Nationalism, national liberation and democracy in South Africa
Second (less common) definition sees African Nationalism as the attempt to define the continent of Africa as a coherent “nation”
As a general definition, African nationalism in South Africa can be seen, broadly, as all political actions and ideological elements to improve the status, the rights and position of Africans in the emerging society imposed by white intrusion and conquest
Political Organization before World war II
Rarely explicitly nationalist tended to seek reform or a changed relationship with the colonial power, rather than an absolute break
Political organizations tended to overlap with pre colonial political identities or ethnic identities
The African National Congress
Developed in the specific (and unusual) environment of the Cape Colony, where a non racial, propertied franchise had been in place since 1853
African National Congress founded in 1912, two years after the Cape Colony had been made a part of the Union of South Africa (the name was changed to the African National Congress in 1923) was organized.
Made up largely of African “middle class” teachers, lawyers, journalists, etc.
It was the first South Africa wide conference after the South Africa Union Act in 1910
There was a recognition that Africans needed to coordinate their political actions and to speak with greater unity in the new Union of South Africa.
ANC document gives some details of that founding convention.
It is argued sometimes that this organization was a class organization of newly educated and westernized elite seeking to improve its own position and being willing to sell out the majority of other Africans.
We shall discuss this more later, but this is a great exaggeration and distortion
It has been advanced by those who are determined that ‘class’ is the only significant determinant of behaviour and human history
It is true that most of the leadership of the ANC came from the westernized elite; this is hardly surprising as this kind of organization is not based in African tradition and it had to operate in an environment that was part of the western political system imposed by conquest and white domination.
However, from the ANC’s beginning, elaborate efforts were made to involve others. "An Appeal to the Members of the Imperial Parliament and Public of Great Britain“ in 1914
This Congress, gravely disturbed at the menace to native rights under the Natives' Land Act, passed a strong resolution against the Bill
A deputation waited upon the Government asking that the Bill should be delayed until the natives could study its provisions.
These efforts failed, and the Bill which had been introduced only in May became law on June 16th, 1913.
The natives, already suspicious of the measure, were now greatly alarmed at the haste with which it was forced through Parliament.
Accordingly, the Native Congress, July 19th, 1913, resolved to send a deputation to His Majesty the King, praying that the Act might be disallowed
All these endeavors having failed, the Native Congress meeting at Kimberley, February, 1914, reaffirmed its resolution to send a deputation to England.
But, once more, it petitioned the Union Parliament and the King's representative.
The petition, however, was not presented, as its presentation was discouraged by the Prime Minister, who also is now Minister of Native Affairs.
After exhausting all these constitutional Means in South Africa, for the redress of our grievances in connection with the Natives' Land Act of 1913 it was decided by the South African Native National Congress that we should proceed to England, as their delegates, to lay our cause before the Imperial Government and the people of Great Britain.
Before 1948, the ANC was quite conservative aimed at preserving what they saw as British political structures and engaged largely in lobbying or petitioning as a means of action
Over the period from 1910 to 1948, the government of the Union of South Africa became increasingly hostile to African political rights, culminating in the imposition of the apartheid system in 1948
The ANC Youth League
Founded in 1944 by a group of men in their 20 and 30 (including Mandela)
Espoused a more explicitly anti government agenda than the ANC had previously embraced
Called for civil disobedience and other overt acts of protest
ANC Youth League Policy Statement, 1948
The African people in South Africa are oppressed as a group with a particular colour
They suffer national oppression in common with thousands and millions of oppressed Colonial peoples in other parts of the world.
African Nationalism is the dynamic National liberatory creed of the oppressed African people.
Its fundamental aim are
a) The creation of a united nation out of the heterogeneous tribes
b) The freeing of Africa from foreign domination and foreign leadership;
c) The creation of conditions which can enable Africa to make her own contribution to human progress and happiness.
The African has a primary, inherent and inalienable right to Africa which is his continent and Motherland, and the Africans as a whole have a divine destiny which is to make Africa free among the peoples and nations of the earth.
In order to achieve Africa's freedom the Africans must build a powerful national liberation movement, and in order that the national movement should have inner strength and solidarity, it should adopt the national liberatory creed African Nationalism and it should be led by the Africans themselves.
Mass nationalism
Some scholars have divided the history of the ANC and African nationalism up to the repression following the Sharpeville incident into two stages
Early, elite stage up to World War II
Mass movement stage from middle 1940s to 1960, to mobilize the masses of Africans and lead resistance to apartheid 1948 Sharpeville massacre in March 1960 to 1978 and 1978-1994
Nelson Mandela
Mandela became one of the leaders of the ANC.
