Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
ETRD EAGR ETTC EAID ECON EFIN ECIN EINV ELAB EAIR ENRG EPET EWWT ECPS EIND EMIN ELTN EC ETMIN EUC EZ ET ELECTIONS ENVR EU EUN EG EINT ER ECONOMICS ES EMS ENIV EEB EN ECE ECOSOC EK ENVIRONMENT EFIS EI EWT ENGRD ECPSN EXIM EIAD ERIN ECPC EDEV ENGY ECTRD EPA ESTH ECCT EINVECON ENGR ERTD EUR EAP EWWC ELTD EL EXIMOPIC EXTERNAL ETRDEC ESCAP ECO EGAD ELNT ECONOMIC ENV ETRN EIAR EUMEM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID EREL ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA ETCC ETRG ECONOMY EMED ETR ENERG EITC EFINOECD EURM EENG ERA EXPORT ENRD ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EGEN EBRD EVIN ETRAD ECOWAS EFTA ECONETRDBESPAR EGOVSY EPIN EID ECONENRG EDRC ESENV ETT EB ENER ELTNSNAR ECHEVARRIA ETRC EPIT EDUC ESA EFI ENRGY ESCI EE EAIDXMXAXBXFFR EETC ECIP EIAID EIVN EBEXP ESTN EING EGOV ETRA EPETEIND ELAN ETRDGK EAIDRW ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ENVI ELN EAG EPCS EPRT EPTED ETRB EUM EAIDS EFIC EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR ESF EIDN ELAM EDU EV EAIDAF ECN EDA EXBS EINTECPS ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EPREL EAC EINVEFIN ETA EAGER EINDIR ECA ECLAC ELAP EITI EUCOM ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID EARG ELDIN EINVKSCA ENNP EFINECONCS EFINTS ECCP ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEFIN EIB EURN ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM ETIO ELAINE EMN EATO EWTR EIPR EINVETC ETTD ETDR EIQ ECONCS EPPD ENRGIZ EISL ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO EUREM ENTG ERD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECUN EFND EPECO EAIRECONRP ERGR ETRDPGOV ECPN ENRGMO EPWR EET EAIS EAGRE EDUARDO EAGRRP EAIDPHUMPRELUG EICN ECONQH EVN EGHG ELBR EINF EAIDHO EENV ETEX ERNG ED
KMDR KPAO KPKO KJUS KCRM KGHG KFRD KWMN KDEM KTFN KHIV KGIC KIDE KSCA KNNP KHUM KIPR KSUM KISL KIRF KCOR KRCM KPAL KWBG KN KS KOMC KSEP KFLU KPWR KTIA KSEO KMPI KHLS KICC KSTH KMCA KVPR KPRM KE KU KZ KFLO KSAF KTIP KTEX KBCT KOCI KOLY KOR KAWC KACT KUNR KTDB KSTC KLIG KSKN KNN KCFE KCIP KGHA KHDP KPOW KUNC KDRL KV KPREL KCRS KPOL KRVC KRIM KGIT KWIR KT KIRC KOMO KRFD KUWAIT KG KFIN KSCI KTFIN KFTN KGOV KPRV KSAC KGIV KCRIM KPIR KSOC KBIO KW KGLB KMWN KPO KFSC KSEAO KSTCPL KSI KPRP KREC KFPC KUNH KCSA KMRS KNDP KR KICCPUR KPPAO KCSY KTBT KCIS KNEP KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KGCC KINR KPOP KMFO KENV KNAR KVIR KDRG KDMR KFCE KNAO KDEN KGCN KICA KIMMITT KMCC KLFU KMSG KSEC KUM KCUL KMNP KSMT KCOM KOMCSG KSPR KPMI KRAD KIND KCRP KAUST KWAWC KTER KCHG KRDP KPAS KITA KTSC KPAOPREL KWGB KIRP KJUST KMIG KLAB KTFR KSEI KSTT KAPO KSTS KLSO KWNN KPOA KHSA KNPP KPAONZ KBTS