(Archived document, may contain errors)
10/13/92 342
WASEM'qGTON SHOULD BEWARE OF UN. PEACE MONITORS IN SOUTH AFRICA
South Mica may W on do brink of civil ww. The on-again-off-again
multipaV nago&doas Ara post- apathaid South Africa = now off.
On September 27, the Inkaft Freedom Pwy of Zulu Odd Mangosuthu
Buthdlezi dropped out of negotiations with the government and
Nelson Ma n dela's African .National Congress. In the fim ofroutine
Inkaft-ANC violeiice, Buthelazi clahns that h*aha will stay away
ftern the negotiating table until the ANC's AK-47-kaded military
arm, Umkhonto we' Sizwe, is disbanded. Meanwhile. South Africa
suffer s 300 politically motivated killings each mouth. N South
Afirica, erupts into fidl-scale violeace, the United States could
find Itself under tremendoin pzessura to participate in, or own W4
a United Nations peacekeeping operation them. Participation in suc
h a U.N. force, similar to the one now in Yugoslavia, would not be
in the U.S. nationali interest. To avoid this pw4ca- ment,
Washington slumld resist pressuring die South African govartment
into accepting increasing international intervention into its int e
rnal affairs. This intervention to dam consists of 65 or so
U.N.-sanctioned peace monitors. By the ad of October, a fifty-
member U.N. delegation will be in fWl form in South Africa. The
European Community also is providing -fif- teen or so monitors,
unde r U.N. supervision. These monitors are on a mission to-define
potential aca of vio-, lance. If violence breaks out, they are to
determine who is responsible. Despite their good intantions, the
peace monitors actually could encourage more violence in South A
ftica. Some -South Afticari. activists using or contemplating
violent political tactics probably view the admission of U.N. and
other peace monitors as a "defeat" for the South African
government. The South Aftica of *e past widmly parded its
sovereignty, opposing any intervention into its internal affairs.
This perception a I'vic- tory" may incite radicals to increasing
levels of violence, in the hope of maintdning. or even increasing,
the number of peace monitors. Violence as Political Weapon. Or the
pea c e monitors may be ineffective. South Africa's political
nagotia- dons have foundered partly because far too many
SouthAfricans view violence as a potent political weapon. This, was
demonstrated tragically an September 7, when 40.000 ANC
sympathizers.march e d in CiskeL ostensi- bly to protest this
quasi-independent homeland's lack of democracy. A group of ANC
radicals among this crowd, however, were intent on overthrowing
Ciskei's military ruler, Oupa Gqozo. Even if this attempt failed,
the ANC was hoping to provoke a violent confrontation, win
international sympathy, and put the South Amcan governmem which
supports Gqozo, on the defensive. Gqozo's overzealous security
forces killed 29 demonstra- tors in successfully defending Ciskei.
Ile fact that South Afri c an President F.W. de Mark gave the ANC
significant concessions soon after the Ciskei massacre was not lost
on the ANC radicals, who have not yet given up the armed struggle.
Sensing do Mark's weakness, the ANC has not ruled out further
protest marches on o therhomelands. Some within the ANC would like
to forcibly occupy South -Africa's. Parliament building. These
tactics are guaranteed top ". - more violence. Meanwhile, elements
within the government's security forces have their own plans to
continue iiacit ing violence.
Given this potential for increased violence, it is likely that
there will be pressure to dispatch more peace moni- tors to South
Africa, regardless of their effect. The mechanism for doing so is
in place. U.N. Security Council Resolution 772, passed last A
ugust, authorizes Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali to deploy
an unspeci- fied number of peace monitors to South Africa. Some
Security Council members already have sought to send 400 U.N. peace
monitors to South Africa. All that is needed is the Sou t h African
government's permission. So far, the South African government has
welcomed a "reasonable"number of peace monitors, but not as many as
400. -Unprecedented Intervention. De Klerk is in a weak position to
resist demands that South Africa accept add i - tional peace
monitors, having already sanctioned an unprecedented intervention
into its internal affairs. In this respect, the South African
government has crossed the Rubicon. The U.S., however, must not
pressure South Af- rica into accepting more peac e monitors. In
fact, the U.S. should even avoid pressuring de Klerk into keeping
the current peace monitors if they are unwanted. There are two
reasons for this: 1) peace monitors cannot re- verse the political
dynamics fueling the violence; they may, in f a ct, be used
politically by one side against the others; and 2) if things were
to get out of hand, and the U.N. had to launch a major peacekeeping
operation -in South Africa, the U.S. would be pressured to take the
lead to finance it and possibly provide m i litary support. This
may prove to be unwise, given the potentially intractable nature of
civil conflicts in South Africa. How- ever, if Washington
repeatedly has pushed South Africa to accept a greater
international involvement in its inter- nal affairs, i t will be in
a weak position t& shun such a peacekeeping effort for South
Africa. To be sure, the U.S. has interests in South Africa.
Washington would like to see a peaceful dismantling of apartheid
and a stable transition to democracy. These interests, h o wever,
in no way warrant a major U.S. finan- cial and military commitment
to a U.N. peacekeeping operation. South Africa may never reach the
point where such a commitment is asked for. Yet the potential
exists. Therefore, the U.S. should establish a recor d of detach-
ment from the international community's increasing pressure to get
involved in South Africa's internal affairs. The, U.S. should
respect the South African government's prerogative to reject-this
involvement. And it should refuse to pressure So u th Africa one
way or another on accepting peace monitm. This will ensure that the
tables will not be turned on Washington if South Africa spins out
of control. Internationalizing South Africa's conflict may be, in
the long run, a sure way to Americanize i t.
Thomas P. Sheehy Policy Analyst
}}