U.S. relations with Zimbabwe, a mineral-rich southern African country, remain strained. Tensions in bilateral relations emerged in the late 1990s, when increasing indications of human rights violations, undemocratic governance, and economic decline, accompanied by radical government economic policies and land seizures, spurred concern among Members of Congress and other U.S. policymakers. Bilateral relations since that time have been—and remain—dominated by U.S. policy, diplomatic, and targeted assistance efforts intended to prevent and counter such outcomes, mitigate their effects, and push for policy and governance reforms in Zimbabwe, as well as alleviate socioeconomic hardships among the country's people. Legislation enacted by Congress is a key component of these policy efforts. Zimbabwe attained independence in 1980 under a negotiated political settlement that ended white minority rule, following a long armed struggle. Its politics have since been dominated by the Zimbabwe National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) political party, which has its origins in the struggle for majority rule, and President Robert Mugabe ( moo-G AH -beh ), Zimbabwe's sole post-independence president. Opposition parties have pushed for governance reforms and greater pluralism, notably during a period of often uneasy power sharing between ZANU-PF and the opposition under a Government of National Unity (GNU) between 2009 and 2013. The GNU had been formed under a regionally mediated accord intended to overcome a political impasse between ZANU-PF and the opposition following violent, procedurally disputed elections in 2008. Elections were last held in July 2013, but their legitimacy was disputed by the opposition and criticized by the Obama Administration, among others. The elections gave ZANU-PF a strong majority in parliament, extended Mugabe's presidential tenure, and ended power-sharing under the GNU. Since then, economic conditions have steadily deteriorated. Public dissatisfaction with the economy and with the Mugabe administration and its intolerance of opposition activity have recently sparked a growing number of large public demonstrations and repressive responses by the government. Protest organizers have included political parties, aggrieved workers, and new citizen-led movements, notably a social media-organized movement known as #ThisFlag. Such demonstrations have added to ongoing political turmoil and maneuvering by parties over governance and economic policy, prospects in the upcoming 2018 elections, and rivalry over the prospective succession of Mugabe, who turned 92 years old in early 2016. The succession question has led to internal ZANU-PF factionalization, notably including an emergent split between Mugabe and veterans of the pre-independence armed struggle, who have long been one of ZANU-PF's most vocal core constituencies. The government has responded to growing domestic criticism and protests by seeking to restrict public gatherings and harshly lashing out at its critics, both in public statements and through law enforcement actions. Such patterns of conduct—and a host of more serious reported human rights abuses—have long concerned domestic and international human rights advocacy groups and Western policymakers. For over two decades, successive U.S. administrations have sought to counter abusive and undemocratic actions by the ZANU-PF government by imposing targeted economic and travel sanctions on individuals and firms identified as having committed or abetted abuses. The targeted sanctions regime is authorized under a series of executive orders. Executive branch officials have periodically stated a willingness to consider changes to the U.S. sanctions regime in response to demonstrable improvements in governance, but to date they have deemed progress to have been insufficient to warrant major changes in U.S. policy. For many years, U.S. sanctions were complemented by similarly extensive sanctions by other Western governments. Surrounding the 2013 elections, however, most of these other foreign actors, most notably the European Union, removed or relaxed their sanctions regimes, in contrast to the United States. Sanctions were originally called for by Congress in a "sense of Congress" provision of the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 (ZDERA, P.L. 107-99 ). Expressing congressional concern over negative governance, human rights, and rule of law trends in Zimbabwe, ZDERA also prohibits U.S. support for international financial institution (IFI) loans or grants to Zimbabwe's central government, unless and until the Zimbabwean government fulfills a range of governance reform conditions. In the years since ZDERA's passage, Congress has reiterated the ban on U.S. support for IFI credit assistance to Zimbabwe in annual appropriations legislation. Such legislation has also restricted bilateral aid for Zimbabwe, with exceptions for aid programs designed to foster the kinds of humanitarian, education, health, poverty reduction, human rights, and good governance outcomes sought by U.S. policymakers. Zimbabwe is also ineligible for IFI loans under U.S. laws other than ZDERA due to its failure to make payments on its debt to these institutions. Recently, the possibility that Zimbabwe might again become eligible for IFI loans has emerged as an issue for policymakers. In October 2015, the Zimbabwean government issued a plan to repay its IFI arrears as a prerequisite to applying for new IFI credit (see " Zimbabwe's Arrears Clearance Effort "). If it does so, Members of Congress may reexamine the conditions imposed by ZDERA and other legislation, and may seek to influence whether, and under what circumstances, the Mugabe government might be able to receive financial support. Such conditions may be likely to include concrete, demonstrable efforts to pursue market-led economic growth, improved economic management and fiscal transparency, more transparent and accountable governance, and free and fair elections. The question of who may succeed President Mugabe arguably presents the most immediate and pressing challenge for Zimbabwe's political system, and for foreign governments engaged with the country. The stakes are high. Succession outcomes are likely to shape future developments in all major policy arenas, and the succession process could generate political and economic instability, possibly violent, in the wider southern Africa region. Succession is subject to the interplay of diverse, primarily domestic factors, however, making it an unpredictable and fluid process, and one not readily influenced by U.S. or other foreign policy interventions. Enduring support and admiration for Mugabe in southern African political circles—including within South Africa—may also limit the impact of U.S. actions. Zimbabwe gained independence in 1980, after a lengthy armed struggle by black Zimbabweans for universal suffrage and against white minority rule. It achieved independence under the Lancaster House Agreement, an accord negotiated between the British government, the armed black independence Patriotic Front movement, and the so-called Zimbabwe-Rhodesia government. The Patriotic Front was an alliance between the Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU), led by Mugabe, and the Zimbabwe African Peoples Union (ZAPU), another liberation movement led by the late Joshua Nkomo. The Lancaster House accord provided for elections just prior to independence, in which ZANU won a majority. ZAPU and a party that essentially represented the former white-dominated government won almost all of the remaining seats. After independence, ZANU suppressed alleged anti-government activity by members of ZAPU, its armed wing, and elements of its ethnic Ndebele political base, including through a series of mass detentions and killings led by the Fifth Brigade of the ZANU-dominated army, known as Operation Gukurahundi. Following these actions, in 1987 ZAPU and ZANU signed a unity accord, under which ZAPU was merged into ZANU, which was renamed ZANU-PF. The armed struggle and the enduring effects of post-independence land allocations—which continued to favor whites until the commencement of large-scale land seizures in the 2000s (see " Natural Resource Nationalization ")—have profoundly shaped post-independence politics and ZANU-PF's often radical policies. This history has also led to frequent anti-Western and anti-imperialist rhetoric by ZANU-PF which, along with its general intolerance of and periodic violent action against its political opponents, has long caused friction with donor governments. Zimbabwe has held a series of highly contested elections since 2000, when ZANU-PF nearly lost its parliamentary majority to the then-newly formed opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). The vote took place after Zimbabweans rejected a set of ZANU-PF-supported constitutional amendments in a public referendum. Despite this outcome, later in the same year ZANU-PF used its slim majority in parliament to amend the constitution to allow for the compulsory acquisition of land "unjustifiably dispossessed" by the United Kingdom (UK)—that is, provided to white settlers during British colonial rule—and to hold the UK liable for any compensation. The government then supported a campaign of often violent seizures of large, mostly white-owned commercial farms, without compensation, for redistribution to black farmers. The policy was later regulated under a program known as the Fast Track Land Reform Program (FTLRP). Such seizures, along with alleged election irregularities, human rights abuses, and various violations of the rule of law, spurred Congress to pass ZDERA in 2001. In succeeding years, a decline in agricultural production linked to land seizures, a variety of state-centric economic policies, and persistent political turmoil led to a severe, multi-year economic contraction. In elections in 2008, amid reports of widespread irregularities, ZANU-PF lost its parliamentary majority and Mugabe received fewer votes than his main opponent, Morgan Tsvangirai ( CHAHN -geh-rai ), the presidential candidate of the MDC-Tsvangirai (MDC-T, the main opposition party, so-named to distinguish it from a smaller breakaway faction). Despite Tsvangirai's claim to have won the election outright, official results gave him 47.9% of votes, below the 50% threshold needed to avoid a second round. A violent presidential election run-off followed, which Tsvangirai boycotted, allowing Mugabe to win with over 90% of votes. The international community rejected the result as illegitimate, as did the MDC-T. A post-election political impasse led to regionally mediated talks, which resulted in the September 2008 Global Political Agreement (GPA). A Government of National Unity (GNU) was formed in early 2009 under the terms of the GPA, with Mugabe as president and Tsvangirai as prime minister. Under the GNU, executive power was shared between ZANU-PF, the MDC-T, and a smaller MDC faction—the parties that had won parliamentary seats in 2008. The GPA also set out agreements on a range of contentious issues and governance reforms, the drafting of a new constitution, and