Deal or no deal? Zimbabwe still divided over land 25 years after white farmers evicted
Once the backbone of the country's agricultural sector, many of them are now elderly, visibly frail, battling illness and financially desperate.
"I believe this is the only opportunity. We can't wait 10 years for another deal, " 71-year-old Arthur Baisley told the BBC.
Still recuperating from back surgery, Mr Baisley was among those who arrived earlier this year at a conference room in the capital, Harare - some aided by walking sticks and walking frames - to discuss the deal.
The catch is that these farmers have now been paid only 1% of their total compensation in cash - the rest is being issued as US dollar-denominated treasury bonds that mature in 10 years – with 2% interest paid twice a year.
The land reform programme, sparked by the invasion of white-owned farms around the country by supporters of the late Robert Mugabe, was launched in 2000 by the then president, who was desperate to shore up political support at the time when Zimbabwe had about 2,500 white farmers owning 4,000 farms - half of the country's best farmland.
The seizures became Africa's biggest modern-day land revolution, and was meant to redress colonial-era land grabs, when black people were forced to leave their land. But it set the country on a collision path with Western nations - economic sanctions followed, companies exited and the economy collapsed.
This compensation deal has been pushed by Mugabe's successor President Emmerson Mnangagwa, who is keen to mend fences. The money being given to the farmers, as stipulated by the constitution, is for infrastructure and improvements to the land - like buildings and dams, not the value of the land itself, which Zimbabwe's government insists rightfully belongs to the country's original inhabitants.
Overall this is estimated to total $3.5bn (£2.6bn). However, the recent cash pay-out totalled just $3.1m for 378 farms.
Mr Baisley said it was not the best deal but was reasonably fair - and his decision to accept it has come with the realisation that the takeovers cannot be undone.
"It was difficult for my family in the beginning but life goes on, you have to move on," he said, adding that he would start selling some of the bonds immediately to offset medical bills and to care for his sickly parents.
It is a significant shift, a softening of hard lines previously drawn by both sides.
Mugabe used to pound the lectern at party rallies saying the white farmers should go to the UK, the former colonial power, for their compensation - although quietly he was paying out select farmers.
The white farmers meanwhile had insisted on a $10bn full cash settlement. Both sides have settled on the $3.5bn figure.
However, unlike Mr Baisley, the majority of white farmers are holding out for a deal which would see all the cash paid upfront.
Deon Theron, who in 2008 was forced off the farm he had bought after independence, leads more than 1,000 farmers who have rejected the offer.
Boxes of his possessions, hastily packed during his departure, still fill the veranda of his Harare home where he told me the deal was not fair as there was no guarantee that the bonds would be honoured in 10 years' time.
The 71-year-old said it was clear that the government did not have the money – and he wanted to see the international community, including the UK, help with negotiations as the government was refusing to budge, or even meet the dissenting group.
"The British can't go and sit in the pavilion and watch what's happening because they are part of it. They are linked with our history. They can't walk away from it," he told the BBC.
In an agreement brokered in the run-up to independence, the UK was to support land reform financially - but it floundered towards the end of the 1990s when the Labour government came to power and relations soured.
The need to re-engage Britain on the compensation was the battle cry of many of the war veterans who led the farm invasions. They had fought in the 1970s war against white-minority rule - and felt let down by the slow pace of land reform following independence.
But like the white farmers, the war veterans are also split over the government's handling of the compensation.
One faction is suing the government for "clandestinely" agreeing to pay $3.5bn in compensation, saying the offer should have been agreed in parliament.
One of its leaders, Godfrey Gurira, said that given the myriad economic challenges cash-strapped Zimbabwe faced, it should not have prioritised white farmers.
"It's such a colossal amount... for a nation of our size. People are suffering they can hardly make ends meet, the hospitals have nothing, then we have the luxury to pay $3.5bn. In our opinion it's an unnecessary act of appeasement," he told the BBC.
A second lawsuit challenges an aspect of a new land policy that demands that new farmers pay for the land in order to obtain title deeds to own the land outright.
