Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Africa and South Asia, Volume XI, Part 1

745A.00/8–654

The Ambassador in the Union of South Africa (Gallman) to the Department of State

official use only
No. 45

Pretoria, August 6, 1954.

Subject:

• Final Summarization of Views on South Africa¹

This, after almost three years in residence in South Africa, is the final summarization of my views on the South African scene. It will be somewhat repetitious. Much that I have to say I have said before in somewhat more detail in previous despatches. But the fact that there is some repetition may not be without significance. It brings into relief the fact that there are present certain basic situations or problems that stand out and will persist for some time.

The Nationalists

The first fact, as I see it, for those interested in South Africa to face and accept is that the Nationalist Party, now in power, will remain in power for the foreseeable future. The Party’s victory of 1948 was very substantially extended in 1953. Following that recent victory, its fortunes have even improved. In the by-elections held since April, 1953, the Nationalists have either held their own or increased their strength. The Opposition, the United Party, following its severe defeat in last year’s election, has been weakened still more by the defiance, followed by expulsion, of the so-called “rebels” who brought out into the open the intra-Party dissatisfaction over leadership. Ineffectual leadership caused a still further, and probably in the long run more damaging, defection. That was the withdrawal from the Party of its more articulate liberal wing and formation by it of a separate Liberal Party, leaving the United Party more than ever, vis-à-vis the Nationalists, a mere “me too” party. One has on the one hand the Opposition United Party with weak leadership, divided counsel, and compromising actions; on the other, the Government party, the Nationalists, disciplined, with the rank and file following unquestioningly the Party program, finely organized down to the precinct level with Party workers on the job around the clock, and one real simple tenet of faith, “White supremacy,” which actually means Afrikaner supremacy, preached day in and day out to the young, middle aged, and old; one simple, appealing article of faith with which to carry on and keep in power. The way it is tirelessly exploited by Cabinet Ministers on weekends and by the lesser Party devotees during the other five days of the week is indeed impressive.

Whoever, therefore, has interests in South Africa or is contemplating acquiring interests in South Africa in the near future had better do his planning and base his calculations on the fact that he will have a Nationalist Government to deal with for quite some time.

The Non-European

This discussion of the non-European is concerned almost exclusively with the largest of the non-European element, the Bantu, or, as he is generally referred to, the Native.

In almost every activity in South Africa the Native plays some part. He works in the home, on the farm, on the streets, highways and railroads, in the mine and factory, and in the building trade. Something in each of these activities is left to him to do. Should he be brought into a nationwide organization with discipline and centralized leadership, no more than a nod from the top could conceivably tie up the economy and public services of the country at large, with incalculable repercussions on the security, health and wealth of the country. Such a calamity is not a present threat, for the requisite organization and leadership do not now exist. Given time, both could emerge. The elements are at hand; that is, fairly wide discontent with living conditions as prescribed by color bars, segregation and pass laws, and some, although numerically limited, Native leadership.

To eliminate this potential threat to the country’s stability and security, time is needed to work out a more equitable way of life for European and non-European to carry on side by side. In some quarters, mainly non-Governmental, serious thought is being given to working out such a way of life. Until, it seems to me, this is done with all honesty, cooperatively, by Government and non-Government groups, the prospects for a sound, fair and long-term program are slim. The first prerequisite is the creation of an atmosphere free from present tensions in which to work out calmly and unhurriedly, in consultation with Native leaders, a long-range program. While there are no present indications that within a reasonable time this will come about, there are also no indications that the country now faces the danger of countrywide disaster. For the present, the danger is confined to possible sporadic, scattered disturbances.

Some leadership in passive resistance in the future may, as it did two years ago, come from the Indian element. Some leadership in a general movement of protest may eventually come from the more literate and better educated Colored group. The likelihood of this happening would be increased by discriminatory action against the Coloreds (as, for example, removal from the common electoral roll), the effect of which would be to force them away from cooperation with Europeans into collaboration with the Natives. It is among this more literate, better educated Colored element that, too, no doubt the most effective leadership for the Communist cause could be found, a leadership that would know how to exploit the Natives’ discontent even though the Natives’ understanding of Communism would be but vague, if not really non-existent, as is generally the case today.

Problems Facing South Africa

The problem of how to work out a stable way of life between Europeans and non-Europeans obviously overshadows every other problem which South Africa has to face. The other problems cannot, however, be ignored.