the conduct of a constitutional referendum, prospectively leading to elections. The GPA decreased political violence and helped create a working but often tense relationship between the main GNU parties. It also enabled the MDC-T-controlled Finance Ministry to pursue critical economic reforms that spurred robust economic recovery after years of severe contraction under ZANU-PF stewardship. At the start of the GNU, Zimbabwe faced hyperinflation of 500 million percent or more, widespread poverty, unemployment at 80%-plus, collapsed social services, and a dearth of hard currency. To address these challenges, the GNU adopted the U.S. dollar as the effective national currency, ended price controls, and established a cash budgeting policy, among other liberalization policies. This led to a rapid expansion of the agriculture, mining, and services sectors. Economic expansion under the GNU began in 2009 and lasted until 2013, the last year of the GNU, when growth stalled. While some GPA governance reforms were implemented, many were not, and there were reports of violations of GPA-guaranteed rights and freedoms, notably press freedom and political assembly. There were also periodic acts of political harassment and violence. Constitutional and other reform processes were slow and contentious, leading to renewed Southern African Development Community (SADC) mediation, a 2011 "election roadmap," and a schedule for implementing unfulfilled GPA goals. Contested implementation of the roadmap then became a key focus of GNU politics for the next two years. The roadmap's effects were ultimately limited, but one of its main goals, the completion of a new draft constitution, was achieved in early 2013. Voters adopted the new charter by an overwhelming margin in a referendum in March 2013. A highly disputed electoral process followed, resulting in a ZANU-PF victory and an end to power sharing under the GNU. President Mugabe has led Zimbabwe since independence, initially as prime minister, and has long presided over ZANU-PF. His party leadership has been driven by both ideological and tactical considerations, and he has played a central executive and mediational role within ZANU-PF's hierarchy and policymaking processes, which have long shaped patterns of state governance. Under his tenure, the party has controlled state power through a mixture of nationalistic economic policies and rhetoric, command of the public sector, social regulation, political cooptation, often corrupt patronage, and periodic repression of and violence against ZANU-PF opponents and critics. His eventual exit from the presidency will mark a major watershed and could conceivably lead to political and policy transformation. Such a transition is not a given, however, especially if ZANU-PF retains control and continues to pursue its current policy agenda under the strong influence of an aging, conservative cadre of security sector officials. In the meantime, Mugabe shows no interest in retiring, despite his advanced age, periodic signs of debility, and reported health problems. In 2014, he accepted ZANU-PF's nomination to be its presidential candidate in 2018, when he would be 94, a decision reaffirmed by a party Congress in late 2015. In 2015, he chaired both SADC and the African Union, reflecting his continuing influence among fellow African leaders. Mugabe has no designated successor, which has generated succession rivalries. In July 2016, he stated that he would hold office as long as the party continues to back him. Fluid divisions and alliances have long characterized the ruling party. Public information about these dynamics, however, tends to be opaque and expediently driven by party insiders, most notably Mugabe. He continues to actively shape the party leadership by orchestrating promotions and countervailing appointments and dismissals. Debate and political jockeying over Mugabe's succession and alternatives to his leadership have occurred for years. Although often discussed in the press, these issues were considered sensitive and were not often publicly addressed by the party. Those perceived as challenging or implying an end to Mugabe's tenure historically faced penalties, such as demotions or party suspensions. In recent years, however, the succession issue has increasingly come to be discussed in public, including by Mugabe. Until late 2014, the main reported ZANU-PF rivals to succeed Mugabe—as both head of state and of ZANU-PF—were two long-time top officials, Emmerson Mnangagwa ( mm-nahn- GAHG -wa h ) and Joice Mujuru. Both were die-hard ZANU-PF members closely linked to Mugabe. Mnangagwa, however, a former intelligence chief and GNU Defense Minister, maintained a reputation as an uncompromising hardliner. In contrast, Mujuru, a former liberation war combatant who had served as national and party Vice President since 2004, was viewed as both a strong party loyalist and a potential pragmatist open to possible reforms in various areas. In late 2014, Mugabe led a purge of top ZANU-PF elements linked to Mujuru and dismissed her as party and national Vice President. He then elevated Mnangagwa, alongside a less prominent official, Phelekezela Mphoko, to the dual national and ZANU-PF vice presidencies (there are two deputy posts in both the state and party). His action also appeared intended to facilitate the entr y into politics of his 50-year-old wife, Grace Mugabe, who had actively encouraged Mujuru's removal while raising her own political profile. Mujuru's fate was sealed when Mugabe railed against her during the ZANU-PF party congress, accusing her of plotting with U.S. embassy officials to oust him (an allegation linked to the Wikileaks scandal and later denied by the State Department). Further purges of Mujuru-allied officials and the naming of a new cabinet followed. In early 2015, ZANU-PF formally expelled Mujuru, citing her putative anti-Mugabe plot. To date, however, she has not been criminally indicted. Should Mugabe vacate the presidency, either by choice or due to natural causes, Mnangagwa, who also serves as Justice and Legal Affairs Minister, would likely succeed him temporarily. He might then formally accede to the post, but such an outcome is not assured. Mugabe's successor must be chosen by the party, and Mnangagwa's rivals could engineer an alternative successor. Another possible successor, Grace Mugabe, has often led party outreach events and distributed patronage goods since Mujuru's ouster. These activities appear intended to strengthen her national profile as a credible successor to her husband and, at a minimum, to protect her family's assets and influence by ensuring she plays a high-level post-Mugabe political role. Her lack of independence war credentials and relative youth, however, could be liabilities, given Zimbabwe's often gerontocratic political culture and the traditional dominance of veterans within ZANU-PF and among security establishment leaders. They have long maintained that liberation war experience is a prerequisite for any national president, and are likely to strongly influence any succession process. Nevertheless, generational change in politics is on the horizon, as signaled by the emergence of an informal ZANU-PF faction, the Generation 40 (G40), a term alluding to a younger cohort that came of political age after independence. They reportedly support a leading role for Grace Mugabe—potentially through her replacement of Mnangagwa as vice president, making her Mugabe's likely successor, or through an alliance between her and one of Mnangagwa's ZANU-PF old guard rivals. The G40-Mnangagwa rivalry may also be leading veterans, long a key ZANU-PF base of support, to break with Mugabe. Also factoring into party and succession dynamics are clan alliances and rivalries, both within the majority Shona ethnic group, to which Mugabe and many top ZANU-PF leaders belong, and between the Shona and the Manyika—a smaller, but still key ZANU-PF ethnic base. Opposition supporters are also divided. Intra-party recrimination over the MDC-T's performance during the 2013 elections divided the party, which is the largest opposition group. Continuing dissension eventually prompted the Tsvangirai-led faction to expel 21 rival sitting MDC-T members of parliament (MPs) and some indirectly-elected senators, thus making them ineligible to remain MPs. This led to June 2015 National Assembly by-elections for 16 seats, most of which had been vacated by the MDC-T. ZANU-PF won all of them after the various MDC factions boycotted the vote over claims of a flawed election process and demands for related reforms. In July 2016, Tsvangirai, who has colon cancer, prompted renewed internal party dissention after he unilaterally appointed two new party vice presidents. While the MDC-T enjoys strong representation in many municipal governments, its parliamentary delegation lacks sufficient seats to advance legislation, and it acts primarily as a critic of the government. Its limited electoral power is also under threat, as the minister of local government has ousted and replaced the MDC-T mayors of Harare and the smaller city of Gweru. The government is also sponsoring an opposition-contested bill that would create a substantially ministry-controlled tribunal with the power to suspend and replace municipal officers. The MDC-T, like other opposition parties, has also faced attempts by the government to regulate and restrict its public political gatherings. In some cases, such restrictions have been overturned in the courts, however, reflecting a significant degree of Zimbabwean judicial independence. In April 2016, after police denied the MDC-T a public demonstration permit, a court ruled in favor of an MDC-T suit to have the denial overturned. The MDC-T then held one of the largest anti-Mugabe protests in recent years. Other mass rallies, both by opposition parties and a wide range of other stakeholders—in some cases permitted by courts against government wishes—have since followed. The future influence of the MDC-T and of opposition parties more broadly is likely to depend on their success during the next national elections in 2018, which, in turn, may depend on coalition-building. Prospects for an opposition victory, however, are mixed. In May 2016, five small parties formed the Coalition of Democrats (CODE), under which they are expected to jointly back consensus positions and candidates. While former finance minister Tendai Biti reportedly supports the coalition, his PDP party—and, more significantly, the MDC-T and Joice Mujuru's new Zimbabwe People First (ZPF), established in February 2016—declined to join it. Eighteen opposition political parties are also collaborating and jointly pushing for shared electoral system changes and Zimbabwe Electoral Commission neutrality ahead of the 2018 elections under the National Election Reform Agenda (NERA) coalition. While aimed at electoral reform, NERA members are involved in organizing mass protests bringing together opponents of continued ZANU-PF political dominance. In addition to opposition parties, the government has recently faced criticism from a fast-growing, nonpartisan, citizen-based campaign focusing on demands for