APARTHEID AND THE CHALLENGES OF AFRICAN LEADERSHIP

Nthato Motlana Stanley Mogoba

Ota, Nigeria 24 October to 1 November 1988

APARTHEID AND THE CHALLENGES OF AFRICAN LEADERSHIP

Nthato Motlana Stanley Mogoba

Discussions of the Inaugural Programme of the Africa Leadership Forum

Ota, Nigeria 24 October to 1 November 1988

Table of Contents

Page

1.

Apartheid and Leadership by Dr. Nthato Motlana Forum Discussion Apartheid and the Challenges of African Leadership By Rev. Stanley Mogoba Forum Discussion List of Participants Background Note: The Africa Leadership Forum 7

2. 3.

10

4. 5. 6.

16 20 23

Apartheid and Leadership By Nthato Motlana

The struggle for recognition of legitimate leadership in South Africa pre-dates apartheid as enshrined by the Nationalists. It was with the coming of the Nationalists that the cornerstones of apartheid were developed in an attempt to ensure the subjugation of the black majority by denying it basic human and civil rights. Prior to 1948, the leadership struggle was not dissimilar to that being waged in other African countries it was an issue of colonialisation and of outsiders being leaders of the South African people. The white settlers in South Africa were, by and large, no different from white settlers anywhere else, and in fact used the same methods to assert themselves. Even after they had ensconced themselves as the governors of South Africa, they did not manage to quell the true leader of the black people, beginning a dichotomy between leadership and government that today still characterizes South Africa. The history of South Africa, even before 1948, is thus a history of the clash between the imposed government and the true leaders of the people, and of the measures which successive governments used in an attempt to crush that leadership, destroy its power base, and subjugate the people. It is also a history of resistance on the behalf of black South Africans a history of resilience, suffering and determination to achieve liberation. In his seminar book The Puritans in Africa, M.W. de Klerk discusses the strange phenomenon of the 1952 Dutch who settled in South Africa at about the same time that the Pilgrim Fathers peopled the United States stubborn people who created a legally stratified society that has persisted up to this day. The unsophisticated Afrikaners of the 17th century had no idea how to deal with the leaders of Colonial Africa. The relationships were characterized by a nave, disingenuous, patronizing, always brutal attitude. Blacks need only recall their dealings with Dingaan the Zulu king-and the killing of the Voortrekkier Piet Relief. As in so many things of this world, we owe it to the suave, sophisticated British who in many years of ruling half of mankind had developed special skills in controlling the natives. As in many other parts of the world, Britain practised what came to be known as Indirect Rule. The tribal kings/chiefs or elders were left in place, merely changing into full-time, paid civil servants to carry out the wishes of their masters. Didnt Andrew Young say Britain had invented racism? It is a policy that apartheid South Africa has embraced. Thus, we have the caricature of ignorant, often illiterate chiefs shored up, dressed up like a Gilbert and Sullivan MajorGeneral in imitation gold braid parade on national television as the authentic black leaders. 1

In 1948, the Nationalist Party came to power, and with it the system of apartheid the grand design to ensure the subjugation of blacks and the supremacy of whites by placing total power in the hands of a minority white government. Apartheid codified the system of repression and set out to destroy the power base of existing black leaders and prevent new leaders from coming to power. It has failed miserably. Rather than prevent the emergence of new leaders of the people, apartheid has engendered leadership as successive generations have rejected repression and been willing to fight for freedom and human rights. It is this constant emergence of leaders and the State repression of them that I wish to concentrate on. I simply want to indicate some key events and the response to them so as to show the breadth and depth of South African leadership in the years since 1948. The South African government has always been threatened by the true leaders of the black people, which is why it has always responded to them with brutality. Once its grand design of reducing all blacks to subservience had failed, it attempted to create its own leaders people who it co-opted to try to take power from the true leaders of the people. Hence there arose a complicated network of regional and local structures that attempted to pass themselves as the legitimate governmental entities of the black people. In the case of Transkei, Ciskei, Venda and Bophuthatswana, the government went to the extreme by invoking independence for entities that were neither credible, legitimate nor did they enjoy popular backing. Just last week the government engaged in another futile exercise under the guise of municipal elections, which could claim only a miniscule fraction of the black peoples support. Indeed, all efforts at mass co-option have uniformly failed. Generations of true leaders have been imprisoned, killed, forced into exile and yet the South African government has not destroyed the leadership of black South Africans, and it still has not achieved control through subjugation. Oppression has not clouded our vision. To suggest why this has not happened is to indicate a salient feature of black South African leadership. It is essentially community-based. Black South Africans are first and foremost community leaders. They are not appointed. It is for this reason that the South African government has not managed to erode the true leadership of the black people, and also why it has not managed to instigate a system of government that is effective. The South African government is threatened by leadership at all levels, from the national heroes like Mandela and Sisulu to the grassroots leaders who are involved in organizing, at the local level, to empower communities to exercise an element of control over their own existence. This leadership threatens it because it represents the resilience of the black South Africans to resist the apartheid regime and to define its own destiny. After the Boers and the British had fought over the gold and diamonds and the encrusted southern land which is my country, the Union of South Africa came into being in 1910. A constitution was drawn up in collaboration with, and the concurrence of, the then liberal government of Great Britain. Two generals at the peace convention in 1910, namely Louis Botha a distant grandfather of P.W. Botha and the well known Field Marshal of the British Empire, John Smuts, threatened to walk out of that conference if Britain 2

