SOUTHERN AFRICA IN THE COLD WAR, POST-1974 WAR, SOUTHERN AFRICA IN THE COLD SOUTHERN AFRICA IN THE COLD WAR, POST-1974 History and Public Policy Program Critical Oral History Conference Series Edited by Sue Onslow and Anna-Mart van Wyk History and Public Policy Program Critical Oral History Conference Series SOUTHERN AFRICA IN THE COLD WAR, POST-1974 Edited by Sue Onslow and Anna-Mart van Wyk Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20004-3027 www.wilsoncenter.org ISBN# 978-1-938027-06-2 Cover image: Soviet and East Bloc military advisors in Angola. “Soviet Military Power,” 1983, Page 92, U.S. Department of Defense, http://www.defenseimagery.mil © 2013 Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars SOUTHERN AFRICA IN THE COLD WAR, POST-1974 Contents A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS v OPENING REMARKS 1 SESSION 1: The Angola/Mozambique Crisis Briefing Paper 15 Discussion 43 Documents on Angola 74 Timeline on Angola 153 SESSION 2: The Rhodesia/Zimbabwe Confrontation Briefing Paper 159 Discussion 183 Documents on Rhodesia 217 Timeline on Rhodesia 309 SESSION 3: South West Africa/Namibia Briefing Paper 323 Discussion 335 Documents on South West Africa/Namibia 378 Timeline on South West Africa/Namibia 453 SESSION 4: South Africa Briefing Paper 455 Discussion 466 Documents on South Africa 492 Timeline on South Africa 524 CLOSING REMARKS 535 iii III The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars is the national, living U.S. memorial honoring President Woodrow Wilson. In providing an essential link between the worlds of ideas and public policy, the Center addresses current and emerging challenges confronting the United States and the world. The Center promotes policy-relevant research and dialogue to in- crease understanding and enhance the capabilities and knowledge of leaders, citizens, and institutions worldwide. Created by an act of Congress in 1968, the Center is a nonpartisan institution headquar- tered in Washington, D.C., and supported by both public and private funds. Conclusions or opinions expressed in Center publications and programs are those of the authors and speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Center staff, fellows, trustees, advisory groups, or any individuals or organizations that provide financial support to the Center. The Center is the publisher of The Wilson Quarterly and home of Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Dialogue radio and television. For more information about the Center’s activities and publications, please visit us on the web at www.wilsoncenter.org. Jane Harman, Director, President, and CEO BOARD OF TRUSTEES Joseph B. Gildenhorn, Chairman of the Board Sander R. Gerber, Vice Chairman Public Members: James H. Billington, Librarian of Congress; John F. Kerry, Secretary, U.S. Department of State; G. Wayne Clough, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution; Arne Duncan, Secretary, U.S. Department of Education; David Ferriero, Archivist of the United States; Fred P. Hochberg, Chairman and President, Export-Import Bank; Carole Watson, Acting Chairman, NEH; Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Private Citizen Members: Timothy Broas, John T. Casteen III, Charles Cobb, Jr., Thelma Duggin, Carlos M. Gutierrez, Susan Hutchison, Barry S. Jackson Wilson National Cabinet: Eddie & Sylvia Brown, Melva Bucksbaum & Raymond Learsy, Ambassadors Sue & Chuck Cobb, Lester Crown, Thelma Duggin, Judi Flom, Sander R. Gerber, Ambassador Joseph B. Gildenhorn & Alma Gildenhorn, Harman Family Foundation, Susan Hutchison, Frank F. Islam, Willem Kooyker, Linda B. & Tobia G. Mercuro, Dr. Alexander V. Mirtchev, Wayne Rogers, Leo Zickler Acknowledgements Gathering together former antagonists to compare perspectives and reflect on decisions, backed by primary documents from a variety of international sources, is a well-established exercise in ‘Critical History’—a methodology pioneered by historians Jim Blight and janet Lang, and used extensively to good effect by the Wilson Center’s History and Public Policy Program, and its partners around the world. Employing Critical Oral History as a research tool in the Southern African context was both an innovation, and a daunting challenge, as the region’s past is very much alive and kicking. That is one reason why the planning of this first-ever Critical Oral History Conference on Southern Africa in the Cold War took over five years. The conference itself could not have taken place without the financial support of the Aluka Project, the Nordic Afrika Institute, the Journal of Southern African Studies, and the generous backing and provision of excellent facilities by Monash South Africa. In addition to the kind contribution from the speakers at this two day meeting, and the input from our fellow academics Professor Vladimir Shubin, Professor Chris Saunders, Professor Brian Raftopoulos, Professor Tilman Dedering, Professor Iain Edwards, and Dr. Thula Simpson, we would also like to thank the following academics and administrators for their steadfast support: Professor Arne Westad, Co-Director of LSE