accountable governance. The movement, organized on social media under the hashtag #ThisFlag , emerged after Evan Mawarire, a pastor, posted online an impromptu video reflection on economic malaise, corruption, and a need for patriotic civic activism. The April 2016 video elicited a massive spontaneous positive response and went viral, leading Mawarire to call for a month of citizen activism centered on countering poverty, injustice, and corruption. Opposition parties sought to capitalize on the campaign, and ZANU-PF to counter it with its own #OurFlag social media campaign. In May 2016, two MDC-T MPs wearing flags around their necks in a tribute to #ThisFlag were ejected from parliament. On July 6, 2016, Mawarire and #ThisFlag activists, joined by the Tajamuka-Sesijikile (roughly "fed up and opposing") Campaign, a recently formed youth alliance critical of the government, organized a "Zimbabwe Shutdown" action. It was intended to temporarily interrupt private and public sector business and signal dissatisfaction with the country's ongoing economic malaise, unpaid civil servant wages, and state corruption. The boycott, which was widely heeded, coincided with labor strikes by doctors and teachers. It was generally peaceful, but featured some youth-led civil unrest in poor urban areas. It came on the heels of a July 4 protest by taxi drivers against high police traffic fines that turned violent, as well as late June protests in the southern border town of Beitbridge against new import restrictions. These events resulted in multiple arrests, and prompted authorities to temporarily shut down social media forums being used to organize the protests. In mid-July, Mawarire was arrested and charged with attempting to subvert the government, but a magistrate's court dismissed the charges and released him. He later sought refuge in South Africa. President Mugabe and ZANU-PF militants have threated Mawarire; meanwhile, security forces are reportedly on high alert and are prepared to forcefully halt further demonstrations. Relations between ZANU-PF leaders and independence war veterans appear to be deteriorating after decades of strong interdependence. In recent months, Grace Mugabe and various politicians associated with the G40 faction have made public comments belittling the political roles and influence of independence war veterans, long a politically sacrosanct base of activist support for ZANU-PF. In early 2016, police fired water cannons at an anti-G40 veterans' march on ZANU-PF headquarters, and in March, Mugabe replaced his veterans' minister, the chair of the traditionally influential Zimbabwe National Liberation War Veterans Association (ZNLWVA), reportedly in relation to the official's opposition to the G40. In a possible sign of continuing deference to veterans, however, Mugabe also publicly acknowledged a demand by some veterans that he step down from power. Relations between Mugabe and veteran leaders deteriorated further after ZNLWVA issued a scathing statement on ZANU-PF and Mugabe in late July 2016. It harshly condemned the government and implied that Mugabe should exit power. The veterans' statement is significant because the armed struggle was crucial in bringing majority rule to Zimbabwe, and their contributions toward that end have long helped legitimize ZANU-PF's hegemonic rule. Veterans have formed a core ZANU-PF constituency since independence, and some have acted as a proxy force for the party, politically and at times physically attacking alleged government critics. The government reacted strongly to the statement—which was not attributed to any specific individuals—calling it "traitorous" and "treasonable." Some ZNLWVA leaders later faced arrest. To prevent further anti-regime action by the current ZNLWVA leadership, the government may be attempting to create a rival pro-G40 faction within ZNLWVA. The Mugabe-ZNLWVA split may lead to further internal ZANU-PF fissures, as many top ZANU-PF officials are likely to continue to view veterans as a vital constituency. This is particularly true of the Mnangagwa camp, known as "Team Lacoste" (a play on Mnangagwa's nickname, "The Crocodile"). Mugabe's split with the veterans has been interpreted by some observers as a rejection of Mnangagwa's faction in favor of the G40. Human rights advocates have for years raised concern with documented government violations of the rule of law and respect for human rights, particularly during election periods and with regard to its treatment of political opponents and human rights and democracy advocacy groups. Frequent reported perpetrators of political violence in recent years have included the state security forces, ZANU-PF youth militants, members of ZNLWVA, and, to a lesser extent, MDC militants. In July 2016, Amnesty International (AI) reported that "recently, human rights defenders and activists in Zimbabwe have been receiving threats and [are] subjected to arbitrary arrests, ill–treatment and attempted abductions." ZANU-PF supporters were implicated in harassment and intimidation in the lead-up to the by-elections in mid-2015, in addition to prior violence linked to the purge of Mujuru supporters, while opposition activists engaged in violent skirmishes in connection with intra-MDC competition. There have also been reports of state- and party-mediated allocations of food, fertilizer, and other commodities, as well as coercion, to secure votes or political support for ZANU-PF. The reported March 2015 daytime abduction of a Zimbabwean journalist and human rights activist, Itai Dzamara, allegedly by state security officials, has also drawn widespread local and international attention. Dzamara has not been found, and U.S. officials have called for a full and open investigation of his case. Similar allegations of state involvement in other abduction cases have periodically been reported since the early 2000s. Police regularly halt public political and economic demonstrations and arrest political and labor union protesters. In its 2016 World Report , Human Rights Watch (HRW) asserted that in 2015, "those who criticized Mugabe or his government, including human rights defenders, civil society activists, political opponents, and outspoken street vendors, were harassed, threatened, or arbitrarily arrested by police and state security agents." Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR), a nongovernment advocacy group, has contended that authorities intentionally "misinterpret and selectively misapply laws." Annual State Department human rights reports have reflected similar findings. Recently, however, and against the government's wishes, some judges have allowed bond for detainees facing protest-related charges, reduced or tossed out such charges, and permitted several protests for which the police have denied permits. HRW, ZLHR, and others also assert that the government has not pursued many of the legal reforms that they contend are needed to bring the national legal code and system into compliance with the 2013 constitution, including the repeal or reform of laws constraining freedoms of expression, association, and movement. These groups also call for progress toward an impartial state media and apolitical security services. Collectively, these laws have often been used to harass political and civil society activists. ZLHR, among other human rights groups, views several of them as contrary to the 2013 constitution, and in the absence of their full repeal or replacement sees an urgent need to bring them into line with the constitution. The government is also seeking passage of the Computer Crime and Cyber Crime Bill, which would reportedly give authorities additional authorities to intercept electronic communications and seize digital devices in a wide variety of circumstances. The new measure may reportedly be used by police to restrict expression via social media, which critics have often used to organize protests. ZLHR also urges that a range of constitutionally required commissions (e.g., on national peace and reconciliation, gender, and land) be given adequate resources to pursue their mandates, and that legal reforms be enacted to devolve authority and resources to the provinces. ZLHR and HRW contend, in particular, that the official Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission lacks adequate resources, and HRW has noted that its mandate—limited to acts committed since early 2009, when the GNU was established—leaves it unable to investigate or help secure justice for victims of prior human rights abuses and political violence. Police harassment and criminal prosecutions of journalists and social media writers, often based on allegations of slander against Mugabe and other state officials, have been common, although in early 2016, the Supreme Constitutional Court found Zimbabwe's criminal defamation laws to be unconstitutional. Law enforcement officials also regularly crack down on micro-businesses such as street vendors in the widespread informal sector. The state and ZANU-PF also have a history of sponsoring various "operations," a term drawn from military and law enforcement parlance, which refers to party or security agency campaigns that generally seek to support ZANU-PF-backed policies, aid the party's support base or, conversely, targeting putative ZANU-PF opponents, real and perceived. The targets of these campaigns have varied; examples include irregular housing settlements, illegal artisanal mining, and unregistered satellite TV receivers, as well as extra-governmental efforts to control inflation, meet housing demands, boost agricultural production, or undertake land reform. Others have involved systematic campaigns of political violence. The Zimbabwean state also has a history of forcibly displacing selective groups of citizens and seizing their property, often for political ends. In 2014, HRW documented the eviction and resettlement without adequate compensation of 20,000 flood-displaced persons, who suffered security force abuses when they protested. The government has reportedly since acknowledged some fault in the case and pledged to address the victims' situation. Periodic uncompensated seizures of farmland, often orchestrated by top ZANU-PF or security service figures and targeting the few remaining white commercial farmers and others not favored by the government, have also continued. ZANU-PF-linked beneficiaries of land grabs continue seek to gain legal ownership of such properties. "Indigenization," the mandatory partial nationalization of foreign firms, is another current form of state property expropriation. Another key human rights challenge is trafficking in persons (TIP). Under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA, P.L. 106-386 , as amended), the State Department has classified Zimbabwe as a Tier 3 country since 2009, meaning that its government does not fully comply with minimum U.S. TVPA standards and is not making significant efforts to do so. Zimbabwe's ranking has made it ineligible for "non-trade related, nonhumanitarian assistance to the government except for certain economic assistance for various specific purposes with specific limitations." In every year since 2010, the