insisted, as she did, on the enfranchisement of black South Africans. Finally, a compromise was reached: Britain agreed that those blacks and people of mixed descent, who were in 1910 on the common voters roll, could remain there but that no others would ever be added. Blacks were to be represented in the Senate by four white representatives, and in the House Assembly by another four, elected by black electoral colleges. Even this token recognition, without franchise and taxation, was abolished in 1936 when the Land Act was piloted through Parliament; re-establishing domination. The Native Representative Council of 1936 was the last body that black South Africans were misled and misguided into believing could be an authentic representative body. As representatives of the black community of South Africa it had some of the most outstanding black leaders of our country who grace all our history books, and who had agreed to become members of that body: Prof. G. Matthew, Dr. Moorka and Dr. Molema. This body existed from 1936 until 1949. I will never forget that date because I had just joined the youth league of the African National Congress. We went to a conference in Bloemfontein and the first resolution we took at that Congress was that everybody must resign from this toy parliament cum native representative council. We forced all those men to resign. Since then there has not emerged in South Africa a government-created structure purporting to represent black South Africans that has found general acceptance. This is a very important date in the history of our people. Subsequently, other structures have emerged, like the homelands, but authentic leaders of the people have refused to defile their hands by participating in such bodies. That, of course, has raised other problems, such as the question of participation, non-participation, coercion or, cooption etc. Whatever term you want to use. In 1912, the South African Native National Congress was formed (native was once a respectable term particularly as it referred to our claim to the land; it was nothing to be ashamed of to be referred to as natives), which became the African National congress (ANC) in 1925. This was an attempt by the then African leaders, led by a lawyer called Garseme, to establish an effective movement to discuss issues, to lobby as a pressure group and to resist measures which were then being contemplated by the South African government. This were - taxation without representation, - total exclusion from the common voter roll, - The pending legislation which was to become the 1913 Land Act, and which demarcated South Africa into 13% for black occupation and 87% for white occupation and ownership. That law remains the basic constitution of South Africa till today. In the following years, the ANC mounted resistance campaigns against the carrying of passes and other legislation designed to infringe on the civil liberties of black people. The ANC Youth League was formed in the 1940s and a programme of action was instituted in 1949.

In the 1950s, the ANC mounted many campaigns and other forms of protest including boycotts and strikes, to which the government responded almost routinely with raids on the black townships in which many people died. In one such protest during the1950 May Day protest, which the government saw as a change in opposition and consequently put down with the violent death of 18 people. The 1950s saw the growth of campaigns to oppose the government, particularly the Defiance Campaign, and also the growth of government repression as leaders were banned and legislation introduced to cut off channels of opposition Criminal Law Amendment Act and the treason trial of 1956 foreshadowing things to come. Other groups were formed Unity Movement, Pan-Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC), and other organizations such as TIC and NIC were involved. In 1959 PAC broke away from ANC. In 1960, a new wave of oppression occurred in response to anti-apartheid demonstrations organized by the ANC and PAC. The South African government declared a state of emergency, passed the Unlawful Organizations Act and banned both the ANC and PAC. All these actions foreshadowed things to come and indicated the response by the state to lawful opposition the attempt to crush, oppress and repress. The Sharpeville Massacre chillingly portrayed the readiness of the state to use violence to counter and crush opposition, a willingness that has been seen time and time again since then. During the 1960s, the repression and oppression continued. The ANC and PAC were forced into exile, together with many leaders even as the Rivonia trial ended with the imprisonment of leaders such as Mandela and Sisulu. Other measures include the banning and listing of individuals. A peculiarly South African phenomenon, if you are listed it means your name is put on a list kept by the State Attorney -General; you may then never again be quoted in any newspaper, radio or television; you may never again enter any institution of learning schools or university and you may never publish; in other words you die a civil death. All these were in addition to increasing imprisonment of opposition leaders and organizers for long periods. The 1970s saw the growth of the black consciousness movement, with outstanding leaders such as Steve Biko; the era of SASO, BPC, the FRELIMO rallies, SASM, trials of black consciousness leaders, SSRC and several unrest. The States response to all these was again violence, mass arrests, increasing repression and a massive clampdown on community based organizations, more banning and arrests. The 1980s saw the emergence of AZAPO and the United Democratic Front and with it increased government oppression, political trials, and more legislation curtailing the opposition, more violence and imprisonment of leaders. A state of emergency was imposed and re-imposed the most recent one in June 1986, which was suspended after a year and then re- imposed because the State thought it could not control internal dissent without this tool. We are confronted by mass detentions without trial, detention of minors, torture, increasing clampdown on community organizations and trade unions,

restrictions on the press coupled with ever much stronger attempts to create structures and to co-opt leaders all of which have failed. The situation we face in 1988 is one of increased oppression as the gap between government and the leadership widens. The South African government becomes increasingly aware that it has failed to impose an unjust system on the black majority. I should not say black majority, I should say an injustice on the people of South Africa because one thing that the United Democratic Front demonstrated when it was launched five years ago was that there is a very broad front in South Africa which includes people of African descent, Asian descent, of mixed blood, and even whites. Throughout South Africa today we have a phenomenon of very many white groups, in leadership positions, and in the universities, who have become members of the United Democratic Front and are willing to pay horrendous sacrifices to accomplish the goals of the party. Those people opposing apartheid are determined that they will create a situation in which the government and the leadership of South Africa are one where we will be able to elect our true leaders to positions of power. This, indeed, is the leadership challenge in South Africa. This task is inherently a domestic one. Democracy must come from within. It cannot be imposed from outside. Yet, it is a task in which all people can participate by recognizing the righteousness of our cause and putting pressure on the government of South Africa to recognize the legitimate leaders of the people that it has consistently sought to repress. In this light, we call upon the international community to support us in our struggle to create a democratic and just South Africa, in which the leadership is finally that of the people, so that the sacrifices and suffering of all of our leaders, both past and present, will not have been in vain In conclusion, we are disposed to look at the future and ask ourselves what of the future? There is under way a resurgence of right wing fascism in the country; the kind of fascism we last saw in 1939 when Afrikaner leaders went to jail in their support of Hitler. One of the most disappointing things in South Africa today is to find support for the National Party, which runs white South Africa, particularly from refugees from Eastern Europe who have come into South Africa in big numbers. The immigrants from Portuguese Africa who have moved to South Africa in their thousands, from former Rhodesia, from Britain, many of the so-called liberal British South Africans are in fact on the right of the National Party. One of the reasons by the way that South Africa has swung so far to the right is that in the last general election in South Africa in 1986 the National Party outdid itself in frightening its electorate. You see, every single party that has been elected in South Africa since the Union has gone into power by playing on the so-called Suad Hafar-black danger. There was a time when other countries elsewhere played up the yellow peril, meaning communists from China. In South Africa it is Suad Hafar black danger. Elections after elections without exception is fought and won on what people are told about this black menace. In the last election, the National party fighting the Progressive Federal Party which had done very well in the previous election, presented to South Africa on television and newspapers the picture of Oliver Campbell and the gorillas, raping white women, killing white children, destroying beautiful white cities. 5

