MK in southern Africa
- INTRODUCTION:
SOUTH AFRICAN POLITICS
- LIBERATION
MOVEMENTS
- BOTSWANA
- LESOTHO
- SWAZILAND
- ZIMBABWEAN
LIBERATION MOVEMENT
- PORTUGUESE
COLONIES IN SOUTHERN AFRICA: ANGOLA AND MOZAMBIQUE
- ANGOLA
- MOZAMBIQUE
- INTERNATIONAL
SUPPORT FOR THE MK
- CONCLUSION
- LINKS
- SOURCEs
i. Introduction (BACK TO
TOP)
From
1961, under the leadership of Prime Minister Hendrik
Verwoerd, South
Africa was dragged into a new political phase by the National Party.
Following British victory in the South African War, the Union of
South Africa, bringing together formerly and defeated independent
Boer
republics and British colonies was forged
in 1910 under the British Commonwealth. For the most part during
the development
of this Union, the government was in the hands of the pro British South
Africa Party and United Party, which were led by Prime Minister Louis
Botha and later Prime Minister Jan
Smuts. The
Afrikaner National Party held power at some point (1925-1934), but
it was largely
managed by entering into a coalition with the Labour Party first and
later the Unionist Party and South Africa Party. As a result of these
coalitions, the party was not strong enough to unilaterally pursue
its domestic and foreign policies.
The
growth of Afrikaner nationalism reached its momentum after the Second
World War. The Afrikaner people during the first and second world war
were split between the pro German and pro-British lobby. The National
Party as a representative of the pro-German lobby was displeased with
fighting on the side of what they thought of as a British war of imperialism.
During both wars, the Afrikaner people and National Party attempted
to prevent the Union from supporting the British. But with pro-British
government
these attempts failed. In 1948, shortly after the war, the Nationalist
Party won the national election with a strong majority compared to
previous years. The National Party was an overtly racist party committed
to a
separate development policy that would further entrench legislated
segregation of white people and black people (apartheid).
In 1961, still in power, the National party withdrew from the commonwealth
of nation when it was criticized for its policies of racial discrimination
and unilaterally declared independence from Britain.
ii.
Liberation Movements (BACK
TO TOP)
These political transformations
had a tremendous impact on South Africa’s
liberation movements. The African National Congress, South
African Communist Party, the Indian Congress, and other parties to fight
apartheid and
find alternative ways of fighting apartheid also matched increasing
legislated racial discrimination with an increasing determination.
Initially, South
African liberation movements were committed to a policy of non-violence
and constructive engagement with the government. The increasing use
of security forces to brutally suppress resistance and torture resisters
convinced the ANC that a military option could succeed
were non-violence has failed.
A positive development for
the ANC was an increasing tide of Independent African states in the
1960s. Coupled with the growing influence of Pan
Africanism and African nationalism in the foreign policy of these states.
Most of them were committed to the liberation of Africa as a whole. For
a long period the Organisation of African Unity was informed by this
commitment. The ANC was supported by most African states and ANC leaders
fleeing from the Apartheid state were welcomed to stay in most African
states and operate and co-ordinate the liberation struggle from their
host countries. Though
committed to the principle of supporting liberation movements in African
colonies, the efforts of many African countries
were limited by their economic weakness and dependence on their former
colonial masters. Moreover, aware of their weakness, South Africa adopted
what it called a ‘new policy’ to entice African states into
closer co-operation and friendly relations with her in return for financial
aid, mainly in the form of technical aid.
It was largely neighbouring countries like Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland,
and Malawi that were opposed to breaking financial ties with South Africa.
Because their economies were defined by there almost dependence on South
Africa, before 1960, the British colonial policy towards these states,
then British protectorates, was that eventually they would be annexed
into South Africa. As a result, there was very little development of
these protectorates. By the time they gained independence, Botswana and
Lesotho in 1966 and 1968 for Swaziland, the ANC had already accepted
the formation of an independent military wing (MK) to fight apartheid
in 1961. By 1963, Zambia, under the presidency of Kenneth
Kaunda, was
the only African country actively opposed to apartheid and it was the
only country actively supporting the MK.
