Rhodesia's "Internal Settlement"

I've read a little about this in the recent biography of Margaret Thatcher, and I've been reminded of it by the current thread on Apartheid that's going on. As that thread seems to be declining into a tit-for-tat argument, I thought I'd open a new one about the matter.

So, a few queries for those who know more than I. Why was the Internal Settlement so roundly rejected in 1978? Is there a way to keep the main tenents of the settlement intact? And does this lead to a better Zimbabwe today?
 
I've read a little about this in the recent biography of Margaret Thatcher, and I've been reminded of it by the current thread on Apartheid that's going on. As that thread seems to be declining into a tit-for-tat argument, I thought I'd open a new one about the matter.

So, a few queries for those who know more than I. Why was the Internal Settlement so roundly rejected in 1978? Is there a way to keep the main tenents of the settlement intact? And does this lead to a better Zimbabwe today?

I think I am one half of the tit-for-tat argument.

Apologies.

:eek:

The Internal Settlement was rejected because it didn't include the Patriotic Front of ZANU and ZAPU, who were the true representatives of Zimbabweans. Muzorewa etc were seen as puppets.

It's difficult to get the Internal Settlement to work at all I think.
 
From what I've read, a widespread scepticism that Smith was going to keep to the agreement "this time" when he had backed out on equalising racial equality in the past (the UDI with Wilson for example, though how much of that could be chalked up with a clash of personalities compared to Home, a topic briefly looked at in Crowned Prime Minister if you don't mind shameless advertising, and the pressure from both the party mainstream, personal beliefs by Wilson and black African leaders is debatable). This had made a lot of people, including Jimmy Carter and David Owen, sceptical and thought that the idea was essentially both a half-measure and was legitimising race-baiting figures at the expense of men like Mugabe and other guerilla resistance figures, causing them to oppose such a measure and undermined the Settlement.

Another reason had been that some saw the Bishop as a stooge for the government, the UN as a whole saw the whites-only referendum as a sign that the black majority was being locked out of the process again, Mugabe and Nkomo were against the moderate arrangement, Mugabe wanting more land reform for example and the exclusion of their parties had meant that UN also saw it as a way for Rhodesia to pretend that equality was present. Pressure was added to talk with the radical parties, Carter refusing to side with Thatcher in working with Muzorewa and Smith, and this led to the Lancaster House Agreement.

As Marius said, keeping the Internal Settlement without Lancaster is difficult, too many people didn't trust Smith and the locking out of radical parties and the whites-only referendum didn't endear Rhodesia to the UN. During the 1980 election after Lancaster, the British government considered banning ZANU due to heavy intimidation at the polls but chose not to and Mugabe's ZANU managed to win the election, your POD for keeping Mugabe out would be Thatcher and Soames going through with such a measure. The risks would be that the UN would condemn the move, as would many in Labour and the Liberals in a time where Mugabe's reputation was high, but Reagan may side with the British, but that doesn't aid in keeping Zimbabwe-Rhodesia.

It's likely that ZAPU, rather than ZANU, would gain the landslide victory in many black seats, bolstered even more by the use of martyring Mugabe. Muzorewa's party wouldn't gain much more seats, his arguments with radical figures had undermined his unifier image, instead we would see Nkomo in charge which would lead to Mugabe going back into threatening military action as many of his party backers claimed he would do if he lost. This may cause a government of unity to break out but it is very unlikely, some of ZANU may not follow Mugabe into the jungles if Nkomo refuses to give ZANU positions in the Patriotic Front government but he may do so and Mugabe would be the one to lose power instead.

Ultimately, you need to set Mugabe and Nkomo against one another to keep them from removing Zimbabwe-Rhodesia from existence, if Mugabe decides to reject compromise and attacks the ZAPU government, you'll get the two factions fighting but Smith and Muzorewa aren't getting back in that easily. If Nkomo is weakened enough by the resulting civil war, or Thatcher and reagan decide that aid comes with a cost e.g. work with Muzorewa, then we could see things working but it would be a bloody civil war if Mugabe decides to fight.
 
It's likely that ZAPU, rather than ZANU, would gain the landslide victory in many black seats, bolstered even more by the use of martyring Mugabe. Muzorewa's party wouldn't gain much more seats, his arguments with radical figures had undermined his unifier image, instead we would see Nkomo in charge which would lead to Mugabe going back into threatening military action as many of his party backers claimed he would do if he lost. This may cause a government of unity to break out but it is very unlikely, some of ZANU may not follow Mugabe into the jungles if Nkomo refuses to give ZANU positions in the Patriotic Front government but he may do so and Mugabe would be the one to lose power instead.

I don't know about that, ZAPU was the Ndebele party and ZANU the Shona party. ZANU would probably have still won the majority of seats.
 
In any event, assuming the settlement attracted more international support, but still did not include ZAPU/ZANU and their patrons - what is the chances that this would make any real difference to the viability of Z-R? Less sanctions would be useful sure, but emigration was high, the budget was shot etc, the State needed boots on the ground and munitions.

No one is going to really be keen to do that I would think, not in such a way that would have any prospect of turning the tide. Z-R needs a powerful patron ready to go all in.
 
I don't know about that, ZAPU was the Ndebele party and ZANU the Shona party. ZANU would probably have still won the majority of seats.

The argument that I was suggesting was that ZANU would be banned from the elections, as Thatcher and Soames considered doing after reports of intimidation came through. Or are you suggesting that these would be protest votes or a "new party", that is essentially ZANU in all but name, being set up in protest of the ban and getting voted for, who would benefit from the lack of a ZANU option in the official polling papers if they were banned?
 
The argument that I was suggesting was that ZANU would be banned from the elections, as Thatcher and Soames considered doing after reports of intimidation came through. Or are you suggesting that these would be protest votes or a "new party", that is essentially ZANU in all but name, being set up in protest of the ban and getting voted for, who would benefit from the lack of a ZANU option in the official polling papers if they were banned?

Sorry, my bad.

Maybe I should read posts properly before commenting.

:eek:
 
Sorry, my bad.

Maybe I should read posts properly before commenting.

:eek:

Still, would the ethnic divisions between the Shona and the Ndebele be enough to cause voters to vote for a selection of parties or would it be that they would hold their noses and vote for ZAPU?
 
Still, would the ethnic divisions between the Shona and the Ndebele be enough to cause voters to vote for a selection of parties or would it be that they would hold their noses and vote for ZAPU?

I don't know, to be honest with you.

I don't know enough about the ethnic dynamics of the time to give you an informed opinion.
 
Just found this photo


Muzorewa-UANC-1979.jpg
 
Best. T-shirt. Ever.

I am vaguely tempted to get it reprinted, but I feel it would be in poor taste, notwithstanding the usual retro exemption.

Also, knowing my luck, the first day I wear it I'll run into the South London Veterans of the Chimurenga Club. Then, as I run sobbing and bruised down the street while being pursued by angry veterans, I'll meet the Selous Scouts RSA out for a pub crawl
 
Top