What happened was that whereas they hoped that the white electorate would jump from the Progressive Federal Party which spoke so "blackly" about black participation, they leapfrogged over the National Party into the welcoming arms of the Conservative Party, heading towards purely openly fascist administration. We are indeed in for a cold political winter. Clearly, tactics and strategies must be reviewed. Black South Africans are talking of possible participation, possible use of surrogates in some government structures, support of sanctions. Even in the black community there is dissension about the tactics to follow. However, a broad-based leadership, is always there. Our leadership in South Africa is not the charismatic leadership you find in some African countries, it is community leaders. It has depth, worth and even if they kill Steve Bikos there are thousands of others ready to support. You see this so well when you call for a stay-away from work or a boycott of the voting in South Africa. When the Government called its elections they decreed it would be held under a state of emergency, where meetings could be held. Secondly, they introduced a very sinister form of voting, called Prior Voting where they gave people 14 days. In those 14 days the political parties could do anything. They bussed the sick, the old, the unemployed to these voting booths, gave them tea and biscuits, which they had not had for quite a long time, and showed them where to put the cross. When the newspaper exposed this kind of fraud, the government did not even care to respond. You could not call for a boycott. Only people like Bishop Tutu or Alan Boesak could call for a boycott. But I as President of the Soweto Association could not say to my people around that area do not vote!" But despite that the percentage of the poll was 4% of the eligible voters. In other words, the community leadership is able to reach its people whenever it wants to. The problem is how do we interpret in the next few years that broad reach which we do enjoy.

DISCUSSION Chairman: Olusegun Obasanjo Olusegun Obasanjo Let me start the discussion with some insight from my experience in South Africa and from the point on which you ended your lecture. Owing to of the repression in South Africa and despite the brutality of the regime, the young men and women who are assuming leadership have become, virtually irrepressible. When you take the government apparatus, for example whichever way it deals with a crop of young leaders whether they are incarcerated or they go underground, they are still working. It's only when they are they are incarcerated that they cannot. But whichever way you look at its, you have a new crop of leaders coming up. My question is how long can this go on? Another point relates to my observation when I was there, namely the problem of the credibility of leaders like you yourself. Young boys and young girls are now saying: look, you cannot restrain us and if you want to restrain us what have you got to give us? More and more, these boys and girls will undertake the leadership role. The maturity and experience that is needed may not be there and the whole society becomes endangered. These young men and young women have idealism, dynamism and courage but they need more than that. I have seen this when the Soweto boys came here in 1976. How do we handle this? The third point is a problem again that I saw in South Africa when I was there as a member of the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group. How will you begin to deal with the separation in the homelands in terms of really bringing people together? When I was there, we went into KwaZulu and all the rural areas. Wherever we went, even in the remotest places, people recognized and called on Nelson Mandela. One sees Nelson Mandela as a unifying factor. What happens if Nelson Mandela leaves the stage? Even now, you have Chief Buthelezi saying: "look I wont deal with these people unless Nelson Mandela is released!" What will happen if Nelson Mandela is no longer on the scene and Oliver Tambo is no longer on the scene? These are some of the problems that are on the horizon and one would want to hear from people like you as to how they will be dealt with. Nthato Motlana You asked how long we could continue to produce cannon fodder young men who simply get killed. I can assure you that it worries us. It worries me to death when we bury a young man in Alexandria Township and young men suddenly held aloft the hammer and sickle. The communist party is driving the government up the wall. I want to say to these young chaps: "For Gods sake, stop raising the flag,! It is not necessary!" But you see, one thing we have learnt in South Africa is to shut up sometimes. But if you shut up you are labeled a coward.

You say how long can this go on? I think as long as our will is there, as long as we are productive and give birth to sons, the young men will always be there. It is a testimony I think I said that at the funeral of Steve Biko that where they kill one, a hundred will rise up to replace him. All the South African prisons are not big enough to hold all the young men who are determined to change the system. I think the system will change before our men give up. The credibility of leaders like myself? We have a million problems. We of the older generation, the "passing on generation", have a problem because we have failed to deliver. The ANC was formed in 1912 and whereas the rest of Africa has attained independence there is black rule everywhere. Even though it may be shaky, or there may be mistakes, but you are in control. The one area where blacks have in fact regressed and lost whatever political influence they had since 1912, is South Africa. So, our young people look at us, and say what can be done? One man who is safe from that kind of criticism is Nelson Mandela. He cannot make speeches, he cannot make mistakes; he is in prison! We sometimes say that the longer he stays in jail the better for us although his wife is my friend and I know his family missed him. He is so larger in everyones imagination. By the way, I have been informed that on 15 November he may be released, but of course, it may not happen. We have heard such rumours before. The government wants to release him but doesnt know how to do it. He is in a private nursing home now, he is not in prison. As far as the homelands independent or non independent are concerned, this concept is an abject failure. When South Africa is freed from racist oppression, the government of South Africa will simply reintegrate these territories no problem. The one real problem we do have, however, is with Chief Buthelezi. There have been deaths and killings in the area around Pietermaritzburg where he is lord and master. He has the support of the South African government. The ANC doesnt know how to deal with him. So he is most embarrassing for us. A few years back, he could command audiences of 50,000 people in a stadium in Soweto. Now he dares not come and he will not address a public meeting. Even in Natal his following, his credibility and charisma are disappearing. Yes, Nelson Mandela in the context of ANC must be seen as a unifying factor. We pray for Long Life and immediate release of Nelson Mandela but if he departs from the scene, I am confident that other leaders would emerge. In fact, they have to emerge. Victor Mpoyo To say that other African countries have succeeded in obtaining their independence carries the risk of being accused of racism by a black South African. I am not quite in agreement with the proposition that the Africans of Azania have failed. It is rather a matter of the form of colonization in a particular region and of the ruling powers. Unfortunately, the landscape of South Africa resembles that of Zimbabwe. Whoever colonized that region, which is not tropical, colonized a region that resembles very much, temperate European areas. South Africa is a problem for Africans! If the Boers think of themselves as Africans, they should sit down and discuss it with us. If the black African has accepted to co-habit with the Boer why is it then that the Boer does not agree to share power with whom he lives? They are not being asked to leave, they are simply being asked to truly cohabit, to respect the black and to share the power with him with a view to

