|
|
South Africa Flexes Its Economic Muscle
| Article
# : |
12352 |
|
|
Section : |
CURRENT ISSUES
|
| Issue
Date : |
1 / 1987 |
1,803 Words |
| Author
: |
Sanjiv Prakash
|
With world outcry against South Africa's apartheid policies reaching a fervent pitch, it is natural to expect that the bulk of the criticism against the Botha regime would originate from the black African states. Both President Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia and Prime Minister Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, for example, have tirelessly rallied world support against Pretoria. For the past 12 months, beginning with the British Commonwealth heads of state meeting in Nassau, the Bahamas, in October 1985, the call for broad economic sanctions against South Africa has rapidly accelerated. At the Nassau summit, 49 countries which were once part of the British Empire issued a call to the Western industrialized nations, especially the United States, to use their influence to economically ostracize South Africa in an effort to force that nation to renounce its apartheid policies.
The call that originated during that seven-day meeting has since snowballed into a global consensus for punitive sanctions against South Africa. The United States originally greeted the hue and cry from Nassau without much enthusiasm; the White House and the State Department preferred to back a policy of "constructive engagement." With congressional and public opinion in the United States coming down squarely against South Africa, though, the administration gradually came to accept sanctions as part of its overall policy toward South Africa. The British government continues to balk at levying sanctions, labeling them as "unwise and unnecessary."
With most Western nations - who account for nearly 68 percent of South Africa's trade - taking the passive route, either out of domestic political concerns or national self-interest, the brunt of the nonviolent war of words and actions has fallen squarely on the shoulders of Zimbabwe and Zambia. Both nations have been outspoken in their criticism of the Botha regime and were among the first nations to impose unilateral sanctions against South Africa. Such sanctions, though, will have little impact economically on South Africa. Pretoria produces more than five times the combined gross national product of Zambia and Zimbabwe; their embargo on commerce has barely made a dent in South Africa's coffers. Still, these actions have set the tone for other African, European, Asian, and Latin American nations to follow. Pretoria seems determined to avoid this end at any cost, even if it means imposing sanctions of its own on the frontline states.
Fear of sanctions
The thought of what South African sanctions would mean to these poor African states whose lifelines and economic arteries pass through South Africa, has created an atmosphere of trepidation. Zimbabwean Prime Minister Robert Mugabe lamented at the Eighth Nonaligned Summit in Harare that "even geography has been cruel to us, for we border South Africa." Geography's cruelty is not unrecognized by South Africa, moreover, which has within its power the ability to clog the frontline states' economies, thus throwing them into a state of utter chaos. Symptoms of the coming confusion have begun to emerge: traditionally freewheeling African businessmen have concocted schemes to circumvent the politically unacceptable "Made in South Africa" label and some black states are even exploiting the situation to make huge sums of money - at the expenses of their fellow black African states.
Yet the real irony of South Africa's economic stranglehold on southern Africa came
...
Read Full Article
|
|
