Ÿþm Icrosoft W

Chapter 10 Chapter 10 An Ambiguous Champion: Some Concluding Remarks' Tore Linn Eriksen Norway and "the apotheosis of all evil" "The fact is that for almost four decades South Africa had been a central preoccupation of the Norwegians. Whole generations of Norwegian schoolchildren had been raised on the premise that apartheid was the apotheosis of all evil and that Nelson Mandela and the ANC could do no wrong. Norway was one of the main contributors to the ANC and one of its most vociferous supporters in international campaigns to isolate South Africa."2 Although this quote from the autobiography of F.W. de Klerk, former president of South Africa and the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize (together with Nelson Mandela), might be regarded as somewhat exaggerated, it highlights the fact that the struggle for liberation in Southern Africa has been an important issue in Norway since the late 1950s. In the previous chapters we have attempted to document this process and discuss the forms which the support for the liberation movements has taken over the years. Clearly, as even the largely empirical and narrative chapters show, this process has not been without its conflicts, complexities and contradictions. In the concluding chapter we will select a number of central issues for further exploration and attempt to identify some of the major factors and actors shaping Norwegian policies in the Southern African region. To achieve a broader perspective, our discussion of the most striking features of the Norwegian experience will also integrate the "Southern African voice", as expressed in interviews with a wide range of representatives from the liber1 The title is borrowed from Linda Freeman's perceptive study on Canada and the struggle for liberation in Southern Africa: The Ambiguous Champion. Canada and South Africa in the Trudeau and Mulroney Years. Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1997. 2 F. W. de Klerk: The Last Trek-A New Beginning. The Autobiography. London: Macmillan, 1999, p. 297. ation movements themselves.3 In addition, we will where appropriate employ a Nordic comparative perspective. Although our study was never meant to be a history of the liberation struggle per se, we will attempt to situate the history of the Norwegian involvement within a broader Southern African context. As shown below, the attention given to the Southern Africa issue both among NGOs and at a state level to a large extent reflects the resistance and repression in the region itself: the Sharpeville massacre, the successful struggle of the liberation movements in the Portuguese colonies, the Soweto uprising, the achievement of independence in Zimbabwe and the mounting antiapartheid resistance in South Africa in the mid-1980s. Such conjunctures provided a new coalescence of forces and prompted new responses. The uniqueness of the Nordic countries Most Western countries can boast solidarity movements, churches, trade unions and parties on the left which called for support to the liberation struggle and the imposition of sanctions against the apartheid regime. The Nordic countries, however, are unique in the direct humanitarian assistance and diplomatic support they extended to the liberation movements at the state level. This is also why the chapters 1-4 of this study have focused on this particular aspect of the Norwegian- Southern African relations. While the liberation movements received the major part of their arms from China or the Soviet Union and other East European countries, the impact of the Nordic support for their refugee settlements and their non-military struggle can hardly be overrated. Norway played its part in providing food, clothes, schools, means of transport and equipment for printing textbooks and information material. In the words of Raymond Suttner of ANC: "... (the) Nordic countries literally provided the clothes that people wore, the food they ate, the funds for their basic sustenance, the educational infrastructure and volunteers in the ANC schools and support for the ANC Women's League, as part of their commitment to ensuring gender equality in our democratic development."4 Which, then, were the movements benefiting from this assistance during what has aptly been described as the "Thirty Years War" in Southern 3 Tor Sellstrbm (ed.): Liberation in Southern Africa. Regional and Swedish Voices. Uppsala: Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, 1999. See also comments by scholars and representatives from the liberation movement presented to the conference on "Nordic Solidarity with the Liberation Struggles in Southern Africa, and Challenges for Democratic Partnerships into the 21st Century", organised by the Robben Island Museum, the Mayibuye Centre (University of Western Cape) and the Nordic Africa Institute at Robben Island 11-14 February 1999. The proceedings are referred to later in this chapter as Conference Report. 