PC: Violent end to the Apartheid regime

Just from reading some contemporary literature, I sort of got this vibe that people in the late '80s weren't really expecting a non-violent outcome to the transition to majority-rule, or at least considered it less likely than other unsavory alternatives. So how plausible were those (in hindsight) far fetched predictions?
 
Just off the top of my head, I think something like that could happen in the late 90s or around the turn of the century if the white regime decides to crack down harder and harder instead of taking the course they did, although I'm not sure of the specifics of how this would happen.
 
As far as the military situation is concerned South Africa was in no real danger in 1990 the internal security situation was Rhodesia in 1965 not Rhodesia in 1975. Whites were still a sufficient segment of the population that a large enough army could be raised to maintain control and the economic situation was still good enough that the Army could be funded. Obviously it was unsustainable in the long run and the situation was only going to get worse but South Africa definitely had a 15-20 year life span barring outside intervention. However as the results of the referendum showed the political will to fight on wasn't there. The ANC had changed policy, the USSR had fallen and whites had come to believe that majority rule didn't equal Stalin style Communism. Without that threat why keep fighting?
 
As far as the military situation is concerned South Africa was in no real danger in 1990 the internal security situation was Rhodesia in 1965 not Rhodesia in 1975. Whites were still a sufficient segment of the population that a large enough army could be raised to maintain control and the economic situation was still good enough that the Army could be funded. Obviously it was unsustainable in the long run and the situation was only going to get worse but South Africa definitely had a 15-20 year life span barring outside intervention. However as the results of the referendum showed the political will to fight on wasn't there. The ANC had changed policy, the USSR had fallen and whites had come to believe that majority rule didn't equal Stalin style Communism. Without that threat why keep fighting?

You could potentially have had more violence after Apartheid ended, if someone, who was more radical than the late Chris Hani, was head of Umkhonto we Sizwe and decided that Mandela et al were being too moderate.
 

d32123

Banned
You could potentially have had more violence after Apartheid ended, if someone, who was more radical than the late Chris Hani, was head of Umkhonto we Sizwe and decided that Mandela et al were being too moderate.

That doesn't really fulfill the requirements of the OP though.
 
That doesn't really fulfill the requirements of the OP though.

See that's the problem. The NP was too powerful to be really bested through violent means. After the regime steps down, then you could have tons of problems though.

Hmm... perhaps as a side effect if the USSR won the Cold War

Also, it's like that if the NP thought they were going to lose a war, they would withdraw to what is now the Western Cape province, which had the highest number of whites and coloreds and continue on as a rump South Africa after expelling most of the black population. I imagine it would be in a similar position to Israel.
 

d32123

Banned
I think as a prerequisite for this to happen you need the United States to oppose the apartheid government more directly.
 
Were the ever present threat of international sanctions one of the big things that forced moderation throughout the transition?
 
Also, it's like that if the NP thought they were going to lose a war, they would withdraw to what is now the Western Cape province, which had the highest number of whites and coloreds and continue on as a rump South Africa after expelling most of the black population. I imagine it would be in a similar position to Israel.

Very unlikely, people talked about creating a white majority province but to do it would require moving the vast majority of the white population and completely destroying their way of life which was (and is) dependent on masses of cheap black labour. You won't find many white janitors, even post 1994. You'd need the NP to establish a totalitarian regime for white people and that's ASB.


Were the ever present threat of international sanctions one of the big things that forced moderation throughout the transition?

They played a significant part in changing attitudes.

In 1980 with minimal sanctions, secure border and a hardline still economically communist ANC majority rule meant: white property being expropriated, a command economy, possibly Uganda style expulsions etc. while Apartheid meant the highest white living standards in the world (higher than whites in the US), strong economic growth and 18 year old males spending 2 years in the army where they probably wouldn't get shot at.

By 1990 with sanctions impacting the economy, the Soviet Union collapsing, war on the border and the ANC reforming majority rule meant; white property being secured, renewed economic growth in a market economy, no expulsions, and whites continuing to enjoy a 1st world living standard. While Apartheid meant ever more international opprobrium, war on the border and in the townships with more and more middle aged men being called up for reserve service, white living standards stagnating etc.

Naturally whites opted to stick with Apartheid in 1980 and dump it in 1990. But change a few details, for example stop the ANC reforming, keep the Soviet Union going and soften Western sanctions then suddenly majority rule is looking a lot less attractive.
 
Last edited:
Top