H-Diplo Roundtable, Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
2017 H-Diplo Roundtable Editors: Thomas Maddux and Diane Labrosse @HDiplo Roundtable and Web Production Editor: George Fujii Introduction by Elizabeth Schmidt Roundtable Review Volume XIX, No. 15 (2017) 11 December 2017 Jamie Miller. An African Volk: The Apartheid Regime and Its Search for Survival. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016. ISBN: 9780190274832 (hardcover, $78.00). URL: http://www.tiny.cc/Roundtable-XIX-15 Contents Introduction by Elizabeth Schmidt, Loyola University Maryland.................................................... 2 Review by Andy DeRoche, Front Range Community College ......................................................... 6 Review by Jacob Dlamini, Princeton University .................................................................................... 8 Review by Hermann Giliomee, University of Stellenbosch ............................................................. 15 Review by Nathaniel K. Powell, Fondation Pierre du Bois pour l’histoire du temps présent ..... 20 Author’s Response by Jamie Miller, University of Pittsburgh ........................................................ 24 © 2017 The Authors. Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License. H-Diplo Roundtable Review, Vol. XIX, No. 15 (2017) Introduction by Elizabeth Schmidt, Loyola University Maryland ince the 1960s, scholars of Southern Africa have produced a significant body of work on African nationalism, resistance, and nation-building in the context of decolonization and the Cold War. South S Africa, the region’s political and economic powerhouse, often has been viewed as an exception. Although challenged by anticolonial nationalist movements, the white-ruled state, which repressed its own citizens and waged wars of destabilization against its neighbors, remained an exemplar of colonial racism and oppression. South Africa’s white minority generally has been viewed as separate, apart from the rest of the continent—as the very term ‘apartheid’ suggests. If not exactly European—Afrikaner settlers left their original homes before the Age of Enlightenment—the ruling classes were certainly not African. Jamie Miller challenges this view, at least in regard to a segment of the Afrikaner ruling elite at a particular point in history. Focusing his study on the regime of Prime Minister John Vorster (1966–1978), Miller argues that Vorster and his associates recast Afrikaners as an “African volk” and “attempted to hijack the norms and values of the postcolonial era,” in order to “relegitimize existing racial hierarchies” (16). Hoping to diminish South Africa’s diplomatic isolation by strengthening ties to anticommunist African governments in Southern Africa, Vorster presented Afrikaner nationalism and its apartheid offspring as simply another embodiment of African nationalism, a natural response to political, economic, social, and cultural repression by a foreign power. To encourage regional détente and build alliances, Vorster offered the carrot of economic aid and diplomatic mediation. Vorster’s approach had some early successes, but it was quickly overtaken by events. The collapse of Portuguese colonialism in 1974 was followed by the rise to power of a Marxist liberation movement in Angola, despite South African and American attempts to stop it. The renegade white regime in Rhodesia remained in power, despite Vorster’s efforts to replace it with a pliable African government that would prevent the contagion of radical African nationalism from spreading south. The Soweto uprising and its bloody aftermath, which focused world attention on apartheid racism and oppression, encouraged the reemergence of a siege mentality. Vorster’s policy of regional rapprochement, deemed a disaster by his critics, was successfully challenged. Defense Minister P.W. Botha, who replaced Vorster as prime minister in 1978, abandoned his predecessor’s policy and mobilized his white ethnic constituents to confront a ‘total onslaught’ against their way of life. He faced the perceived threat with a ‘total strategy’ supported by a security establishment that penetrated all aspects of South African life. Miller argues that understanding Vorster’s vision and foreign policy, which presented Afrikaners as part of rather than apart from Africa, is critical to understanding South African history during the apartheid era. A proper understanding also requires consideration of the world from the perspective of the actors, in this case, the Afrikaner ruling elite in the Vorster regime. In the reviews that follow, four scholars with expertise in African international history assess Miller's endeavor. Nathaniel Powell, whose scholarship focuses on French military intervention in Africa after political independence, calls