A war veteran who was given a piece of land described to Human Rights Watch how he found that the same land had been reallocated to different people in subsequent weeks when he tried to go back to his plot. He had been given no written proof that the land was allocated to him. He lamented, “I felt angry because I felt there was some kind of disorder and there was no proper responsibility for the exercise.”53 In many cases the people being resettled are also told not to erect permanent shelters. There is a high turnover in new settler populations, with people coming and leaving resettled areas after varying periods of time. You will see a certain plot being pegged ten times to different people When they bring the first lot, they will stay about five or six weeks, then they leave on the war veterans’ tractor, then they come back with some old and some new.54 Farmers who are members of the Commercial Farmers’ Union have also reported conflict between different groups of settlers, caused by the lack of certainty in the process.55 Many rural black Zimbabweans expressed a profound disapproval of the manner in which government is carrying out land reform, in particular the lack of clear criteria for the allocation of land and the lack of structured support for new settlers. “This issue of land, we are not saying people should not be given land, of course they should; but it should be done in a proper way. Some people can just go and settle at a place where there are no facilities like water, schools, clinics, sanitation…And the loss of jobs brings hunger to the farming areas, since the workers aren’t buying from the small-scale farmers either.”56 A UNDP technical team considering the fast track land reform program in late 2001 noted that “the provision of roads, schools, clinics and boreholes, etc. was lagging far behind settler emplacement,” and that the provision of essential public infrastructure within a reasonable timeframe “will be impossible on the Government’s past track record and its current implementation capacity.”57 Therefore, the team concluded that the current scope of the Fast Track is not implementable on a sustainable basis unless (a) the settlement timetable is substantially adjusted; (b) there is a considerable infusion of resources to finance the necessary infrastructure and support services; and (c) there is a stronger basis for optimism on the part of settlers about their future leading them to form viable community organizations aimed at ensuring the sustainability of new settlements.58 One women’s rights activist commented that the fast track process meant that, “You are just moving poverty from one location to another.”59 Uncertainty has been exacerbated by the rule that land in the communal area be given up when fast-track land is taken: land in communal areas is allocated for cultivation and occupation by traditional leaders, with no absolute ownership; if the person to whom the land is allocated is not present, he forfeits his right to hold it. Giving up communal land without secure tenure elsewhere may leave one displaced and without any access to land. People respond with pragmatic interim arrangements. 53 Human Rights Watch interview, war veteran, Bulawayo, Matabeland South, August 3, 2001. Human Rights Watch interview, farm security officer in Beatrice, Mashonaland East, and settler from Masvingo, July 23, 2001. 55 In Mashonaland East, for examp le, in November 2001, a farm owner reported “fighting between the old and the new settlers over land that has been plowed.” Commercial Farmers’ Union, Farm Invasions and Security Report November 12, 2001. 56 Human Rights Watch interview, villager, communal area, Chimanimani, Manicaland, July 17, 2001. 57 UNDP Interim Mission Report, January 2002, pp.21-23. 58 Ibid. p.24. 59 Human Rights Watch interview, Harare, July 12, 2001. 54 Human Rights Watch 15 March 2002, Vol. 14, No. 1 (A)