In 1960 during a peaceful protest and the protestors were fired on and 60 were killed. This was known as the Sharpeville Massacres.
Mandela then formed the “Spear of the Nation” movement. A violent movement against the South African government
The movement an underground military group that campaigned against apartheid.
In 1964 Mandela was sentenced to life in prison when the ANC was banned and it’s leaders imprisoned.
Mandela became a symbol of freedom.
In 1990 Mandela was finally released from prison
In 1994 Mandela was elected President of South Africa.
Negotiation process to Democratic South Africa
The apartheid system in South Africa was ended through a series of negotiations between 1990 and 1993 and through unilateral steps by the de Klerk government.
These negotiations took place between the governing National Party, the African National Congress, and a wide variety of other political organisations.
Negotiations took place against a backdrop of political violence in the country, including allegations of a state sponsored third force destabilizing the country.
The negotiations resulted in South Africa's first multi racial election, which was won by the African National Congress.
The very first meetings between the South African Government and Nelson Mandela were driven by the National Intelligence Service (NIS) under the leadership of Niel Barnard and his Deputy Director General, Mike Louw.
These meetings were secret in nature and were designed to develop an understanding about whether there were sufficient common grounds for future peace talks.
As these meetings evolved, a level of trust developed between the key actors (Barnard, Louw, and Mandela).
To facilitate future talks while preserving secrecy needed to protect the process, Barnard arranged for Mandela to be moved off Robben Island to Pollsmoor Prison in 1982.
This provided Mandela with more comfortable lodgings, but also gave easier access in a way that could not be compromised.
Barnard therefore brokered an initial agreement in principle about what became known as "talks about talks".
It was at this stage that the process was elevated from a secret engagement to a more public engagement.
The first lesstentative meeting between Mandela and the National Party government came while P. W. Botha was State President. In November 1985, Minister Kobie Coetsee met Mandela in the hospital while Mandela was being treated for prostate surgery.
Over the next four years, a series of tentative meetings took place, laying the groundwork for further contact and future negotiations, but little real progress was made, and the meetings remained secret until several years later
When F.W. de Klerk became President in 1989, he was able to build on the previous secret negotiations with the imprisoned Mandela.
The first significant steps towards formal negotiations took place in February 1990 when, in his speech at the opening of Parliament, de Klerk announced the unbanning of the African National Congress (ANC) and other banned organisations, and the release of ANC leader Nelson Mandela after 27 years in prison.
Initial negotiations
Groote Schuur Minute
The negotiations began with a meeting between the African National Congress and the South African government on 4 May 1990 at the presidential residence, Groote Schuur.
This resulted in the Groote Schuur Minute, a commitment between the two parties towards the resolution of the existing climate of violence and intimidation as well as the removal of practical obstacles to negotiation including immunity from prosecution for returning exiles and the release of political prisoners
Pretoria Minute
On 6 August 1990 the South African government and the African National Congress extended the consensus to include several new points.
This Pretoria Minute included the suspension of the armed struggle by the ANC and its military wing Umkhonto we Sizwe
National Peace Accord
The National Peace Accord of 14 September 1991 was a critical step toward formal negotiations.
It was signed by representatives of twenty-seven political organisations and national and homeland governments, and prepared the way for the CODESA negotiations.
The Convention for a Democratic South Africa I (CODESA)
The Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA), under the chairmanship of the judges Michael Corbett, Petrus Shabort and Ismail Mahomed, began with a plenary session on 20 December 1991, almost two years after the unbanning of political parties and the release of Nelson Mandela.
The first session lasted a few days, and working groups were appointed to deal with specific issues. These working groups continued their negotiations over the next month. The negotiations took place at the World Trade Centre in Johannesburg.
About 228 delegates from nineteen political parties attended and pledged their commitment to negotiations by signing the Declaration of Intent.
Absent from the Convention was the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) which had withdrawn from negotiations a few days earlier.
The PAC believed that negotiations should be held outside the country under the stewardship of a neutral party, such as the United Nations or the Organisation of African Unity
Other more extremist organisations such as the Conservative Party and Azanian People' Organisation (AZAPO) also did not attend.
Later in the negotiations, Mangosuthu Buthelezi of the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) withdrew in protest at the exclusion of the representatives of the Zulu King Goodwill Zwelithini and the Kwa Zulu homeland.
