Apartheid's
murderous role in
Namibia
Evidence of South African atrocities against Namibian freedom fighters is mounting. A documentary film, showing the bodies of combatants who had been shot in the head at point blank range, was screened in the US Senate on April 18 and is due to be shown on American TV at the end of April.
The South African military is hunting out and executing fighters from the People's Liberation Army of Namibia (PLAN) in the north, while South African battalions are lining up along the Namibia-Angola border to catch any fighters who try to get back into Angola. Farlier in the month, Sunday Telegraph correspondent Simon O'Dwyer-Russell reported (April 9, 1989) that he saw 18 dead combatants, most of whom had apparently been shot in the face af close range with small calibre wcapons?.
This information complements what SWAPO, church sources and local civilians have been saying for the past few weeks concering the battles in the norther Namibia and the breakdown in the United Nations ceasefire. For weeks now Namibians have insisted that it was South Africa who broke the ceasefire and that South Africa has been using the fighting in the north as a cover to conduct a scorched earth policy against civilians (in which hundreds have been killed or wounded) and a "shoot-to-kill' policy against PLAN combatants and SWAPO activists. But who lis
At the first news of the outbreak of fighting. along with Margaret Thatcher's pronouncement that a very serious incursion has taken place...and we condemn it totally", the majority of the westem media (particularly the British, with The Independent taking the prize) launched into a scurilloux attack against SWAPO. Without any of the facts at that time being known, an: relying on South African military sources, SWAPO was condemned as the is ever ty merely ending on mi
1, and thereby breaking the formal ceasefire which came into effect at 4am that day. The rows that have hroken out since have centred on the interpretations of the United Nations plan for Namibia's independence and its related resolutions and documents - UN Security Council Resolution 435 - and the supposed agreements reached at last year's peace talks, particularly in relation to the ceasefire and SWAPO's military wing, PLAN.
SWAPO has always argued that Resolution 435 (1978) was a massive compromise. Had they not gone along with it they would have been accused of trying to hold upthe implementation of Namibia's independence. It was, in fact, a watered down version of the earlier 1976 Resolution 385, which was drafted by the now-
FEA cn defunct Western Contact Group (Britain, US, France, Canada and West South Africa, outside the framework of the UN.
Needless to say its terms &
are very favourable to relegated the UN's role to one of monitoring the elec. colonial Administrator General in Namibia in ef. Apartheid's gunmen patrol Namibia fect organising them. The independence plan does not insist that Walvis Bay - the country's only deep water port and crucial to the economy. - in an integral part of Namibia It was annexed by South Africa in 1977 (using 19th century British colonial treatiesl), together with several off-shore islands. South Africa says it will negotiale the future of Walvis Bay and the islands with a Trendly govemment.
SWAPO has not even been party to any of the peace negotiations rince July/August 19821 Since then, the South Africans, backed by Reagan, Thatcher and co, Have consistently argued that they would not sit at the negotiating table with SWAPO. They got away with dictating the conditions of the peace talks. SWAPO's absence last year at the peace talks between Angola, Cuba and South Africa over the future of Namibin and the issue of Cuban troops in Angola was a scandal.
Namibia's independence process was set to begin on April 1. No sooner had the formul ceasefire come into effect than the South Africans accused SWAPO of breaking it by moving PLAN combatants over the border from Angola. The South Africans then requested that the UN Socretary General'sspecial representative in Namibia, Manti Ahtisaari, sanction the use of South African police unils to mund up the PLAN fighters.
By a stroke of luck, Margaret Thatcher was on hand to twist Abtisaari's arm into going along with this (and to denounce SWAPO In the world's press). Local South African police surrounded and attacked a PLAN unit at around 1lam at Okahenge in northern Namibia. Eyewitness accounts of the incident all repon that the South African forces opened fire first. The UN inquiry into the presence of PLAN in the north later stated that the combatants had "no hostile intent'. Six local South African 'no hostile intent'. Defence Force (SADF) battalions, including the notorious South West Africa Territory Force's (SWATF) 101 Battalion, were let out of basesto assist the police units. What then fol lowed was over ten days of some of the worst fighting in Namibia's war of independence.
