To Compensate or Not To? Revisiting the Debate on Compensation for Former Large–Scale Farmers in Zimbabwe
The Government of Zimbabwe (GoZ) has, since November 2017, been engaged in attempts to normalise economic relations with traditional donors, International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and other new potential supporters. However, these efforts have not yielded the expected results and instead have been characterised by shifting donor interests and conditionalities. Before the elections, the precondition for funding was the need for the then-transitional government to hold free and fair elections. After the elections, donors insisted on a turnaround strategy; they were given the Transitional Stabilisation Program (TSP), and then the target moved again, this time to paying off outstanding debts and
compensating former large-scale commercial farmers, who are mostly of Caucasian origin.
As part of efforts to align with donor demands, the GoZ recently announced its plans to compensate former large-scale commercial farmers who lost their farms during the Fast Track Land Reform Program (FTLRP). There has been a raging debate on social media platforms following the announcement on whether it is necessary to offer compensation. A poll was carried out to test the opinions of people, and approximately 85% said there should be no compensation. Even Julius Malema, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader in South Africa, weighed in by threatening that President Mnangagwa will not complete his term if he goes ahead with the plans to compensate the former large-scale farmers. He is quoted as saying;
It’s a sell-out position. The way he (Mnangagwa) is going about it, he is not going to finish his term. That country is swimming in a pool of poverty; they can’t afford basic things like primary health, proper education and infrastructure. He gets money and goes to give it to people who are not deserving. He is reversing the gains of the revolution struggle. It’s unsustainable.
However, there are several issues that have not been adequately communicated by the GoZ, one of which is the actual position regarding the compensation of former owners and the timing of the announcement. For the record, the government policy on the subject has not changed. In the late 1990s, the GoZ said they would compensate former farm owners for the improvements on the farms, and several farmers have already been compensated. The timing of this latest announcement will be discussed in more detail later, but it is important to note that the Minister of Finance made known the government’s intentions just before attending the World Bank and International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Spring Meetings. In this brief article, I will explore how compensation to former largescale farmers is central to Zimbabwe’s economic recovery. Rather than seeing it as a capitulation, it probably plays a bigger role in the normalisation of Zimbabwe’s relations with the former colonial master and with the broader donor community, given that Zimbabwe has been in international isolation for more than two decades and during that time the economy has shrunk.