Basic HTML Version
Britain's
Grim Dilemma
B
RITISH
Prime Minister
Margaret Thatcher is
confronted with the
most perplexing dilemma of
her often-stormy seven years
in office.
On the one hand is pressure
on her from the 49-member
Commonwea lth to agree to
trade sanctions-certain to end
in economic warfare- against
South Africa.
These sanctions could rebound
harshly upon the British economy,
throwing out of work more than
80,000 people who are engaged in
Britain's substantial trade and
commercial relations with the for–
mer Commonwealth member.
On the other hand, her refusal to
agree to such sanctions could cause
the Commonwealth to fracture. lt
is the Commonwealth, successor to
the British Empire, that enables
Britain to still play a world role, to
be more than just a regional power
in Europe.
Question
ot
Morality?
Mrs. Thatcher has also questioned
the morality of throwing hundreds
of thousands of South Africans,
mostly black, out of work. She ob–
served the irony of saving people
from climatically and politically in–
duced starvation in one part of
Africa, Ethiopia, while sending
others, elsewhere, to the brink of
starvation.
Sorne of southern Africa's black
leaders maintain that their people,
deprived of the política! right to
vote, are will ing to sacrifice their
jobs and lives for "liberation." But
two bloody riots between rival
tribal groups in South Africa last
winter, primarily over who was to
get jobs in a shrinking labor mar–
ket, showed that jobs are still a
most important commodity.
Mrs. Thatcher stresses that by
November / December 1986
EmpireGone...
Nowthe
Commonwealth?
by
Gene H. Hogberg
imposing comprehensive sanctions,
unemployment and starvation
would spread to untold millions of
blacks in the African subcontinent.
More than 80 million people in
nine different economies depend to
varying degrees on South Africa.
Ai r links, roads, rail lines and com–
munications circuits tie the entire
region together.
lntractable lssue
Events are thus moving closer to a
point of no return.
Regardless of the immediate im–
pact they would have, global sanc–
tions are supported in the white–
rul ed Republic by the African
National Congress and by the
South African Communist Party
(who would take over from within
after
an ANC revolution).
Meanwhil e, South Africa's
whites have moved- late in life–
far in the direction of what they
hope would work and, if possible,
be accepted in the world: a concept
of power-sharing with sorne of the
country's severa! (and rival) black
groups.
But power-sharing rather than
black majority rule is considered
by many blacks as insulting, in–
dicative of white distrust. How–
ever, given the political and eco–
nomic history of other nations in
postwar black Africa, that distrust
is real. "Beyond a certain point,"
notes Bruce Anderson
in
the July
1O
Times
of London, the whites
"will not yield. That is why the two
sides are in conflict."
A mood is growing in the Re–
public of South Africa that the
sooner full sanctions come the bet–
ter; that preparations should be
made now for retooling the coun–
try's industry for wholesale import
substitution.
SmaJI countries in the vicinity of
South Africa that cannot afford to
impose sanctions, such as Lesotho,
Swaziland, Botswana and Malawi,
would be spared the worst effects.
Others, who are trade dependent
but may clase their borders, will
suffer greatly. In desperation they
will probably have no choice but to
call upon the great powers to bail
them out with massive airlifts of
aid!
The price of strategic minerals,
presently obtained from South
Africa, will soar. (The United
States has only abo ut a year's
worth of supplies of chrome, man–
ganese, platinum and vanadium.)
Sorne experts foresee the even–
tual imposition of a United Nations
military operation, especially a
naval blockade, against South
Africa
with both the United States
and Soviets taking part in the cru–
sade.
"That thing is my nightmare
and has been for years," concedes
South Africa's former ambassador
to the U.N. and the United States,
Brand Fourie.
(Continued on page 29)
5