Senate Nears OK of Sanctions Plan : Virtual Embargo of S. Africa Rejected; Moderate Moves Likely to Be Adopted

Defying a veto threat by President Reagan, the Republican-controlled Senate appeared ready to pass a moderate package of economic sanctions against South Africa after Thursday night’s rejection of a virtual trade embargo.

Before deciding at 11 p.m. to take no more votes Thursday, the Senate voted 51 to 48 against a proposal by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) that the Republican leadership denounced as a thinly disguised effort by liberals to bring a halt in commerce between the United States and South Africa.

“We are not seeking a scorched-earth policy,” argued Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. “We are not looking to punitive sanctions. Our objective is not economic destruction, it is persuasion.”

Lugar characterized the legislation that was expected to be approved by the Senate as a broadly supported compromise that would penalize Pretoria for its policy of apartheid without destroying the South African economy.

‘Don’t,’ Speakes Says

At the White House, spokesman Larry Speakes was asked what message the President would send to senators who were preparing to vote for such sanctions. His response: “Don’t.”

Supporters of sanctions argued that they are necessary for the United States to express its firm opposition to a repressive system of discrimination that Sen. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. (R-Conn.) described as “the greatest wrong of our time.”

“It’s time for the world to understand that President Reagan does not speak for the American people on this issue of apartheid,” said Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.).

While the Senate did adopt some liberal amendments to toughen the measure as it was approved by the Foreign Relations Committee, the bill was still considerably less stringent than a House-passed measure calling for total divestiture of U.S. investment in South Africa and a boycott of all South African goods except strategic materials.

Among other things, the Senate measure would ban imports of uranium, coal and textiles; prohibit new investments in South Africa and loans to the Pretoria government; terminate U.S. landing rights for South African Airways, and bar deposits in U.S. banks by the South African government or government-owned companies.

The legislation also outlines additional measures that the United States will take if the South African government fails to begin dismantling apartheid within a year.

These include a ban on the import of diamonds, food, agricultural products, steel and strategic minerals; a prohibition against all South African deposits in U.S. banks, and an end of U.S. military assistance to countries such as Israel that are believed to be circumventing an international embargo on arms shipments to Pretoria.

Conservatives Act

Even as liberals complained that these sanctions were not strong enough, a small band of Republican conservatives led by Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) sought to weaken the bill. The Senate accepted one watered-down Helms amendment by a vote of 67 to 31 after the North Carolinian promised to withdraw 14 others if it passed.

As originally drafted, the Helms amendment characterized some South African black groups, including the African National Congress, as violence-prone and led by Communists. Under pressure from Lugar, Helms revised it to give equal weight to evidence of violence and repression carried out by the South African government.

Sen. Malcolm Wallop (R-Wyo.) spoke for conservative opponents of the bill when he declared disdainfully: “What we have here is middle-class, comfortable white senators playing up to the black population of America, the liberal population of America.”

The Senate accepted a variety of strengthening amendments, including one proposed by Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) imposing an immediate ban on textile imports that passed by a vote of 67 to 29. Textiles became a symbol for the liberals last month when it was learned that the Reagan Administration had signed a new agreement with Pretoria allowing an increase in these imports next year.

2 Provisions Deleted

At the same time, two provisions proposed by the Foreign Relations Committee were deleted. By a vote of 58 to 41, the Senate accepted the argument of Sen. Larry Pressler (R-S.D.) that Congress should not ask Reagan to sell off U.S. gold reserves to depress the price of gold, and it removed from the bill at the suggestion of Sen. Nancy Landon Kassebaum (R-Kan.) a restriction on visas for members of the white South African elite.

The bill would provide that the President could lift or modify the sanctions if Pretoria frees black leader Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners and takes any three of the following steps: repeals the current state of emergency, lifts a ban on political protest meetings, repeals the Group Areas and Population Registration acts, which control where blacks can live and work, and makes a commitment to good faith negotiations with representatives of the black majority.

The Senate rejected by a vote of 51 to 46 a proposal by Sen. William Proxmire (D-Wis.) that would have required the President to get explicit congressional approval for lifting or modifying the sanctions. It would have further increased the likelihood of a veto.

Kennedy argued that his defeated amendment was needed to close the many “loopholes” in the legislation. He noted that while the bill purports to ban new loans to South Africa, it exempts some transactions that amount to an estimated 80% of the total.

Among other things, Kennedy would have prohibited rescheduling of existing loans. He argued that his proposal was consistent with expected action by the Commonwealth countries.

Policies May Not Change

Implicit in much of the debate was a feeling that even sanctions may not change the policies of the South African government. Lugar noted that many U.S. corporations already have stopped making new investments in that country because of the turmoil.

“Sanctions almost certainly will have no effect on the policy of South Africa,” said Sen. John C. Danforth (R-Mo.). “This is an instance where symbolism outweighs practicality.”

Weicker acknowledged that critics of the measure have condemned it as “moral posturing.” He added: “I plead guilty. I consider it vital that this nation adopt a posture of morality that for all time will place the United States on the side of democratic opportunity in South Africa.”