In the wake of the redistribution, the 250,000 people who replaced the 2,500 white farmers were only entitled to 99-year leases. However this meant it was near-impossible for them to get bank loans as their security of tenure was not guaranteed.
Last year, the government said farmers could apply to own their land outright – with title deeds - but they needed to pay between $100 and $500 per hectare (2.47 acres).
That money will go towards the compensation deal to white farmers, according to the government.
Those challenging this say forcing black farmers to effectively buy back the land contradicts the law.
And the black farmers themselves are divided over the issue.
The land reform programme has had mixed results. Many new farmers did not have the skills, the finances and labour to farm successfully. But the country's agricultural sector is now rebounding with pockets of successful farmers.
In 2002, Solomon Ganye arrived on a bicycle to receive a 20-hectare bare piece of land in Harare South.
It was part of the sprawling 2,700-hectare farm that had been divided among 77 people.
He found the initial years a struggle - suffering from a lack of finances and climate shocks. But slowly through Chinese money ploughed into the tobacco sector, and after handing the business over to his sons - both agriculture graduates in their 20s - things have improved.
They have built an enviable enterprise with 200 permanent workers, and have expanded into dairy and livestock farming. They are applying for the title deeds of their land and have even acquired more in recent years from the government.
Aaron Ganye, his oldest son, told the BBC that without the land reform programme, his family would probably not have been able to buy a farm because in the past the structure of ownership saw vast tracts of land being held by a single family.
"I'm very happy because to be honest we've taken farming to another level because now we're living a good life through farming. We're doing more than what the white guys were doing in terms of quality of tobacco and the leaf is good," the 25-year-old said proudly.
"We've invested in technology. It's not easy. I'm now motivating more farmers to do good work here," he said.
He does believe that new farmers should contribute to compensation payments but based on the value of infrastructure they inherited.
On the political front, tensions are also easing - and the UK government no longer has any Zimbabwean on its sanction list having recently delisted four military and government officials it had accused of human rights abuses.
The UK's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office told the BBC this was because they were no longer in the positions they held at the time they were added to the list in 2021.
Nonetheless, it is a significant development, marking the end of more than 20 years of sanctions against Zimbabwe.
The country now hopes that the farmers' compensation issue can be properly sorted out to get Western support for ongoing talks on restructuring its massive foreign debt.
There is no question that 25 years on, calm has returned to almost all farming fronts.
Agriculture is rebounding, this year farmers have sold over 300,000 tonnes of tobacco at auction - the highest tobacco production ever.
But compromise is needed on all sides for the country to fully jump over the hurdle of land reform and its fallout.
How a self-styled knight giving away cars and wads of cash got people talking
I cannot forgive Mugabe's soldiers – massacre survivor
Is Zimbabwe extending an olive branch to its white farmers?
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.
Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Focus on Africa
This Is Africa
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Blair's fury with Chirac over Mugabe summit invite
Tony Blair bitterly accused French president Jacques Chirac of trying to undermine UK efforts to put pressure on Zimbabwe's dictatorial leader Robert Mugabe, according to newly released government files. Papers released by the National Archives show Mr Blair erupted with anger when he learned Mr Chirac was insisting the Zimbabwean president should be allowed to attend an EU-Africa summit due to be held in 2003. 'But this is the opposite of what he said to me,' he scrawled in a handwritten note after No 10 officials told him Mr Chirac feared South African president Thabo Mbeki would stay away from the gathering unless Mr Mugabe was invited. 'Ultimately if France wants to take the heat on this they can and probably they are using it to damage the UK's standing in Africa in the belief (mistaken) that Mugabe retains credibility. 'But we should be seen to do all we can to protest.' The row came as Zimbabwe was caught up in a worsening spiral of violence and economic collapse after Mr Mugabe instigated a violent campaign to drive the country's remaining white farmers from their lands. Mr Blair's Labour government was at the forefront of international efforts to pressurise Mr Mugabe to end the chaos, implement democratic reforms and restore the rule of law. The UK's intervention was, however, deeply resented by Mr Mugabe who argued that – as the former colonial power – Britain should be paying reparations to his country. As the situation worsened Mr Blair noted that they needed to be 'pretty fierce on Mugabe' if they were to make any progress. He was, however, warned by South Africa's former president Nelson Mandela that – as a veteran of Africa's struggles for liberation from colonial rule – Mr Mugabe still needed to be treated with respect. 'Despite the recent turmoil in Zimbabwe we must not forget that President Mugabe is a statesman who has made a major contribution not only to Zimbabwe's independence but to the liberation of southern Africa,' he wrote in a letter to the prime minister. 'He deserves our good will, support and advice. As friends we should be able to discuss the issue of land redistribution, the rule of law and violence frankly and constructively with him.' Meanwhile, efforts to foster better Anglo-French co-operation on Africa were hampered by a deep personal antipathy between Mr Chirac and Britain's international development secretary Clare Short. Sir John Holmes, Britain's ambassador to Paris, said Mr Chirac had taken him aside to complain that she was 'viscerally anti-French and 'insupportable''. He contrasted her attitude with the good working relationship French foreign minister Hubert Vedrine had enjoyed with his British counterpart Jack Straw and before him Robin Cook. 'Vedrine and Cook had worked well together, and Vedrine and Straw were continuing in the same vein. But Ms Short was impossible,' Sir John reported the French president as saying. 'He had not liked to raise this with the prime minister because they always had lots of other things to talk about, but we needed to know the position. In typical Chirac fashion, he laboured the point for several minutes.' When Sir John assured him that Ms Short's views had been 'transformed' in the light of a recent trip to the region by Mr Vedrine, the French president replied 'God be praised'.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘Democratizing space' is more than just adding new players – it comes with questions around sustainability and sovereignty
'India is on the Moon,' S. Somanath, chairman of the Indian Space Research Organization, announced in August 2023. The announcement meant India had joined the short list of countries to have visited the Moon, and the applause and shouts of joy that followed signified that this achievement wasn't just a scientific one, but a cultural one. Over the past decade, many countries have established new space programs, including multiple African nations. India and Israel – nations that were not technical contributors to the space race in the 1960s and '70s – have attempted landings on the lunar surface. With more countries joining the evolving space economy, many of our colleagues in space strategy, policy ethics and law have celebrated the democratization of space: the hope that space is now more accessible for diverse participants. We are a team of researchers based across four countries with expertise in space policy and law, ethics, geography and anthropology who have written about the difficulties and importance of inclusion in space. Major players like the U.S., the European Union and China may once have dominated space and seen it as a place to try out new commercial and military ventures. Emerging new players in space, like other countries, commercial interests and nongovernmental organizations, may have other goals and rationales. Unexpected new initiatives from these newcomers could shift perceptions of space from something to dominate and possess to something more inclusive, equitable and democratic. We address these emerging and historical tensions