COLUMN RIGHT : South Africa Will Never Be One Nation

The idea of a “new South Africa” is not new. Seventy years ago, former Prime Minister Daniel Malan announced a new South Africa. And recently Oliver Tambo, leader of the African National Congress, envisaged a different new South Africa.

Tambo and current President Frederik W. de Klerk share a similar vision of renewal, that is the surrender of white rule and the introduction of black rule over all of the peoples of South Africa. President de Klerk denies any intention of surrendering power; he is prepared to share it. He does not explain how power can be shared without losing control, or how white people can avoid being dominated by a black majority in government posts and in the security forces.

De Klerk’s idea of building a new nation out of disparate nations is not new either. Soviet leaders have tried and failed. That was also the mistake of colonial powers in 19th Century Africa. While a “state” can be any population ruled from one center, a “nation” consists of people who feel that they belong together and who demand that the power by which they are governed is their own.

De Klerk should be aware that South Africa’s 13 peoples and racial groups are not one nation and will never be. However, he plans to “reform,” or transform, them into one nation. He apparently disregards the current violent clashes between the Zulu and the Xhosa (4,000 killed), or the cultural, political and even religious differences--the clashing loyalties and antipathies that cause the deaths of dozens of blacks every week. We have also seen the beginning of violent conflict between blacks and whites the past few days.

The modern trend in political development elsewhere in the world will tell De Klerk that his idea of a unitary state, composed of various nations, is outdated and against the trend. Margaret Thatcher has referred to the idea of one sovereign parliament for the various European nations as “aery-fairy”.)

In the Soviet Union, the attempt to build a supernation from the peoples of 15 republics failed miserably. Even the race-related Walloons and Flemish of Belgium confirm the folly of forcing disparate communities into one political system.

I can speak on behalf of the majority of the white nation when I say we are not prepared to accept domination by any other nation or its allies. We do not foster any death wish. We demand recognition of our right to govern ourselves and to protect our value system.

The current conflict will only escalate if De Klerk forces his ideal of a nonracial new nation on us.

This conflict is also not conducive to investment from abroad. Every right-minded South African would welcome increased investment in our country. But it is obvious that the political uncertainty created by the so-called reform policies, the prospect of black rule and the economic decline will lead to an ungovernable state if the present conflict and unrest continue.

De Klerk’s intended land reform will enable black tribes to retain their land and even expand by purchasing more land. But what has been considered white land will be free for all who can pay, thereby depriving the white nation of its own geopolitical basis. This is discrimination in the reverse.

There is an increasing impatience among whites against American and European pressure for majority rule for the whole of South Africa and their refusal to recognize the independence of the black homelands of Transkei, Ciskei, Venda and Bophuthatswana. We seriously object to the double standards by which self-determination is granted to all peoples but denied the whites in South Africa.

We also reject the naive concept of democracy for all races and nations in South Africa. Such democracy would be tyranny. We suggest that such advocates try to establish a French-German-Dutch-Swiss democracy in one undivided Europe. The very idea is absurd. So why demand it of South Africa’s peoples?

I fully agree with those who say that it is over-optimistic to think that for the first time in history, the wisdom of the poor masses and their leaders will find a way to bring together different races, tribes, cultures and classes, and to find a straight way to heaven without detrimental effects.

It is not only over-optimistic, and more than a little stupid, it is somewhere between idiotic and criminal to neglect all historical facts in the whole world.

De Klerk talks much about the irreversibility of his reforms. We maintain, however, that it would be the biggest irreversible error if the white nation thinks that it could retain control over the economy and the security forces under a black-dominated government.

It is a true maxim that you “either rule or are ruled.” It is a myth to think that you can share power with anyone and still be in control.