Issues
After the negotiating parties had agreed and signed the declaration of intent, five working groups were elected to deal with specific issues.
These groups were mandated to investigate the establishment of:
The new constitution
The setting up of the interim government
The future of the homelands
Time period for the implementation of the changes
The electoral system
Structure
A working group made up of two representatives and two advisors from each negotiating party was established and a Management Committee set up of one delegate and one advisor from each of the parties.
The Management Committee was assisted by Fanie van der Merwe and Mac Maharaj , who were appointed as the secretariats.
CODESA 1 played a significant role in laying the foundation for multi-racial discussions
It was agreed that the next session would begin in March 1992. Two months before CODESA 2, the five working groups began their discussions and met for two days a week.
Although most politicians had a mandate and support from their constituencies for talks towards democracy, this was not so for the National Party camp.
National Party (NP) parliamentarians felt that CODESA has replaced their role.
The increasing nervousness among NP members forced De Klerk to use the opening of parliament on February 2, 1992 to reassure his colleagues that the NP still held power.
He went on to say that no official agreement had been made to change the governance of the country.
This did little to stop his critics who accused him of acting without a mandate.
He responded by saying he was willing to prove he had the confidence and backing of his supporters and especially Afrikaners through a white referendum .
Although the ANC and the British Anti Apartheid Movement strongly opposed this move, on March 17, 1992 a whites only referendum was held.
F. W. De Klerk urged people to vote 'yes' in support of him and warned that a 'no' vote would mean the continuation of sanctions. The outcome was that the majority of whites voted 'yes'.
In the period between CODESA I and CODESA II in early 1992, the National Party lost three by-elections to the Conservative Party. De Klerk announced that a "whites only" referendum would be held on the issue of reforms and negotiation.
The result was a landslide victory for the "yes" side, with over 68% of the voters voting for a continuation of the reforms and negotiations CODESA II and the breakdown of negotiations
The Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA II the second plenary session)
Took place in May 1992. In June 1992, the Boipatong massacre took place, with 46 residents of Boipatong killed by mainly Zulu hostel dwellers.
Mandela accused De Klerk's government of complicity in the attack and withdrew the ANC from the negotiations, leading to the end of CODESA II.
The ANC instead took to the streets with a programme of "rolling mass action", which met with tragedy in the Bisho massacre in September 1992, when the army of the nominally independent "homeland" of Ciskei opened fire on protest marchers, killing 28.
This brought a new urgency to the search for a political settlement
Other issue was of disbanding the ANC's military wing, MK, and the role of the public broadcaster, the South African Broadcasting Corporation.
Pressure from the NP for the disbanding of MK was viewed with suspicion by the ANC, especially the NP call for the surrender of arms to the security force.
There were also disagreements on the restructuring of the SABC.
The ANC felt that a neutral broadcasting body was required to provide fair coverage of the political developments and negotiation process leading up to elections.
The SABC could not be trusted to do this with its history of bias and propaganda and links with government. The NP reluctantly agreed to the restructuring of the SABC.
Resumption of negotiations
During the negotiations, De Klerk's government pushed for a two-phase transition with an appointed transitional government with a rotating presidency.
The ANC pushed instead for a transition in a single stage to majority rule. Other sticking points included minority rights, decisions on a unitary or federal state, property rights, and indemnity from prosecution for politically motivated crimes.
Following the collapse of CODESA II, bilateral negotiations between the ANC and the NP became the main negotiation channel. Two key negotiators were Cyril Ramaphosa of the ANC, and Roelf Meyer of the National Party, who formed a close friendship
It was Joe Slovo, leader of the South African Communist Party, who in 1992 proposed the breakthrough "sunset clause" for a coalition government for the five years following a democratic election, including guarantees and concessions to all sides.
In the course of the negotiating and reshaping process, the government under De Klerk also let prisoners release who were classified as political prisoners now.
Among those released in 1992 were also death convicts like Barend Strydom and Robert McBride from the opposite ends of the political spectrum.
Record of understanding
On 26 September 1992 the government and the ANC agreed on a Record of Understanding.