in a paper published in May 2025 in the journal Nature, in which we describe the difficulties and importance of including nontraditional actors and Indigenous peoples in the space industry. Continuing inequalities among space players Not all countries' space agencies are equal. Newer agencies often don't have the same resources behind them that large, established players do. The U.S. and Chinese programs receive much more funding than those of any other country. Because they are most frequently sending up satellites and proposing new ideas puts them in the position to establish conventions for satellite systems, landing sites and resource extraction that everyone else may have to follow. Sometimes, countries may have operated on the assumption that owning a satellite would give them the appearance of soft or hard geopolitical power as a space nation – and ultimately gain relevance. In reality, student groups of today can develop small satellites, called CubeSats, autonomously, and recent scholarship has concluded that even successful space missions may negatively affect the international relationships between some countries and their partners. The respect a country expects to receive may not materialize, and the costs to keep up can outstrip gains in potential prestige. Environmental protection and Indigenous perspectives Usually, building the infrastructure necessary to test and launch rockets requires a remote area with established roads. In many cases, companies and space agencies have placed these facilities on lands where Indigenous peoples have strong claims, which can lead to land disputes, like in western Australia. Many of these sites have already been subject to human-made changes, through mining and resource extraction in the past. Many sites have been ground zero for tensions with Indigenous peoples over land use. Within these contested spaces, disputes are rife. Because of these tensions around land use, it is important to include Indigenous claims and perspectives. Doing so can help make sure that the goal of protecting the environments of outer space and Earth are not cast aside while building space infrastructure here on Earth. Some efforts are driving this more inclusive approach to engagement in space, including initiatives like 'Dark and Quiet Skies', a movement that works to ensure that people can stargaze and engage with the stars without noise or sound pollution. This movement and other inclusive approaches operate on the principle of reciprocity: that more players getting involved with space can benefit all. Researchers have recognized similar dynamics within the larger space industry. Some scholars have come to the conclusion that even though the space industry is 'pay to play,' commitments to reciprocity can help ensure that players in space exploration who may not have the financial or infrastructural means to support individual efforts can still access broader structures of support. The downside of more players entering space is that this expansion can make protecting the environment – both on Earth and beyond – even harder. The more players there are, at both private and international levels, the more difficult sustainable space exploration could become. Even with good will and the best of intentions, it would be difficult to enforce uniform standards for the exploration and use of space resources that would protect the lunar surface, Mars and beyond. It may also grow harder to police the launch of satellites and dedicated constellations. Limiting the number of satellites could prevent space junk, protect the satellites already in orbit and allow everyone to have a clear view of the night sky. However, this would have to compete with efforts to expand internet access to all. What is space exploration for? Before tackling these issues, we find it useful to think about the larger goal of space exploration, and what the different approaches are. One approach would be the fast and inclusive democratization of space – making it easier for more players to join in. Another would be a more conservative and slower 'big player' approach, which would restrict who can go to space. The conservative approach is liable to leave developing nations and Indigenous peoples firmly on the outside of a key process shaping humanity's shared future. But a faster and more inclusive approach to space would not be easy to run. More serious players means it would be harder to come to an agreement about regulations, as well as the larger goals for human expansion into space. Narratives around emerging technologies, such as those required for space exploration, can change over time, as people begin to see them in action. Technology that we take for granted today was once viewed as futuristic or fantastical, and sometimes with suspicion. For example, at the end of the 1940s, George Orwell imagined a world in which totalitarian systems used tele-screens and videoconferencing to control the masses. Earlier in the same decade, Thomas J. Watson, then president of IBM, notoriously predicted that there would be a global market for about five computers. We as humans often fear or mistrust future technologies. However, not all technological shifts are detrimental, and