consolidating the most solid society and an economy of entire Africa and to rejoining the rest of Africa. L.B.B.J. Machobane My first question relates to the broad community-based leadership. I am curious as to how much is it just political organization and how much it really helps the people to get some economic power. You spoke of unemployment. Is it just that the system makes it impossible for people to be helped and to be empowered? Or is there some problem of leadership or something in between; leaving room for action? Another question is about PAC and ANC. One hears of their differences, but from here the differences do not seem so irreconcilable. Yet it appears as if they have not been able to get above that difference. Why has it been so difficult to reconcile these two groups? Nthato Motlana When the split occurred between PAC and ANC in 1959, a lot of those debates actually took place in my consulting rooms. All of these guys were friends of mine. They were Africanists and have always been Africanists. So, by definition I belong with them. They did not break away for ideological reasons. They broke away because they resented white interference in the ANC. They thought that black leadership was essential for the freeing of black minds. I disagreed because I said to them, and continue to say up to this day, that we need one solid, powerful liberation front to deflect white racism. We may not win by splitting our forces into little factions over things that do not matter. You spoke about community leadership and empowerment. I have always been interested in economic empowerment to the extent that my credibility again comes into question. I agree to become a director of the fourth biggest insurance company in South Africa. I went to Port Elizabeth to attend a board meeting of an organization called IDASA. I couldnt eat my lunch! Those young men attacked me for hours. I spent the whole afternoon trying to explain to them that power, real power is political and is economic. No one has any political power without economic clout. We blacks must not only get loans, we must make money. There is nothing wrong with making money, it is the use to which it is put that is essential.

Apartheid and the Challenges of African Leadership By Rev. M. Stanley Mogoba A. Introduction South Africa is a complex country that has been described as a microsom of all the world problems. In one sense it can be described as a semi-colonial, racist dictatorship. It has a population of about 35 million with some 8 black tribal groups and 8 white tribal units. This is not how it is usually described. The official policy portrays a situation that you have one white nation and eight black tribal nations. My view is that we have one white and one black nation within the bosom of one nation. The whites are nearly united against the blacks and equally the blacks are nearly united against the whites. The trouble in South Africa was brought about by the GUN. The gun was manifestly superior to the tribal spears that our forebears used. If there had been no gun, there would have been no apartheid problem. The wars of dispossession in the 18th and 19th century tipped the scale against the indigenous African tribes. The lovely climate and the beauty of the land made it attractive for the white colonists. The absence of the mosquito and tsetsefly made the task even greater. Thus, South Africa has always had the highest percentage of whites of any state in Africa. Apartheid as a policy began about 336 years ago during the Dutch occupation of the Cape, even though the British also espoused it. Thus the gun determined our fate but the British sealed it in favour of the white settlers. B. HISTORICAL REVIEW 1. THE PERIOD 1980 to 1910 The period 1908 to 1910 is very important for South African history, as this was the time when the Union of the four provinces of South Africa was decided by the all-white National Convention of 1908. This was consummated by the Act of Union in 1910; authorized by the British government. 2. THE GENESIS OF BLACK UNITY The Africans felt snubbed by this manifestation of white unity. It has been said that the African concept of land tenure was part of the problem. The African believed that land belongs to all people. It belongs to one large family; many of whose members are dead, few are still living, countless are yet unborn. (A paraphrase of a quote by Kwame Nkrumah on the African concept of land tenure as opposed to the white man's concept). Whilst the Africans were still asleep, the whites were demarcating the land, erecting beacons and acquiring title deeds. In 1913, the new government was already declaring that 87% of the land belonged to one quarter of the population the whites. The Africans were rudely awakened from their slumber; their response in the establishment of the

10

African National Congress in 1912 after four years of negotiating and organizing. A petition was drawn and sent to the British government to protest against the white union and the grabbing of our land. The Queen and the British government however did not do much to help. 3. THE PERIOD OF NEGOTIATION: 1912-1950 For 48 years, the ANC was consolidating its strength and seeking a democratic peaceful resolution of the problem. All the Africans could achieve was the creation of a Native Representative Council (1936-1948) an advisory and consultative body. There was a clear black consensus that this was a toy telephone which was good for young children only. It was not adequate. 4. THE PERIOD OF POSITIVE NON-VIOLENT ACTION: 1950 - 1960 In 1948, the Nationalist Party took over the government and it subsequently embarked on its vigorous policy of apartheid in South Africa. The blacks were now left with no choice but to work out some clear policy of opposing the government. This period covers the famous Defence Campaign led by Chief Albert Lithuli, the President of the ANC; the first treason trial against all the prominent leaders of the ANC (which the Tribalists won) and the emergence of the Congress Alliance Movement which for the first time brought the coloured people, Indians and whites into the struggle. This unfortunately also led to the division of the ANC and the formation of the PAC. 5. THE PERIOD OF VIOLENCE: 1960 - 1970 As the Apartheid government entrenched itself, the blacks also intensified their opposition. The events followed: 1960: SHARPEVILLE PAC led by Robert Sobukwe called for a peaceful stay-athome. The response was the well-known Sharpeville massacre of Africans by the police and the imprisonment of Sobukwe and some other PAC leaders. 1960: THE PASS CAMPAIGN The ANC called for the burning of the passes. Chief Lithuli actually took his own pass and burned it in Union Square, Pretoria. From that moment on, the call was made for passes to be burnt. A pass was a document that determined your movements. It said you could only be in a certain area at certain hours and if you were found in another area beyond those hours you were immediately arrested. The pass was such an important document that a man would rather forget his jacket than his pass. It was an instrument of control. This was the first time that people realized that something could be done about the passes that were oppressing them. In 1960 as a result of these two events, the ANC and PAC were declared unlawful organizations. 1963: POQO UPRISING The PAC led by Potlako Leballo led a country-wide violent uprising, which was quickly suppressed with many people arrested. 1963: RIVONIA UPRISING The ANC was also planning a major national uprising led by Nelson Mandela. This was also thwarted with many arrests made. In 1963, more than 1000 people were convicted and handed long sentences ranging from 18 months to life 11

