In 1971 the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO) turned its attention to the Tete province, in which Cabora Bassa, a dam being built by the Portuguese with considerable help from South African, American, British and other European companies, is situated. By early 1972, FRELIMO controlled enough of the province, which has a common border with the north-east of Zimbabwe, to provide a valuable jumping-off point for ZANU operations. With FRELIMO's assistance, ZANU was able to gain the support of the Shona People, who live on both sides of the border in that area. By late 1972, there was a steady flow of arms and explosives from Zambia, via Mozambique, to dumps in the Mavuradonha mountains. Armed actions began in late December with an attack on a farm north of the town of Centenary. At the same time an African Trading Post WaS Tael A day later a second farm was attacked and other buildings were burnt down. The aim of this technique is clear. Isolated farms are very weak and they have been further weakened by a recent drought. The attack on African workers' facilities is calculated to force essential migrant labour (a good deal of it from Moza mbique) out of one of the regime's most important agricultural areas, thus crippling the Zambia. The border would remain closed, he announced 'until satisfactory assurances are obtained from the Zambian Government that they will no longer permit terrorists to operate against Rhodesia from their territory. South Africa and Portugal, however, opposed the move vigorously, and although guerrilla attacks continued unabated the Rhodesian government soon declared that the necessary assurances had been forthcoming. It re-opened its side of the border on 3 February, but as South Africa and Portugal had feared, Zambia kept its side closed and elected to find alternative trade routes.
Since February of this year there have been numerous incidents in the north-east. The Smith government has responded with increasingly repressive measures - revealing their inability to 'deal' with the guerrillas as they have done in the past. The regime has tried to seal off the north-east, and all known leaders in the area have been purged. Some 200 people have been arrested, and a system of collective fines on the local population has been instituted. There has also been the indiscriminate shooting of villagers both in Rhodesia and across the border in Mozambique.
PREPARATORY WORK Careful preparatory work has now led to a quathe lorry owners claimed that he still intended to carry out nationalisation measures. Other demands have also been conceded in order to bring the lorry owners to the negotiating table. I am glad to see that Red Weekly has started the series 'Africa in Struggle'. This is an area which deserves more attention from Marxists. most analysis being reduced at present to lists of facts.
However, I have a serious criticism of John Sutton's article on South Africa (Red Weekly 13). This article implies that there are serious differences in the South African ruling classes as to the strategy for their continued rule, Comrade Sutton suggests that Vorster 'has chosen to balance between industrial liberalisation and armed repression'. In other words he is balancınc between tne (contradictory interests of the white 'workers', farmers, etc. and the international monopolists.
Despite the superficial correctness of this view, it can constitute a dangerous concession to bourgeois reformism. The 'concerned' liberal capitalist (a la Guardian) will seize on this point to argue that apartheid is not in the interests of international capita lism. The restrictions on number of skilled workers (job reservation) and the limited home market (starvation waces are a brake on economic crowth. There fore increased investment by the corporations will force the gradual abolition of apartheid However, despite the very real differences over aspects of apartheid, the above argument hides the real coincidence of interests amongst the ruling classes in South Africa. The Nationalist Party came to power in South Africa, backed by white 'workers', farmers, poor whites etc., by advocating greater division between the races. Thev extended and deepened the system of migratory labour for blacks, and gave privileges to whites. Yet in the same period (from 1948 to the early '60s) the South African economy was rapidly expanding.
The reason for this is that the migratory labour system, the nub of apartheid, completely atomised and fragmented the African working class, making it almost impossible for them to defend their interests. This meant that the international monopolies. which were reaping the benefits of low wage bills, were expanding (and diversifying) rapidly precisely in a period of increased racism, apartheid, repression etc. This is in total contradiction to the views of our 'concerned' capitalist cited above. In fact capitalists in South Africa cannot attck apartheid, for racism, migratory labour, etc. are an integral part or the 'totality of social relations' which constitute South African capitalism.
The present difficulties of South African capitalists do indeed include the problem of increasing the size of the home market, numbers of skilled workers, etc. However they cannot do this at the expense of losing their social base, the white 'workers'. Also an even greater problem looms on the horizon - the recent strike wave has shown that the African workers are recover mo trom me cereals or tne eary ous. ine real opponents of apartheid and capitalism are entering the only be solved under socialism, and only the strength of the black working class can destroy capitalism and the racist system of aprtheid on which it depends. Red Weekly Reporter