S. Africa Santions Voted by Conferees : Action Expected to pass, Would Ban Krugerrrand Sales, Halt Bank Loans

House and Senate negotiators, paving over differences on a measure that would impose economic sanctions against South Africa, agreed Wednesday to immediately ban the lucrative sale of gold Krugerrand coins in the United States, to halt most American bank loans to the Pretoria government and to limit U.S. computer sales to government agencies.

The action, expected to win eventual approval in both chambers, underscores congressional displeasure with South Africa’s policy of apartheid and mounting frustration with President Reagan’s strategy of relying on quiet diplomacy to press for reform.

The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), said that Secretary of State George P. Shultz had told him Congress would have to “wait and see” whether Reagan would sign a sanctions bill or veto it.

New U.S. Coin Series

In addition to imposing penalties, the agreement also calls for the minting of a new series of American gold coins to help fill the void left by the ban on Krugerrand sales for traders and investors in this country. Unlike the South African medallion, however, the U.S. coins could be traded as legal tender and would be valued at $2 to $50.

Although the Reagan Administration initially opposed the sanctions bills passed in separate form by the House and Senate, relations between the White House and the Pretoria government have significantly deteriorated since the South African government imposed a state of emergency July 20.

The two countries have recalled their ambassadors for consultations, the White House has demanded an end to the state of emergency, and Administration officials have said that Reagan’s low-key diplomatic approach, known as “constructive engagement,” is under review.

Both Democratic and Republican backers of sanctions legislation have been pressing to send a compromise to Reagan’s desk before Congress breaks this week for its traditional August recess.

Although the House is expected to approve the final version of the bill quickly, Senate sponsors are worried that final action there might be delayed until September if Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) launches a filibuster, as he did last month when he delayed the Senate’s first vote on the sanctions bill for several days.

Lugar said he will attempt a Senate vote today, but an aide to Lugar said that Helms, when asked by colleagues whether he would filibuster, went into a “Cheshire cat routine”--smiling cannily but remaining mum.

In reaching an accord, the conferees split the difference between the House-passed bill, which imposed tough new punitive measures on Pretoria in protest against its racial separation policies, and the milder Senate version.

For House Democrats, the key concession was a retreat from a provision that would have halted new American investment in South Africa. In return, Senate Republicans agreed to accept the House-approved prohibition on the sale of Krugerrands in the United States. Half of all of South Africa’s foreign exchange earnings come from Krugerrand sales, and the United States is the biggest market.

Worldwide, 2.67 million ounces of the coins were sold in 1984, an amount that at current prices would bring $870 million. Sales the previous year totaled 3.49 million ounces.

The complex agreement also contains a variety of legislative carrots-and-sticks, designed to woo and prod the Pretoria authorities into change. Included were provisions that would:

--Impose an immediate ban on most U.S. bank loans to the South African government and government-run corporations, allowing loans only for schools, housing and health facilities that are open to blacks as well as whites.

--Halt the sale of all computers except small personal ones to police, military and other agencies that could use the machines to keep records on blacks and help enforce apartheid laws.

--Forbid the sale of American-made supplies and equipment that could be used in the development of nuclear technology.

Under the compromise, Reagan could waive the Krugerrand ban and some--but not all--of the other sanctions if he certifies that South Africa is making progress toward ending apartheid and improving conditions for the nation’s 22 million blacks. If Congress disagrees with the President’s assessment, it could override his action and make the punishments stick.

Warning by Opponents

At the same time, the measure would require Reagan to impose a new investment ban, trade restrictions or other new curbs if he found that the South African government had not taken steps to ease apartheid within 12 months from the date the bill became law.

Opponents argued that the sanctions would backfire by wrecking the South African economy, hitting blacks hardest by tossing them out of work, and also by destabilizing the pro-Western government in Pretoria.

“We ought not to throw out the baby with the bath water,” Helms argued. “If we do anything to cause South Africa to fall into the arms of the Soviet Union, we will live to regret it. . . . If South Africa goes, the whole continent goes.”

But Rep. Parren J. Mitchell (D-Md.), another negotiator, said that those who argued that congressional action would harm blacks the most reminded him of opponents of the U.S. civil rights movement 20 years ago. “The argument was always raised that if you break down the color barriers, you’ll just hurt blacks more,” he recalled.

Rep. Howard Wolpe (D-Mich.) said that U.S. reluctance to bring sharp pressure on South Africa had encouraged the white minority government to preserve apartheid.

“Economic sanctions represent the only alternative to an absolute bloodbath,” Wolpe said. “The regime will negotiate only at that point when they perceive they have more to lose than gain with the present system.”

In addition to sanctions, the measure would require American firms in South Africa that employ more than 25 people to abide by the Sullivan Principles, a code of conduct drawn up by the Rev. Leon Sullivan of Philadelphia, a black civil rights activist, mandating non-discriminatory hiring practices.