IDEAS, Associate Professor Dina Burger, Deputy Pro-Vice Chancellor for Research at Monash South Africa, Dr. Proscovia Svard, Dr. Graham Dominy and Neels Muller of the South African National Archives, and Dr. Christian Ostermann (Director) and Tim McDonnell, at the Wilson Center in Washington, D.C. We are also deeply grateful for the continued interest and advice from Professor Mervyn Frost and Professor Jack Spence of the Department of War Studies at King’s College, London. But our most profound thanks and appreciation go to the ‘witnesses’ themselves. Dr. Sue Onslow and Associate Professor Anna-Mart van Wyk V Opening Remarks Iain Edwards and Sue Onslow EDWARDS: The terms “the Cold War” and “the Iron Curtain” are certainly amongst the most well-known terms in the post-World War II political lexicon. The Cold War was an epic period in world history, probably the first period in history that we can speak of as global histo- ry. South Africa was a cause celebre in the “life and times of the Cold War” and southern Africa was a significant geographical area within this global contestation. This would serve as a period of around thirty years. Within this period in southern Africa we can identify five broad histori- cal processes: first, decolonization; second, the rise of the apartheid state; third, the growing power of anti-colonial national liberation movements and the ideological and organizational forms of “Third World-ism;” fourth, the increasing importance and complexity of superpower and other foreign interventions in the area; and finally, war. From small-scale sabotage to the articulation and operational conduct of various forms of armed struggle, from conventional to asymmetrical warfare, the Cold War in southern Africa was very often a hot war. Historical analysis is always under continual revision. Ever since the outbreak of the Cold War, academic debates on the origins and characteristics of the Cold War have dominated the field of contemporary history. As the Cold War proceeded, the histori- ography of the Cold War developed its own dynamics. In the early phases of the Cold War academic discourse was ideologically partisan, fiercely divergent and even combat- ive. Indeed historians and their works were part of the Cold War. Later historical work became far more nuanced. However, historians were still very much shackled by the realities of this continuing global conflict happening around them as they researched and wrote. The situation has now changed. Four features of this contemporary scholarly debate are salient and will provide much of the intellectual direction for this conference. First, since the end of the Cold War, the historical context is much more open-ended, providing sources of both opportunity and confusion. Historians seek to review earlier approaches and assertions and, probably more excitingly, explore new areas of research. 1 OPENING REMARKS Historians are reviewing their concepts and methods and are posing new questions. Historians seek new and relevant knowledge. Second, during the Cold War secrecy and openness interrelated in complexly important ways. For the most part, the Cold War was a conflict conducted within shrouds of secrecy but carried out within the gaze of enormous publicity and propaganda, and with effects The Cold war which could not be hidden. Historians need to understand how this wider process mani- fested itself in various situations, regions and periods. For historians, this is a critical issue of was not a both evidence and analysis. State secrecy, when combined with all governments’ legitimate declared war. archival restrictions, has served to decisively limit historians’ access to crucially important primary sources. Inevitably, this limited historians’ analytic abilities. This is now changing It’s simple, but across the world as more and more primary source material is becoming publicly accessible. you don’t know However, the processes of archival opening have by no means been universal, continuous or uncomplicated. Historians still need to seek out further primary source material. how deep that Third, throughout the world very many key Cold War figures live on. Historians have a concept goes. responsibility to engage with these people. The Cold War was not a huge moment in history leaving only a documentary trail. It was a period of dramatic human agency. These actors have places in history. In a time of massive popular fascination with autobiography and memoir, many of these figures have written memoirs. Many more such works will doubtless follow. However, Cold War historians must seek a dialogue with these figures. Cold War historians must listen and learn. It is here that the contemporary historian, in the case of the Cold War, must embrace oral history. As with all contemporary historians, historians of the Cold War must be oral historians too. This must be a conference of listening and learning. Finally, despite its ending, the legacy of the Cold War lives on, and is pervasive. The Cold War will cast a long shadow. Good historical work on the Cold War will remain of enormous contemporary importance.