Black S. African unionists debate strategy of alliances

Scan page 11

On June 6-8, the biggest and most extensive strike in the history of South Africa took place. It was called in protest against the Labour Relations Amendment Bill and the increasing repression of the opposition movement. [See July 1988 issue of Socialist Action.] One of the most significant features of the strike-and an important reason for its success—was the fact it was called jointly by the two rival trade-union federations: the 900,000-member Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) and the 400,000-strong National Council of Trade Unions (NACTU).

The COSATU leadership, which had not long ago accused NACTU of being a "scab union federation" led by "adventurists and racists," had come under increasing pressure from its own affiliated unions to carry out joint actions with NACTU against the apartheid regime.

[The COSATU leadership is politically close to the African National Congress (ANC), while the NACTU leadership is close to the Azanian People's Organization (AZAPO).] At a special congress of COSATU on May 15, 1988, for example, a sizable minority of delegates—in opposition to the leadershipsupported a resolution presented jointly by the National Union of United Democratic Front, which was banned by the Feb. 24 government decree), to set up a planning committee to draw up a program of action and to invite organizations to attend the conference.

According to one delegate to the COSATU conference quoted in the July/September issue of the British magazine Socialist Outlook, this resolution would "allow COSATU together with its allies to draw up a program that will be consistent with its support of the Freedom Charter but with the authority to invite groups such as NACTU and the Five Freedoms Forum to participate." [The Five Freedoms Forum is a white liberalcapitalist organization.] Other white capitalist groupings that are being asked to participate in the conference, according to the June 1, 1988, issue of The Guardian newsweekly, include the Institute for a Democratic • Alternative in South HE Africa (IDASA) and the National Democratic Movement.

According to the June S, 1988, issue of the South African daily The Star, the ANC leadership has already held various meetings with leaders of these two white organizations to "discuss the possibility of boycotting the Oct. 26 municipal elections and collaborating in other longer-term projects.

What kind of alliances?

Elijah Barayi, president of COSATU, in his speech to the federation's special conference, gave a good indication of the kind of program a wing of the COSATU leadership would like to see adopted by the anti-apartheid conference. Barayi stressed that the "broad anti-apartheid front" should be based on the principles of the Freedom Charter.

"We urge those who are genuinely interested in peace and security," Barayi said, "to consider a future in the terms we have formulated in the Freedom Charter." Barayi's position is a step backward from that of the African National Congress, which in early May issued a joint statement with NACTU which stated that the issue of the Freedom Charter should not be a stumbling block to unity. [See statement in July 1988 issue of Socialist Action.] Barayi's position is consistent with a decision by the last regular COSATU congress calling to build "disciplined and permanent alliances with other progressive and democratic forces within the country." The term "democratic forces" is a code word for sectors that include components of the white liberal capitalist class.

There is, of course, nothing unprincipled about uniting in action with sectors of the capitalist class around specific democratic demands. But a program based on the Freedom Charter that is oriented to cementing "permanent alliances" with sectors of the capitalist class has nothing to do with a united front. It is a recipe for a popular front.

A popular front is a programmatic—not a temporary, limited, or action-oriented— alliance between the workers' movement and the liberal bourgeoisie. Because of its logic of class collaboration, it sets off a dynamic that restrains and derails the struggles of the workers and the oppressed. Such a front is explicitly based on the respect of capitalist property relations.

The leadership of the Azanian People's Organization (AZAPO), the organization to which the bulk of the NACTU leadership looks for political guidance, has consistently opposed "popular fronts." It can therefore be expected that NACTU, too, will reject participating in a "broad front" that opposes apartheid but accepts capitalist exploitation.

For the moment, no date has been set for the anti-apartheid conference called by COSATU. But a heated debate within the Black working class is already under way concerning who should be invited to the conference and what program should be adopted.

The success of the June 6-8 general strike, the imposition by the rank and file of a united action, and the increasing resistance within COSATU itself to the imposition of the Freedom Charter are all indications that the anti-capitalist sentiment among the Black working class of South Africa is extremely deep. They are indications that there will no doubt be strong resistance within COSATU as well to the political orientation proposed by Elijah Barayi.

This sentiment bodes well for the future of the South African revolution.

We must keep in mind that during the "stay-away" protest, Manpower Minister Piet du Plessis repeatedly called on the bosses to fire striking workers. These declarations only encouraged the bosses to further attack the workers. This is why we believe that, at this stage, we cannot negotiate with the minister.

NACTU

----- pull-quotes -----

OTHER PROGRESSiVE ORGANiSATiONS.

BILL! NACTU AND COSATU! UNiTED FRONT