http://www.smh.com.au/world/one-mans-giant-leap-forward-20100205-nitm.html


One man's giant leap forward 
ALEX DUVAL SMITH 
February 6, 2010 
 
Long march to freedom ... Nelson Mandela and his then wife Winnie leave Victor 
Verster Prison near Cape Town in 1990. Photo: Reuters

Twenty years on, F.W. de Klerk talks about his decision to release Nelson 
Mandela, reports Alex Duval Smith. 

After 26 years in prison, Nelson Mandela did not want to be set free straight 
away. Two days before his release, the world's most famous political prisoner 
was taken to see President F. W. de Klerk in his Cape Town office. The 
president got a surprise. 

''I told him he would be flown to Johannesburg and released there on 11 
February 1990. Mr Mandela's reaction was not at all as I had expected,'' said 
De Klerk. ''He said: 'No, it is too soon, we need more time for preparation.' 
That is when I realised that long hours of negotiation lay ahead with this 
man.''

Twenty years after the event, sitting in the study of his Cape Town home, 
Frederik Willem de Klerk, now 73, still has the headmasterly style and 
deliberate speech that the watching world came to know as he played a crucial 
role in dismantling apartheid.

But the winner of the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize still recalls the enormous leap of 
faith that was required to negotiate the end of white minority rule with what 
he describes as the ''fundamentally socialistic'' African National Congress of 
the time.

Just after 4pm on the date appointed by De Klerk, Mandela, then 71, walked 
free, holding the hand of his wife, Winnie. The prisoner had lost his argument 
for a later release date but had persuaded De Klerk to allow him to leave 
directly from Victor Verster Prison, in Paarl, near Cape Town. Mandela held up 
his fist in an ANC salute. In an instant he switched from being a symbol of the 
oppressed to the global symbol of courage and freedom that he remains today.

Mandela's release did not signal the end of apartheid. In fact, the white-ruled 
pariah state was entering the most dangerous chapter in its history since the 
introduction of racial separation in 1948.

Four hours after leaving prison, Mandela arrived in Cape Town to address 
thousands of people gathered outside city hall. The impatient crowd had clashed 
with police and bullets had been fired. But Mandela did not bring a message of 
appeasement. ''The factors which necessitated armed struggle still exist 
today,'' he told the cheering onlookers.

Mandela called on the international community to maintain its sanctions. ''I 
have carried the idea of a democratic and free society in which all persons 
live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. I hope to live to see 
the achievement of that ideal. But if need be, it is an ideal for which I am 
prepared to die,'' he shouted.

With hindsight, Mandela used the fiery address to take up a negotiating 
position and convince the black majority that he had not made a secret pact 
with the authorities.

De Klerk had his moment of truth nine days earlier, in an address to the 
all-white parliament that coined the phrase ''a new South Africa''.

''There were gasps in the house, yes,'' said De Klerk, ''but not at the news of 
Mr Mandela's release. The gasps came when I announced the unbanning not only of 
the ANC but also the South African Communist Party and of all affiliated 
organisations, which included the armed wing of the ANC, Umkhonto we Sizwe. 
There were gasps then and, from the far-right party, protests and boos.''

DE KLERK speaks slowly and clearly - and charmlessly. He is a lawyer from a 
strict, Calvinist tradition in which displays of emotion are seen as a sign of 
weakness. His one quirk seems to be the incessant chewing of gum. He has lived 
in this modern house in Fresnaye for 18 months, having moved into Cape Town 
with his second wife, Elita, from his farm in Paarl.

He points out that, from his garden, he has a view of Robben Island, where 
Mandela spent 18 years in prison.

Radical change requires steely nerves. De Klerk had become president in 
September 1989, the son of a National Party cabinet minister and the nephew of 
a prime minister. He grew up with Afrikaner fear in his DNA - the dread that 
after 400 years on the tip of Africa and the struggle against British colonial 
rule, his Huguenot descendants would be chased into the sea by the black 
majority.

That fear contributed to policies that built his nation - forced removals to 
create racially segregated areas and blacks being deprived of their 
citizenship. It led to ''passbooks'', introduced to restrict black people's 
movements beyond those that were necessary to the economy, and separate 
beaches, buses, hospitals, schools, universities and lavatories for blacks, 
whites, mixed-race ''coloureds'' and Indians.

De Klerk claims he had no confidant as he prepared his February 2 speech at his 
holiday home in Hermanus in the Western Cape. ''My predecessor, P.W. Botha, had 
an inner circle and I did not like it. I preferred decisions to evolve out of 
cabinet discussions. That way we achieved real co-ownership of our policies.''

