Shultz Asks High-Level Talks With S. Africans : But Officials Make Clear That U.S. Response to Crackdown Will Be Primarily Rhetorical

Secretary of State George P. Shultz called Thursday for a high-level meeting with the South African government to give the United States a chance to dramatize its outrage at the white minority regime’s crackdown on black political activity.

But Shultz and other top Administration officials made it clear that the U.S. response to South Africa’s “state of emergency,” during which at least 800 people have been arrested and at least 15 have been killed, would be primarily rhetorical.

White House spokesman Larry Speakes said that President Reagan continues to oppose sanctions against the South African government, and the State Department denounced France’s decision to ban new investment in South Africa, saying it would hit hardest not at the government but at the country’s blacks.

Speakes said the Administration has reviewed its options and decided to stick with its policy, known as “constructive engagement,” of trying to cajole South Africa into reforming its apartheid policy of strict racial segregation.

The United States could take “a variety of steps” to put pressure on the South African government, Speakes said, “but the steps that we are taking right now are the ones that we intend to stick with.”

Shultz, speaking to reporters aboard his Air Force plane on the way to Mexico City for consultations with the Mexican government, said the United States is seeking a meeting with South African officials “to express a point of view in a direct and careful way.”

U.S. officials accompanying Shultz said that South Africa earlier this week had asked for a meeting to explain its side of the present crisis.

Shultz declined to say when a meeting with South Africa might be held or who might represent the United States.

On Capitol Hill, opponents of apartheid vowed to force the Administration’s hand by writing economic sanctions into law. Supporters of a tough House-passed bill said that the current South African crackdown, along with the French sanctions and earlier, limited actions by Canada and the Scandinavian countries, will strengthen their position as they work out a compromise with a less stringent measure passed by the Senate.

A House-Senate conference committee will begin trying next week to reconcile differences between the bills.

Rep. William H. Gray III (D-Pa.), author of the House bill, said the South African crackdown has given Reagan a chance to impose sanctions without appearing to be bowing to congressional pressure. “The Administration has an opportunity to change its policy and not be perceived as acting from weakness,” Gray said.

Comment From Wolpe

Rep. Howard Wolpe (D-Mich), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Africa, said the United States must adopt policies at least as tough as France’s. “Anything short of what the French did will be perceived as being weak and ineffective,” he said.

But the Administration repudiated the French move, announced Wednesday, to suspend all new French investment in South Africa. The French also recalled their ambassador, a step the United States took last month in response to South African raids into Botswana and Angola.

“Such actions as the French government’s decision to restrict new investments both undermine South Africa’s economy and create additional hardships for black South Africans,” State Department spokesman Charles Redman said, reading from a carefully crafted policy paper.

Investment May Dry Up

In his interview en route to Mexico City, however, Shultz said that investment in South Africa will probably dry up even without government sanctions.

“New investment is, I’m sure, affected by political turmoil,” he said. “You don’t have to have a government to tell investors that they don’t want to put money into that kind of turmoil.”

A senior Administration official said Wednesday that Reagan’s advisers have given him a variety of possible sanctions that the United States might impose. Although Speakes seemed to rule out sanctions, it remained possible that the Administration might toughen its stance in the face of escalating violence in South Africa and continuing pressure from Congress.

The Senate voted July 11 to ban U.S. bank loans to the South African government and to block the sale of computers to government agencies. The House-passed bill includes those provisions and would also prohibit new private investment, prevent the export of nuclear power equipment and block the importation of South African gold coins, which supporters of the bill say produce $600 million a year in revenue for the regime.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) had urged the House to accept the Senate bill on the grounds that anything tougher might face a filibuster in the Senate or a veto by the President. But House leaders insisted on a chance to write their own language into the final bill, and Lugar agreed Thursday to attempt to draft a compromise measure.

Norman Kempster reported from Washington and Doyle McManus from Mexico City.