some technological changes can have clear benefits. In the future, robots may perform tasks too dangerous, too difficult or too dull and repetitive for humans. Biotechnology may make life healthier. Artificial intelligence can sift through vast amounts of data and turn it into reliable guesswork. Researchers can also see genuine downsides to each of these technologies. Space exploration is harder to squeeze into one streamlined narrative about the anticipated benefits. The process is just too big and too transformative. To return to the question if we should go to space, our team argues that it is not a question of whether or not we should go, but rather a question of why we do it, who benefits from space exploration and how we can democratize access to broader segments of society. Including a diversity of opinions and viewpoints can help find productive ways forward. Ultimately, it is not necessary for everyone to land on one single narrative about the value of space exploration. Even our team of four researchers doesn't share a single set of beliefs about its value. But bringing more nations, tribes and companies into discussions around its potential value can help create collaborative and worthwhile goals at an international scale. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Timiebi Aganaba, Arizona State University; Adam Fish, UNSW Sydney; Deondre Smiles, University of Victoria, and Tony Milligan, King's College London Read more: Astronomers have warned against colonial practices in the space industry − a philosopher of science explains how the industry could explore other planets without exploiting them Astronomers have warned against colonial practices in the space industry − a philosopher of science explains how the industry could explore other planets without exploiting them The Starbase rocket testing facility is permanently changing the landscape of southern Texas Tony Milligan receives funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant agreement No. 856543). Adam Fish, Deondre Smiles, and Timiebi Aganaba do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Perseus Mining Delivers Encouraging Drilling Results at Nyanzaga Gold Project
Perth, July 22, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- PERSEUS MINING DELIVERS ENCOURAGING DRILLING RESULTS FROM ITS CURRENT DRILL PROGRAM AT THE NYANZAGA GOLD PROJECT Perth, Western Australia/July 22, 2025/Perseus Mining Limited (ASX/TSX: PRU) is pleased to provide an update on ongoing resource definition drilling currently being conducted at its Nyanzaga Gold Project (NGP) in Tanzania and to announce some of the more significant drill results achieved since our last exploration announcement, dated December 5, 2024 (see release 'Confidence Boosting Infill Drilling at Nyanzaga Project). Below is a summary of the release. The full release with all drill hole data and results is available at and Invest in Gold Thor Metals Group: Best Overall Gold IRA Priority Gold: Up to $15k in Free Silver + Zero Account Fees on Qualifying Purchase American Hartford Gold: #1 Precious Metals Dealer in the Nation The current drilling program has been designed to further inform and advance Perseus's proposed open pit mining scenario at NGP as detailed in the Feasibility Study update, released to the market on April 25, 2025 (see release 'Perseus Mining proceeds with development of the Nyanzaga Gold Project'). Drill holes have been designed to infill existing drilling, collect additional information including metallurgical and geotechnical data and most importantly evaluate potential strike and depth extensions to the mineralisation. As of the end of June 2025, a total of 35,623 m of combined reverse circulation (RC) and diamond (DD) meters have been drilled into the Tusker and Kilimani deposits since the last update in December 2024 (refer Since acquiring the NGP in April 2025, Perseus has drilled a total of 58,609 m, with the majority of this being resource definition drilling into the Tusker and Kilimani deposits. Infill drilling was designed to improve the average drill spacing across the deposit from 40 m × 40 m to a nominal drill pattern of 20 m × 40 m and was completed across the main Tusker mineralisation and the adjacent Kilimani deposit. Drilling remains ongoing across both Tusker and Kilimani and continues to support the current mineralisation interpretation across both deposits. More significant drill hole data and related drill results results received from the recent drilling include: Tusker Deposit NYZRCDD1374C: 51 m @ 4.43 g/t gold from 269 m including 4 m @ 42.04 g/t gold from 274 m; NYZDD1389: 36 m @ 6.28 g/t gold from 292 m including 4 m @ 47.82 g/t gold from 314 m; NYZDD1390: 10 m @ 15.38 g/t gold from 264 m; NYZDD1490: 33 m @ 3.14 g/t gold from 275 m including 2 m @ 32.28 g/t gold from 161 m; 61 m @ 4.35 g/t gold from 235 m; NYZRCDD1347: 62 m @ 2.38 g/t gold from 432 m; NYZRCDD1351: 63 m @ 6.49 g/t gold from 435 m including 1 m @ 307.8 g/t gold from 438 m; 16 m @ 6.15 g/t gold from 501 m including 6 m @ 14.73 g/t gold from 511 m; NYZRCDD1372: 69 m @ 3.94 g/t gold from 335 m including 21 m @ 7.99 g/t gold from 375 m; NYZRCDD1373: 57 m @ 6.50 g/t gold from 203 m including 11 m @ 26.93 