destroyed, 16 rail cars seriously damaged escaped their Portuguese pursuers by fleeing across the Malawi border. (Rand Daily Mail. May 17, 1973.) Tensions between Mozambique and Malawi flared on May 3, when Portuguese forces clashed with Malawi troops in a day-long battle along the border 45 miles southwest of Zomba. (Agence FrancePresse, May 4, 1973; Johannesburg Star, May 5, 1973.) Both nations have since denied that any such engagement took place, reports Portugal's Diario de Noticias in its May 6 issue. In Tete province, the location of the giant Cabora Bassa hydroelectric project, an estimated 2.500 guerrillas, with support of some 30,000 Africans, have chalked up successes during the last 12 months that even the Portuguese military command acknowledges. Nevertheless, the Portuguese claim the insurgents have yet to break the protective cordon surrounding the project, which they say is being constructed ahead of schedule. (London Times. May 15, 1973.) Increasingly, the men assigned to fight the Frelimo guerrillas are not white Portuguese from Europe but Black Mozambiquans. General Kaulza de Arriaga, commander-in-chief of the armed forces, reports that 58 per cent of the army is African, and that with the addition of 10,000 more Africans by December the percentage will top 60. (Rand Daily Mail, April 25, 1973.) Although news reports emanating from Mozambique focus heavily on the guerrilla war, it would be false to view the territory as a Vietnam-like conflagration. Most fighting is confined to the three northern provinces of Cabo Delgado, Niassa and Tete. In Lourenço Marques, Mozambique's capital on the southern coast, there is little noticeable concem with the war. Businessmen there, regardless of their varying political persuasions, agree with the govemment in dismissing the guerrilla campaign as ineffectual. More promising in their eyes is a steady development of Mozambique industry and trade. (London Times, May 3 and 11, 1973.) ⚫ The economic independence forced on Mozambique (and on Angola and Guinea-Bissau) over a year ago by an economically ill Portugal may be of greater significance than either the recent constitutional changes that ushered in a Black majority or the country's nineyear-old guerrilla war. According to Michael Knipe of the London Times, the view widely held in nongovemmental circles is that the combined effect of growing constitutional autonomy and the new economic independence "point inevitably to an eventual parting of the ways." (London Times, May 2, 1973.) The North London Haslemere Group has announced a shareholders' campaign to boycott the main retailers of Nescafé coffee in Britain. Nescafé is a product of the Swiss Nestle Company, the main importer of Angolan coffee into Britain. The North London Group is undertaking the boycott to protest working conditions on Angolan coffee plantations and use of purchase money to finance the Portuguese anti-guerrilla campaign. They estimate that more than 13 per cent of the coffee trade's income goes directly for military uses. (Peace News, April 27, 1973.) Namibia A state of tension pervades Ovamboland-home of nearly half Namibia's people-following the arrest of 10 political leaders and the destruction of the headquarters and the printing press of the Ovambo-Kavango Evangelical Lutheran Church. Both the arrested men and the Church have persistently criticized South Africa's administration of Namibia and the policy of separate development. (Windhoek Advertiser. May 18, 1973.) Three Ovambo leaders-Johannes Nangutuuala, president and founder of the opposition National Democratic Co-operative; the party's secretary, Andreas Nukwawo, and John Otto, a leader of the South West Africa People's Organization in Namibia (SWAPO)—were arrested by South African police while leading a peaceful demonstration against Ovamboland's elevation of selfgoverning status on May 1st as part of a separate-development scheme for Namibia. (Windhoek Advertiser, May 7, 1973.) Another SWAPO leader, Johannes Ampala, who had participated in the demonstration was also arrested. (Johannesburg Star, May 13, 1973.) All four men are accused of holding an illegal political meeting and of making statements aimed at undermining the state's security. Large crowds of Ovambos-estimated by the Windhoek Advertiser to number "at least 5000-turned up to applaud the four arrested leaders during the opening days of their trial on May 21 and 22 (Windhoek Advertiser, May 22, 1973.) On the second day of the hearing, policemen reportedly used force to disperse a gathering of some 1500 people. Accounts say demonstrators were clubbed with machine guns and kicked. (Johannesburg Star, May 26, 1973; Windhoek Advertiser, May 23, 1973; London Times, May 23, 1973) Police spokesmen said the charges were "downright lies" (Windhoek Advertiser, May 24, 1973.) The hearing itself has been adjourned until June 20. The trial served to magnify the uneasiness that has built up since explosives destroyed the central buildings and the printing press of the Ovambo-Kavango Evangelical Lutheran Church on May 11. More than half the population of Namibia are members