These three states supported
the liberation movement in South Africa but were opposed to opening
their territories to MK operations. This
was largely due to fears that the South African government would make “mince
meat out of them before breakfast” (pg 27). The government of Botswana
did not have a military until 1974, until this year it relied on the
presence of the British military contingent in Franscistown.
iii.
Botswana (BACK
TO TOP)
The government of Botswana gained independence from Britain in 30 September 1966. The first president
of Botswana, Sir Seretse Khama, was acutely
aware of his country’s weakness in international politics of the
cold war (link to SAHO) and the moral imperative to support South Africa’s
liberation from white minority rule. Compared to Lesotho and Swaziland,
the government of Botswana was very vocal about its opposition to apartheid.
Moreover, her relation with the government of South Africa was conflictual
for the most part.
At independence, Botswana was surrounded by two hostile states under
minority rule. South Africa was in the south and southern Rhodesia in
the east, in 1980, following the Lancaster agreement that brought an
end to minority rule, southern Rhodesia became the Republic of Zimbabwe.
In the west and north it was bordered by South West Africa mandated to
South Africa under the Mandate system introduced by Jan Smuts after the First
World War. In the north, it was independent Zambia. But the government
of South Africa and Rhodesia disputed claims by the two governments shared
a common border where their borderline crisscrossed. South Africa and
Rhodesia clamed that it was a pinpoint accurate crossing that provided
no room for a construction of a bridge or road without altering the borders
of other states (link to map of this region). In short, they claimed
that Botswana was completely surrounded by South Africa and Rhodesia.
Considering the above, the
economic weakness and lack of a professional military to protect her
territorial integrity or deter any attack from
these two giants of southern Africa, the government of Botswana’s
opposition to Apartheid was vocal only. However, the government of Botswana
acted mainly as a refugee area. For the MK, it was a safe passage to
Zambia in the North. Botswana consistently prohibited the ANC from launching
its military operation against South Africa within her borders or from
opening an army base in Botswana.
In
1967, the MK launched the Wankie campaign to
establish communication bridges in South Africa and MK headquarters
outside South
Africa. A detachment with Chris Hani as a commissar attempted
to cross Rhodesia to reach South Africa. After, at least, two successful
raids on Rhodesian and South African forces the detachment was finally
forced to retreat. On their retreat to Zambia they attempted to cross
to Zambia via Botswana. On entering Botswana they were arrested and
imprisoned to terms of three to five years in jail.
The arrest of this detachment was a result of pressure on the government
of Botswana from South Africa, Rhodesia, and the British government.
The Botswana para-military that arrested them was under the command of
a British commander. The government of Botswana took these measures to
avoid reappraisals from the two governments. President Sir Seretse Khama
said:
[a]s a consequence of Botswana’s geographical situation, we face
unusual and onerous handicaps….Whilst Botswana accepts that we
are part of the Southern African economic complex and that the harsh
fact of history and geography cannot be obliterated, for obvious reasons,
we have to maintain normal friendly with South Africa (Niemann 1993).
iv.
Lesotho (BACK
TO TOP)
Lesotho gained independence
the same year with Botswana. Contrasting Botswana, Lesotho is surrounded
by South Africa. Lesotho, according to
a newspaper report, was a “caged hawk”. Chief Leabua Jonathan
was a close ally of the South African government. Lesotho, together with
Malawi, was the only country to abstain from an Organisation of African
Unity vote banning the sale of weapons to South Africa. Lesotho’s
position was that a better route was constructive dialogue with South
Africa not aggression. Nevertheless, Chief Leabua Jonathan was not silent about the policies
of South Africa he actually blamed the South African government for violence
and acts of Sabotage in the country. However, most of his criticism of
South Africa came early in the 1970s and were largely due to a growing
discontent about his friendly policy towards South Africa. Lesotho allowed
South African refugees were allowed to enter the country and were granted
asylum while in the country including a passage out of Lesotho.
v.
Swaziland (BACK
TO TOP)
The kingdom of Swaziland gained
independence in 1968, a year after the Wankie campaign. Swaziland shares
a border with South Africa and Mozambique.