imprisonment. Most of these were PAC members but gradually the ANC members in jail began to increase. 6. THE PERIOD OF YOUTH REVOLT: 1970 1908 BLACK PEOPLES CONVENTION: The Apartheid government continued to intensify its programme. Universities were segregated as were students movements. The Homeland policy began to take clear shape. The Towns were declared the domain of the whites, rural, undeveloped tribal reserves were set aside for the blacks. 8 homelands were created with their own Parliaments, independence, stadium, and cabinets etc. Capital towns were carved out of the bush. One feature of the homelands was the growth of casinos and hotels, which attracted the whites to go for a night and gamble. Someone observed that instead of One Man One Vote we were having One homeland, One casino. The Black Consciousness Movement arose among the young students and it spread like prairie fire. It produced leaders like Steve Biko and Barney Pitjanu. The response of the government remained the same: imprisonment of all activists. 1976: SOWETO UPRISINGS: The youth exploded in 1976 and the government threw away the kid gloves, deployed the army to the townships and opened fire on the youths, children, everybody. More than 1000 people were killed and the killings have never stopped altogether. 1977: THE BLACK CONSCIOUSNESS MOVEMENTS were all banned. 7. THE PERIOD OF NEW ORGANISATIONS AND NEW LEADERS: (1980 1988) This is the period when many new organizations emerged within the country, e.g; United Democratic Front (UDF) Azanian Peoples Organisation (AZAPO) Zulu National Movement (INKATHA) Tricameral Leaders (Indians & Coloureds) Congress of South Africa Trade Unions (COSATU) National Council of Trade Unions (NACTU), ETC., In 1988, 17 of these new organizations were banned and approximately 800 people detained B. FEATURES OF LEADERSHIP IN SOUTH AFRICA 1. White Leadership: White leadership is represented by the Nationalist Party which is still very strong; the Conservative Party which is right wing and growing; the Progressive Party which is middle of the road; the vocal, but weak Institute of Democratic Alternatives which is a bit left wing; and an extra-parliamentary movement, the tricameral leaders-the Indians and

12

Coloured. I put them all in this category because they are pro-government and in a sense they are the creation of white leadership. 2. Black Leadership Here are the exiled or imprisoned movements the ANC which is very popular and has a lot of support among the Africans, the Indians and the white youth; the PAC which is black and Africanist which has some silent support and then the Black Consciousness Movement which has some support among African, Coloured and Indians. Then I refer to inside opposition, not only exiled or imprisoned, but those inside the country: the UDF is very popular and pro-ANC; AZAPO is as popular and pro-BCA and PAC. The leaders among the trade unions: COSATU is a very powerful body, ANAPTU is powerful and growing. COSATU tends to support the ANC side of things and ANAPTU has a black consciousness/PAC inclination. Then we have the church leadership. The church in South Africa is not like the church here. Because of the fact that the people have been silent for so long and people could not express their views, the church has become very vocal. We have an organization called the Church Leaders Meeting, organized in CapeTown where the police came and arrested a few leaders and sprayed the people with water canons. I was the there and I was arrested. It was a very historic thing as, for the first time, more than 16 church leaders took part in this expression of solidarity in CapeTown. Then you have the South African Council of Churches the most famous leaders are the General Secretary, Frank Chikane and well-known church spokesmen such as Archbishop Tutu and Alan Boesak who need no introduction anywhere in the world. Then of course, we have local leaders, like Nthato Motlana of the Soweto Crisis Committee, in crisis committees all over the country. But we also have pro-government groups who are organized and were the object of the elections held last week. For completions sake, we must also mention the eight homeland leaders. They are secure, have a rural base and the government is supporting them with money. These people actually believe that South Africa can be governed through homelands. Finally, we have youth leaders, who have just sprung up. They are action-oriented. They are severe on blacks and whites alike. They are organized into street committees. There are sharp divisions of course between the various groups. There are sharp divisions between them. We have vigilantes, government groups being used to fight against the activists, young activists and even old activists too. These young people are so determined that they have introduced the peoples court where they pass judgement over certain people. They go to extremes sometimes however. They sentence delinquent parents. It is a new phenomenon: youth power. It could be a frightening power, but it only shows that where people are desperate, they will fill the vacuum what is created.

13

C. PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS 1. Crisis of Hope First of all, I would make this observation that at this moment, there is a crisis in our country; a crisis of hope. People are hoping against hope that a solution will be reached before the situation becomes more complicated and more violent. 2. Crisis of Communication Then, there is the crisis of communication. With the diversity of political groupings, communication becomes crucial. The government is determined not to speak to leaders who are in prison or those in exile, therefore whenever leadership emerges, it is immediately axed and the leaders are sent to jail. We have a very queer country which has political views and political parties but it has not got proper leadership because the leadership is hunted and sent into jail, it hasnt got offices and headquarters. They operate from the air without headquarters. They dont hold annual conventions where the parties can formulate policies; they have no newspapers. In a sense, the main political parties within South Africa have been completely denied operation and denied a place in South Africa. Thus, we have monologues instead white monologues, black monologues and no sign that the two are coming together. 3. Crisis of Negotiation That leads to a crisis of negotiation. There is now a growing consciousness that the following views are non-negotiable in terms of what the blacks need. Firstly, the release of Nelson Mandela and all the political leaders in prison. Secondly, the involvement of exiled leaders like Oliver Tambo and Johnson Mlambo. People feel that they should be involved in whatever negotiations take place. Thirdly, the release of all people detained. Fourthly, the acknowledgement that South Africa is one unitary state. Fifthly, that we cannot negotiate away the principle of one man one vote. These are for us the five nonnegotiatiable issues in the whole negotiation saga. The Government, on the other hand, wants negotiations on its own terms. It wants to involve the new urban local authorities. It wants separate parliaments with own affairs and general affairs; whatever that is supposed to mean. In South Africa, it was calculated that there are about 15 Ministers of Education. The government believes in one man, one vote but only for separate governments. The government seems to believe that it can release political prisoners but they must be released on its own terms only. 4. The International Dimension and Leverage South Africans are becoming tired of the political impasse in which they find themselves. The world is also becoming tired of this insolvable problem when they have to confront their own problems at home. In recent months, we have had unexpected diplomatic exercises involving superpowers in, South Africa, Angola, Mozambique, Lesotho and Zaire. These activities may not yield much but they do however reflect a climate that is favorable for talks. My own view is that an initiative by P.W. Botha will not bring any 14