Obama Administration has issued a partial waiver of these restrictions to allow certain types of assistance deemed to be "in the national interest." One positive development praised by human rights campaigners was an early 2016 decision by Zimbabwe's Constitutional Court to outlaw the marriage of anyone under 18 years of age. Child advocates see it as a key step in reducing Zimbabwe's reportedly high rate of child marriage, which particularly affects minor brides. Public corruption has been a persistent problem, as acknowledged by top ZANU-PF leaders, who periodically inveigh against it and included anti-corruption efforts as a key goal in ZANU-PF's 2013 election platform. While Zimbabwe does not rank as poorly as some other African countries, according to a late 2015 survey of corruption in 36 African countries, 80% of Zimbabweans polled rated the government's efforts to fight corruption as "very" or "fairly" bad. The problem afflicts common public service delivery, but a particular feature of corruption in Zimbabwe has been elite appropriation of public resources. "Salarygate," a series of media reports in 2013 and 2014 revealing the self-award of large salaries and other perks by leaders of multiple state-owned enterprises and public agencies during a period of public austerity and service cuts, drew intense public ire. While ZANU-PF took steps to address the issue by capping such salaries, in other cases, it has failed to rein in publicly reported acts of self-enrichment by top ZANU-PF or state officials. A number of analysts view selective ZANU-PF tolerance of the use of public resources for private gain as a structural feature of a political patronage system that has enabled ZANU-PF elites to access and control both wealth and political power . Zimbabwe's Central Bank has identified illicit financial flows worth hundreds of millions of dollars annually—in the form of illicit or suspicious cross-border bank transfers, trade mispricing, bulk cash exports, and related activities—as a key economic challenge. Such flows have reportedly contributed to a shortage of U.S. dollar paper currency. How vigorously the government is prepared to counter such flows, however, is unclear. For instance, despite Mugabe's complaint in 2016 that as much as $15 billion in diamond revenue had been diverted in recent years by ZANU-PF and military-linked firms, he reportedly refused to take action against Jinan, a Chinese firm accused by the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) of illegally exporting nearly half a billion dollars. Responding to an inquiry about the Jinan case, RBZ Governor stated that they had "allowed bygones to be bygones." After the 2013 elections, many observers viewed economic policy as a make-or-break challenge facing the newly elected ZANU-PF government given the severe crisis, hyperinflation, and massive economic contraction (-66.8%) that occurred from 2000 to 2009 under ZANU-PF stewardship. Since the advent of the ZANU-PF majority government in August 2013 and the departure of GNU finance minister Tendai Biti, economic growth has slowed considerably, and many Zimbabweans face increasingly dire economic prospects. The IMF estimates that GDP growth has declined from 4.5% in 2013 to 3.3% in 2014 and 1.4% in 2015. Weak economic growth is attributable to a drop in exports, a lack of credit for the private sector, in part due to high government borrowing, low demand linked to poverty and illiquidity, poor financial sector performance, and low foreign investment levels. Other contributing factors, according to some analysts, have been problematic economic policy decisions and regulatory actions, notably relating to indigenization and, more recently, currency and trade controls. A severe regional El Niño-related drought in 2015-2016, meanwhile, has buffeted the agricultural economy, decreasing export crop production and creating widespread food insecurity. Low world prices for several key Zimbabwean minerals, together with new mining royalty payment requirements, have dampened mineral production and exports. Imports have also fallen significantly, in part due to shortages of hard currency necessary for foreign transactions, but remain about double the value of exports. Low import demand is also driven by low formal sector domestic production. Import demand has been driven by low formal sector domestic production, which has also been hampered by low demand, generating a 2.5% deflation rate and lack of access to credit and hard currency. Many businesses have reportedly closed or downsized in recent years, and 65% of manufacturing capacity was reportedly idle in 2015. Regular, lengthy electricity cuts have exacerbated this situation. Formal sector unemployment is widely reported to be extremely high, although accurate employment data is lacking, and much of the labor force works in the informal sector. All of these factors have both helped spur and been affected by widespread poverty and contributed to weak market demand. Zimbabwe's reliance on the U.S. dollar—the main local transactional currency since 2009—has also inhibited growth, due to a worsening dollar shortage and associated economic uncertainty. Rising local demand for the U.S. dollar has been driven by the international strength of the dollar; high import demand, including for food, production of which has dropped due to the drought; and a preference for hard currency in Zimbabwe's cash-dominated economy. The RBZ, which has few monetary policy options because it does not control its own currency, is attempting to address the shortage by limiting hard currency withdrawals (e.g., at ATMs) and import transactions. The bank, through which foreign exchange import transactions must flow by law, is distributing export earnings in multiple foreign currencies, rather than the dollar alone, to reduce reliance on the dollar and increase cash flows. It is also prioritizing certain imports over others, interfering in market mediation of demand and supply for goods, requiring multi-currency pricing of goods and the use of point of sale machines that can handle multiple currencies and payment types, and limiting external financial transfers. The RBZ has also announced very controversial plans to issue $200 million worth of local bond notes intended to serve as proxies for and be valued at par with U.S. dollars. The bank's intention is to bring cash liquidity to the domestic economy and increase the volume of money circulating. The bond plan, however, has spurred fears of a return to the hyperinflation associated with the defunct Zimbabwean dollar and predictions that bonds will trade at a depreciated value relative to the dollar, depriving bond holders of the full value of their holdings. In August 2016, police used tear gas and water cannons to disperse a reportedly peaceful protest against the bonds. RBZ external transfer controls have also reportedly drawn the ire of politically connected elites and businesses. A severe El Niño-related drought that affected the entire southern Africa region during the late 2015-2016 rainy season has disrupted the agricultural economy and, critically, resulted in a sharp decrease in the production of maize, the staple food crop. There are increasing reports of hunger in rural areas and a rising need for food aid. The government expects to import up to 700,000 metric tons of maize in 2016, about seven times the 2015 level, but has not budgeted for this cost, and already faces public revenue shortfalls. In February 2016, the government declared a state of disaster in some areas and called for $1.6 billion in foreign food aid. In March, the World Food Program (WFP) launched a $220 million food aid appeal for Zimbabwe covering programs through March 2017. As of early May 2016, U.S. FY2016 food security contributions for Zimbabwe totaled $34.7 million, adding to $42.6 million provided in FY2015 and $34.8 million in FY2014. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which administers some U.S. food aid, reports that in 2016-2017 the period prior to planting, when food stocks from the prior harvest run low, will "start earlier than usual in September and end later than usual, in April, due to the El Niño-related impacts." Citing a 2016 Zimbabwean government assessment, USAID also reported that at the peak of the lean season, from January to March 2017, an estimated 4 million Zimbabweans "will be food insecure." USAID had earlier reported that about 2.8 million of 9.4 million rural dwellers were food insecure as of early May 2016. The drought is also expected to dampen production in 2016 of tobacco, a key cash crop that, along with gold, had been one of the few economic bright spots. The tobacco sector grew steadily after hitting a production low in 2008. Strong tobacco prices led to strong export earnings in 2014 and 2015, notably from exports to China, but production and projected exports are plummeting. Gold has done well despite problems in the rest of the mining sector and a relative price decline after peaks in 2011 and 2012. Foreign direct investment (FDI), which would likely increase inflows of hard currency, has remained flat or increased moderately in recent years. A key deterrent is indigenization, a state policy under which foreign-owned businesses are required to share ownership of their operations with Zimbabwean citizens. The process is intended to increase local black ownership of major economic assets, and primarily affects large foreign-owned firms. Application of the indigenization law, despite an early 2015 reform, is viewed by many observers as politicized, opaque, and subjective, making it a key investor concern. The government has periodically amended some requirements, both to achieve indigenization policy goals more effectively and clarify the law for foreign investors. While some investors appear able to negotiate agreements that are reliable enough to allow them to remain in the country, frequent changes have generated the perception that indigenization is subject to political whims and other unpredictable shifts. Mugabe himself, contending that "confusion" over the indigenization law had undermined FDI, issued a "clarification" on the law in April 2016, further to other reform measures enacted in late 2015. The latter measures allow investors to use unspecified "empowerment credits or quotas," negotiated between the government and individual investors, to meet indigenization requirements. Despite these efforts to make legal compliance easier, the government periodically threatens to seize or halt businesses that it alleges are not complying with the law. In early 2016, the government launched an indigenization compliance audit of foreign-owned firms. It has even required politically favored Chinese state-owned firms to turn over mining concession rights in some cases. Zimbabwe has made concerted efforts to form strong relations with China for over a decade, in part to diversify its foreign trading partners and replace Western investment and capital that fled in the early 2000s. China has become a key source of foreign investment and credit. Much of this activity has involved bilateral state economic cooperation in