From: philip@ziggy.stanford.edu (Philip Machanick)
Subject: Re: UPI: Ciskei troops kill fifteen as ANC marches on Ciskei capital
Reply-To: philip@ziggy.stanford.edu (Philip Machanick)
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:00:46 GMT

In article <Sep.7.16.24.07.1992.14389@andromeda.rutgers.edu>  
detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio) writes:
> vamg6792@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mbanane) writes:
> >	The latest phase of the campaign will concentrate on the homelands
> >and is aimed at strengthening the ANC's influence in areas where black
> >authorities favor the South African government, and normally suppress
> >ANC activity.
> 
> If you favor anyone else beside the ANC, is it then grounds for your
> authority and position to be threatened by the ANC?  This is fair?  This
> is reform by the self-appointed future leaders of SA?

A military dictator has "authority and position"? Of course the ANC is not  
totally clean on this issue because they are happy to accept the support of  
other military dictators such as Holomiso in Transkei and others in Venda. The  
real solution is of course to hold elections.

> >	The ANC leadership believe Gqozo is the weakest link in the chain of
> >black political figures who are, actually or potentially, the ruling
> >National Party's allies in a democratic election.
> 
> Again, it is not possible for the Nats or anyone else to maintain allies
> or supporters throughout SA?  It seems to slip people that in a general
> election, the Nats could win.  Experience and ability is on their side.

Maintain allies and supporters by propping up military dictatorships?  
Bophutatswana is another case. "Experience" yes. "ability" no - I would grant  
that they are skilled at electioneering but they have not done a great job of  
running the country. If they were confident of winning an election I doubt they  
would have held out for a 75% majority to decide the constitution.

> >	The liberation movement envisages the overthrow of Gqozo as the
> >beginning of a chain of events which will displace, or at least weaken,
> >the government's key black allies and weaken the government's position
> >at the negotiating table.
> 
> How does this weaken the SA govt's authority and position while black
> on black violence continues to grow.

There is the alternative theory that this violence in fact aids the government  
in reducing the support of the ANC. It is not at all clear to me how the ANC  
can be blaimed for this specific incident of violence since they sent a very  
senior leader to head the march. [Or do you suppose some faction in the ANC set  
this up to get rid of Cyril Ramaphosa? - inserted in case one of the leading  
conspiracy theoreticians on the net is following this.] But I await a proper  
investigation of this one with interest.

> >	The ANC does not recognize the homelands as independent or separate
> >from the rest of South Africa and plans for their reincorporation into
> >the country.
> 
> And what if the country does not wish to rejoin SA?  Does the ANC invade
> the land, seize power, and appoint themselves in charge?  Does this also
> also include the other homelands, and the two small nations within SA?
> 

What do you mean by "the country"? Ciskei has always beend ruled by dictators  
(prior to the current military regime, the venal Sebe family). If these people  
constitute "the country" you are right, but the population as a whole to my  
knowledge has not been consulted on this. In general, the "independence" of the  
homelands is a totally dubious proposition. The only case I can recall of an  
"election" being one by a pro-independence party was in Transkei in the mid 70s  
and there the precaution of putting most of the opposition in jail was taken.  
Again: the propoer solution is to hold an election (though how this would be  
done is inetersting to speculate since the eay the apartheid system was set up,  
everyone with any form of ancestral link to a specific homeland automatically  
became a voter there to justify their exculsion from voting in "white"  
elections).

The argument is not whether apartheid was a destructive, injust and inhuman  
system. Even the National Party now accepts that. The real problem is how to  
move forward and to work on building a new society without going into yet  
another disaster of social engineering.
--
Philip Machanick
philip@pescadero.stanford.edu