Other Developments Among African Nationalists Inside Rhodesia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Keesing's Record of World Events (formerly Keesing's Contemporary Archives), Volume 23, November, 1977 Rhodesia, Page 28648 © 1931-2006 Keesing's Worldwide, LLC - All Rights Reserved. Other Developments among African Nationalists inside Rhodesia At a press conference on Sept. 2 Mr Smith did not reject the proposals out of hand but was highly critical of many of their features. The plan appeared to him to be “a very cunning scheme” to put the Patriotic Front in power; it was, he said, a “crazy suggestion” that the “terrorists” fighting against his Government should form the basis of the future security forces; to surrender power to some such organization as a United Nations peace-keeping force during the transition was to him “an almost insane suggestion”; and he went on: “It seems to me almost a crazy suggestion to ask a Government and people to dissolve themselves, to surrender, without even knowing what their replacement is going to be.” In his view the whole plan was “not only ill-conceived, it was rushed”. He added, however, that after the proposals had been analysed by a subcommittee, “we will give it [the analysis] serious consideration and a careful and considered reply to the proposals”. Mr Mark Partridge, then Rhodesia's Minister of Defence, said on Sept. 8 that neither he nor his Government would accept the disbandment of the Rhodesian Army or the incorporation into it of “terrorists”. Mr Ian Smith, accompanied by Mr David Smith (the Rhodesian Deputy Prime Minister), held talks in Pretoria on Sept. 12 with Mr Vorster and Mr R. F. Botha, the talks also being attended by two other South African ministers Mr Chris Heunis (Economic Affairs) and Mr P. W. Botha (Defence). It was reported afterwards that Mr Vorster had expressed concern that any outright Rhodesian dismissal of the Anglo-American proposals would entail trade and oil sanctions imposed against South Africa by the United Nations once the latter had endorsed the proposals. (Mr Heunis had already, on Sept. 9, outlined the South African Government's strategy in the event of such sanctions, disclosing that orders had been given to stockpile strategic and other imported material, including oil. According to a South African expert, oil produced from coal in South Africa would provide only about 30 per cent of the country's requirements.) Mr R. F. Botha said on Sept. 19 that his Government had committed itself to the effort to obtain an internationally acceptable solution in Rhodesia, but that the proposed security arrangements were incapable of creating the necessary conditions for a ceasefire in Rhodesia. He also issued a warning against the threats of tightening sanctions against Rhodesia or extending them to South Africa, as these would be “counter-productive”, and he added: “There is a point beyond which we cannot be pushed, and that point has just now been reached.” Of South Africa's views on majority rule for Rhodesia he said: “On the basis of Mr Smith's own acceptance of majority rule, South Africa would wish to see clearly who commands that majority support. If Mr Nkomo can win it openly and fairly, then he wins, and it would be foolish of South Africa to turn against a man who has proved he commands the majority support.” On Sept. 28 Mr Smith said in the House of Assembly that the Anglo-American terms would have to be put to a referendum of the White electorate before they could be accepted, and that rejection by the White voters would negate the settlement, just as would disagreement among the African nationalist parties. Among African and Commonwealth leaders the proposals had a varied reception. Mr Joseph Msika, secretary-general of the Zimbabwe African People's Organization (ZAPU, led by Mr Nkomo), said in Lusaka on Sept. 2 that the Patriotic Front rejected the Anglo-American proposals and would continue its guerrilla warfare until Mr Smith “surrendered to the people of Zimbabwe”. He objected in particular to the wide powers to be given to the Resident Commissioner and to the proposed retention of units of the Rhodesian Army. President Nyerere welcomed the Anglo-American plan on Sept. 1, saying: “The Western powers have now firmly indicated that they are prepared to use their influence to bring about the transfer of power to the majority of people in southern Africa.” He added, however, “We have to be on our guard… that the current initiatives do not result in depriving the people of southern Africa of the victory for which so many of their countrymen and women have died.” Mr Shridath S. Ramphal, the Commonwealth Secretary-General, strongly supported the proposals in a statement issued on Sept. 2, when he urged Commonwealth Governments to assist the process of reaching a peaceful settlement in Zimbabwe. President Kaunda of Zambia, however, said on Sept. 5 during a visit to his country by Lieut.