I once felt that differences within the European camp were a source of serious danger to the country. What I had primarily in mind was the cleavage between the English and the Afrikaner elements or, put in loose political terms, the struggle between the Nationalists and the United Party. While quite often the clashes and struggles between these European groups, as I have witnessed them, are very bitter, I do not think, as I once did, that there is danger of paralysis in the political field arising from them. What I have come to feel is that on any fundamental issue touching the relations of the European community as a whole with non-Europeans, all Europeans will be found, in principle, in agreement. They may not be in entire agreement on ways and means, but they are in agreement, I feel, on the end to be achieved. Still more I have come to feel, particularly in view of the outcome of the 1953 election and its aftermath, that in the narrow field of party struggle the Nationalists have now such a preponderance of power that the dangers of political paralysis are greatly diminished, if not non-existent.

There are, though, dangers of a subtler kind that South Africans must recognize. They are dangers that all too few of them are conscious of. There are the dangers arising from geographic isolation, a benevolent climate, ready labor to do all menial work, and a too easy source of wealth from rich and varied mineral deposits. Future income from uranium production alone is vast, and that, let it be noted, is weath largely derived from what has until now been a waste product of gold mining.

He lives a rather self-satisfied, isolated existence. He suffers from not having near at hand the stimulation that comes from competition. The world over the past three hundred years has moved on and left him shut off in a fool’s paradise of his own creating. All this has made for comparatively low standards. In his thinking and in the work he does, regardless of what field one examines, the South African is not only quite satisfied with something somewhat inadequate and indifferent, but he thinks it is up to, if not superior to, the standards insisted upon in Western Europe and the United States.

In all fairness I must add, however, that one does from time to time find a questioning attitude on prevailing standards among younger South Africans, those in their early thirties and twenties, and even among teenagers, and therein lies some hope for the future.

[Here follow a further exposition of Gallman’s views on how climate, geography, and the presence of “near slave labor” had affected the South African character and a description of the South African press, radio, and bookstores.]

South West Africa

While South West Africa is in a sense also a problem for the Union, it has a peculiar importance and should therefore be dealt with, as I am doing here, in a section by itself. I do not think it is recognized by the present Government strictly speaking as a problem, but rather more as a source of annoyance and irritation in its dealings with the outside world, specifically, that is, with the United Nations.

The present Nationalist Government, like its predecessor the Smuts Government, regards South West as an integral part of the Union being administered as such in accordance with the terms spelled out in the original League of Nations mandate. To be called on for an accounting by an international agency is resented. It is coming to be regarded more and more as a challenge to the country’s sovereignty and an intrusion into the country’s domestic affairs.

Mandates lapsed with the passing of the League. The International Court ruled, in effect, that while South Africa could not unilaterally set up a new system for running the affairs of South West, neither could the new trusteeship be enforced against her will. The result is that she not only keeps administering the country as she did under the mandate, but goes on with certain refinements. South West is now represented in Parliament, and before long no doubt South West Native affairs will be lifted from the Office of the Administrator of South West and lodged in the Union’s Ministry for Native Affairs. One might say that the Union is short-sighted in not at least going through the motions of showing some deference to the United Nations by submitting periodically some more or less innocuous report, on the province, to the United Nations. As a matter of fact, I think she could well afford to do that. It would relieve her of being publicly pressed at every General Assembly meeting without in any way loosening her hold on the territory. And even if one could envisage cutting the present ties of the Union with South West, who then would or could step in to administer it? For the present the Union’s position is secure and unthreatened. That may, however, not always be the case.

When I visited South West in 1952, two aspects of life there struck me at once and with equal force. One was how strongly the German influence and imprint survived, and the other what a strong sense of local pride and loyalty persisted. I found German widely spoken and German signs everywhere on the shops. In my talks with residents, and I talked with a good cross section of the population, I never once heard the United Nations mentioned, not even in anger, nor, for that matter and that is the significant point, the Union. When “my” or “our” country was mentioned South West was meant; and when the future of South West was touched upon, frequently a future with only slim ties with the Union was obviously envisaged.

When I returned to Pretoria from Windhoek, an official of the present Union Government remarked to me that I had, of course, been impressed with how strongly South West felt to be, and was, part and parcel of the Union. I shall never forget how taken aback he was and how crestfallen he looked when I told him I had found quite the contrary. Far from frequent references to the Union, I told him, I had more often heard talk with a decided autonomous flavor of South West, and of South West’s own immediate interests.