addition to private sector activity, including some development grants or loans, and investment funded by Chinese state-backed loans from the China Development Bank and Export and Import Bank (Exim) Bank, or backed by finance insurance from the China Export and Credit Insurance Corporation. Typically, deals have been between large Chinese state-owned corporations or other Chinese enterprises with state connections and their Zimbabwean counterparts. The focus of these transactions has varied. Key examples include Chinese exports of aircraft, buses, rail vehicles, engineering services, and agricultural and construction equipment, and Chinese purchases of Zimbabwean minerals, tobacco, and cotton. Chinese firms have also invested in Zimbabwean mining, infrastructure construction, agricultural, telecommunications, mineral processing, and power generation projects. Many deals involve joint ventures, and some—as elsewhere in Africa—have involved exchanges of services for mineral rights or commodities. Transparency advocates have criticized some of these deals as exploitative. During a 2015 state visit to Zimbabwe by Chinese President Xi Jinping, the two countries signed 12 agreements, including a $1.2 billion China Exim loan under which China's Sinohydro Corp. will add 600 megawatts of capacity to the national utility's largest thermal power plant. China also cancelled $40 million in loan interest on part of a reported $1 billion in Chinese concessional loans to Zimbabwe over the past five years. In return, Zimbabwe announced that it would increase use of the Chinese yuan, and hold it as a reserve currency. The Chinese government further agreed to provide a $65 million grant to support construction of a new parliament building and a pharmaceutical warehouse. A double taxation accord was also signed, as was a cooperation agreement, under which China donated to Zimbabwe $2.3 million worth of vehicles and equipment for wildlife protection. While Zimbabwe's economy is healthier than it was before 2009, its potential remains largely unrealized. According to the World Bank, "with a relatively well-educated workforce, abundant natural resources and developed infrastructure (albeit aging), the fundamentals for growth and poverty reduction are strong, provided the country can tackle its political fragilities, and build a consensus around inclusive and competitive investment policies." Progress has been stymied, in part, by political uncertainty and insufficient access to investment capital, notably in the mining sector and public infrastructure. Especially problematic, given their broad economic and social welfare impacts, are poorly performing water supply and electricity systems—which have been further weakened by the drought. While state and donor-financed upgrades in these areas are underway, state revenue receipts are constrained by low growth and a large informal business sector that pays few taxes. Wage payments often take priority over long-term public capital investments. IMF data suggest that Zimbabwe spends about 70% of state revenues on salaries, although other estimates are higher, and there is political resistance to reductions in public worker payments, which are key to maintaining support for ZANU-PF. The government is increasingly struggling on this front, however; revenue shortfalls resulted in late military and civil service salary payments in June and July 2016—a major political challenge for the government. Public funding shortfalls have long spurred a chronic failure to pay external national debts. This, in turn, has constrained access to foreign credit. In 2015, Zimbabwe owed an estimated $7.1 billion in long-term external public debt, nearly 79% of which was in arrears. This prompted the IFIs to halt lending years ago. Domestic business is also constrained by credit scarcity and high interest rates due, in part, to a banking system in which nonperforming loans have been common. To help address these challenges, the government receives support from the World Bank under the Zimbabwe Reconstruction Fund (ZIMREF), a five-year multi-donor trust fund launched in 2014, to which the United States does not contribute. ZIMREF supports parts of Zim Asset (see below), Zimbabwe's national economic plan. ZIMREF projects support for business environment reforms, public expenditure governance and effectiveness, poverty program monitoring, and public sector analysis and advice. Although Zimbabwe is not eligible for IFI loans, in early March 2016, the government completed an IMF staff-monitored program (SMP). Under the SMP—technical cooperation that did not involve new IMF credit—the IMF monitored Zimbabwe's implementation of jointly agreed economic reform actions. A key goal for Zimbabwe in undertaking the SMP was to improve the economy and relations with the IFIs and donors as a precursor to negotiating the planned repayment of roughly $1.8 billion in IFI credit arrears, prospectively leading to renewed IFI credit flows and expanded technical cooperation. In October 2015, Finance Minister Patrick Chinamasa presented a national arrears clearance plan during the annual meetings of the IMF and the World Bank in Washington, DC, While IMF officials initially gave the plan a positive reception, it reportedly faced internal ZANU-PF opposition. One impediment to an IFI arrears deal and possible future new IFI loans is likely to be a longstanding congressional requirement, first set out in ZDERA and most recently reaffirmed in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 ( P.L. 114-113 ), that the United States vote against any new IFI loans or grants to Zimbabwe's government, "except to meet basic human needs or to promote democracy." Absent robust economic and governance reforms by the government, some in Congress continue to oppose the prospect of new IFI loans by some in Congress, notably Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, and by some in the broader U.S. policy community. While the United States does not hold veto power over IFI loans, its views are influential on IFI Boards. According to U.S. Treasury officials, U.S. officials have expressed support for Zimbabwean arrears clearance efforts, but have contended that Zimbabwe must pay arrears with its own resources, and have noted that they are bound by U.S. law to vote against most new IFI credit. Press reporting on an AfDB meeting in late May 2016 suggested that Zimbabwe's plan was progressing well, but U.S. Treasury officials consulted by CRS indicated that controversy over Zimbabwe's bond note plan has given pause to IFI and bilateral creditors. In July 2016, an IMF official stated that "there's no financing program under discussion with Zimbabwe at this point." The next big IFI forum on Zimbabwean arrears efforts is likely to occur in the fall of 2016. Treasury officials also stated that, like the United States, most major foreign donor governments are likely to tie any eventual multilateral and bilateral debt clearance deal to governance and human rights reforms. More robust, demonstrable economic policy change and greater financial transparency may also be required. Observers are split over whether the Zimbabwean government's stated support for economic reform is genuine and fully backed by top ZANU-PF leaders—many of whom have long periodically expressed hostility toward the IFIs—or is driven primarily by a desperate search for credit and liquidity for the economy. According to the Economist Intelligence Unit, an economic analysis firm, there is little sign thus far of a genuine change in the administration's prioritisation of its political agenda over economic management. […] Policy confusion is likely to persist as (relative) moderates and hardliners fight for influence within the ruling party, and in this environment Zimbabwe is unlikely to make rapid progress on formulating a prudent economic policy. A key ZANU-PF policy since the late 1990s has been an often violent and chaotic program of land expropriations from large, primarily white commercial farmers. The invasions, generally by landless people, ex-war veterans, and ZANU-PF youth militants, reflected pent-up demand for land and resentment over racially unequal distribution of land inherited from the pre-independence system, with whites owning large tracts of the fertile central highlands. The invasions followed a long period of slow land reform generally premised on a "willing seller-willing buyer" model. After the defeat in 2000 of ZANU-PF-proposed constitutional amendments allowing for land seizures, the government informally blessed the invasions and then slowly regulated and systematized them under the Fast Track Land Reform Program (FTLRP). The FTLRP facilitated the expropriation of millions of hectares of land that was then redistributed, under often partisan processes, to a mix of poor and landless persons (so-called "A1" recipients), and large commercial farm ("A2") recipients, who were often politically connected. FTLRP spurred an exit from farming (or from Zimbabwe altogether) of thousands of white farmers who had produced much of the country's food stocks. This led to a sharp drop in farm output, food supplies, and export earnings in the 2000s, and to internal displacements and job losses for hundreds of thousands of black farm workers. Some positive effects have also been reported, such as welfare gains for poor resettled farmers. However, many redistributed large farms reportedly remain idle, large commercial production has never recovered, and many studies show many problems across the post-FTLRP agricultural sector. The government has often urged that land should be fully used, and in 2015 it initiated a donor-aided national land audit, a key unfulfilled goal of the 2008 GPA. The exercise reportedly faced resistance from politically connected persons whose property claims the audit might affect. In general, security of land tenure for new land occupants is not assured, and their land cannot be used to access credit, a key challenge. Redistributed land recipients generally must comply with "offer letters" requiring that the land be in active use, but the government reportedly sometimes rescinds these letters, allegedly for political reasons. A2 offer letter holders may also apply for 99-year leases, which can ostensibly be used as collateral for bank loans. All land, however, is state property under the constitution, and most farmland (as opposed to deeded urban property) cannot be freely bought and sold. As a result, banks reportedly are generally unwilling to provide lease-collateralized credit. An abiding issue with implications for whether reengagement with the IFIs will be successful is if and how Zimbabwe may compensate white farmers whose land was seized. While the government has pledged to pay full compensation for land seized from foreign investors under bilateral investment treaties, authorities assert that compensation for land seized from nationals will be limited to the cost of property improvements, reimbursement for movable property that was taken, and related legal fees. It has paid off some dispossessed white farmers on this basis, but legal disputes over the valuation and