South Africa: Maneuvers proliferate as ANC pushes forward Patriotic Front WOSA refuses to sign Peace Accords

Scan page 12

Over 3000 people have been killed so they have ceased to be our enemies. We far this year in violent clashes in South are unable to sign peace with our eneNational Congress (ANC) charges that 3) "WOSA refused to sign the Peace most of the attacks have been organized Accords because it calls for the disbandby a "third force" within the South ing of all Selt-Defense Units and allows African government in order to eliminate for the arrest of all persons in possession On Sept. 14, the ANC signed Peace New, so-called Self-Protection Units, Accords with the government and which work with the police and SADF, Inkatha, a conservative movement based will be formed in place of Selt-Detense have done little to stop the violence. "The Accords not only gives permisOver 150 people have died since the sion to the police to arrest all activists in Several political groups refused to sign leaders who serve on the peace committhe Peace Accords. These groups included tees to identify those in possession of the Pan-Africanist Congress (PAC), the weapons and even assist in arresting Azanian Peoples Organization (AZAPO), them. WOSA refused to sign because we and the Workers Organization for Social- will not do the dirty work of the police, WOSA explained in a press statement banding Self-Defense Units can bring why it rejected the Accords. WOSA peace to the townships. pointed out that, despite the hopes of 4) "The Accords requires those who millions of people, "violence will persist signed to provide the police with the full because it is endemic to the system of names, addresses, and contact numbers of apartheid-capitalism, because it will be all local leaders and activists. It also promoted by right-wing groups, because gives protection to people who inform an illegitimate and undemocratic govern- on their comrades in the name of keeping violence against the oppressed and 5) *The so-called Peace Accords also exploited, because the mass struggle and criminalizes all 'unrest' activity and creFollowing are several of the key rea- punish those responsible for 'unrest.' sons why WOSA said it refused to sign Social unrest, which effectively means 1) "The peace mechanisms spelt out in liberating process into a destructive the accords amount to co-option of the force, the consequences of which have to tures to the SAP/SADF (South African "In times of 'unrest' the peace commitPolice/South African Defense Force] tees will have to identify 'culprits and government. The political organizations hand them over to the special criminal and local peace committees along with courts agreed to in the Accords. This will the police and SADF, the local tribal leaders and supporters. If WOSA were to authorities, churches, industry, and busi- sign such an agreement it means that we "They will act as eyes and ears of the would agree to betray local people active police, they will make rules for marches, in the liberation struggles. We therefore responsible for 'unrest.'* with the police in identifying people of the so-called development proposals is 2) "We refused to sign a document to make the oppressed and exploited which recognized this white minority majority, who are the victims of government or the Bantustan govern- apartheid-capitalism, and the victims of ments as legitimate. WOSA believes that violence, feel responsible for these until [the] government unconditionally crimes against them and to rope them concedes the convening of a constituent into patching up the system whenever it future of South Africa, until this illegiti- "How to stop the violence? There is an mate and undemocratic government alternative to the collaborationist Peace ceases to exist, WOSA cannot accept that Accords: Build Peace From Below!"

12 SOCIALIST ACTION NOVEMBER 1991 F. W. de Klerk was given the job of carrying through a process of reform from above.

One by one, most of the apartheid laws were dismantled. The Black liberation movement was granted major concessions-such as the freeing of African National Congress (ANC) leader Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners.

Promises were made that Blacks would soon be given representation within the government itself. The ANC maintains that De Klerk's government should resign in favor of a multi-racial "interim government." De Klerk rejects the proposal, but concedes that Black leaders might be given posts in his cabinet in order to form a new "collective leadership."

The price that the government has demanded from the ANC is that they call off the armed struggle, downplay the mass struggle, and participate as "responsible" partners in a negotiated settlement.

And so, for the past year, "talks about talks" have gone round and round.

Unfortunately, neither the ANC nor the government has dared to openly address the question that is most pertinent to these political negotiations—who should hold political power in South Africa?

There are only two choices: The oppressed Black working class, or the current rulers—the wealthy owners of industry, banks, mines, and agribusiness. Since these two classes have no substantial goals in common, they will be unable to find a satisfactory "settlement."

Patriotic Front conference

During the weekend of Oct. 25-27, the ANC met with its traditional rival, the Pan-Africanist Congress (PAC), and close to 90 other groups in order to set the terms under which they will meet the government in negotiations.

The conference was held in Durban, South Africa. Organizations that attended the conference included the two leading Black labor federations—the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) and the National Congress of Trade Unions (NACTU).

