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.
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”
RSS