change in South Africa and will not bring any peace. But neither will any initiative by the liberation movements. Therefore, there is a chance for a broad African initiative supported by the superpowers which will enable all the people (blacks and whites) to move forward without losing face. It will be less costly in terms of human and other national resources. This is where the Africa Leadership Forum may come in.

15

DISCUSSION Olusegun Obasanjo I want to dwell a little bit more on the power of the youth, or youth leadership. I saw a bit of it in South Africa about half a dozen young men came to see me in my hotel and they said: we came here because we know you are a General, where are the guns you have brought for us? I said I have come here on a peace mission, you dont carry guns around. I was very surprised and at the same time skeptical! This was a time, when there were demonstrations and protests in the black townships and Archbishop Desmond Tutu was advising restraint on the part of the youth and organizing intervention with the Government. These young men said that Archbishop Tutu would go and come back empty handed and of course, he did. The young men said to me: look, this time we are prepared to die. This problem has existed since our great grandfathers, our grandfathers, and our fathers. If they had been prepared to die more, then we would not be in this problem today. What do the leaders do in this type of situation? For as long as the minority government incapacitates the mature leaders in the African society, the solution will be further and further away. You talk about AZAPO some of the voices in AZAPO are the voices who came from Soweto after the killings in 1976. Again you have this radicalization of the youth which is not going to help a peaceful solution to the problem. I just wonder how much of this the Afrikaners and the government know, and how much of this they see as a danger if they do not do anything about the present situation? Stanley Mogoba I think that the whites are very much aware of what is happening. They have seen things change in the last few years. They have seen a whole community being transformed for the worse. The manifestation of public whippings and "necklacing" with tyres( a ritual before burning) showed that things have completely turned for the worse. But South Africa is a very big country, in such a way that people could be burning in one part of the community and another community could be quite peaceful elsewhere because it is a white area and not a black area. The reality in South Africa is that the blacks and whites would be keen to appreciate the problem if they were all suffering in the same way. Black life and white life is not the same. If there is a killing of a white child the police would turn out in their hundreds until they arrest somebody, either the right persons or someone who they can say did it. And yet, 100 black children may be killed, without the police showing up. In fact, invariably the police may be the culprit. This pattern characterizes the entire system. As long as we are talking about suffering in these different terms so long will the blacks continue not to be insulated from the reality of the situation. But the penny is dropping and the whites are beginning to realize that there will come a time when they will be engulfed by the violence in the community. Olusegun Obasanjo How can one work on such a difficult terrain as South Africa? You have to understand it and see it to know how rough the terrain is. All the same, it is not a burden that our 16

brothers and sisters in South Africa can bear alone. They have a large part of the burden but we should do whatever we can and there is a lot to lift their burden and make the burden of the whites so heavy that they would see that it is more costly to hang on to the policy of apartheid than to throw it out of the window. We talk of organization of external forces, consolidation and coordination of internal forces. All these have to be done. The Africa Leadership Forum can help in raising the consciousness and building awareness, which are necessary for understanding, support and increased pressure from outside. The empowerment of the black members of the South African society requires long and sustained efforts from within and without the role and place of a post-apartheid South Africa. The African community must start to engage the attention of Africans inside and outside South Africa. We must start to plan our reactions to the reality of the inevitable. Ahmadu Jalingo I agree that increased repression radicalizes people and I believe that if our elders dont cross over into the violent arena it is because they dont find themselves confronted with the physical violence that others are confronted with. Certainly our academia as well as the student bodies in this country are still very charged and full of energy insofar as their militant activities for South Africa are concerned. What worries us at times is the kind of talks we listen to from people who have come from South Africa or have been to South Africa, knowing full well that the white settlers are not prepared to relent on their racist policies. I wonder how and why people from South Africa believe that peaceful pressure is going to change anything when they themselves know that they have been dealing with intransigent people and this kind of "peaceful" approach, so to say, yields nothing. Nthato Motlana The emphasis of my paper was to try and show how long the struggle has been; that it has not been easy and that it has been very violent. We have lost many young and old people in our land. We are not saying that negotiations are the only avenue for peace in South Africa. I believe in a multi-pronged strategy. It means we will try everything negotiation, violence, sanctions etc. There is no simple solution. The only reason we have spoken about negotiations is to try and counteract the P.W. Botha-type of negotiations that are going on. The Botha negotiations are out of the question! Negotiations suggested by the international community and the world powers might have a chance. I am really trying to fly a kite in terms of solutions. The bottom line is that if Reagan and Gorbachev can come together and talk, when there is a whole world between them, why not 2 or 3 leaders from the same country, who have children, lives, property, education and everything at stake. I am saying that, conceivably, we may be forced into some form of negotiation and it would be good to have thought about it, to have weighed up the pros and cons instead of being caught napping and find that the negotiation option is thrown at us a time that we are not ready to handle it.