- General Olusegun Obasanjo, the Nigerian head of state, that the proposals were based on the “glaringly false” premise that Mr Smith would voluntarily surrender power-which made the plan “a non-starter”. Lieut.-General Obasanjo, on the other hand, said that he believed in the sincerity of Britain and the United States, that the plan should be given “a fair chance”, even though the guerrillas in Rhodesia should “not relent in their efforts until Mr Smith and his conspirators are removed” and that there should be no failure to recognize the guerrillas as “a basic nucleus in the new military force of Zimbabwe”. At the end of a meeting between Lieut.-General Obasanjo and President Mobutu of Zaïre in Kinshasa on Sept. 7, the two leaders declared in a joint statement that the Anglo-American plan for Rhodesia should be supported “provided it is correctly enforced without delaying manoeuvres or rearguard tricks”. Bishop Muzorewa said at a meeting of White Rhodesian farmers on Sept. 6 that he welcomed the Anglo-American proposals and that it would be “dangerous” for any Black leader to negotiate directly with Mr Smith on achieving an “internal” settlement. At the end of a four-day meeting of Mr Mugabe and Mr Nkomo in Maputo (Mozambique) the two Patriotic Front leaders declared in a joint statement on Sept. 14 that the Anglo-American proposals could form the basis for “further negotiations” although the “absolute powers” proposed for the British Resident Commissioner were not acceptable. Mr Nkomo also objected to the proposed UN peace-keeping force and demanded the disbandment of the entire existing Rhodesian security forces, including the police, but he also said. “We are prepared to absorb into our forces some elements from the security forces.” Mr Mugabe was reported to have sent a copy of the Patriotic Front's “counter-proposals” to Mr Stephen Miles, the British high commissioner in Zambia. The “front-line” Presidents announced after a further meeting (in Maputo), attended by all of them except President Neto of Angola, on Sept. 22–23 that in their view the Anglo-American American proposals formed “a sufficient basis for further negotiations between the parties concerned”, although President Nyerere added that they contained “many negative features” and left “many questions unanswered”. Following the defection of several leading members of Bishop Muzorewa's UANC[see page 28553], the Bishop announced on Aug. 24 that he had dissolved his entire central committee and national executive. This announcement was followed by the resignation and withdrawal from politics of Dr Gordon Chavunduka, the organization's former secretary-general, who stated that the Bishop had no powers to dissolve anything. At a meeting held in Que Que on Sept. 10 and attended by over 5,000 people the Bishop announced new organs of the U.N. and the appointment of Mr James Chikerema as first vice- president with responsibility for foreign affairs-which was approved by acclamation. Mr Chikerema, a former leader of Mr Nkomo's ZAPU and later leader of the Frolizi group[see page 24963], returned to Rhodesia on Sept. 18 after 13 years of self-imposed exile since being released from detention in 1963[see 19295 A]. Upon his return Mr Chikerema declared on Sept. 19 that he was in favour of two of Mr Smith's moat crucial demands in connexion with a settlement-that the existing armed forces should remain intact and that the White minority should be given a parliamentary “blocking mechanism” under majority rule as a safeguard against “retrogressive legislation”. He stated that he wished to help settle the country's problems peacefully, and he rejected “outside interference” by the “front-line” states and also any alliance with the Rev. Ndabaningi Sithole. At the same time he asserted. The armed struggle is being fought for a genuine cause, and until that cause is settled the struggle will go on.” He claimed that this struggle was supported by “99 per cent of the people of this country”. Bishop Muzorewa, however, dissociated himself from these remarks on Sept. 21 when he said that Mr Chikerema's statement reflected only his own views. An apparently unsuccessful attempt to reconcile Bishop Muzorewa and the Rev. Ndabaningi Sithole was made by President Banda of Malawi when the two Rhodesian African leaders visited that country on Sept. 13–14. Mr Sithole was meanwhile making efforts to broaden the basis of his wing of the ANC. On Aug. 26 Mr Sithole announced the formation of a new political movement called “Unity” which, he stated, was aimed at “the transfer of power from the White minority to the Black majority” and which would have links with the conservative ZUPO, led by Chiefs Chirau and Ndiweni [see above].