Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

JEREMY CRONIN: This very accurately and unambiguously reflects ANC and ANC alliance policy at the time, which was a staged approach towards the negotiated settlement.  The first stage began at the beginning of 1990 with the unbanning of our organisations and a cease-fire, indeed after November 1989, there were no further MK actions - official MK actions whatsoever, after '89.
	In August of 1990, we then suspended - officially suspended, the armed struggle so that - not only was there a cease-fire but there was a suspension of the armed struggle.  At this point in time, when Hani is speaking we're in a situation where Umkhonto weSizwe still exists, we've suspended the armed struggle but we've not said that we've renounced armed struggle for all time - we've suspended it because we're uncertain about the outcome of the negotiations process.  
"We dearly wanted to succeed"
Chris Hani is saying that quite explicitly: 
"We wanted to succeed, we hope it will, we'll give it our best shot but we've had a cease-fire, we've suspended the armed struggle, we've got a whole lot of returning MK soldiers coming back from exile or emerging from underground - they exist as an MK formation.  We will assemble them, keep then in good order so that if the negotiations process goes as we hope it will, they can be integrated into a future armed force and that is exactly what has happened"
So he's accurately reflecting both our policy and indeed what has happened in this period, so he's saying that: "We can't simply disband MK and leave 10.000 - whatever, MK soldiers to their own devices, we have to assume responsibility for them" - that indeed is also part of finding an effective and durable - sustainable, negotiations and peace process.

MR PRINSLOO: But Mr Cronin, ...[indistinct] what's stated here on page 43?

JEREMY CRONIN: Yes, let me read it to you, it says
"Ultimately"
...[intervention]

MR PRINSLOO: Here, right ...[intervention]

JEREMY CRONIN: Let me read it very clearly and slowly so that you understand, it's very important that you should understand Mr Prinsloo, what ...[inaudible]  - he's asked by Robby
"But why don't you - Chris, the armed struggle"
he says:
"So often it's held up in this referendum debate.  The ANC communist alliance, they've still got Umkhonto weSizwe, they've still got an armed struggle - again in the interest of moving forward, wouldn't it be better to disband to finally declare the armed struggle over"
Ultimately yes, he's saying: 
"The objective of the ANC and the Communist Party are to disband Umkhonto weSizwe"
He's right and that's what we've done. 
"But I want to proceed by saying that it's a question to time"
In other words:
"That's where we're going - we're moving there, we're not	preparing some army in exile for some other renegade actions - we've got an MK, we are moving towards disbanding it.  We must reach a period in our negotiations where we are satisfied that there will never be a reversal - there will be no going back, and then we shall sit down and discuss the whole issue of a future security force to serve a democratic South Africa.
That's a correct description of our policy at the time and that in fact is a very prescient description of what has happened as well over the last period.

MR PRINSLOO: So at that stage Mr Cronin, the armed struggle in 1992 was not disbanded - according to what is stated here and nor suspended?

JEREMY CRONIN: No, it was suspended, the armed struggle was suspended - you're reading too much into what John Robby asking him and you're dealing with a live radio programme - we're not dealing with legal proceedings here and maybe John Robby - who's not a lawyer as far as I know, might have formulated the question.  What Chris is saying quite clearly is
"We retain an Umkhonto weSizwe"
That exists yes, at this point in time.

MR PRINSLOO: But how was the public to interpret what was stated here by Mr Hani and Mr Robby at the time Mr Cronin?

JEREMY CRONIN: Well, I think that ...[intervention]

MR PRINSLOO: You say it's not legal proceedings, but how would the public interpret it?

JEREMY CRONIN: The public should have noted that in August of 1990, the ANC officially suspended the armed struggle - that's the position, that's the position that Hani's reflecting and any member of the public who had half an interest in trying to understand what was happening, should have understood that - it was certainly for want of trying from the side of Chris Hani.

MR PRINSLOO: Just a moment please.  Now, Mr Cronin, as you told the Commission that Mr Hani - he said what his perceptions are with regard to communism is what took place in the Soviet Union wasn't the correct approach, is that correct?

JEREMY CRONIN: Yes, he was saying that even self-critically I would add, that he felt that the South African Communist Party - although it's principal focus had been South Africa, had indeed - and we've said this both as Chris but as the Party, that we had illusions about some of the aspects of communism in the Eastern European countries.

MR PRINSLOO: What did the Communist Party in South Africa have in mind at that stage as to policy?

JEREMY CRONIN: We had in mind exactly what we've got now in South Africa, which is that we as a Communist Party stand for a socialist perspective but within the context of an unfolding democratic non-racial and non-sexist dispensation - and in the case of the CP, one should have a united South Africa - on other words, not one with Volkstaats and so on.
	So, we believe - as a Communist Party and we believed then, that there was only way of securing an advance to socialism and that had to be democratic and there was only one - the great lesson, the overwhelming lesson of Poland, of Tjekoslavakia, of the former Soviet Union, was that unless there is deep thorough going democracy, that socialism isn't going to work.
	So if Janus Walus - as he approach Chris Hani down the driveway, had asked him what he thought about Poland, Walus might have found a willing interlocutor.  Chris would have been interested to hear what Walus's experience were in Poland and ...[indistinct] that Walus might have found that Hani was prepared to agree with some of his perspectives - not all of them, but he would certainly have engaged him in an rational and civilised discussion about the failures of so-called communism in Poland.  So, it's one of the great tragedies of this - one of the many tragedies of this assassination, that Walus chose to pull a trigger rather than to engage in discussion.

MR PRINSLOO: That's not the question I asked you Mr Cronin. ...[intervention]

JEREMY CRONIN: I'm sure it wasn't.

MR PRINSLOO: But be that as it may, at page 44 of R5 - first of all I'll put it to you this way - before I'll be reading it to you, that ...[intervention]

JEREMY CRONIN: I've lost you ...[indistinct]

MR PRINSLOO: Before reading this to you, Mr Hani was a dedicated communist, is that correct?

JEREMY CRONIN: Absolutely.

MR PRINSLOO: He was totally opposed to any other form of Government?