While the SADF, its notorious Koevoet counterinsurgency unit and its local SWATE battalions went on the rampage, they were elevated by much of the media into a freedomloving peacekeeping force, obviously protecting Namibia from maurading bands of SWAPO fighters. The amcar campaign ugainst SWAPO got into full swing, full of rucist and patronising insults, insinuating that SWAPO, representing black people, were incompetent and could not understand or were misrepresenting what had been written down in the mounds of UN documents and resolutions concerning Namibian independence, SWAPO's President, Sam Nujoma, came under personal attack as the westem press tried to label him a "tribal leader" in an attempt to dismiss what the liberation movement and the masses of black Namibians have been struggling for over the decades of colonial rule, In contrast, the South African, British and US governments were portrayed as beyond reproach and beyond reproach and obviously telling the
In retrospect, it appears that South Africa's deliberate breach of the ceasefire and its subsequent attacks on SWAPO were well planned and well timed. They were well timed to cnincide with Thatcher's unexpected" visit to Namibia's capital Windhoek on April 1 Thatcher and Pretoria were in this together, days if not weeks in advance (Pretoria knew long before anyone else that Thatcher would be going to Windhoek). What is more, the presence of PLAN fighters inside Namibin before April 1 was certainly not news to the South Africans - they have been fighting a hush war against PLAN for the last 23 years.
But why would South Africa, in collusion with Thatcher, try to sabotage the peace process hefore it had got off the ground? The whole exercise was designed to give the South Africans intemational credibility in theirtole in Namibia and to isolate SWAPO. It was a chance to test how far they could manipulate the UN peacekeeping forces, and to get everyone used to South Africa dictating the terms of the independence elections, It was also a chance to score a few military points against SWAPO and totry to demoralise and intimidate people in the
lead up to the clections.
South Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia is the central issue in all this, not the location of SWAPO's fighters. And the key to stopping further bloodshed is the immediate withdrawal and disbandment of all South African military and police forces (including Koevoet and SWATF):
wah never any confusion on SWAPO's part about the provisions for PLAN combatants in the various UN documeuts and resolutions. Nowhere does it state that PLAN should not he in Namibia al the outset on April 1. When Resolution 435 was adopted it war envisaged that at the time of the formal ceasefire PLAN fighters would be be confined to bases in Namibia under the supervision of the UN Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG). Soutl African complaints against this procedure were never resolved by the UN, who up until the last minute fudged the issue, despite requests from SWAPO to clarify the situation. Pretoria and Thatcher, to deflect scrutiny of these documents, announced that SWAPO had hroken the Geneva Protocol (August 5, 1988). which according to them, stated that all PLAN forces should be north of the 16th parallel (in Angola) before the peace process could start. This document does not say anything of thie kind. It refersto PLAN forcesin Angola (not in Namibia). In any case, this was still a secret document on April 1.
It is true that the heauty of such hurcaucratic documents is that they are often vague and their meaning can be manipulated, but the main point here is not the interpretation of documents but that SWAPO was again not party in the first place to the latest peace negotiahons, which started in May 1988 in London. To add insult to injury, South Africa, Angola and Cuba met near Windhock (inside Namihia!) and drafted the Mount Etjo Declaration (April 9) which made provisions for the withdrawal of PLAN forces from their own country - without the
LL ะจ R
LONDSLIDE VICTORY Roma LamBo SeCTION
10F SWAPO
VIVAPLAN FAPLA
South Africa is keen to isolate SWAPO: above, February rally in Katutura. Liberation movement being present.
UN Capitulation
Once a LIN peacekceping force arrives in a colonial country like Namibia there is a feeling anong many in the west that everything is going to be all right. This is often based on the assumption that the UN is a neutral body whose interests are divorced from those of imperialism, that it is ahle (and willing) to impose its will on the conflicting sides in a war and that everyone involved will be persuaded to abide by the rules and play cricket. In fact, looking at other colonial and neo-colonial situations, for cxample the Congo and Lehanon, the UN's hislone role is precisely to come down on the side of its paymasters, the imperialist countries, when the crunch comes.
And the UN role in Namibia in the past few weeks is a glaring example of this. Ahtisman's sanctioning of the use of the South African military (the colonial power!) to police' the heration movement was a terrible betrayal of the people the UN is supposed to be protecting.
It was also in contravention of Resolution 435!
As SWAPO Secretary for Information and Publicity, Hidipo Hamutenya, said in London recently, 'the same people are killing us.
whether under South African or UN flags'.