At the time of independence Mozambique was a Portuguese colony in a state
of civil war between Frelimo and the colonial government. Portuguese
colony (Mozambique) formed an “unholy alliance” with South
Africa and Rhodesia to assist each other in their combat against liberation
movements in their respective countries. Sandwiched by Mozambique and
South Africa, Swaziland adopted a friendlier policy towards South Africa.
President John Vorster referred to King Sobhuza of Swaziland as his friend.The Swaziland government was more stringent on its opposition of the
ANC using Swazi territory to launch attacks against South Africa. In
some instances King Sobhuza threatened the ANC by pointing out to them
he would allow the South African government to send its troops into Swaziland
to attack the MK. Nevertheless, the Swazi governement continued to provide
the ANC, Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) (Link to SAHO PAC), and Mozambican
refugees with a safe haven.
vi.
Zimbabwean Liberation Movement (BACK
TO TOP)
One
of the strongest allies of the MK was the Zimbabwean National Union
military wing. Strong in a sense that because it had engaged the regime
of Ian Smith it was able to provide the MK with grounds to launch attacks
against South Africa from Zimbabwean soil. The
Wankie campaign was a result of close co-operation between the two
liberation movements. Because
both the MK and Zimbabwean liberation movement were faced with a common
enemy. Common enemy because the South African government supported white
minority in Rhodesia and Mozambique because of the racist notion that
it is only white rule that can deliver progress and improve the lives
of Africans. Zimbabwe liberation movements
were greatly influenced by South Africa’s
liberation movements, in particular the ANC. Because without prospects
of higher education in Rhodesia many leaders of the Zimbabwe liberation
movement came to South Africa for education and were influenced by earlier
resistance campaign of the 1950. Before adopting the Zimbabwean African
National Union (ZANU), the party was known as the ANC. Both these liberation
movements relied on the support of the Zambian government because Mozambique
was still under colonial rule until 1975; Malawi under the leadership
of Banda was strongly opposed to both these liberation movements to the
extent that it was stigmatized as a collaborator, and Botswana, Lesotho,
and Swaziland preferred not to allow military operation in their countries
for security reasons.
vii.
Portuguese Colonies in Southern Africa: Angola and Mozambique (BACK
TO TOP)
Angola and Mozambique were
the only two colonies in southern Africa colonized by Portugal. The
Portuguese government attempted to use education
and isolation to maintain a tight control of the population and avoid
the road to independence that was opening up after the Second World War.
Moreover, the colonial policy at the time considered colonies belonging
to Portugal integral part of the metropole. Therefore, there was no need
for independence. However, population control is never absolute. From
the 1950s, the people of these two colonies were increasingly attempting
to free themselves from Portugal. In both colonies a war of liberation
was fought and in 1975 both gained independence from Portugal. Both of
them shared a border with South Africa. But the Angolan border with South
Africa was a result of South Africa’s annexation of Namibia.
viii.
Angola (BACK
TO TOP)
The war of liberation in Angola
was divided between a socialist Popular Movement for the Liberation
of Angola (MPLA) and a pro capitalist National
Union for the Total Independence of Angola (Unita) movement. Initially,
the two movements co-operated because of their common enemy but because
of cold war politics, the MPLA was backed by the Soviet Union and Unita
was backed by South Africa and the United States. For South Africa and
the United States, Unita was a front against the spread of communism.
Because of this political context, the ANC allied itself with the MPLA.
South Africa’s relation with Unita developed only after the MPLA
won the independence of Angola in 1975. The MPLA was able to gain power
because of Soviet Union backing. Prior to this development, the South
African government was an ally of Portugal.As early as February 1968,
the MPLA was reporting that South African helicopters in South East
Angola had attacked it and South African Troops
guarded the hydroelectric power station still under construction. There
was growing evidence within the government that Zambia and Angola were
providing security for the MK. Government’s solution was to attack
and destroy ANC MK bases in Angola and assist the Portuguese government
defeat the MPLA and Unita forces. The war in Angola became South Africa’s
war to preserve white minority rule.
ix.