Forsyth, Secretary for External Affairs, was during the thirties a magistrate in South West. Not so long ago we were reminiscing, I about the immediate pre-war days in Danzig and he about his experiences at the same time in South West. Nazi agents were very active, he recalled, and it was a disquieting scene. He then commented on Western Germany’s impressive recovery since 1945. “And South West,” he added, “bears watching, for history might very well repeat itself.” This called to my mind the concern expressed to me by Neser, the Secretary to the Administrator in South West during my stay in Windhoek in 1952. He said he was disturbed by the number of German immigrants who had been coming into the territory since 1945.

I have not been able to get figures on German immigration. I have up to now been able to get only statistics on immigration in general into South West from 1946 through 1950. These figures show a rise from 14 in 1946 to 356 in 1950. It could be that, and I take it from Neser’s remark that, most of the 356 were Germans and that there might have been even quite some increase in 1951 and 1952.

What Forsyth and Neser have said to me should be weighed in the light of present South African-German relations in general. Economic relations between South Africa and Western Germany are steadily expanding. Western Germany is showing increased interest in this part of Africa. Within a matter of only a few years Western Germany’s representation was stepped up from Consul General to Minister to Ambassador.

What in the long run will be the position of South West? Is it just a question of whether the Union’s voice will prevail solely, or with some tempering from the United Nations? Has not the problem been widened by a resurgent Germany, and will it not be necessary in time to give thought to just what the relationship of South West to a resurgent Germany is to be? I would not rule out the eventual necessity of facing that problem.

In any event, as I see it now, the Union in her relations with South West, quite apart from what the United Nations might try to do, is in the long run in for some fairly heavy going.

Republic Issue and Commonwealth Relations

[Here follows a discussion of the Malan government’s interest in keeping the Union of South Africa within the British Commonwealth.]

Relations with the United States

There is a very large measure of good will for the United States in South Africa, and this is particularly noticeable among the Afrikaner element. Persons of English descent quite naturally think first of all of England, still largely regarded as the mother country. The Afrikaner’s response to an interested, friendly approach is more immediate. He does not feel bound by any overseas ties, and shows his feelings without reservations. Then, too, the English element is to the Afrikaner a reminder of British imperialism, an inimical force he fought against in the Boer War when American sympathies were largely on his side. That he still remembers vividly. But while there is a shade of difference between the response a friendly approach gets from the South African of English background and from the Afrikaner, there is among Europeans generally, with roots in South Africa, an instinctive friendliness for the United States and Americans, and I should say understanding as well. The explanation for this, I think is to be found in a common heritage and experience that have left an identical imprint on the character and outlook of both peoples. Both peoples have their origins in Europe. Both set out from countries plagued by old problems to make new homes in new surroundings. Both faced at the start frontier conditions. Both struggled over the years to force the frontier back. As a result, there is quite prevalent a common outlook or in any case a sympathetic and understanding bond between them. That is most fortunate for us. We have here a very friendly ally. He is solidly with us in our worldwide struggle against Communism, and without haggling has come to mutually beneficial terms with us on the exploitation of the country’s rich uranium source and vital mineral wealth generally, making it easier for us not only to meet our own defense and industrial needs but also to meet our promises of aid to the free world at large.

Caution in Passing Judgment

Let us remember that Western civilization was brought to the tip of Africa by the forebears of these friendly people and that they and their descendants, in developing the resources of this part of the world, have given benefits to peoples in many parts of the world. They have done this in the face of all those difficulties that ordinarily have to be contended with in building a new country in virgin territory. And during practically all their history, they have had a most baffling race problem to live with. That problem they have lived with for three hundred years. They have made mistakes and are making mistakes, as so many of them will readily admit, in trying to work out their relations with the Native. Some constructive things have been done. Some wise proposals have come, for example, from academic circles and race relation study groups. A lot of soul searching and thinking are constantly going on. All that should be remembered before we, in our part of the world, judge them. We in the States should above all remember that the reports we see in our newspapers at home are spotty, with all too often only the more sensational events made available, or only the more sensational side of any development. Unfortunately, we are without a single full-time correspondent in South Africa of an American daily newspaper, or American representing one of our news services. We had one of the former here last year during the election period, but right after the elections he went “Mau Mau-ing” in Kenya. Since then he has returned several times from trips farther afield in Africa, but only temporarily. And so the American public as a rule gets only bits from news agency stringers or stories from an occasional special correspondent sent for a very limited time, with directions to concentrate chiefly on some passing, more or less sensational, development.

I want to end on that word of caution.

W. J. Gallman

1. Gallman left his post in the Union of South Africa on Aug. 15, 1954. His replacement, Ambassador Edward T. Wailes, presented his credentials to the Union Government on Nov. 29, 1954.