17

Olusegun Obasanjo I have maintained that there are two required ingredients: The internal pressure and external pressure. The internal pressure will have to be increased, invariably violent, when the external pressure is not high enough. That is why some of us have been calling for more effective sanctions. The more effective sanctions are, the less the need for destructive internal pressure that will bring about a change inside South Africa. If we are going to have prolonged internal military conflict, which at the moment has not been discarded, then it will mean greater loss of life, greater descent into violence and counterviolence and at the end of the day a greater part of South Africa will be in ruins by the time change comes. This is the kind of situation which it is hoped can be avoided if we can have some form of negotiated settlement which gradually meets the final objective. One may say that the Commonwealth EPG group, of which I was a part and which went into South Africa two years ago, nearly succeeded. If we had succeeded in getting negotiations going, the give and take would have marked the beginning of the end. The negotiating concept devised by that group is still as applicable today as it was when it was initiated. Ahmadu Jalingo A very interesting development has taken place in Namibia where SWAPO has two divisions, the internal wing and the external wing. We actually believe in a campaign to persuade those racist Boers to allow the existence of an internal ANC wing and an external wing. The internal wing clearly cannot embark on a campaign of violence. So, the idea is that while the external wing may send in the bombers, we who work inside use peaceful measures. We must work on the basis that those who carry firearms have bases outside South Africa or operate very deeply underground. Fortunately we have many abandoned mines underground. L.B.B.J.Machobane With regards to the meeting of Lesothos Head of State recently with P.W. Botha, it was necessitated by of Lesothos geographic position, but it had nothing to do with Bothas efforts with other countries. Having said this, one fully appreciates the position that has been presented and one cannot add much except to say that the suffering of the masses in South Africa touches Lesotho very directly. One third of Lesothos country lies in South Africa, having really not been conquered but having been ceded to South Africa by the British in 1868, in an arrangement in which Lesotho was not even quite clearly a crown colony but a forced protectorate. So we have our own people who live in South Africa. There are intermarriages taking place. It is our people suffering there. There are constant migrations, created by the economic situation, as at the beginning of the late 19th century we were forced into economic dependence to South Africa. This explains why Lesotho finds itself working with some liberation efforts in South Africa. When the ANC was formed in 1912, Lesotho was part and parcel of that convention. Currently, not only are South African refugees economic and political allowed to live in Lesotho freely without being put into any camps but also the National University of Lesotho provides a quota of 20% for the admission of South African students. 18

Flora Lewis I would like to get an idea of what effects the pending Namibian independence will have on events in South Africa. South Africa is rationalizing its position, withdrawing troops and it is not so much interested in foreclosing outside. It wants to see what it can do inside even if it is maintaining its apartheid clutch before it gives up. Furthermore, pretend for once you are those homeland councillors or municipal councilors. I dont imagine they are whites, I dont live in South Africa, I have never been there. My knowledge is based on what I read in books and hear at fora like this or on the news. But somehow it has stuck in me that I cant see myself playing a part even in these local moves towards whatever the whites believe they have as their ultimate goal a progressive democracy of some sort or separatist democracy. The blacks have their own way of going about democracy. The whites have their own way. I would like to know what goes on in the thoughts of these homeland councilors or whatever they are. Nthato Motlana I said that the Africans believe in the so-called domino principle, concentrating on one country and then the next. The hope is that after Namibia the whole attention will be focused on South Africa. A few years ago, when Namibia was put on the back burner we suspected that South Africa would not get independence before Namibia. Now things have changed and Security Council resolution 435 is now again on the front burner. Because of outside pressure and the economic shambles of South Africa, the Namibian independence is now a distinct possibility. The fact that all the worlds attention is focused on Namibia will have a very important effect on South Africa. One of the things I wanted to refer to in my travels my first time in Nigeria is the basic difference of the attitudes of black South Africans and Nigerians. I have complained over the years about the psychological effects of oppression in South Africa. The black South Africans are beginning to emerge from centuries of slavery, which has sown seeds of self-doubt in the black South Africans. Whenever a white man attends a conference such as this, it is common knowledge how South African blacks defer to him, not because he has any better brains than I have, but because he is white. I watched the operation in the Sheraton Hotel last night where the whole administration is black! You often dont see that in Africa and that is a major difference.

19

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS CHAIRMAN: A. General Olusegun OBASANJO

LECTURERS/PANELISTS 1. 2. Ojetunji ABOYADE (Nigeria), Professor and Chairman, Pai Associates Chief Simeon O. ADEBO (Nigeria), former Permanent Representative to the United Nations, New York and Executive Director, United Nations Institute of Training and Research (UNITAR) 3. Adebayo ADEDEJI (Nigeria), Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Secretary, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) 4. Tariq HUSAIN (PAKISTAN), Representative of the World Bank in Nigeria. 5. Junzo KAWADA (Japan), Professor, Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo. 6. Alexander A. KWAPONG, (Ghana), Lester Pearson Chair for

Development Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada; former Vice-Rector, United Nations University, Tokyo 7. Thomas A. LAMBO (Nigeria), President, Lambo Foundation for the Advancement of Biomedical and Bio-behavioural Sciences; former Deputy Director-General, World Health Organisation 8. 9. Flora LEWIS (USA), Columnist, The New York Times. Akin L. MABOGUNJE (Nigeria), Professor, Pai Associates; ProChancellor and Chairman of Council, Ogun State University, Ago-Iwoye 10. Ntatho MOTLANA (South Africa), President-Founder, Soweto Crisis Committee and Chairman, Get-Ahead Foundation 11. 12. 13. A.M.A. MUHITHA (Bangladesh), Former Finance and Planning Minister Col. Raji RASAKI (Nigeria), Military Governor of Lagos State. Helmut SCHMIDT (Federal Republic of Germany,) Former Federal Chancellor 14. Wole SOYINKA (Nigeria), Nobel Prize Winner 1986 for Literature

20

15.

J.U. AIRE (Nigeria), Executive Director, A.G. Leventis and Co. (Nig.) Limited.

16.

A. ANATHARAMAN (India), Managing Director, Tower Aluminum (Nigeria) Ltd.

B.