KWWW KY KJRE KPAOKMDRKE KCRCM KSCS KWMNCI KESO KWUN KPLS KIIP KEDEM KPAOY KRIF KGICKS KREF KTRD KFRDSOCIRO KTAO KJU KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KO KNEI KEMR KKIV KEAI KWAC KRCIM KWCI KFIU KWIC KCORR KOMS KNNO KPAI KBWG KTTB KTBD KTIALG KILS KFEM KTDM KESS KNUC KPA KOMCCO KCEM KRCS KWBGSY KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KWN KERG KLTN KALM KCCP KSUMPHUM KREL KGH KLIP KTLA KAWK KWMM KVRP KVRC KAID KSLG KDEMK KX KIF KNPR KCFC KFTFN KTFM KPDD KCERS KMOC KDEMAF KMEPI KEMS KDRM KEPREL KBTR KEDU KNP KIRL KNNR KMPT KISLPINR KTPN KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KTDD KAKA KFRP KWNM KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KWWMN KECF KWBC KPRO KVBL KOM KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KEDM KFLD KLPM KRGY KNNF KICR KIFR KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KDDG KCGC KID KNSD KMPF KPFO KDP KCMR KRMS KNPT KNNNP KTIAPARM KDTB KNUP KPGOV KNAP KNNC KUK KSRE KREISLER KIVP KQ KTIAEUN KPALAOIS KRM KISLAO KWM KFLOA
PHUM PINR PTER PGOV PREL PREF PL PM PHSA PE PARM PINS PK PUNE PO PALESTINIAN PU PBTS PROP PTBS POL POLI PA PGOVZI POLMIL POLITICAL PARTIES POLM PD POLITICS POLICY PAS PMIL PINT PNAT PV PKO PPOL PERSONS PING PBIO PH PETR PARMS PRES PCON PETERS PRELBR PT PLAB PP PAK PDEM PKPA PSOCI PF PLO PTERM PJUS PSOE PELOSI PROPERTY PGOVPREL PARP PRL PNIR PHUMKPAL PG PREZ PGIC PBOV PAO PKK PROV PHSAK PHUMPREL PROTECTION PGOVBL PSI PRELPK PGOVENRG PUM PRELKPKO PATTY PSOC PRIVATIZATION PRELSP PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PMIG PREC PAIGH PROG PSHA PARK PETER POG PHUS PPREL PS PTERPREL PRELPGOV POV PKPO PGOVECON POUS PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PWBG PMAR PREM PAR PNR PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PARMIR PGOVGM PHUH PARTM PN PRE PTE PY POLUN PPEL PDOV PGOVSOCI PIRF PGOVPM PBST PRELEVU PGOR PBTSRU PRM PRELKPAOIZ PGVO PERL PGOC PAGR PMIN PHUMR PVIP PPD PGV PRAM PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOF PINO PHAS PODC PRHUM PHUMA PREO PPA PEPFAR PGO PRGOV PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PREFA PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PINOCHET PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA PRELC PREK PHUME PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PECON PEACE PROCESS PLN PRELSW PAHO PEDRO PRELA PASS PPAO PGPV PNUM PCUL PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PEL PBT PAMQ PINF PSEPC POSTS PHUMPGOV PVOV PHSAPREL PROLIFERATION PENA PRELTBIOBA PIN PRELL PGOVPTER PHAM PHYTRP PTEL PTERPGOV PHARM PROTESTS PRELAF PKBL PRELKPAO PKNP PARMP PHUML PFOV PERM PUOS PRELGOV PHUMPTER PARAGRAPH PERURENA PBTSEWWT PCI PETROL PINSO PINSCE PQL PEREZ PBS