This dealt with a constitutional assembly, an interim government, political prisoners, hostels, dangerous weapons and mass action and restarted the negotiation process after the failure of CODESA
Multiparty Negotiating Forum
On 1 April 1993 the Multiparty Negotiating Forum (MPNF) gathered for the first time. In contrast to CODESA, the white right (the Conservative Party and the Afrikaner Volksunie), the Pan Africanist Congress, the Kwa Zulu homeland government and delegations of "traditional leaders" initially participated in the Multiparty Negotiating Forum
Following the Record of Understanding, the two main negotiating parties, the ANC and the NP, agreed to reach bilateral consensus on issues before taking them to the other parties in the forum.
This put considerable pressure on the other parties to agree with the consensus or be left behind.
In protest at the perceived sidelining of the mainly Zulu Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), Mangosuthu Buthelezi took the IFP out of the MPNF and formed the Concerned South Africans Group (COSAG; later renamed the "Freedom Alliance") together with traditional leaders, homeland leaders and white right-wing groups.
A period of brinkmanship followed, with the IFP remaining out of the negotiations until within days of the election on 27 April 1994.
Buthelezi was convinced to give up the boycott of the elections, after Mandela offered the Zulu king, Goodwill Zwelithini kaBhekuzulu, a guarantee of special status of the Zulu monarchy, and to Buthelezi, the promise that foreign mediators would examine Inkatha's claims to more autonomy in the Zulu area.
This was managed with the help of a foreign team led by former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and former British Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington.
On 10 April 1993, the assassination of Chris Hani, leader of the SACP and a senior ANC leader, by white right wingers again brought the country to the brink of disaster, but ultimately proved a turning point, after which the main parties pushed for a settlement with increased determination.
The assassination of Hani sometimes is considered as an event which led to a shift of power in favour of the ANC because of Nelson Mandela's handling of the situation.
The negotiations were dramatically interrupted in June 1993 when the right-wing Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging stormed the World Trade Centre in Kempton Park, breaking through the glass front of the building with an armoured car and briefly taking over the negotiations chamber.
The MPNF ratified the interim Constitution in the early hours of the morning of 18 November 1993.
Thereafter, a Transitional Executive Council oversaw the run up to a democratic election
Elections
The election held on 27 April 1994 resulted in the ANC winning 62% of the vote, and Nelson Mandela becoming president, with De Klerk and Thabo Mbeki as deputies.
The National Party, with 20% of the vote, joined the ANC in a Government of National Unity.
Transitional politics continued after the election, with a new constitution finally agreed in 1995, and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission dealing with politically motivated crimes committed during the apartheid era.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was a court-like body assembled in South Africa after the end of apartheid.
Anybody who felt they had been a victim of violence could come forward and be heard
Those who committed violence could also give testimony and request amnesty (freedom) from prosecution.
The TRC was a crucial component of the transition to full and free democracy in South Africa was generally regarded as very successful.
Creation and mandate
The TRC was set up in terms of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, No. 34 of 1995, and was based in Cape Town.
The hearings started in 1996.
The mandate of the commission was to bear witness to, record and in some cases grant amnesty to the perpetrators of crimes relating to human rights violations, as well as reparation and rehabilitation.
The TRC had a number of high profile members: Archbishop Desmond Tutu (Chairman), Dr. Alex Boraine (Deputy Chairman), Mary Burton, Advocate Chris de Jager, Bongani Finca, Pumla Gobodo Madikizela, Sisi Khampepe, Richard Lyster, Wynand Malan, Reverend Khoza Mgojo, Hlengiwe Mkhize, Dumisa Ntsebeza (head of the Investigative Unit), Dr. Wendy Orr, Advocate Denzil Potgieter, Mapule Ramashala, Dr. Fazel Randera, Yasmin Sooka, Glenda Wildschut, and Emma Mashinini.
Committees
The work of the TRC was accomplished through three committees:
The Human Rights Violations Committee investigated human rights abuses that occurred between 1960 and 1994.
The Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee was charged with restoring victims' dignity and formulating proposals to assist with rehabilitation.
The Amnesty Committee considered applications from individuals who applied for amnesty in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
Public hearings of the Human Rights Violations Committee and the Amnesty Committee were held at many venues around South Africa, including Cape Town (at the University of the Western Cape), Johannesburg (at the Central Methodist Mission), and Randburg (at the Rhema Bible Church).
The commission was empowered to grant amnesty to those who committed abuses during the apartheid era, as long as the crimes were politically motivated, proportionate, and there was full disclosure by the person seeking amnesty
To avoid victor's justice, no side was exempt from appearing before the commission.
The commission heard reports of human rights violations and considered amnesty applications from all sides, from the apartheid state to the liberation forces, including the African National Congress.
