South Africa produced The Group Areas act in 1950, which “allocates the residential land in white South Africa for the use of each racial group.” South African law dictated that no one may reside in a place other than his or her given group area , implementing severe segregation among the black and white South Africans. In 1991, the South African government began to repeal the land acts, which reserved some areas for white Africans and some for black Africans, and the group areas act, “the territorial or spatial arrangements of apartheid are slated to be demolished.” These official laws that are racist in intention do not even reflect the social and cultural oppression that rose out of the apartheid. The violence, disrespect, hatred and racism that raged against Black South Africans by the White South African Minority and government was appalling, alarming and a true example of an undemocratic government where the minority rules the majority.
The Western world began to give attention to South Africa and considered it a problem, but why? Grundy argues that “part of what made South African policies a global issue was that the country was swimming against the current of universal values…the South African government was beginning to systematize and rationalize the racial basis of its power and the rest of the world were declaring racism evil.” South Africa was also “on the agenda” for the United States especially as there was economic interest, between trade and over 350 major corporate investments; South Africa held an economic interest for the United States.
The United States efforts in ending South African apartheid were lackluster and disappointing. More was done on a civilian level, such as economic divestment by colleges and churches, than on a government level. “Despite its role as a world leader, the U.S until recently only played a secondary role in pressuring South Africa…this mounting opposition was not unidirectional. There were spells, under Nixon and Reagan, during which the U.S experiences major lapses…there had been a reticence to identify with Pretoria’s most vocal and militant enemies.” Grundy argues that due to the United State’s lackluster policies and lax attitude towards South African Apartheid, could reflect support in a sense, of the white dominated and supported government and the institution of apartheid itself.
Eventually, the Western world, including the US began a more uniform and pressured attempt to cease apartheid as an institution. Encouraging civilians not to travel to South Africa, urging people to break diplomatic ties, terminating international facilities for South African planes and ships, were just some of the security council’s policies implemented to end apartheid. In 1963, the Security Council passed the S.C Res 181, which called “for a ban on the sales of arms to South Africa.” The United States also took more individualized actions to show its rejection of apartheid by closing down their NASA defense port in Johannesburg and by not allowing “U.S Naval Vessels to berth in South Africa, or have their Naval sailors take shore leave in South African ports.”
Though Apartheid has ended in South Africa, its violence, poverty and deaths had eternal lasting effects on those who lived through the reign of white domination in which even the police endangered and killed black Africans. The United States lackluster attempt to aid Black South Africans and terminate apartheid as an institution only reveals two things, the economic and the racial factor. The economic factor clearly played a role in the interest and attention given to South Africa, especially due to the fact that other countries who face similar problems of racial segregation and violence such as Uganda, Lebanon and Cambodia, have not gained as much attention or aid. The race factor is that those other countries have mostly if not all entirely black populations. Seemingly, the white presence in South Africa and the economic trade it held for the United States played a huge role in the United States participation to end Apartheid.
There should have been a more major and severe economic divestment to weaken the government and display the United States rejection of apartheid. Though it is difficult to undo segregation, attempts should have been made early on by the U.S government to force the African government into signed legal documents permitting equal housing opportunities for all. Similarly, an employment act in which jobs were made available to all was needed. Violence also needed to be addressed, as the white police were no help, but rather an aid, to the killing of black South Africans. Police should have been discharged and imprisoned until trial for any racial based violence without probable cause.
U.S efforts could have been stronger, more unified and more demanding of the South African government, however the fact that the U.S was involved at all with South Africa and not with other crisis countries, such as Uganda and Cambodia and until recently, the Sudan, begs the question of where their priorities lie.
Why does America get involved so late in the crisis, yet cry that it a crime against humanity…was it not a crime against humanity the moment it began? Though it is sometimes seen as out of place, for a foreign country to step in and declare that what one country is doing is wrong, the universal code of ethics needs to be upheld. If a country does not uphold these acts, they should be held responsible and accountable. Genocide should not be allowed by the U.S or anyone to go on as long as it did in the Sudan, before U.S involvement, and even now, the attempt is lackluster at best. A universal code of ethics of what every single person in the world is entitled to, needs to be written, agreed upon and signed and then
aggressively upheld in order to ensure the right to live, which every man, woman and child, is entitled to. There needs to not just be an economic interest, or a reputation interest, but a genuine concern for the good and fairness for all humanity because only if people generally care, will policies be enforced and peace upheld.