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 02HARARE2265, PUBLIC OPINION POLL REVEALS SUPRISING PERCEPTIONS

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #02HARARE2265.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
02HARARE2265 2002-10-15 05:42 2011-08-24 16:30 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Harare
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HARARE 002265 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR J. FRAZER 
LONDON FOR C. GURNEY 
PARIS FOR C. NEARY 
NAIROBI FOR T. PFLAUMER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAID PGOV PHUM PREL ZI
SUBJECT: PUBLIC OPINION POLL REVEALS SUPRISING PERCEPTIONS 
OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 
 
REF: HARARE 00482 
 
SUMMARY 
-------- 
1.  A USAID-funded Post-Presidential Election Survey revealed 
some surprising results about the presidential election and 
the political environment.  According to the poll, more than 
72 percent of those surveyed said they voted, more than 
official numbers.  Almost 40 percent of those surveyed would 
not reveal for whom they voted but for those who did disclose 
their votes more than 30 percent voted for opposition 
candidate Morgan Tsvangirai and less than 30 percent voted 
for President Robert Mugabe.  Surprisingly, nearly 60 percent 
of those surveyed were opposed to mass action; the perception 
of electoral fairness was evenly divided; and more than 60 
percent felt the post-election period was calm and 
non-violent.  End Summary. 
 
POST-ELECTION SURVEY RESULTS 
---------------------------- 
2.  In mid-September, the Mass Public Opinion Institute 
(MPOI)--Zimbabwe's only indigenous polling 
organization--released the results of a July public opinion 
survey, four months after the presidential election.  The 
polling sample consisted of 1768 randomly selected people 
(50.7 percent rural and 49.3 percent urban) from all of 
Zimbabwe's provinces.  Survey results revealed some 
surprising attitudes about Movement for Democratic Change 
(MDC) mass action, the fairness of the election, the desire 
for a government of national unity, and perceptions about the 
level of violence after the election.  The survey was a 
follow-up to a poll conducted in February, prior to the 
presidential election, and used the same enumeration areas 
(with the addition of Mashonaland Central). 
 
VOTER TURNOUT 
------------- 
3.  More than 72 percent of the respondents said they 
voted--more than the official percentage of some 55 
percent--with a higher turnout in rural areas than in urban 
ones (76 percent versus 68 percent).  (COMMENT: This gap 
could be attributed to a reluctance by some to admit that 
they did not vote.  END COMMENT.) In the pre-election survey 
86.7 percent of respondents indicated that they intended to 
vote.  Of those who did not vote, the reasons were split 
between not being registered (30 percent), not being in the 
home constituency on polling day (22 percent) and other 
reasons (21 percent).  In Harare, the primary reason for not 
voting were the long lines (27 percent of respondents).  More 
than half the Harare respondents waited in line for more than 
six hours and one-third waited in line for more than nine. 
 
ELECTION RESULTS 
---------------- 
4.  Forty percent of respondents refused to disclose for whom 
they voted compared to 60 percent who refused to disclose 
their preferences in the pre-election poll. Overall, 30.5 
percent of respondents said they voted for MDC candidate 
Morgan Tsvangirai while 27.4 percent said they voted for 
President Robert Mugabe.  In contrast, the Zimbabwe Election 
Support Network, a coalition of thirty-eight non-governmental 
organizations formed to coordinate activities pertaining to 
elections, reported 43.1 percent voting for MDC and 56.9 
percent for ZANU-PF.   Predictably, more rural dwellers said 
they voted for Mugabe than urban dwellers (35 versus 18 
percent) and 39.7 percent of urban residents voted for 
Tsvangirai.  Masipula Sithole, director of the MPOI, 
 
SIPDIS 
estimated that 88 percent of those who would not reveal their 
votes, voted for Tsvangirai. 
 