Miller’s study “a fresh, well-written, and deeply insightful” consideration of the white minority regime’s attempts to end diplomatic isolation and to respond to the new regional order that replaced H-Diplo Roundtable Review, Vol. XIX, No. 15 (2017) colonialism.1 Rejecting the common one-dimensional portrayal of apartheid leaders, Miller marshals evidence from a wide range of archival and oral sources “to bring regime agency back into the picture.” He helps readers come to a deeper, more complex understanding of South Africa in the 1970s “by examining its main actors, internal debates, ideological currents, personality conflicts, domestic constraints, and its international relationships” from the perspective of those who made South African foreign policy. Powell would have liked greater elaboration on the influences outside the government—including socioeconomic changes that affected the Afrikaner population and the impact of Afrikaner and English-speaking capital and special-interest lobbies on foreign policy decision-making. Nonetheless, he concludes that “Miller’s work is remarkable, and promises to be a standard reference for years to come.” Hermann Giliomee, who has written extensively about Afrikaner history and political thought, praises Miller’s book as “the first in-depth study, based on primary sources, of Vorster’s efforts” to improve South Africa’s image in the world arena and to win allies among its neighbors.2 He is impressed not only by the range of archival sources and interviews, but also by the fact that Miller is proficient in Afrikaans—the language in which the documents were written and the subjects interviewed—and thus “was able to develop an acute understanding of the dynamics of Afrikaner politics and the often contradictory goals” of various state agencies from the perspective of regime insiders. Finally, Giliomee notes, Miller’s impressive array of primary sources is complemented by his mastery of the theoretical works on the Cold War and African states. This background provided him a nuanced “understanding of superpower rivalry, the strength and weaknesses of the South African system of rule, and the demographic and economic forces that were at play.” Giliomee concludes that “Miller has made a seminal contribution to both Cold War history and to the study of the crucial stages of the transition to black rule in Southern Africa.” Andy DeRoche, who has published widely on U.S.-Southern African relations during decolonization and the Cold War, also lauds Miller’s contribution to “a veritable treasure trove of groundbreaking new studies” that reassess Southern African international history in the 1970s and 1980s.3 He appreciates Miller’s nuanced portrayal of Vorster’s attempt “to maintain the institutional racism of the apartheid system while simultaneously cooperating with independent black African states.” By highlighting divergent views within the South African foreign policy and national security establishments, and by demonstrating clear links between domestic and foreign political decision-making, Miller “has added another crucial piece to this complicated and important historical puzzle.” DeRoche also notes that Miller’s Pretoria-centered account of South African diplomacy and politics complements “earlier studies that foregrounded the views from Washington, Havana, and Lusaka.” Moreover, by “putting himself into the shoes” of apartheid leadership, Miller offers a convincing reappraisal of a regime that sought to style itself as “postcolonial and African, while simultaneously defending a putrid system of institutionalized racism.” DeRoche concludes that Miller’s 1 For Powell’s work, see especially, Nathaniel K. Powell, “Battling Instability? The Recurring Logic of French Military Interventions in Africa,” African Security 10:1 (2017), 42-72. 2 For Giliomee’s work, see especially, Hermann Giliomee, The Last Afrikaner Leaders: A Supreme Test of Power (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2013). 3 For DeRoche’s work, see especially, Andy DeRoche, Kenneth Kaunda, the United States and Southern Africa (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016). 3 | Page H-Diplo Roundtable Review, Vol. XIX, No. 15 (2017) account succeeds at the very difficult task of presenting the apartheid regime as complex and human rather than one-dimensional. For Jacob Dlamini, whose work has focused on the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa, that approach is just the problem.4 In his attempt to view the world through the eyes of the apartheid regime, Miller, in Dlamini’s view, jettisons the scholar’s obligation to cast a critical eye. Although he appreciates Miller’s attempt “to take his historical actors on their own terms” and to understand them “as they understood themselves and the contexts in which they acted,” Dlamini