compensability of assets have often slowed this process. In March 2016, the government notified parliament that it had established a Lands Compensation Fund to address the issue and proposed to capitalize it with state revenues from A1, A2, and other land rental fees and leases, as well as possible future foreign aid or state appropriations. The state, however, reportedly lacks adequate funding for what one MP has estimated might cost as much as $11.4 billion. Some A1 recipients, many of whom are poor and need access to credit and inputs themselves, have reportedly protested the plan. Several years ago, the government had reportedly discussed a scheme with the World Bank under which the government would issue public bonds backed by IFI credit guarantees as a means of generating compensation funds for dispossessed farmers, but whether it pursues such an approach remains unclear. Diamonds have been a source of controversy since a 2006 mining rush in the Marange in eastern Zimbabwe. Between 2006 and 2008 production was mostly undertaken by artisanal miners tapping alluvial reserves (stones deposited on the surface by water and other geological factors). These miners were removed from the area through a brutal police and military campaign before the zone was parceled out to large commercial concessionaires. In the late 2000s, these abuses and alleged exports outside of the Kimberly Process (KP), an international rough diamond trade regulation regime, generated multiple human rights probes, unsuccessful calls for Zimbabwe's suspension from the KP, and KP monitoring of Zimbabwe's diamond exports. The diamond sector has also drawn international scrutiny because financial flows within the sector have been opaque and subject to limited and politically influenced state oversight. During the GNU, large sums of diamond earnings were allegedly systematically funneled to ZANU-PF and politically connected military, intelligence, and ZANU-PF figures involved in the handful of firms that control diamond mining in Marange. Some of these include joint ventures with opaquely managed Chinese state-backed firms. For several years under the GNU, the industry made very limited public tax and royalty payments relative to the hundreds of millions of dollars-worth of diamonds that it exported, a fact publicly noted and criticized by the then-MDC Finance Minister. While little was done during the GNU to exert control over the diamond sector, recently President Mugabe, justifying an ongoing nationalization of the sector (see below), stated that the industry had engaged in "a lot of swindling and smuggling," and that diamond sector firms had "robbed us of our wealth." He claimed that the state had realized only $2 billion of $15 billion in diamond sector earnings. The basis for that unusually high estimate is unclear—officially, the country exported a total of $2.29 billion in diamonds from 2009 through 2015—as is the government's willingness to account for past alleged diamond sector diversions. In early 2015, the government announced that the small number of partially state-owned diamond firms that had controlled the sector would be required to form a single diamond consortium, the Zimbabwe Consolidated Diamond Corporation (ZCDC), in a 51%-49% partnership in favor of the state. The move is ostensibly aimed at boosting sector transparency and accountability and curbing illicit exports. It comes as reserves of alluvial diamonds are declining and as firms move toward tapping kimberlites (deep diamond deposits). The ZCDC is intended to facilitate such extraction, which requires expensive equipment, by pooling investments and attaining economies of scale, while increasing state control over the sector and indigenization of ownership. Some affected firms have sued to halt the mandatory merger, which the state enforced by seizing control of the entire Marange mining area in early 2016. After the suits, at least one of which favored the plaintiffs, President Mugabe declared that that the state would take control of all diamond operations; what this means for the future of ZCDC is not clear. Centralization and indigenization within the diamond processing sector is also underway. While hunting is a significant source of conservation income nationally, generating $45 million in 2014 according to the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority , it is controversial. In July 2015, a protected, rare black-maned lion dubbed Cecil, which was reportedly lured out of Zimbabwe's Hwange game reserve, was killed by a U.S. trophy hunter. The hunt was reportedly licensed but the killing allegedly occurred under the negligent supervision of a paid professional guide, faced criminal charges in Zimbabwe. The U.S. hunter was investigated by U.S. authorities but not charged. The killing drew global attention, condemnation, and calls for an end to lion hunting in Africa, and prompted several airlines to stop transport of animal trophies. The killing of Zimbabwe's elephants for their ivory tusks has also drawn global attention, as has a spate of poaching-related, cyanide-based poisonings that reportedly primarily targeted elephant and rhinoceros and affected multiple species. An estimated 400 or more elephants have reportedly been killed in this manner since 2008, including about 70 in 2015 in Hwange and other parks in Zimbabwe, as have several hundred rhinos in recent years. Rhino horns are valued by Asian traditional medicine buyers, and are a key target of traffickers. In separate cases, in 2015, authorities arrested a group of game wardens and a group of villagers near Hwange in relation to cyanide poisonings, and recently killed an elephant poacher and arrested his alleged accomplices. To counter such activities, in late 2015, the Environment, Water and Climate Minister announced that the government would deploy the national army to supplement game warden and police poaching patrol and interdiction activities in several large game parks using helicopters, drones, and other methods. Other government efforts to manage wildlife populations have proven controversial. In July 2015, some conservationists criticized Zimbabwe after wildlife officials corralled a number of allegedly juvenile elephants and exported about 20 of them to China—reportedly as part of a cull in Hwange to reduce an elephant population that is ecologically unsustainable, as well as to earn foreign currency. Critics allege that such captures disrupt herd life and that the animals have been mistreated in China. Zimbabwe had previously come under criticism for similar actions involving exports to countries including China, the United Arab Emirates, and France, but is continuing such exports. In June 2016, the government drew criticism after requesting sale offers from private game reserves to buy wildlife residing in public game reserves. The stated objective was to reduce populations, thereby easing pressure on natural food stocks, and to raise funds to provide food and water to distressed animals. U.S. efforts to combat poaching and illicit trade in wildlife are pursued under the Obama Administration's National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking, in which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) plays a leading role. In an effort to foster elephant conservation in Zimbabwe, the FWS issued a temporary ban—imposed under the authority of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which lists the African elephant as threatened—on the import of sport-hunted elephant trophies from Zimbabwe for most of 2014. In 2015, FWS extended the ban indefinitely, pending possible creation of a demonstrably robust elephant conservation system, a goal that U.S. Interior Department officials are working with the government to achieve. The ban was initially justified by a FWS finding that Zimbabwean conservation plans did not adequately specify goals and progress towards conserving elephant populations, and that the government had insufficient data with which to assess the status of its elephant populations and lacked adequate capacities to effectively implement and enforce elephant-related laws. FWS therefore asserted that it could not determine if limited elephant hunting there would enhance the survival of the species. In late 2015, after a review of scientific and commercial information, FWS also listed a subspecies of lion found in eastern and southern Africa, Panthera leo melanochaita [ P. l. melanochaita ], as threatened under ESA. FWS also issued a concurrent rule, which took effect in early 2016, that creates a comprehensive permitting process for all U.S. P. l. melanochaita imports (e.g., live animals, scientific specimens, and sport-hunted trophies). It is intended to ensure that such imports are legally sourced, ESA-compliant, and originate only from countries with well-managed, scientifically based lion species conservation programs. In press accounts, Zimbabwean officials have portrayed the lion and elephant bans as devastating to the country's hunting industry. Hunting bans may have unpredictable effects. Reducing hunting could protect some animals, but properly regulated hunting theoretically targets relatively few animals, and the imposition of bans could change conservation-related economic incentives. Given high fees generated by commercial hunts, bans could potentially reduce community conservation funding and make poaching more economically attractive, potentially placing many species at greater risk. Critics of trophy hunting, however, assert that hunting is often not sufficiently regulated and that the link between conservation and income from hunting is not as strong as proponents may claim. Executive branch-issued sanctions on individuals whom the United States has identified as having undermined democratic institutions and processes in Zimbabwe have reinforced U.S. condemnation of ZANU-PF-led human rights violations, breaches of the rule of law, and undemocratic practices since 2000. Such persons are also subject to U.S. visa restrictions. Congress had called for the imposition of such sanctions when it passed ZDERA ( P.L. 107-99 ) in 2001. As earlier noted, ZDERA also set out a range of restrictions requiring U.S. representatives on the boards of IFIs to vote against loans or debt cancellations benefitting the Zimbabwean government, pending fulfillment of a range of conditions. These relate to the effective rule of law (e.g., guarantees of property rights, freedom of speech and association, and an end to the state-backed violence and intimidation); a freely held presidential election or the fulfilment of other conditions conducive to free and fair elections; an equitable, legal, and transparent process of land reform; and subordination of the security services to elected civilian leaders. At the time of ZDERA's passage, Zimbabwe was already ineligible for most multilateral loans as it was in arrears on past loans. Recent annual foreign aid appropriations laws have also prohibited U.S. support for international financial institution loans or grants to the Zimbabwean government, with some exceptions, pending fulfillment of a range of conditions. In an early 2016 letter to Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, SFRC Chairman Bob Corker voiced support for such conditions, as well as others, writing that any new lending to Zimbabwe's government, including lending related to help Zimbabwe clear its IFI arrears, should "be preceded by meaningful progress toward" clear benchmarks for the restoration of the rule of law, including respect for private property, free press, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly; a credible process of accountability for missing revenues from diamonds and a monitored plan for capturing future revenues; and official acknowledgement of past gross human rights abuses and a demonstration that the Government of Zimbabwe is prepared to make an earnest effort to remedy those abuses. In addition to restrictions on lending, Zimbabwe's default on U.S. loans makes it subject to appropriation prohibitions on government-to-government bilateral aid, with some exceptions (for education, agriculture, anti-corruption, family planning, reproductive health, agriculture, food security, and macroeconomic growth), in some cases subject to executive branch waivers. Zimbabwe's government is also generally ineligible for non-trade-related, nonhumanitarian U.S. aid due to its poor anti-trafficking-in-persons ranking under the TVPA ( P.L. 106-386 , as amended). Successive Administrations have determined Zimbabwe to be ineligible for trade benefits under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA, P.L. 106-200 , Title I, as amended). There is also a U.S. International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) ban on the export of defense articles and services to Zimbabwe, with exceptions for hunting rifles for personal use. The Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) administers targeted financial sanctions imposed by executive order that currently affect roughly 200 Zimbabwean individuals and entities called Specially Designated Nationals. Violators have been convicted in U.S. courts, and in February 2016, Barclays Bank Plc. paid a $2.49 million settlement to OFAC in relation to 159 prohibited transactions by its Zimbabwean subsidiary. In advance of the 2013 elections, the Treasury Department licensed transactions with two sanctioned entities: the Agricultural Development Bank of Zimbabwe and the state-owned Infrastructure Development Bank. State Department Senate testimony in mid-2013 indicated that the action was meant to demonstrate U.S. intent to work toward normalizing relations if further democratic progress was made after the 2013 constitutional referendum. In February 2016, the two entities were removed from the OFAC sanctions list. Starting in 2002, the EU introduced various broadly similar sanctions, as did other governments at various times, but gradually eased them beginning in 2012 in response to putative progress made toward democratic reforms under the GNU. Currently, President Robert Mugabe, his wife, and Zimbabwe's defense industries remain subject to an EU asset freeze and travel ban, which also applies, on a suspended basis, to five top-ranking Zimbabwean military or security officials. An EU arms embargo also remains in place. In the past, U.S officials have occasionally raised the possibility that positive rapprochement in bilateral relations might be possible and described the kinds of changes that might warrant a possible relaxation of U.S. aid restrictions and sanctions. This was particularly true toward the end of the GNU, as progress was made toward a reformed constitution. The flawed nature of the 2013 elections, however, together with subsequent ZANU-PF unwillingness to work constructively with the opposition, a return to problematic ZANU-PF policymaking, a failure to more robustly implement reforms necessary to implement the constitution, and an ongoing pattern of using state security forces to repress government critics appear to have foreclosed the near-term possibility of warming relations. Despite legal restrictions and sanctions, the United States supports a relatively robust and diverse U.S. aid program implemented by nongovernment actors. The primary goal of U.S. aid programs in Zimbabwe, according to the FY2017 State Department Congressional Budget Justification, is to "provide support for the democratic, legal, and economic reforms needed for the country's transition to a democracy that is able to meet its citizens' needs." To do so, the Obama Administration plans to continue to support efforts by "key stakeholders and activists to continue to advocate for transparent and accountable governance, to enhance political participation, and to create a more active and robust civil society that promotes respect for human rights, equitable economic growth, political and electoral reform, as well as improved delivery of essential social services." Other key development programs seek to "improve access to vital health services, increase food security and resilience to shocks, and promote more transparent, accountable, and effective economic governance." Zimbabwe, like most African countries, participates in the Obama Administration's Young African Leaders Initiative (YALI). Bilateral aid totaled an estimated $172 million in FY2015 and $152 million in FY2016, and $160 million was requested for FY2017. Zimbabwe also periodically benefits from USAID regional programs. Programs under the FY2017 request—which build on past year programs and are aligned with the USAID 2013-2015 Transition Country Development Cooperation Strategy [CDCS]—are slated to focus primarily on selected governance, food security and agriculture, and health goals. A new CDCS has been approved but not yet published. FY2017 governance programs are slated to provide support for citizen-government engagement, civil society policy analysis, monitoring, and advocacy of constitution implementation and legislative reforms, especially relating to fiscal management, transparency, and debt management. They are also to support the protection of human rights, especially through support for local organizations supporting human rights defenders and other vulnerable democratic activists. USAID programming also provides targeted technical assistance to selected parliamentary committees to enhance lawmaking skills, support legislative actions needed to achieve full and effective implementation of the new constitution, increase fiscal transparency oversight, and promote engagement with various civic constituencies. Ongoing support for electoral reform advocacy, voter education, and election monitoring in advance of the 2018 elections is also planned. Health programs, the largest area of assistance, focus on prevention, care, and treatment to counter HIV/AIDS under the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), as well as tuberculosis (TB). Aid under the President's Malaria Initiative (PMI) is slated to scale up malaria prevention and treatment efforts. Food security, agricultural, and resilience-building activities under the Feed the Future global hunger and food security initiative and other programs center on helping smallholder farmers to adopt improved agricultural practices, increase productivity and output, boost their access to credit and earnings, and develop trade capacity and linkages to markets. Nutritional aid to targeted populations and hygiene behavior change are other focus areas, among other food security and economic resilience programs. The United States also supports the removal of landmines in eastern Zimbabwe that remain from the independence war, and provides aid to landmine victims and help to build landmine removal capacity. In light of issues discussed in this report and congressional concerns outlined in current and past legislation, policy communications, and hearings, current U.S. policy issues and options for congressional consideration may include Zimbabwe's ongoing effort to pay its IFI arrears poses a potential challenge to congressional efforts to oppose any new Zimbabwean access to IFI credit assistance, and also provides a possible point of leverage to achieve U.S.-supported policy outcomes. If Zimbabwe were to pay its IFI arrears and apply for new IFI loans or other support, the United States might not be able to prevent IFI assistance if a majority of other IFI-contributing governments were to support it. U.S. influence within IFI forums is strong, however, and in such a scenario the United States could press for strong conditionality on any IFI support provided to Zimbabwe. Examples might include robust financial reform goals, linkages between IFI assistance and improved governance and human rights protections, and strong Zimbabwean compliance with any performance criteria linked to IFI credit or cooperation. Some U.S. policymakers may view U.S. aid restrictions and targeted sanctions as a means of depriving the ZANU-PF-led government and party leaders of resources and support, in the absence of Zimbabwean compliance with a robust set of U.S. conditions. If this outcome—or a message that undesirable behavior will be met with punitive U.S. action—has been the goal of U.S. policy, such measures may have been successful. On such a basis, some U.S. policymakers may support an extension of current U.S. policy, and efforts to broaden or strengthen sanctions against persons who continue to engage in currently sanctioned acts, or set out new criteria defining Zimbabwean government eligibility for U.S. assistance. If the goal has been to change ZANU-PF behavior, however, success has arguably been more limited, as illustrated by Administration decisions to maintain the same sanctions regime that has prevailed for years because U.S.-opposed Zimbabwean behavior has not improved. While ZANU-PF leaders have long regularly railed against U.S. sanctions and aid restrictions, there have been few fundamental shifts in ZANU-PF policy or governance practices. Whether this has anything to do with U.S. policy is difficult to ascertain. The sweeping nature of the conditions associated with U.S. aid restrictions (e.g., that "the rule of law" be "restored"), however, could be seen as making compliance too much of an "all or nothing" proposition for Zimbabwean policymakers. They may perceive as low the likelihood that their decisions will in fact result in U.S. policy changes from which they may benefit, and view as high the risk that such decisions might threaten their own perceived political or pecuniary interests. The relatively restrictive nature of U.S. aid policy and the difficulty of making changes to the sanctions regime may potentially also have reduced the ability of U.S. policy implementers to flexibly use aid or the prospect of sanctions changes in selected cases to incentivize or support incremental change in discrete policy areas (e.g., land ownership) or by individual reformers. Some U.S. decision-makers may consider whether balancing the perceived punitive effect of blanket aid restrictions and sanctions with "carrots" targeting positive actions in particular instances might help to achieve U.S.