On top of this, UNTAG has been shown up to be wholly incompetent through its lack of preparation in deploying its peacekeeping forces. But the source of this leads back again to the major powers. The permanent members of the UN Security Council (Britain, US, France,
China and USSR) reduced the size of the UNTAG force down to 4,650, They were warmed by African states and the Non-Aligned Movement that this would be a problem. Even the original number of 7,500 is not enough and was based on calculations made in the late 1970s. Since then South Africa's military 1970s. Since then presence in Namibia has dramatically escalated not only in the number of conscripts being sent
SCES
in year after vear, but also in the formation of the SWATF and Koevoct as well as the deployment of the South African-backed UNITA handits in the north. Duc to UN Security Council delays only a fraction of the UNTAG force was stationed in Namibia by April 1 and only 9 handful of them in the northern war zone.
With South Africa's Administrator General, Louis Pienaar, calling the shots over their "right" to "interrogate" PLAN fighters and his proposal that "verification operations" take place to find out how many combatants have gone over the border and what types of weapons they are using, SWAPO quite rightly instructed its fighters to go back over into Angola without reporting to the UNTAG assembly points. The whole set-up was a trap, the arembly points have been swarming with the South African military, and as mentioned carlier, captured combatants are being executed South Africa has also recently admitted to holding 28 PLAN prisoners under AG9 (which means detention without trial for an indefinite
The performance of UNTAG gives Namibians little hope at this time that there will be nne hundred percent "free and fair' elections. What will happen when people come out to vote at UN-monitored clection stations? Will the UN stand idly by and let people be intimidated or even murdered for daring to vote for SWAPO? And who will be checking the hallot boxes to make sure votes are not rigged in favour of the small pro-South African parlies, such as the Democratic Tumhalle Alliuce (DTA) who will be taking part in the elections?
I Pretoria had illusions that escalating its lerror campaign against the civilian population in the north would break support for SWAPO then they are mistaken. The north has long been a SWAPO stronghold and there is no indication that the escalation of the war in the last month has weakened support for the liberation movement. During the fighting civilians continued
PHOTO: John Liebenberg/NGCT SOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 15 May 1989 Page 11
to assist PLAN fighters by hiding them, by going themselves to check out whether the UNTAG assembly points were safe for the combatants, Churches in Namibia issued warnings to the fighters that the assembly points were a trap. The mass organisations of workers and students, the National Union of Namibian Workers (NUNW) and its six affiliated unions and the Namibia National Students Organisation (NANSO) have come out firmly behind SWAPO. Together with the Council of Churches in Namibia they organised a mass rally -in commemoration of our fallen
VC freedom fighters" on April 9.
The South African propaganda g machine, by focusing on the issue of? PLAN's presence in Namibia has E managed to deflect international attention away from other South African schemes to sabotage 'free and fair' elcotions and future independence. For example, South Africa's puppet government, hefore it resigned in March, recommended sweeping privatisation of public services including health, post and telecommunications, water and transport. The NUNW rightly claimed this plan was aimed at sabotaging the independence and launched a campaign in opposition to privatisa-
Thousands of workers marched through the capital Windhock on April I in protest and have threatened a general strike if the policy is not reversed. If everything is privatised by the time SWAPO wins the cleetions, how much longer will it take a new govemment to undo the damage. And how much easier it will be for pro-South African capitalists in Namibia to sabotage essential services if they are under private ownership, not to mention the demands for financial compensation they will try to extract from a future govemment who will want to renationalise
The issue of voter registration will be a major hurdle. South Africa is trying to get as many non-Namibians as possible to register as resi dents while trying to place obstacles in the path of exiled Namibians being able to vote. Louis Pienaur, who is drafting the election procedures
(imagine! the colonial administrator is being given carte blanch to do this is proposing that the voting age be 21 - thus excluding masses of youth who form the base of SWAPO's support. He proposes that one year's residency in
Namibia is sufficient to vote. Colonel Botes, in a letter to mainly white conscripted South
African soldiers in the "91 SWA" brigade stationed in Namibia, requests his troops "to par ticipate in the eloction campaign beginning on
June 26. Make sure that you register as a voter and also that you vote. Even if you now live in the Repoblic of South Africa, I specifically ask you to make arrangements to travel twice to
SWA [colonial name for Namibia] - first to register, then on November I, to vote. Imyself will do so. Botesclaims that people will be able to vote if they were born in Namibia or if they have lived there for one year.
