we need at some early stage to lay to rest.”
In a now infamous letter to the Zimbabwe government in 1997, Britain’s former International Development Secretary Claire Short said she did not accept that “Britain has a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe”.
“We are a new government from diverse backgrounds without links to former colonial interests. My own origins are Irish and as you know we were colonised not colonisers … It follows from this that a programme of rapid land acquisition as you now seem to envisage would be impossible for us to support,” Short said in the letter now seen as a turning point in relations between the two countries.
Three years after Short’s letter, white farmers were under siege from independence war veterans and President Mugabe’s supporters who marched on their properties, triggering an outpouring of international condemnation which would lead to Zimbabwe’s international isolation until recently when Western countries agreed to government-to-government talks following the formation of a unity government.
The Commercial Farmers Union (CFU), representing 400 white land owners, recently demanded US$15 billion compensation from the cash-strapped Zimbabwe government for farm “improvements, damages and interest”.
The CFU says most of the country's remaining white commercial farmers are no longer interested in farming and will give up their land if the government gives them fair compensation.
According to the CFU, Zimbabwe expropriated 11,600 out of the 12,000 white-owned commercial farms since 2000.
Pocock said there may be a moment in the future when Britain could assist in the settlement of the land dispute but warned that such an arrangement would not be on the “old paternalistic basis”.
He said: “I hope as we move into the future, as we reach a situation where the restoration of commercial agriculture is possible, it won’t be on the old paternalistic basis, it will be on some new foundation but when we reach that point, as part of the natural justice, as part of building confidence for future investors, some element of compensation for people unconstitutionally displaced might be considered.
“I think we haven't got anywhere near the mechanisms and we certainly haven't decided who would pay for that compensation or indeed how much it would be but I think in natural justice, some form of address to this should be considered and I hope in due course will.”
Britain recently named Mark Canning as its new ambassador to Zimbabwe to replace Pocock who is set to accept a new diplomatic assignment.
Labels: ANDREW POCOCK, LAND REFORM, WHITE FARMERS
Read more...
McGee, Pocock do not deserve any respect
Marondera
EDITOR — Like I have always argued, The Herald has been, and will always be, my newspaper of choice as long as it remains objective as currently reflected through its nationalistic policies.
I refer to the article by Eddie Cross in Wednesday’s issue of your paper in which he raised issues which, if not handled properly, evoke emotions that are better left in the past.
Cross, the way I see it, is very misinformed because he has not read Zimbabwe’s national newspaper in 10 years and I doubt if then he ever listened to or watched national radio and television stations other than the dubiously broadcasting ghost stations that illegally beam into the country.
He portrays ambassadors James McGee (United States) and Andrew Pocock (Britain) as figures who determine the destiny of Zimbabweans, something which is very false.
These two ambassadors’ governments played a very serious role in accepting the request by Cross and friends to have illegal sanctions imposed on this nation with the idea of Cross himself letting Zimbabwe "crash and burn" so that he would come in like the saviour.
The reason why Cross and friends crafted the sanctions on behalf of these two’s governments was because Zimbabwe had dared repossess land illegally acquired and held by Cross and his white friends, this time not with the black ones who helped him knit the sanctions proposals.
These sanctions destroyed Zimbabwe’s economy to an extent that had never been witnessed in our history.
We all remember McGee’s predecessor, Christopher Dell, swearing that our Government would collapse in six months because he knew the effect that the evil sanctions were having on the country’s economy.
Cross demands that we must respect the two ambassadors because they are our guests, but since when did guests start behaving as if they were the hosts? With such kind of behaviour, will guests get the respect they deserve?
I doubt that very much.
Cross tries to drag President Barack Obama into this whole saga, but does the good president hold the same view on Zimbabwe as that held by George W. Bush whom we all know had assigned McGee here for the specific purpose of making sure President Mugabe was taken out of office at whatever cost?