A total of 5,392 amnesty applications were refused, granting only 849 out of the 7,112
Impact
The TRC's emphasis on reconciliation is in sharp contrast to the approach taken by the Nuremberg Trials after World War II and other de-Nazification measures.
Because of the perceived success of the reconciliatory approach in dealing with human rights violations after political change either from internal or external factors, other countries have instituted similar commissions, though not always with the same scope or the allowance for charging those currently in power.
The success of the "TRC method" versus the "Nuremberg method" of prosecution is open for debate.
Usefulness in terms of bringing out the truth of what had happened during the apartheid regime, the feelings of reconciliation that could be linked to the Commission, and the positive effects both domestically and internationally that the Commission brought about in a variety of ways from the political environment of South Africa to the economic one.
Criticism
Hundred victims of human rights abuse during the Apartheid era, found that most felt that the TRC had failed to achieve reconciliation between the black and white communities. Most believed that justice was a prerequisite for reconciliation rather than an alternative to it, and that the TRC had been weighted in favour of the perpetrators of abuse.
Another dilemma facing the TRC was how to do justice to the testimonials of those witnesses for whom translation was necessary.
It was believed that, with the great discrepancy between the emotions of the witnesses and those translating them, much of the impact was lost in interlingual rendition.
Many black South Africans were angered at amnesty being granted for human rights abuses committed by the apartheid government
Basic misunderstanding" about the TRC's mandate, which was to uncover the truth about past abuse, using amnesty as a mechanism, rather than to punish past crimes.
Biko's family described the TRC as a "vehicle for political expediency", which "robbed" them of their right to justice.
The family opposed amnesty for his killers on these grounds and brought a legal action in South Africa's highest court, arguing that the TRC was unconstitutional.
ANC and TRC
The ANC made many concessions to reach a settlement, including temporary power sharing and job reservation for selected civil servants.
Most notably the ANC agreed to grant amnesty to members of the old regime.
The rationale was that, without such a guarantee, the country could easily plunge back into bitter political conflict.
In this regard, amnesty was an essential and inescapable precondition to the negotiated settlement.
Although the ANC did not have sufficient power to demand prosecutions of former human rights abusers (and in reality the criminal justice system probably did not have the capacity to prosecute large numbers of individuals) it could prevent the NP from granting itself blanket amnesty.
The result was a criterion driven amnesty process, amnesty would be granted only if the crime was political in nature and if the individual fully disclosed the details of the act for which amnesty was sought. In essence, truth was traded for formal justice
The TRC was just one component of the transformation strategy. Other bodies and processes were set up to deal with additional issues.
Arguably the most important new programme was the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) which aimed to redress the structural economic imbalances in the country.
In this way the transformation of the country was parceled out into manageable pieces.
The Relationship between Reconciliation and Transformation
To prevent any risk of disturbing the frail economy or igniting conflict, the ANC agreed not to dismantle the economic institutions of apartheid in the short term but to implement change from "the inside out".
This approach ran contrary to the electorates' aspirations, but it did provide an opportunity for gradual and lasting change.
The new government did have some power. It could redirect the "trickle down" economic benefits towards the poor, glean international investment and begin to transform apartheid's institutions to guarantee basic civil liberties for the population.
In short, the term "reconciliation" represented the agreement for a pragmatic path to transformation and came to mean compromise for all concerned.
The TRC also walked the narrow line between fundamental change and the maintenance of stability.
It promised the survivors of apartheid violence accountability, reparations and truth. And by not prosecuting, the TRC ensured that the fragile peace could be sustained
Has Reconciliation Failed?
Is it fair to argue that, if the economic situation of South Africa's poor is not transformed, at least in the short-term, then reconciliation has failed?
One view is that economic equality is the basis of true reconciliation.
In this sense, the South African settlement is perpetuating divisions by maintaining an unjust economic system.
Reconciliation is nothing more than a smoke screen used to justify the perpetuation of old power imbalances.
Conclusion
South Africa's fragile social fabric has been undermined by years of apartheid's destruction. As a result, today's political tensions often lead to violence that spreads horizontally across communities.
The compromises that resulted in peace helped quell this type of violence once, but not before an excessive loss of life and suffering had occurred.
It remains to be seen whether a political system based on accommodation, compromise and moderation will be able to hold frustrations at bay in future, particularly as real economic change for the majority seems unlikely.
Once the honeymoon of the "miracle" transition is over, the future is uncertain
Post a Comment