We have now had more than a week of unrelenting beatification of former South African president Nelson Mandela by exactly the kind of people who stood behind his jailers under apartheid.
Mandela was without question a towering historical figure and an outstanding hero of South Africa’s liberation struggle. So it would be tempting to imagine they had been won over by the scale of his achievement, courage and endurance.
For some, that may be true. For many others, in the Western world in particular, it reeks of the rankest hypocrisy. It is, after all, Mandela’s global moral authority and the manifest depravity of the system he and the African National Congress (ANC) brought to an end that now makes the hostility of an earlier time impossible to defend.
So history has had to be comprehensively rewritten, Mandela and the ANC appropriated and sanitized, and inconvenient facts minimized or ignored. The whitewashed narrative has been such a success that the former ANC leader has been reinvented and embraced as an all-purpose Kumbaya figure by politicians across the spectrum and aging celebrities alike.
However, it is a fiction that turns the world on its head and obscures the reality of global power then and now. In this fantasy, the racist apartheid tyranny was a weird aberration that came from nowhere, unconnected to the colonial system it grew out of or the world powers that kept it in place for decades.
In real life, it was not just former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher who branded Mandela a terrorist and resisted sanctions, or British Prime Minister David Cameron, who went on pro-apartheid lobby junkets. Almost the entire Western establishment effectively backed the South African regime until the bitter end.
Former US president Ronald Reagan described it as “essential to the free world.” The CIA gave South African security the tipoff that led to Mandela’s arrest and imprisonment for 27 years. Former British prime minister Harold Wilson’s government was still selling arms to the racist regime in the 1960s, and Mandela was not removed from the US terrorism watch list until 2008.
Airbrushed out of the Mandela media story has been the man who launched a three-decade-long armed struggle after non-violent avenues had been closed; who declared in his 1964 speech from the dock that the only social system he was tied to was socialism; who was reported by the ANC-allied South African Communist Party this week to have been a member of its central committee at the time of his arrest; and whose main international supporters for 30 years were the Soviet Union and Cuba.
It has barely been mentioned in the past few days, but Mandela supported the ANC’s armed campaign of sabotage, bombings and attacks on police and military targets throughout his time in prison. Veterans of Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), the ANC’s armed wing, emphasize that the military campaign was always subordinate to the political struggle and that civilians were never targeted (though there were civilian casualties).
However, as Ronnie Kasrils, MK’s former intelligence chief, told me on Dec. 11 that Mandela continued to back it after his release in 1990 when Kasrils was running arms into South Africa to defend ANC supporters against violent attacks. There is no doubt that under today’s US and British law, he and other ANC leaders would have been jailed as terrorists for supporting such a campaign.
One of the lessons of Mandela and the ANC’s real history is that the Cold War was not simply fought over capitalism and communism — or freedom and dictatorship, as is now often claimed — but also over colonialism and national liberation, in which the West was unmistakably on the wrong side.
South Africa was not an anomaly. The brutal truth is that the US and its allies backed dictatorships from Argentina to Saudi Arabia, while Soviet support allowed peoples from Vietnam to Angola to win national independence. Cuban military action against South African and US-backed forces at Cuito Cuanavale in Angola in 1988 gave a vital impetus to the fall of the racist regime in Pretoria.
That is one reason Mandela was a progressive nationalist, and why Cuban President Raul Castro spoke at the Dec. 10 celebration of Mandela’s life in Soweto, not Cameron. And why the man US President Barack Obama called the “last great liberator of the 20th century” was outspoken in his opposition to US and British wars of intervention and occupation, from Kosovo to Iraq — damning the US as a “threat to world peace,” guilty of “unspeakable atrocities.”
Such statements have barely figured in media tributes to Mandela, of course. The enthusiasm with which Mandela has been embraced in the Western world is not only about the racial reconciliation he led, which was a remarkable achievement, but the extent of the ANC’s accommodation with corporate South Africa and global finance, which has held back development and deepened inequality.
There have been important social advances since the democratic transformation of the early 1990s, from water and power supply to housing and education. In the global climate of the early 1990s, it is perhaps not surprising that the ANC bent to the neoliberal flood tide, putting its Freedom Charter calls for public ownership and redistribution of land on the back burner. However, the price has been to entrench racial economic division, unemployment and corruption, while failing to attract the expected direct foreign investment.
The baleful grip of neoliberal capitalism, and the growing pressure to break with it, is a challenge that goes far beyond South Africa, of course.
However, along with the struggle for social justice and national liberation, the right to resist tyranny and occupation, and profound opposition to racism and imperial power, that is part of Mandela’s real legacy.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95