of the Church, whose leader Bishop Leonard Auala, has been an outspoken opponent of apartheid. (Rand Daily Mail, May 12, 1973.) A newspaper published by the Church press had consistently criticized both the South African and the Ovambo govemments and had provided a platform for Johannes Nangutuuala, one of those arrested in recent weeks. Most of the other nine arrested leaders were also associated with the Church. (Rand Daily Mail, May 12, 1973; London Times. May 12, 1973.) The latest flare-ups come at a delicate time for Prime Minister Vorster who has been attempting to persuade the United Nations that South Africa is following an acceptable policy in Namibia. In a recent clarification of South Africa's attitude on Namibia provided to United Nations Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim by Dr. Hilgard Muller (South African Minister of Foreign Affairs), the South African Government: promised to respect the wishes of the "whole population" in achieving "self-determination and indepen dence," said it had no intention of delaying self-determination in Namibia and suggested that full self-determination was possible within 10 years, and recognized the right of all political parties to free participation in this process, including the right to speak out and to hold public meetings. (Windhoek Advertiser, May 2, 1973, Johannesburg Star, May 5 and 12, 1973; London Times. May 6, 1973) Although some observers have described the concessions as farreaching, Government sources in Cape Town say the idea of separate homelands has not been shelved and that the reference to "whole population" is still a reference to the different "peoples" in Namibia. (London Times, May 3, 1973; Windhoek Advertiser, May 2 1973.) Secretary-General Waldheim, in a report to the Security Council on April 30, said the South African position is "still far from coin. ciding" with that of the United Nations and that he had not received the "complete and unequivocal clarification" he had been seeking. The question of whether to continue or to break off contact with South Africa on Namibia is now in the hands of the Security Coun cil. The U.N. Council for Namibia, which acts as a quasiprovisional govemment for Namibia, opposes continued dialogue; so does Herero Chief Clemens Kapuuo who told the French ambassador to South Africa that the U.N. should take over the former teritory and train an elected "government of the peoples" to administer it (Windhoek Advertiser. May 7, 1973; Rand Daily Mail, May 16, 1973.) The sporadic and little-reported guerrilla activity in Namibia's Caprivi Strip-a sliver of land between Zambia and Botswana--cost the lives of nine South African policemen and soldiers during the Easter weekend. Several more soldiers were injured on May 23 when their vehicle struck a land mine. (Rand Daily Mail. April 25 and May 25, 1973.) SWAPO claims responsibility for "armed resistance" in the area. which according to South African officials is based in neighboring Zambia. (Rand Daily Mail, April 25, 1973.) APPENDIX 13 EXCHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, AND GEMSTONE MINERS, LTD. CONCERNING U.S. POLICY WITH RESPECT TO INVESTMENT IN NAMIBIA MR. WILLIAM TAFT LESH, Foreign Liaison Office, Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, D.C. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, D.C., Apr. 14, 1972. DEAR MR. LESH: With reference to your telephone conversations with Mr. Haught of this office, I am pleased to furnish you with a statement of the United States' position on American investment in South West Africa (Namibia). On May 20, 1970, the United States announced the following policy: (1) The United States will officially discourage investment by U.S. nationals in South West Africa; (2) U.S. nationals who invest in South West Africa on the basis of rights acquired through the South African Government since adoption of UN General Assembly Resolution 2145 (October 27, 1966) will not receive United States Government assistance in protection of such investment against claims of a future lawful government of South West Africa; (3) Export-Import Bank credit guarantees and other facilities will not be made available for trade with South West Africa. These actions apply solely to South West Africa. The second of the three points does not apply to investments made prior to announcement of the policy nor to subsequent investments based on rights acquired through the South African Government prior to October 27, 1966. I hope this information will be useful to you. Please do not hesitate to call if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely yours, Mr. AARON A. Knopf, President, Gemstone Miners, Ltd., West Hempstead, N.Y. OLIVER S. CROSBY, Director, Southern African Affairs. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, D.C., May 2, 1972. DEAR MR. KNOPF: The United States on February 4, 1972, supported UN Security Council resolution 310. Operative paragraph 5 of the resolution "calls upon all states whose nationals and corporations are operating in Namibia to use all available means to ensure that such nationals and corporations conform in their policies of hiring Namibian workers to the basic provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights". A copy of the Declaration is enclosed. I am writing to you because we understand that your firm has begun mining operations on a limited scale in the international territory of South West Africa (Namibia). I am sure you share our concern with regard to the human rights of the people of the territory, and I hope we can count on your cooperation in taking such steps as may be necessary to ensure that any operations there in which your corporation has an interest are fully consonant with the Declaration. While Articles 23, 24, and 25, dealing with rights respecting employment and adequate standards of living are especially pertinent, many others, such as Articles 1, 2, 4, 13, 16, 18, 19, and 20, are also relevant to the situation in the territory. In the United States the employee enjoys such rights under the Constitution and federal and state laws. To protect these rights, he has open to him such avenues of recourse as labor organizations, freely elected representatives in legislative bodies, and the courts. In the international territory, under South African administration, many of these rights are routinely denied. The employer there thus incurs a special and heavy burden of responsibility, for frequently he will be the only party with the knowledge, bargaining power, and independence effectively to support his employees' rights. The well-being of his workers and the long-term viability of his enterprise depend very much on his ability to interpret, present, and protect their needs and rights vis-a-vis the South African Government and the local authorities under its control. We realize, of course, that it is not within the power of foreign business enterprises in the territory of South West Africa to cause the provisions of the Declaration of Human Rights to be implemented fully with respect to their employees. The United States nonetheless gives its support to paragraph 5 of SC Res 310 (1972) in the belief that what foreign businesses do in this respect makes a significant difference to their employees. I believe, moreover, that with the growth of popular interest in, and concern over, social issues, the practices of American industry in this area will become of increasing importance to the regard in which it is held by the public at large. We would very much appreciate hearing from you regarding your activities in the territory and your plans in connection with the problem of conforming employment policies there to the basic provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Department stands ready to assist you in any appropriate way in dealing with the problem. Sincerely, WILLIS C. ARMSTRONG, Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs. APPENDIX 14 THE CONTROL OF WAGES IN SOUTH AFRICA (By Stanley Siebert and Adrian Guelke) PREFACE October 1973 The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of the impact of apartheid policies on the South African labour market. It is based on statistical evidence of changes in white and African earnings in private manufacturing and construction. The system of controls over African labour that has been established in South Africa is unique, although the same objectives underlie the pattern of controls over African labour in Namibia (South West Africa). Much has been written about the evils of the migrant labour system, which the South African Government defends as a cornerstone of the apartheid aim of granting selfdetermination on a 'multi-national' basis. Our purpose is not to add to this literature. Rather it is to ascertain questions of fact; the effect of this policy on the voluntary mobility of African labour and the extent to which fields of work have been delineated for white and black. We have chosen these questions because they throw light on the current debate on whether foreign investment can be used as a lever to change South Africa's labour policies. In this context, the Study Project on External Investment in South Africa and Namibia set up to undertake research into the role of foreign investment should be mentioned. Also indicative of the current interest in the West's economic stake in South Africa is the inquiry being conducted into the wages paid by British firms in South Africa by a House of Commons sub-committee. The most striking implication of our findings is that foreign firms can do little to bring ⚫about any substantial improvement in African wages or employment opportunities as they have to operate within the institutional framework of apartheid. A second implication is that economic expansion is unlikely to overturn the 'temporary sojourner' policy. Expansion will not cause the unrestricted training and promotion of Africans nor will it place them in a strategic position within the economy. We therefore cannot look to economic expansion alone to bring about political change in South Africa. Finally, our findings demonstrate that apartheid itself is dependent upon the continued extension of government intervention in the labour market. (229) |