Policy Statement of Transafrica Transafrica

Columbia College Chicago Digital Commons @ Columbia College Chicago TransAfrica Documents Cheryl Johnson-Odim Collection 12-1-1981 Policy Statement of TransAfrica TransAfrica Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.colum.edu/transafrica Part of the African History Commons, Social History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation TransAfrica. "Policy Statement of TransAfrica" (December 1981). Cheryl Johnson-Odim Collection, College Archives & Special Collections, Columbia College Chicago. This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Cheryl Johnson-Odim Collection at Digital Commons @ Columbia College Chicago. It has been accepted for inclusion in TransAfrica Documents by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Columbia College Chicago. POLICY STATEMENT OF TRANSAFRICA December 1981 Introduction TransAfrica; the Afro-American lobby for Africa and the Caribbean, seeks to fashion a more enlightened U.S. policy toward the aforementioned regions. The U.S. policies to date, couched wholly in terms of East-West geostrategic rivalry, have served to exacerbate economic, social, and military tensions in the world, the very opposite of what was proclaimed to be the original intent. Caribbean and African peoples basically have been denied the opportunity to harbor legitimate aspirations for a better life and to follow what they perceive to be the best means of achieving their ends especially if the means. differs from Western sanctioned ones. Thus, struggles for political and economic independence are often casted as "communist instigated" and dangerous. The typical U.S. response has been to reflexively side the presiding authoritarian elite or engage in economic sub version. Over the years U.S. foreign aid not only has been meager but closely tied to the purchase of cost ineffective U.S. goods and the. adoption of pro-western policies on the part of the recipient country . Moreover, instead of fostering economic development in the most needy countries, the bulk of aid has flowed to a select few: Israel, Eygpt, the Phillipines, and Pakistan. Other countries with "lesser strategic11 value receive negligible amounts meant to assuage criticism more than to stimulate development. Behind the rhetoric, the U. .S., and for that matter the other Western countries, seem very committed to keeping the Third World divided and weak. TransAfrica argues that the U.S. should strive to increase genuine understanding and cooperation between nations and to address such significant global issues as poverty, resource use, technology transfers, and international trade and monetary reform. Most instability in our view stems from poverty and injustice. U.S. long term interests including Soviet containment would be best served by thoughtful, consistent, and humane policies. Arms races and the naked exercise of power only heighten the possibility of war, polarize relations, and divert precious resources from pressing social and.economic problems . The following are brief analys es and positions of TransAfrica on a variety of issues . POLICY STATEMENT OF TRANSAFRICA SOUTH AFRICA South Africa is distinctive in the world community due to its repression of segments of its population on the basis on race. Twenty-two million Africans, 3,000,000 "Coloreds" and 800,000 Asians are systematically denied basic civil liberties such as the freedom of movement, speech, press, assembly, and voting rights as well as equal economic .opportunity. As a result. of these inequities, the 4.4 million whites enjoy a living standard rivaled by few elites in other countries . Since western investments and technology transfers (by far the largest dollar value on the African continent) buttress and dynamize the South African economy, it is TransAfrica's position that economic sanctions in conjunction with diplomatic pressure should be used in order to hasten the dismantlement of apartheid. Policies of "gentle persuasion" historically have proven effete. The South African minority has vacillated. between cosmetic reform and bold resurgence of white supremacy·. While expensive five star hotels and a few entertainment/spo~ting events have been integrated, political repression is widespread and the central features of apartheid remain. The United States and for that matter the other western powers have to recognize the legitimate right to self determination and take forceful steps before the country is consumed in a violent conflagration. The West cannot ignore the inevitability of Black rule and therefore the West should do more to facilitate the transition of power rather than to forestall it. The Reagan Administration, unfortunately suffers from a serious pox - rabid anti-communism. Reagan policymakers perceive external conununist threats in the region as being more important when in fact the internal conditi6ns - the persistence of apartheid and the acquiescence of the West in apartheid practices -- proffer the Soviets an angle of attack and serves to radicalize the Africans. To compound the problem, the United States is promising a military alliance and normalization of relations with the Pretoria Regime since South Africa is vehemently anti-communist. TQis confusion between cause and effect and foreign policy instruments and objectives is not only regrettable but dangerous . Many believe the anti-communism rhetoric is nothing but a rationalization · for pure economic greed and an affinity with the white settler culture. By portraying African nationalistic movements as Soviet-controllid puppets negates past experience and perpetuates the myth that non-European leaders and peoples cannot think and act independently. Robert Mugabe, while a guerilla was casted as a Soviet lackey yet in power has proven to be moderate and shrewd . Similarly, the leadership in Somalia, Eygpt, and Sudan have expelled large corps of Soviet technicians and troops, showing their independence. U.S./South Africa policy should strive for social justice and long- term stability. The U.S. stands to alienate not only Black South Africans who will one day control the country but the rest of mineral rich Black Africa by wavering on the one issue that unifies all independent nations on the African continent. -2- NAMIBIA Namibia or South West Africa has been · under the domination of South Africa since 1918 by virtue of a League of Nations mandate. After World War II, the United Nations revoked the mandate and in 1968 ruled that South Africa illegally occupied the territory. Four years later the International Court of Justice recommended withdrawal. At each step South Africa balked. During this time the same system of racial discrimi nation practiced in South Africa was also introduced in Namibia. Western business concerns especially uranium mining companies came to play a significant role in the economy. In 1965 the South West Africa Peoples Organization (SWAPO) launched a guerilla campaign to dislodge the white South Africans under the leadership of Sam Nujoma. The ,fighting con,tinue:, today mostly in the northern part of the aountry from SWAPO bases in neighboring Angola. In a calculated strategy to intimidate SWAPO's host, the Angolan people, South Africa continues to support an anti-government insurgency force, UNITA, led by Jonas Savimbi, and conducts a number of raids against ·civilian as well as SWAPO targets. In 1978 the General Assembly at the United Nations adopted Resolution 435 calling for free elections and an orderly U.N . supervised transfer of power to the black majority. Five Western nations (France, Britain, Canada, West Germany, and the United States) were to persuade South Africa to agree while the African frontline countries were charged with winning the approval of SWAPO. SWAPO readily agreed and has even accepted a long list of concessions yet the peace remains elusive . At the present time a set of constitutional principles have been tentatively accepted bY the African nations but South Africa remains noncommittal. The Reagan Administration has struck a deal with the South Africans, namely if the South Africans implement an internationally acceptable settlement the U.S. will endeavor to remove that country's pariah s.tigma and usher it into the Western military alliance. TransAfrica advocates a confrontational approach in dealing with South Africa. The racist regime in insincere by all indications and will only exploit the naivete of the U.S. attempting to portray itself as a nation beleaguered by communism. The ultimate fear is that the U.S . will mortgage itself to South Africa, making it a client state and surrogate defender of Western economic investments in the region. TransAfrica strongly opposes all such measures. United Nations resolution 435 is an acceptable framework and pressure should be brought to bear on South Africa to accept it. 3 Western Sahara/Morocco I.n 1975 Spain agreed to transfer control of the Western Sahara, a desert _territory · of 154,000 square miles, to two adjoining nation-states, Morocco and Mauritania . in exchange for financial compensation and access to the rich phospate deposits. The vast majority of the population favored a United Nations supervised referendum on independence. In November of the same year, thousands of Mo.roccan troops along with a token Mauitanian force invaded and occupied the Western Sahara. King Hassan of Morocco, one of the last absolute monarchs in the world, argued that the Saharan territory was part of a Greater Morocco before the era of European colonialism. Mauritania

Load more