The UN Special Representative has yet to approve Pienaar's proposals, but on past performance he may well go along with whatever the
FEATURE Koevoet thugs in Eengola, northern Namibia. South Africans have in mind. This would mean that thousands of South African soldiers would be ahle to vote - on average over 30,000 conscript troops and thousands of regulars have been deployed in Namibia each year over the past decade, not to mention the thousands of UNITA troops that are now registering as Namibians! Meanwhile, Namibians themselves may be penalised. Will all the Namihian youth who have been born in exile, mostly in the SWAPO settlements, he uble to vote? Not if South Africa has its way.
Pienaar is also prevaricating over the repcal of all racist and oppressive laws saying that only those specifically related to voting procedure need be abolished. South Africa, already conceding that SWAPO will win a majority, is hell-bent on rigging the elections to stop them gaining more than rwo-thirds for the Constituent Assembly in Novemher, Without the two-thirds they will not be able to dictate the terms of the future constitution.
Namibians in general and SWAPO in particular were never under any illusion that the beginning of Namibia's independence process would run smoothly. They know only too well what South Africa is capable of. Nevertheless, after years of struggle and sacrifice on their part, and years of South African aggression, superpower maneovering and UN dithering, their independence is close. Despite the set backs of the last few weeks, the independence process 1s still on course:
It is in the interests of the imperialist powers, particularly Britain and the US that Namibia's independence goes ahead. The US desperntely wants the Cuban forces out of Angola. Britishhased multinationals (eg Rio Tinto Zinc) want to hold on to their massive economic involvement in Namibia. Thatcher, in line with her "diplomacy without sanctions" policy wants tu argue that Namibia's independence is proof of the correctness of this strategy. She will use it to argue that all sanctions against South Africa be dropped and that the apartheid state be brought buck into the international capitalist fold South Africa can no longer afford its cost ly occupation of Namibia, and sanctions are starting to bite Pretoria's nwn economy
The Soviet Union, in line with their rapprochment with the west and their need to scale down their involvement in southern Africa as a whole, want an end to the war in Angola. This is dependent on an end to South African aggression against Angola and therefore Namihia's independence. It is also dependent on stopping all US and South African military aid to UNTTA. What must not happen is a sell-out of Namibia in the interests of peace in Angola and Soviet diplomacy.
In the long-term, the Soviet Union, the socialist countries and labour and socialist movements throughout the world should canpaign hard to assist SWAPO to win more than a two- thirds majority in the elections. Any pressure on them to make concessions to South Africa will not only set back Namibia's task of reconstricting the country but will seriously affect the direction of the long-tem struggle against white supremacist rule inside South Africa A SWAPO victory and independence in Namihia will be a massive victory for the op pressed, not only in Namibia, but throughout the region and inside South Africa
Campaign for 'free & fair elections and a SWAPO victory.
For information on how your trade union.
Labour Puty, community group, cic can sup port SWAPO write to the:
Namibia Emergency Campaign Gointly or ganised by the Namibia Support Committee and the Anti-Apartheid Movement), c/o 13
Mandela Street, London NW1, 01-387 7966 or 01-267 1941/2.
The NEC is organising the following activities. Get delegated from your anion,
Labour Party, etc:
Saturday 13 May
- National Mobilising Conference, Conway
Hall, Red Lion Square, London WCI
(nearest the Holbom), 11-5pm.
Sunday 14 May
- Activists Meeting, University of London
Union, Malet Street, London WC1 (nearest tube Goodge Street), 10.30-3:30pm.
Page 12 SOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 15 May 1989
There has been something to delight almost everyone in the exciting surge of events in the Soviet Union since Mikhail Gorbachev took over as party leader
For those who believe Soviet workers' problems would be solved if they only had a parliamentary system like those in the west, there have heen the first parliamentary elections since
For capitalist idcologues committed to the values of the free market. there are the proposals for perestroika, the restructuring of the Soviet cconomy on market principles, together with the prospect of substantial openings for outside investment and massively increased wester and Japanese trade with the LISSR.
For the White House, Margaret Thatcher and the NATO cold warriors there have been Gorbachev'sdramatic military concessions and unilateral troop reductions, with the prospect of more to come, as sell as a sharp tum towards a conciliationist forcign policy - boding ill for the struggling regimes of Nicaragua, Angola and Mozambique, hut offering an olive
GORBACHEV
Mass turn-out in Kaunas for first legal Lithuanian Independence Day.
Revolution from above?