5.  The following are survey results on voting from MPOI and 
ZESN: 
 
MPOI:Mugabe/Tsvangirai/Secret     ZESN:Mugabe/Tsvangirai 
 
Harare: MPOI:16.6/46.1/35.4  ZESN:25/75 
Bulawayo: MPOI:12.5/35.7/49.1 ZESN:18/82 
Mash East: MPOI:32.3/20/46.2 ZESN:78/22 
Mash West: MPOI:55.3/12.6/32        ZESN:72/27 
Mash Central: MPOI:38.8/8.8/52.5  ZESN:84/16 
Midlands: MPOI:37.7/18.8/42 ZESN:63/37 
Mat North: MPOI:11.3/32.5/56.3 ZESN:64/36 
Mat South: MPOI:8.6/38.6/50 ZESN:53/46 
Manicaland: MPOI:12.3/46.1/35.4     ZESN:50/50 
Masvingo: MPOI:54.8/14.1/31.1 ZESN:70/30 
Total: MPOI:27.4/30.5/40.5  ZESN:56.9/43.1 
 
OTHER FINDINGS 
-------------- 
6.  Surprises in the survey results include: 
 
--The majority of respondents--56.9 percent--were against 
mass action, evenly divided among rural and urban areas.  In 
Harare, slightly more than half of the respondents were 
opposed to mass action and in Bulawayo close to 62 percent 
were opposed. (COMMENT: These results suggest widespread 
concern that mass action would trigger violence and not 
provide an outcome that justifies the risks involved in 
participating in such an action.  END COMMENT.) 
 
--Slightly more people are in favor of a rerun of the 
presidential election (44.9 versus 40 percent).  Manicaland, 
Harare and Matebeleland North are the three areas most in 
favor of a re-run.  Surprisingly, Bulawayo respondents were 
not in favor of rerun (48.6 versus 44.5 percent).  (COMMENT: 
It is interesting to note that people want a rerun but are 
not willing to engage in mass action, an important tool for 
forcing a rerun. END COMMENT.) 
 
--People were evenly divided over the fairness of the 
election with 40.4 percent thinking it very free and fair and 
41.4 percent not at all.  (COMMENT: This result is a 
significant surprise, as we would have expected a widespread 
perception of the election as averwhelmingly fraudulent.  END 
COMMENT.) Predictably, urban residents thought the election 
less free and fair than the rural residents (50.6 percent 
versus 32.5 percent). 
 
--A smaller percentage of people favored a government of 
national unity after the presidential election than before 
(48.5 percent versus more than 60 percent in the pre-election 
survey).  Thirty-five percent of respondents were opposed to 
a government of national unity.  A higher percentage of rural 
dwellers were in favor of a government of national unity than 
urban dwellers (50.2 versus 46.7) but only 29.8 percent of 
rural people were opposed, compared to 40.4 percent among the 
urban residents. 
 
--Prior to the election, nearly half the respondents--49.3 
percent--thought the elections would be violent or very 
violent.  In Harare and Bulawayo, 64.4 percent and 52.3 
percent thought it would be violent or very violent, 
respectively.  The post-election survey revealed that 64.1 
percent of respondents thought the aftermath of the election 
was very calm with little to no violence or intimidation 
(68.5 percent in the rural areas and 59.6 percent in urban 
ones).  In Harare and Bulawayo, 50.9 and 79.4 percent thought 
the post-election period was calm. 
 
--Well over 50 percent of respondents in every province but 
one (Masvingo) said Mugabe should make his retirement plans 
known.  This is the one question where there is agreement in 
all provinces regardless of party affiliation and across the 
rural/urban, gender, and age divides. 
 
LAND IRRELEVANT 
--------------- 
7.  Prior to the election, respondents identified democracy 
and good governance as the most important issue for the 
government to address. After the election, the most important 
issue was the economy.  The least important issue in both the 
pre- and post-election surveys was the land issue in both 
rural and urban constituencies. 
 
COMMENT 
------- 
8. We suspect that some respondents--particularly those in 
rural areas--were suspicious of poll takers and might not 
have been completely honest.  Sithole posited that most of 
those who would not reveal for whom they voted likely voted 
for Tsvangirai.  We have no way of confirming this nor does a 
comparison of MPOI and ZESN voting statistics suggest this 
voting pattern.  END COMMENT. 
SULLIVAN