-supported outcomes and spur reform. Under an "action for action" model, policy implementers could potentially be given the authority, for instance, to seek to selectively relax or amend restrictive measures in response to discrete individual Zimbabwean government actions that fulfill U.S. objectives, or to provide limited and highly targeted support to selected Zimbabwean state agencies that carry out U.S.-supported reform. Such authority could be made subject to close congressional supervision (e.g., be bound by pre-decisional reporting to and authorization from Congress). A more dynamic approach to applying U.S. policy restrictions could potentially enable the United States to exploit and adapt more quickly to emergent trends, developments, and opportunities and foster Zimbabwean government policy actions viewed by U.S. policymakers as positive. Changes in restrictions governing U.S. aid, for instance, might enable the provision of technical assistance to foster Zimbabwean government efforts to implement selected aspects of its economic policy agenda, such as goals agreed with the IMF or other donors under World Bank-mediated Zimbabwe Reconstruction Fund programs, which U.S. policymakers may view as constructive, or support property rights reforms; strengthen implementation of human and civil rights guarantees and other elements of the 2013 constitution, possibly including through efforts to bolster the independence and technical capacity of central government oversight commissions with mandates relating to constitutional rights, freedoms, and other aspects of the rule of law, as well as selected parliamentary committees; and provide or expand leadership training for civil society groups, notably those involved in public policy advocacy and performance monitoring, protection of constitutional rights, and market-led growth. As a complement to any possible changes to aid and sanctions policy, Congress could consider the following: Expanding use of cultural, educational, and citizen exchanges—such as the Young African Leaders Initiative (YALI), in which Zimbabwe participates—to increase exposure to U.S. values and build long-term U.S.-Zimbabwean leadership linkages. Pursuing greater engagement with opposition actors, pragmatic elements of the Zimbabwean government, and foreign donor governments regarding steps to address key congressional concerns relating to such issues as the rule of law, respect for ownership and title to property, and civil freedoms. Such engagement might include direct congressional dialogue with Zimbabwean interlocutors or collaboration with regional governments aimed at urging inclusive political dialogue and reform, in particular in order to ensure a free and fair electoral process in 2018. How and if the United States could seek to engage with the military and security services with an eye toward encouraging the many powerful actors in the security sector to support a peaceful and rule of law-based transition, and potentially establish the basis for future security sector reform. Some policymakers may view pragmatic, realpolitik-oriented engagement as constructive, despite reservations about engaging with elements ZANU-PF or the security sector. Others may prefer an opposite approach, and seek to further restrict diplomacy and engagement with the government with a view toward further isolating it, potentially as a complement to placing additional conditions on aid or strengthening the U.S. sanctions regime. In the view of some observers, however, such an approach may be unlikely to spur reform-oriented change, and instead foster stasis, both with regard to bilateral relations and to the possibility of transformation in Zimbabwe's political system. Finally, Members of Congress could review aid and policy goals set out in U.S. strategy toward Zimbabwe, with respect both to current policy goals and programs and to executive branch contingency planning focusing on post-Mugabe transition scenarios. In particular, Members could focus on ways in which the United States can best help foster a peaceful and constitutionally prescribed transition, and work with other governments to prevent a destabilizing succession process; and ways to leverage the anticipated post-Mugabe transition to achieve key U.S. policy outcomes, such as increased Zimbabwean government accountability and transparency, strengthened democratic processes and institutions, protection of constitutional rights and freedoms and the rule of law generally, and pursuit of market-led economic development policies. The outlook for Zimbabwe is highly uncertain. Many Zimbabwean political actors are increasingly focused on their own prospects in the upcoming 2018 elections and the forthcoming succession of Mugabe. This is particularly the case within ZANU-PF, whose upper hierarchy appears to be divided by factional dynamics and rivalries. Meanwhile, weak economic performance has persisted, generating increasing popular resentment and protest. While some top Zimbabwean policymakers are focused on fostering economic reform—including reforms agreed with the IMF—it is unclear how much cross-government support there is for such efforts, as opposed to simply meeting a set of criteria that might allow the country to eventually access IFI credit, while keeping in place the kinds of nationalist, state-centered economic policies long advocated by ZANU-PF. Mugabe's prospective succession, which has been a focus of Zimbabwean politics and debate for years, is likely to present a watershed moment for the country. It could spur a transition toward a new governing regime with a new leadership ethos—potentially one more accepting of a pluralistic political system and market-led economy. On the other hand, succession could generate significant political acrimony, instability, and violence, possibly with regional humanitarian and security implications. It could also lead to a managed transition characterized by little political and policy change and continued ZANU-PF domination under a new leader. All of these outcomes have implications for U.S. policy toward, and future relations with, Zimbabwe. What influence the United States may have on these outcomes, however, is likely to be limited by the fact that developments in Zimbabwe are dominated primarily by domestic factors—as well as conflicting policy goals among powerful states bordering Zimbabwe, such as South Africa and Angola. The scope and flexibility of actions available to U.S. policy implementers, and thus the potential for U.S. influence in Zimbabwe, may also be limited by relatively static and inflexible U.S. sanctions and aid restriction policies. While some U.S. policymakers may view any relaxation of U.S. aid restrictions and sanctions policy as an accommodation to what they see as a bad government, others may seek to examine changes in policy that might allow greater U.S. freedom of action to engage with reformers and other pragmatic Zimbabwean leadership elements but simultaneously not reward the most problematic actors within the government. 

Summary: Zimbabwe, a southern African country of about 14 million people, gained independence from the United Kingdom in 1980 after a lengthy armed struggle against white minority rule. The armed struggle, and the enduring effects of land allocations that favored whites, have profoundly shaped post-independence politics, as have the nationalist economic policies of the ruling Zimbabwe National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF), led by long-time president Robert Mugabe. Land seizures, state-centric economic policies, and persistent political turmoil under Mugabe led to a severe economic contraction between 2000 and 2009, which contributed to ZANU-PF's first-ever loss of its parliamentary majority in elections in 2008. A subsequent political impasse over the contested election results led to dialogue and the creation in 2009 of a Government of National Unity (GNU) joining ZANU-PF and key opposition parties. A politically tense period of GNU governance led to an economic recovery, some political reforms, and the enactment of a new constitution. Elections in 2013, which featured reported irregularities, gave ZANU-PF a strong parliamentary majority, extended Mugabe's tenure, and ended the GNU. Economic growth has since markedly decreased and intra-ZANU-PF splits and opposition to ZANU-PF's economic policy and governance practices is growing, as indicated by a wave of protests in 2016. Congress, citing governance and human rights concerns, has enacted legal prohibitions on aid to Zimbabwe's central government and on U.S. support for multilateral loans to Zimbabwe's government, under the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 (ZDERA, P.L. 107-99) and foreign aid appropriations measures. Successive U.S. Administrations have condemned human rights violations, breaches of the rule of law, and undemocratic actions by Mugabe and top ZANU-PF officials. U.S. officials have imposed targeted economic and travel sanctions on individuals and firms identified as committing or abetting such actions. Despite such restrictions, the United States funds a relatively diverse set of assistance programs in Zimbabwe that are implemented by nongovernment actors. According to the FY2017 State Department foreign aid budget request, this aid seeks to support a "transition to a democracy" and "human rights, equitable economic growth, political and electoral reform," leading to "transparent, accountable, and effective" political and economic governance. Aid also addresses humanitarian needs. Bilateral aid allocations totaled $172 million in FY2015 and an estimated $152 million in FY2016; $160 million was requested for FY2017. Health programs are the largest area of aid, and focus on HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Regional aid also benefits Zimbabwe. Relevant bills in the 114th Congress include H.R. 5912 and S. 3117, the House and Senate appropriations bills for the Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs. The question of who may succeed President Mugabe, who turned 92 years old in early 2016, presents an immediate and pressing challenge for Zimbabwe's political system and people, as well as for U.S. policymakers. Potential succession challenges could generate political and economic instability, with possible regional humanitarian and migration implications. Additional issues of long-standing concern to U.S. policymakers include what most see as a need for economic reforms to enable private sector growth, improved macroeconomic governance, and reform of land tenure and property rights. An ongoing Zimbabwean government effort to clear its debt arrears with international financial institutions in order to access new loans, for which U.S. support remains restricted under ZDERA and appropriations laws, has recently drawn U.S. attention. Also of interest to some U.S. officials are wildlife protection efforts in Zimbabwe, which came under intense international criticism after a U.S. trophy hunter killed a rare black-maned lion named Cecil near a game reserve in 2015. The United States has taken steps to promote wildlife conservation in Zimbabwe, including by placing temporary bans on the import of sport-hunted elephant trophies and imposing permit requirements on lion imports.