Did divestment end apartheid in South Africa?

Question

There is a great deal of passion for divestment in Sudan. Many proponents of this action cite the success of the method in ending apartheid in South Africa. It is my understanding that there were certainly powerful internal factors pummeling that nation towards greater equality. I am wondering to what extent did divestment push the country over the edge, was it just a little drop in a great big bucket with other factors contributing to a much greater extent, or someplace between those two extremes?

Answer 1

I would say it played quite a significant role in ending apartheid. Realistically, the white government could have controlled the black South Africans for much longer than they did if apartheid was to be ended for internal reasons alone. A huge part of South Africa's international strength was the Cold War. America and many of its allies were convinced that white control in South Africa was the key to preventing the spread of communism in the African continent. I think the end of the Cold War was a huge contributing factor to the end of apartheid. Furthermore, South Africa was a huge investment frontier during the apartheid, investors were getting minimum returns of 15% annually! Although many acknowledged that apartheid was wrong, 15% returns were hard to avoid. Also, living conditions for the whites in South Africa even exceeded the living standard in Southern California for much of the 1960's until the early 1980's. I think the economic embargo's by the UN eventually began to hurt the South African economy by the mid 1980's. People began to pull their investments in favor of the "Asian tigers". Investment was a key to economic stability in South Africa, since their key industries required huge investment to run efficiently (gold and diamonds especially). Sudan isn't getting much foreign investment support right now (at least not on a comparable scale of South Africa). The economy in Sudan is very reliant on agriculture, not industry or commerce like South Africa. I'm skeptical that divestment will correct the situation in Sudan.

Answer 2

"Which brings us to the final fable about economic sanctions: they just don’t work, supposedly. Indeed, this was Reagan's defense for violating the Act he signed into law. The Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 (PL 99-440) imposed very weak economic sanctions against South Africa, with the provision that “if the President determine sthat significant progress toward ending the system of Apartheid and establishing a non-racial democracy in South Africa [has not been made by 1987]... the President shall [recommend which] ...additional measures should be imposed.” The Act specifically defined the evidence which would indicate sufficient progress: repeal of the state of emergency, release of all political prisoners, free participation in the political process to all groups. By 1987, they hadn’t occurred (they still haven't). Yet Reagan, agruing that “punitive sanctions are not the best way to bring freedom to South Africa,” violated the law and refused to impose additional sanctions."

"While Reagan, Crocker and many others including lately, George Bush, continued to argue that sanctions don’t work, the numbers indicated otherwise. Despite the fact that the sanctions imposed by the Act were riddled with loopholes (new investments were forbidden, for example, but new short-term financing was not), and despite the fact that of 40 corporations found by the General Accounting Office to have violated the sanctions, none were ever prosecuted, U.S. and worldwide sanctions effectively crippled the South African economy. Gerald De Koch, Chairman of the South African Reserve Bank, reported that sanctions cost the Republic of South Africa $7 billion between 1986 and 1990. The sanctions are the only reason Nelson Mandela is a free man today, and perhaps it is best to close with his comments upon his release."

" "We call on the international community to continue the campaign to isolate the apartheid regime. To lift sanctions now would be to run the risk of aborting the process towards the complete eradication of apartheid." "

"South Africa Now : The Politics of Sanctions", Blaine De Lancey, The Alternative Orange, August 29, 2000 : http://www.etext.org/Politics/AlternativeOrange/1/v1n3_san.html