g/t gold from 208 m; NYZRCDD1397: 59 m @ 4.39 g/t gold from 442 m and 64 m @ 2.91 g/t gold from 660 m including 23 m @ 4.36 g/t gold from 695 m NYZRCDD1399: 54 m @ 9.69 g/t gold from 577 m including 2 m @ 118.3 g/t gold from 591 m and 5 m @ 20.15 g/t gold from 601 m; NYZRCDD1401: 23 m @ 20.87 g/t gold from 496 m; NYZRCDD1404: 46 m @ 3.15 g/t gold from 550 m including 11 m @ 9.81 g/t gold from 567 m; NYZRCDD1405: 52 m @ 3.01 g/t gold from 506 m; 81 m @ 4.00 g/t gold from 597 m including 8 m @ 16.74 g/t gold from 625 m; NYZRCDD1419: 52 m @ 3.17 g/t gold from 348 m; NYZRCDD1422: 84 m @ 3.24 g/t gold from 339 m including 11 m @ 9.15 g/t gold from 392 m; Kilimani DEposit NYZRC1424: 22 m @ 4.14 g/t gold from 47 m; NYZRC1471: 44 m @ 4.36 g/t gold from 0 m including 3 m @ 43.56 g/t gold from 25 m; Further geotechnical, metallurgical and sterilisation drilling programs are on-going or planned, and are scheduled to be completed by December 2025. The results of this work, together with other key activities, will be incorporated into an updated Ore Reserve statement that is to be released to the market in the March 2026 quarter. ASX/TSX CODE: PRUCAPITAL STRUCTURE:Ordinary shares: 1,353,975,467Performance rights: 9,343,976REGISTERED OFFICE:Level 2437 Roberts RoadSubiaco WA 6008Telephone: +61 8 6144 DIRECTORS:Rick MenellNon-Executive ChairmanJeff QuartermaineManaging Director & CEO Amber BanfieldNon-Executive DirectorElissa CorneliusNon-Executive DirectorDan LougherNon-Executive DirectorJohn McGloinNon-Executive DirectorJames RutherfordNon-Executive Director CONTACTS:Jeff QuartermaineManaging Director & FormanInvestor Relations+61 484 036 RyanMedia+61 420 582 Competent Person Statement: The information in this report and the attachments that relate to exploration drilling results at the Nyanzaga Gold Project is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation prepared by Mr Glen Edwards, a Competent Person who is a Chartered Professional Geologist. Mr Edwards is the General Manager Exploration of the Company. Mr Edwards has sufficient experience, which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being undertaken, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves' ('JORC Code 2012') and to qualify as a 'Qualified Person' under National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ('NI 43-101'). Mr Edwards consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. The information in this report that relates to the Mineral Resources and Ore Reserve at Nyanzaga was updated by the Company in a market announcement 'Perseus Mining proceeds with development of the Nyanzaga Gold Project' released on 28 April 2025. The Company confirms that all material assumptions underpinning those estimates and the production targets, or the forecast financial information derived therefrom, in that market release continue to apply and have not materially changed. The Company further confirms that material assumptions underpinning the estimates of Ore Reserves described in 'Technical Report — Nyanzaga Gold Project' dated 10 June 2025 continue to apply. Caution Regarding Forward Looking Information: This report contains forward-looking information which is based on the assumptions, estimates, analysis and opinions of management made in light of its experience and its perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, as well as other factors that management of the Company believes to be relevant and reasonable in the circumstances at the date that such statements are made, but which may prove to be incorrect. Assumptions have been made by the Company regarding, among other things: the price of gold, continuing commercial production at the Yaouré Gold Mine, the Edikan Gold Mine and the Sissingué Gold Mine without any major disruption, development of a mine at Nyanzaga, the receipt of required governmental approvals, the accuracy of capital and operating cost estimates, the ability of the Company to operate in a safe, efficient and effective manner and the ability of the Company to obtain financing as and when required and on reasonable terms. Readers are cautioned that the foregoing list is not exhaustive of all factors and assumptions which may have been used by the Company. Although management believes that the assumptions made by the Company and the expectations represented by such information are reasonable, there can be no assurance that the forward-looking information will prove to be accurate. Forward-looking information involves known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any anticipated future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Such factors include, among others, the actual market price of gold, the actual results of current exploration, the actual results of future exploration, changes in project parameters as plans continue to be evaluated, as well as those factors disclosed in the Company's publicly filed documents. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. Perseus does not undertake to update any forward-looking information, except in accordance with applicable securities laws. Attachment 20250722_TSX Announcement_Exploration Update Nyanzaga_FinalError in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