A number of political, religious, and professional groups also took part, including the South Africa Council of Churches, the South Africa Catholic Bishops Conference, the mixed-race Labour Party, the Democratic Party (closely tied to the Anglo American corporation), and parties from the Bantustans and other apartheid-based structures.

A majority of the 300 delegates at the Durban meeting voted to form a new "Patriotic Front."

The idea of the Patriotic Front, as the ANC originally explained it, was to bring the Black liberation organizations together under a common platform, which they would then take forward into an All-Party Conference, which is planned to begin soon. The actual front, however, includes organizations from a much broader range of political viewpoints and class interests than had been first proposed. It even includes pro-capitalist "liberals."

Yet enthusiasm for the front is not unanimous. One major Black organization, the Azanian Peoples Organization (AZAPO), did not attend the Durban meeting.

AZAPO was one of the original conveners of the conference, together with the ANC and the PAC. Only days before Africa's Black community. The African mies."

and harass ANG acuvists.

among the Zulu people. But the Accords Units.

agreement was signed.

ist Action (WOSA). ment as De Klerk's is cannot avoid the peace.

strikes will not stop."

the accords:

political organizations as support struc- be corrected.

and trade unions will sit on the regional ness.

rallies and meetings, and will cooperate assembly with full powers to decide the breaks down. of unlicensed firearms and other weapons. defense structures, but also expects local and because we do not believe that disate special criminal courts to rapidly mass action, is thus transtormed from a provoke terrible divisions among local refused to sign."

In summary, WOSA stated: "The gist "liberal" parties participating in the conference, the Democratic Party and the Labour Party.

Their action came in response to a letter that AZAPO Secretary-general Don Nkadimeng had directed to the heads of the Bantustan parties who were invited to the conference. The letter demanded that those leaders resign from the government-associated bodies they serve on.

In a statement to the press, AZAPO spokespeople said that they had "learnt with dismay" of their exclusion, and that seeming need to accommodate liberals and puppets."

Nevertheless, the AZAPO letter gained a favorable response from several Black groups. Reports indicate, for example, that the youth group of the ANC broke with its parent organization to solidarize with the content of the letter. The NACTU labor federation also expressed approval.

A similar point of view was expressed by another organization, the Workers Organization for Socialist Action (WOSA). In a press statement, WOSA announced that it would attend the conference in order to present its proposals for a "fighting alliance of the oppressed (continued and in What economic policies does the ANC advocate for a future South Africa?

In recent weeks, ANC spokespeople have given a confusing range of answers to the question.

It all started when the ANC suggested that one-third of the assets held by whites should be pooled for redistribution among Blacks. The response from "liberal" capitalists was instantaneous. "Communism!" screeched Democratic Party leader Zac de Beer.

Then Nelson Mandela said that the ANC still planned to nationalize the mines and some financial institutions.

At that point, even President De Klerk joined in the fray: "I will not say 'yes' to a system that undermines private property ownership," he declared, reminding the ANC that negotiations hung in the balance.

The ANC began to backtrack. Pallo Jordan, the ANC's head of information, conceded that nationalizing the mines would not make sense because they are a "wasting asset." Another ANC spokesperson pointed out that Mandela also said that the ANC had no "ideological attachment to nationalization," and that the ANC would consider other ways to redress the imbalance of wealth.

But Tito Mboweni, head of the ANC's economic planning division, maintained that the ANC membership demanded nationalization and the issue would not be wiped off the agenda.

A similar round-robin range of views was displayed after ANC Secretary-General Cyril Ramaphosa indicated that a Black majority government would not be eager to honor international loans given to the current regime.

Stanley Mabizela, ANC deputy head of international relations, then informed the press that a new government would have to honor such loans.

Finally, another spokesperson, Carl Niehaus, "clarified" the point:

Ramaphosa had merely said that the ANC reserved the right to "evaluate"

such loans.

The ANC leadership knows that it is walking on thin ice. On the one hand, its big business "friends" have baited their hook with lucrative contracts, offers of foreign aid, and partnership in the government.

On the other hand, many rank-and-file ANC members have become restive-demanding decisive action in order to achieve democracy and a better life for working people and the poor.

And so, where does the ANC stand on basic economic issues? In the words of President De Klerk, "The ANC is blowing hot and cold."-M.S.

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

vukani Arace and Frondon: Now! ASSEMBI Y

they found it regrettable that the Patriot- ic Front was being "torpedoed by a

What about nationalizations