PARTICIPANTS 1. Malam Yaya ABUBAKAR (Nigeria), former Permanent Secretary, Political Department, Cabinet Office 2. P. Ayangma AMANG (Cameroon), Directeur-General, Compagnie Nationale dAssurances C.N.A. 3. 4. Babafemi BADEJO (Nigeria), Senior Lecturer, University of Lagos. Donatien BIHUTE (Burundi), Managing Director Hydrobur; Chairman, Meridien Bank Burundi; former Minister of Planning of Burundi and Vice-President, African Development Bank 5. Cecil BLAKE (Sierra Leone), Senior Programme Olfficer Global Learning Division, United Nations University, Tokyo 6. Munirul CHOUDHURY (Bangladesh), President, Aegean Maritime International, Washington, D.c.; former Adviser to the President of Bangladesh 7. Pierre-Claver DAMIBA (Burkina Faso), Assistant Administrator and Regional Director for Africa, UNDP 8. Francis M. DENG (Sudan), former Minister of State for Foreign Affairs; Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C. 9. Julien DOBONGNA (Cameroon), Conseiller du President,Compagnie Financiere et Industrielle 10. Jens FISCHER (Federal Republic of Germany), Chief of Staff, Office of Mr. Helmut Schmidt 11. Jean HERSKOVITS (USA), Professor of African History, State University of New York. 12. Ahmadu JALINGO (Nigeria) Dean, Faculty of Management and Social Sciences, Bayero University Kano.

21

13.

Mansur KHALID (Sudan), former Foreign Minister and vice-Chairman, World Commission on Environment and Development

14. 15.

Justin LABINJOH (Nigeria), Senior Lecturer, University of Ibadan Zamani LEKWOT (Nigeria), Major-General (rtd.), former Governor of Rivers State, former Ambassador to Senegal

16. 17.

L.B.B.J. MACHOBANE (Lesotho), Minister of Education Rev. M. Stanley MOGOBA (South Africa), President, south African Institute of Race Relations and Secretary of the Conference of the Methodist Church of Southern Africa

18. 19.

Viktor M.P. MPOYO (Nigeria), Industrialist (oil industry) Dragoljub NAJMAN (Yugoslavia), former Assistant Director-General, UNESCO

20.

Lopo Fortunato do NASCIMENTO (Angola), Governor of Huila Province; former Prime Minister and Deputy Executive Secretary, ECA

21.

Letitia OBENG (Ghana), former Regional Director for Africa, United Nations Environment Programme

22.

Anezi N. OKORO (Nigeria), Professor of Medicine, University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu

23.

James ONOBIONO (Cameroon), President, Compagnie Financiere et Industrelle

24.

Hans DORVILLE (Federal Republic of Germany), Senior Officer, UNDP New York and Coordinator, InterAction council Secretariat

25. 26. 27.

Oyeleye OYEDIRAN (Nigeria), Professor, University of Lagos Tayo SERIKI (Nigeria), Chairman, Siemens Nigeria Albert TEVOEDJIRE (Benin) President, Centre Panafricain de

Prospective Sociale; former Deputy Director-General, International Labour Organisation 28. 29. Bilkisu YUSUF (Nigeria), Editor, New Nigerian Terencia LEON-JOSEPH (Peru), Administrative Assistant

22

Background Note The Africa Leadership Forum Despite over a quarter of a century of political independence Africas aspirations and hopes remain today largely unfulfilled. This has not been, however, a period of unmitigated failure in the history of the continent; there have been successes in education, public health, import substitution industries, and in the continuing process of decolonization. The problems of development, peace and security, the health of the world economy, and improving the environment are interrelated global issues; they do not admit of piecemeal solutions. And yet all countries find that in the absence of true global cooperation, they have to tackle particular aspects of them. At the national level in Africa, the inadequacy of information, data, and resources render the problems daunting. Regionally they are overwhelming. African leaders have frequently come to their positions with limited experience. Though most of them have battled on, confronting their awesome problems of development and nation-building essentially not only unprepared but unaided, their efforts have been at best only a qualified success. Africa cannot afford to continue with ill-prepared and unassisted leaders. Those on whom the burden of leadership will fall in future must fully comprehend their responsibilities, duties, and obligations. They must, that is, have exposure and carefully planned preparation if they are to meet the challenges that will face them. The leaders of tomorrow, however, today have to be pursuant their professional careers. They have little time to devote to gaining a comprehensive knowledge of their own countries and their region, nor of the cultures of their diverse peoples. Nor even to learning about and understanding the actions taken by their present leaders where they do not impinge on their own areas of expertise. Most young potential leaders have focused primarily on single issues, lacking time to look at wider, critical regional and world challenges. Time for comprehensive study and reflection, for sharing experiences with persons inside, let alone outside, their countries, region, and field of concentration is very limited. Opportunities for such detached discussion and contemplation are even rarer. There are no private institutions in Africa devoted to preparing potential leaders with a global outlook, leaders who will be able to cooperate within and across national, regional, and institutional boundaries. Further, it is difficult, if not impossible, in many African countries to gain access to relevant and timely information on most national, regional, and global issues. Experience in and out of Government and in international for a bears out this situation, one which poses a challenge to address and remedy. One solution is to launch the Africa

23

Leadership Forum- conducting a series of meetings which may be national, subregional, regional and international in dimension and may vary in duration. The purpose will be to enhance the knowledge and awareness of current and young, potential African leaders, placing special emphasis on diagnosing apparent failures of the past; on understanding multiple dimensions and complex interrelations of local, national, regional, and global problems; and on seeking possible approaches to solutions.

24

Objectives The purpose of the forum is to encourage diagnosis, understanding, and an informed search for solutions to local, regional and global problems, taking full account of their interrelationships and mutual consequences. To that end, the Forum will develop, organize and support programmes for the training of young and promising Africans with leadership potential so as to expose them to the demands, duties and obligations of leadership positions and to prepare them systematically for assuming higher responsibilities and meeting the challenges of an interdependent world. The Forum will also endeavor to generate greater understanding and enhance the knowledge and awareness of development and social problems within a global context among young, potential leaders from all sectors of society, cutting across national, regional, continental, professional and institutional borders. This may foster close and enduring relationship among participants, relationships promoting life-long association and cooperation. Further, the Forum will support and encouraged the diagnosis and informed search for appropriate and effective solutions to local and regional African problems and to global problems from an African perspective within the framework of global interdependence, including consideration of phased action programmes that can be initiated by various countries, sub-regions and institutions. In addition, there will be specific weekend seminars organized as Farm House dialogues to be held quarterly.

25

Financial Aspects The Forum wishes to acknowledge with gratitude financial contributions it received1988 from the Government of Japan, the United Nation Development Programme, Carnegie Corporation of New York and Mr. Victor Mpoyo.

26