4 Raymond Suttner, Conference Report, op. cit., p. 84. Africa?5 Having in mind the public debate about whether or not the liberation movements had a popular following, it is interesting to see that the movements supported by Norway are today the ruling parties in their respective countries. ZANU of Zimbabwe, SWAPO of Namibia and ANC of South Africa received an overwhelming majority of the votes in democratic elections at independence. When the first multi-party elections were held in Angola (1992) and Mozambique (1994) after many years of war and destabilisation, both FRELIMO and MPLA won the majority of the seats in the national assembly. In the case of Zimbabwe, Norwegian humanitarian assistance was also rendered to ZAPU, which after seven years in opposition merged with ZANU in 1987.6 As the only Nordic country, Norway had during the South African liberation struggle also given regular support, although quite modest in financial terms, to PAC, which did not receive more than 1.7% of the votes in the first democratic elections in 1994. From 1973 until the demise of the South African apartheid regime in 1994, official humanitarian assistance given by the Norwegian government to Southern Africa amounted to NOK 2 billion (see Statistical Appendix: Table I). Included in this figure are both direct assistance to the liberation movements and grants contributed to various UN funds and other multilateral institutions. In addition, the liberation movements have also benefited from support from Norwegian NGOs. However, it was official sources that provided the major part of the funds channelled through NGOs such as the Namibia Committee, the Norwegian People's Aid, the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO), the Students' and Academics' International Assistance Fund (SAIH) and the Council for Ecumenical and International Relations (Mellomkirkelig Rid). Seen in a comparative perspective, the Norwegian share of the total Nordic disbursements of humanitarian assistance to Southern Africa is estimated at 23%. According to the statistics, Sweden is in front with 58%, Denmark accounts for 15% while Finland did not provide more than 4% .7 In addition to extending more assistance than the other three countries put together, Sweden is also commonly seen as having established closer links with the liberation movements-based on a firm political commitmentthan the other Nordic countries (see below).8 5 This is a concept coined by John S. Saul in Recolonization and Resistance: Southern Africa in the 1990s. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press, 1993. 6 On one occasion a minor grant was also extended to Abel Muzorewa's UANC in Zimbabwe, an organisation which did not gain any seats in the 1980 elections. 7 These preliminary figures are provided by Tor Sellstr6m, and may be slightly revised in the light of further research. 8 This condusion has emerged from a dose reading of Tor Sellstrbm (ed.), op. dt.; Tor Sellstrtm: Sweden and National Liberation in Southern Africa. Vol. 1: Formation of a Popular Opinion (1950-1970). Uppsala: Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, 1999; Tor Sellstrim: Sweden and National Liberation in Southern Africa, Vol. 11. Uppsala: Nordiska Afrikainstitutet (forthcoming); lina Soiri and Pekka Peltola: Finland and National Liberation in Southern Africa. Uppsala: Nordiska Afrika- If we look at principles guiding humanitarian assistance to Southern Africa, as well as the volume of aid disbursed, there are parallels between Denmark and Norway. Both the NATO countries made support to the liberation movements a regular feature of their development co-operation in 1972/73, while Sweden had embarked upon its ambitious aid programme in 1969. Denmark, however, never entered into the same direct relationship with the liberation movements as Sweden and Norway, preferring instead to channel all its assistance through the UN system and international and Danish NGOs, World University Service (WUS) in particular.9 In this regard, the history of Norwegian involvement is more similar to the Swedish experience. In Finland, the principled decision to extend humanitarian assistance to liberation movements was made in March 1973, but Finland was never seriously involved with the liberation movements in Angola, Mozambique and Zimbabwe. The Finnish contributions were largely confined to SWAPO, a fact which is partly explained by the historical links developed with Namibia through the Finnish Lutheran Mission since the late 19th century. The major part of the assistance to Namibia has been spent on a comprehensive scholarship programme which brought Namibian students to Finland from 1975 onwards. Finland was also significantly involved with the Namibian issue

Load more