Cross should bear in mind that with land evenly redistributed and with no sanctions in place, even our dogs and chickens would never sniff at the bait his friends are using for our people to view our Government negatively.
He sympathises with those ministers who are going around pleading with the West to remove sanctions, but if McGee and Pocock are as holy as Cross alludes to, would these ministers really have to be begging the way that they are doing?
I don’t think so, especially considering what role was played by who in crafting these sanctions and statements like "chitongai tione".
Cross is just trying to create a storm in a teacup, but I would suggest that the best way for us to benefit from McGee and Pocock’s governments is for them to remove sanctions without us pleading so that we farm our own food on our own land just like the British grow their own food on their own soils in Europe and see if we will ever queue for food handouts again.
Cde Jairos Tapfuma.
Marondera.
Labels: AMBASSADOR, ANDREW POCOCK, EDDIE CROSS, JAMES MCGEE, LAND REFORM, NEOCOLONIALISM, SANCTIONS
Read more...
Tsvangirai tackles UK envoy over evacuations
Herald Reporter
PRIME Minister Mr Morgan Tsvangirai yesterday tackled British Ambassador to Zimbabwe Dr Andrew Pocock over reports that London was evacuating its elderly citizens from Zimbabwe.
Mr Tsvangirai said he phoned Dr Pocock and told him that he was dismayed at the British government’s actions because they dented international confidence in Zimbabwe.
The Prime Minister told business leaders during a chief executive officers’ roundtable meeting that he told the British ambassador of his displeasure at the action taken at a time when everybody was working to instil confidence in the inclusive Government.
"I spoke to the ambassador and he said his government was only taking the old people who cannot live on the paltry Government pensions. We want to see people coming to Zimbabwe and not being evacuated. This Government is doing everything to create credibility," Mr Tsvangirai said.
He said there was need to rebrand Zimbabwe as the country’s image had been seriously damaged.
Mr Tsvangirai reassured the business community that the broad-based agreement and the formation of the inclusive Government were permanent features and would not be reversed.
"The consummation of the Global Political Agreement and the resultant formation of this new transitional Government is not a temporary affair. Rather, it marks a definite and irreversible move to a new era of governance in Zimbabwe.
"It represents an acknowledgement that in order to move forward, all of us have a duty to work together to overcome the numerous challenges facing our country."
Inviting the business leaders to join Government to rebuild Zimbabwe, he said the new set-up ushers in an era where national interest is placed above political party or individual interests.
He said the Government was actively engaging the South African government over the use of the rand as legal tender.
He told the business leaders that as Prime Minister, he was responsible for overseeing the formulation of policies by Cabinet and ensuring their efficient and effective implementation.
He encouraged the convening of regular meetings and the maintenance of transparent communication channels between his office and the business community to rebuild the economy.
Mr Tsvangirai set out the national priorities for the inclusive Government, which include protection of people’s freedoms, addressing the humanitarian crisis and economic stabilisation which, in turn, would spur business confidence, commercial and industrial growth.
"The uncertain political climate over the years has created a negative image of the country internationally and this has caused unnecessary international partnerships created over long periods to be set aside, postponed and cancelled to the detriment of the growth of industry," he said.
Mr Tsvangirai said millions of Zimbabweans who left the country would be attracted back to contribute to the growth of the country. He encouraged the business community to re-evaluate their business models to match those of Government and to desist from overpricing their goods, which are often pegged at twice the prices in South Africa.
He said business should pay wages and provide working conditions that are in line with the new dispensation and the skills retention policies that Government would implement.
"In line with our goal of reviving the local industry, we are exploring avenues through which local producers and suppliers can access lines of credit in order to increase and improve production and revenue."
The Prime Minister said he would work to restore in full, the true value of export industries that include gold, diamonds, platinum, horticulture and manufacturing exports.
He said corruption would be decisively dealt with.
Labels: ANDREW POCOCK, MORGAN TSVANGIRAI, UK
Read more...