He says his consultative style was a break with National Party culture. But he 
also claims - in a line of argument that allows him to avoid condemning 
apartheid outright - that the system unravelled through a gradual process. Even 
today, he admits only that international sanctions ''from time to time kept us 
on our toes''.

In 1959 Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd's government divided black South 
Africans into eight ethnic groups and allocated them ''homelands''. The move 
was a cornerstone of an Afrikaner nationalist dream to create a republic, but 
it led to international isolation. De Klerk was a vigorous supporter.

''I wanted us to take a more adventurous approach to the nation state concept, 
but the project ultimately failed because the whites wanted to keep too much 
land for themselves.

''The third phase - which coincided with my entering cabinet but was not 
started by me - was a shift towards reform. It focused on making separate 
development more acceptable while still believing it was just. But by the early 
1980s we had ended up in a dead-end street in which a minority would continue 
to hold the reins of power and blacks, outside the homelands, really did not 
have any meaningful political rights. We had become too economically 
inter-dependent. We had become an omelet that you could not unscramble.''

In 1986 the National Party abandoned the concept of separate development. ''We 
embraced the idea of a united South Africa with equal political rights for all, 
but with very effective protection of minorities. Then my predecessor lost his 
enthusiasm. When I took over, my task was to flesh out what was already a 
fairly clear vision, but we needed broad support. We needed negotiation.''

De Klerk moved quickly. In October 1989, a month after succeeding Botha, he 
released Mandela's political mentor, Walter Sisulu, and seven other prominent 
Robben Island prisoners. De Klerk says: ''When I first met Mandela we did not 
discuss anything of substance, we just felt each other out. He spent a long 
time expressing his admiration for the Boer generals and how ingenious they 
were during the Anglo-Boer war. We did not discuss the fundamental problems or 
our political philosophies at all.

''Later, during the negotiations, it became clear that there was a big divide. 
On the economic side, the ANC was fundamentally socialistic, the influence of 
the Communist Party was pervasive and they wanted nationalisation. They also 
wanted to create an unelected government of national unity which would organise 
elections. We insisted on governing until a new constitution had been 
negotiated and adopted by parliament.''

De Klerk's successive negotiated victories potentially saved South Africa from 
the post-colonial governance void suffered by many other countries on the 
continent. They also entrenched minority rights constitutionally and set the 
country on a capitalist path.

''The government that came into power after the April 1994 elections was going 
to need a budget. It was drafted by our finance minister, Derek Keys, and he 
convinced them of the necessity to stay within the free-market principles that 
had been in force in South Africa for decades. The ANC has stuck to these 
principles and that is one of the great positives.''

De Klerk, who retired as deputy president in 1997, worries that the left wing 
of the governing alliance - which supported President Jacob Zuma's offensive to 
oust Thabo Mbeki in 2008 - will win its current campaign for payback. He also 
believes South Africa is ripe for a political shake-up, maybe as soon as in 
next year's municipal elections.

''You cannot say we are a healthy, dynamic democracy when one party wins almost 
two-thirds of the vote. We need a realignment in politics. I am convinced there 
will be further splits in the ANC because you cannot keep together people who 
believe in hardline socialism and others who have become convinced of 
free-market principles.

''The 2011 elections will be the opportunity for some much-needed shock 
therapy.''

The foundation he runs in Cape Town officially exists to defend the 
constitution but places a strong focus on minority rights - those of Afrikaners 
and the Afrikaans-speaking ''coloured'' population. ''The ANC has regressed 
into dividing South Africa again along the basis of race and class. We see an 
attitude in which for certain purposes all people of colour are black, but for 
other purposes black Africans have a more valid case in the field of, for exam- 
ple, affirmative action than do brown or Indian South Africans. The legacy of 
Mandela - reconciliation - urgently needs to be revived.''

He says some whites still accuse him of having given the country away. Asked 
what would have happened had he not made the February speech, De Klerk has a 
ready answer. ''To those people I say it is a false comparison to look at what 
was good in the old South Africa against what is bad today.

''If we had not changed in the manner we did, South Africa would be completely 
isolated. The majority of people in the world would be intent on overthrowing 
the government. Our economy would be non-existent - we would not be exporting a 
single case of wine and South African planes would not be allowed to land 
anywhere. Internally, we would have the equivalent of civil war.''

The Observer


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Kirim email ke