why did britian and usa suported the apatheid regime of botha in souhth africa, but now condeming mugabee?

Question

during the apethied goverment in south africa, the whole world condemed the goverment's inhumanity to the black people except the british and american goverments.Now, president mugabee is been critisized by these two hypocritical goverment for infringing the rights of the white minorities of zimbabwe. does this mean they value the life of white peolpe to any other race or simply, protecting their own?

Answer 1

They learned from their mistakes. Now, why don't all the same countries who (rightly) condemned apartheid South Africa condemn it in Zimbabwe??

Answer 2

Britain and the US condemned the regime in South Africa. What they didn't do was support econmoic sanctions when Bishop Tutu requested them.

As for Zimbabwe, it's funny isn't it, how the Organization of African States refuses to condemn Mugabe's regime - which lost the last election, and has put the opposition polititions in jail, along with journalists and everyone else who stands up to them or speaks the truth.

They failed just as badly to do the right thing with the regime of Idi Amin in Uganda, and that madman in Zaire (now the Congo)...

It seems that it's alright to condemn a white government, but to condemn a black one wouldn't be right, even if it's being run by a tyrant with no respect for the rule of law...

And one more thing, the regime of Robert Mugabe hasn't just infringed the rights of white minorities, he's brutally infringed the rights of anyone (of any race) who is not on his side.

Answer 3

Robert Mugabe is a murdering, lying and psychopathic dictator.
He was a terrorist (alongside Nkomo) during their terrorist campaign in the 60's and 70's. Nkomo conveniently 'died' shortly after they were given recognition by the usual spineless British government and proceeded to do the opposite of Botha in South Africa and make life difficult for the white minority. Look at the state of Zimbabwe now. Even the African states nearby are worried by his dictatorship. People are murdered EVERY DAY! for voicing their opinions against him. He rigs elections. What else do you describe him as?.
Nelson Mandela could'nt even change him. He is a despot of the highest order and will stay in power as long people like you support him.
But, unlike you....he could speak English.

Answer 4

Britain merely followed the smell of left wing support for the blacks of south africa and for the release of the terrorist nelson mandela.

Big mistake.

South africa,under the leadership of mandela and the new powers of blacks ,acting like lottery winners without a clue what to do next.
The countrys economy and infrastructue has nosedived and will continue to descend until it will be supported by economic and humanitarian aid of the west.

There is no rich vein of vote winning support of zimbabwean public to exploit.So no action.Without the white farmers,the country has descended to its lowest ever ebb and famine waits around the next corner.
Of course it will all be blamed on the british empire.

Answer 5

I am not defending / excusing Botha but he can not be compared with Mugabe who is an out-and-out dictator.
I make no attempt to excuse nor explain American nor British policies but, to focus on the current situation, Mugabe is destroying Zimbabwe.
Many, many more black people than white are suffering from Mugabe's greed and cruelty. In my opinion he appears to be a heartless, cruel and megalomaniac.

Answer 6

What is your evidence to support your initial statement? Both the US and the UK boycotted South Africa during apartheid, unlike the USSR which did great trade with the regime. You are inventing facts to support your preconceived ideas. If you are going to make these statements at least make some pretense at having facts to support you. Of course, you cannot produce any as you are wrong.

Answer 7

Good question...
well, SA is worth more to them, look at the money SA brings for the western countries (Gold and diamonds). They couldn't have ignored their interests.
Zim..these are white farmers that Mugabe is treating badly. So there is interest there as well. Would have been nice if they had sanctioned SA as well. As for the Zim sanctions. He doesn't feel it because the UN is still sending food aid to his people. He has nothing to worry about. That is why he keeps saying there is no problem.

'Private' you are missing the point and out of context completly. also, the past tense of dive is dove.

Answer 8

Britain and America were the first countries to impose sanctions against the apartheid government. later on other countries followed with the blessing of the united nations.

Answer 9

I think you have to check your sources.

Pieter Willem Botha was a long-time leader of South Africa's National Party and a staunch advocate of racial segregation and the apartheid system. His father, also named Pieter, fought as a commando against the British in the Second Boer War (1899–1902) and his mother was interned in a British concentration camp.

Botha hated the British, In the years leading to World War II, Botha sympathised with the German Nazi Party and joined the right-wing Afrikaner nationalists in the Ossewabrandwag, or Oxwagon Sentinel (OB). However in later years, with Allied victory looming in Europe, Botha jumped ship and turned to Christian nationalism instead. In the 1980s he began a secret nuclear weapons program in collaboration with Israel, which culminated in the production of six nuclear bombs. He also remained steadfast in South Africa's administration of the neighbouring territory South-West Africa, particularly while there was a presence of Cuban troops in Angola to the north.

Britian was having very bad relations with the South African Government. The government held a referendum in October 1960 to decide whether South Africa should become a republic and on May 31, 1961, the country officially became the Republic of South Africa. In addition, it chose to withdraw from the Commonwealth of Nations before it was forced to leave because of apartheid policies. It was a case of jumping before being pushed.

Britian started to veto South Africa in the 1970's - before the rest of the world's International financial institutions began to regard South Africa as unsafe for investment. This, combined with increasing demands for international sanctions, led more than 200 U.S. companies to pull out of South Africa during the 1980s. The rand was devalued, and foreign investment virtually dried up. White South African emigration increased dramatically.

By comparison, President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe had fired up his gangs of supporters to began invading white farmers property in 2000.

In the first 18 months of the campaign, eight white landowners and 39 of their black workers were murdered, court orders defied and Zimbabwe's economy plunged into crisis. All but a handful of Zimbabwe's 4,000 white farmers lost their homes and livelihoods when armed gangs of Mugabe supporters - and 10.4 million acres were seized under a scheme designed to create a new class of black commercial farmer. By Mr Mugabe's latest figures, 5.8 million acres are lying fallow.

The new farmers are unable to raise bank loans because their properties are formally owned by the government and they have no individual title deeds. Without loans, they cannot buy seed, fertiliser or farming equipment and the regime has broken a pledge to supply them with tools.

Some farmers have resorted to using horse-drawn ploughs. Many have given up trying to produce anything at all.

Zimbabwe will hold parliamentary elections on March 31 and, for the first time in 10 years, Mr Mugabe is no longer holding out the offer of white-owned land as a vote-winner. Instead, his speeches are dominated by attacks on Tony Blair, who he claims is plotting to recolonise Zimbabwe. Meanwhile, Mugabe's multimillion dollar mansion is coming along nicely.

Britian supported Nelson Mandella in prision for years, and it now supportds the Black and White farmers who have been disposeed of thier livings by this madman Magabe... where do you get your distorted facts from?

Answer 10

Governments just support things that are in their own interest. They are not out to do what is right or fair. That's just the way of the world.