Mozambique (BACK
TO TOP)
The Mozambican history of
liberation is similar to that Angola with few exceptions. Firstly,
Mozambique shares a common border with South
Africa and Zimbabwe (southern Rhodesia). Therefore, Mozambique could
be used easily to launch an attack against either South Africa or Rhodesia.
Secondly, the people of Mozambique are culturally similar to some of
South Africa’s cultural societies, for example the Tsonga, Shangaans,
and Shona people. The people of Mozambique had long been closely tied
to economic developments in South Africa. They came to work in South
Africa as migrant labourers prior to their colonization by the Portuguese.
As a result, political developments such as the formation of black party
politics and liberation struggle were to a certain extend linked. Frelimo (Frente de Libertacao de Mocambique), front for the liberation
of Mozambique, adopted socialist principles and maoist guerilla tactics
to fight the colonial government. The close alliance they had formed
with Tanzania a socialist state guaranteed them that they would have
access to weapons. Tanzania also backed the ANC and Julius Nyerere allowed
the MK to open military bases and headquarters in Tanzania. To destroy the ANC and MK
the South African government together with the Rhodesian forces carried
out raids against Frelimo and MK in Tete
province. On a number of occasions the MK attempted to use Swaziland
as a passage to reach and launch attacks in South Africa. After independence
in 1975, the relationship between Frelimo led by Samora Machel now president
of Mozambique reached a critical stage for South Africa because now the
MK could operate freely on South Africa’s doorsteps. In 19 October
1986, Samora Machel’s plane crushed in South Africa’s Lebombo
Mountains killing all on board. South Africa was suspected for causing
the crash by changing the beacons and thereby cause Samora’s plane
to take a wrong direction.
x.
International Support for the MK (BACK
TO TOP)
Support for the ANC and the armed struggle was to a certain extent influenced
by the prevailing atmosphere of the Cold War. The South African government
exploited cold war fears and rivalry between the United States and Soviet
Union to secure the support of the United States. South Africa labeled
the ANC a rooi gevaar (red danger) and the MK a terrorist organisation
aided by the Soviet government. Moreover, the United States considered
South Africa a strategic partner in the fight against the spread of communism,
in particular the spread of communism in southern Africa. Without the United States
support, the ANC looked east to find support. The Soviet intend on
increasing its power base in the southern hemisphere
gave her support to the ANC. As a result, members of the MK were trained
by the Soviet Union in Moscow. Moreover, the ANC began to align itself
much closely with the communist ideology. A growing number of ANC members
increasingly saw the struggle against apartheid as a class struggle with
black people serving as the underclass. Socialism became a promising
solution to South Africa’s problem and Africa as a whole. ANC strong
backers in Africa, like Ghana, Zambia, and Tanzania had adopted socialism
as a governing policy capable of securing the benefits of freedom. It
was under this guise, however, not the only guise, that the MK was able
to find support internationally.
xi.
Conclusion (BACK
TO TOP)
The MK was probably an ambitious development in the struggle against
apartheid in South Africa. The MK was faced with a formidable army backed
up by a growing economy. Thought the MK could rely on the support of
neighbouring countries, their economic dependence on South Africa was
disheartening. It was because of this dependence and lack of military
strength that the MK was forced to open its military bases far from South
Africa. Their objection to allowing the MK to use their territories to
launch attacks against South Africa weakened the MK in the early 1960s
until 1980. The MK had to use a very dangerous path (Zimbabwe) to launch
its campaigns. This meant that it had to do battle with two equally formidable
Rhodesian Army and South African Army.To a large extend these difficulties reflect the difficulties of the
1960s and early 1970s. Because after these period there was a shift in
the balance of power with Portuguese colonies gained their independence
and provided the MK with a safe haven to open its military bases and
launch attacks against South Africa. In 1980 Rhodesia was freed from
military rule and it changed its name to Zimbabwe. In the early 1970s
southern African countries began to organize themselves into Frontline
States opposed to white minority rule in Southern Africa and also to
decrease their dependence on South African economy. Developments such
as these meant an increased support for the ANC and military operations.
Links: (BACK
TO TOP)
