OCR Specification focus:
‘nature, development and consequences of international opinions towards Apartheid’
The evolving international opinions towards Apartheid shaped South Africa’s political landscape by increasing diplomatic isolation, economic pressure, and moral condemnation, ultimately undermining the regime’s stability and legitimacy.
Early International Reactions
Post-1948 Context
Following the National Party’s 1948 victory and formal adoption of Apartheid, many Western governments initially maintained cautious engagement. South Africa’s status as a Commonwealth member and strategic Cold War ally often outweighed early criticism. However, India became a vocal opponent, raising the issue at the United Nations (UN) as early as 1946, condemning racial discrimination and calling for multilateral action.
United Nations and Global Institutions
1952: The UN General Assembly established the Commission on the Racial Situation in the Union of South Africa, highlighting the regime’s segregationist policies.
1962: The UN called for economic and diplomatic sanctions, marking a decisive shift from debate to advocacy for punitive measures.
1963: A voluntary arms embargo was recommended, setting a precedent for later mandatory restrictions.
Development of International Opposition
Commonwealth and Diplomatic Isolation
1961 Commonwealth Conference: Following the Sharpeville Massacre (1960) and South Africa’s declaration as a republic, member states condemned racial policies. Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd withdrew South Africa from the Commonwealth to avoid expulsion.
The break severed longstanding ties with Britain and other former dominions, accelerating diplomatic isolation.
African and Asian Nations
The newly independent African states formed the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) in 1963, prioritising anti-Apartheid measures:
Coordinated support for liberation movements such as the African National Congress (ANC).
Lobbying for mandatory UN sanctions and pushing for exclusion of South Africa from international sporting and cultural bodies.
Western Powers and Cold War Calculations
United States and United Kingdom initially hesitated to impose strict sanctions, fearing instability and communist influence in Southern Africa.
By the late 1970s and especially after the Soweto Uprising (1976), public opinion and domestic activism in these countries intensified, forcing gradual policy shifts.
Comprehensive Sanctions: Coordinated international economic and political measures—such as trade bans, arms embargoes, and cultural boycotts—designed to compel a state to change specific policies.
Anti-Apartheid Movements Abroad
Grassroots campaigns significantly influenced governments:
The British Anti-Apartheid Movement (AAM) organised boycotts of South African goods and pushed for a cultural and sporting embargo.
Anti-Apartheid Movement sticker urging consumers to boycott South African goods, a core tactic used to isolate the Apartheid regime internationally. The image illustrates how civil society converted moral opposition into everyday economic pressure. Source
Cultural and Sporting Boycotts
International Olympic Committee barred South Africa from the 1964 Tokyo Olympics, a ban lasting until 1992.
The Gleneagles Agreement (1977) united Commonwealth countries in discouraging sporting contact with South Africa, symbolising moral rejection of Apartheid.
Police line and barbed wire at the 1981 Springbok rugby tour in New Zealand, when mass protests disrupted matches to oppose sporting ties with Apartheid South Africa. This photograph captures how international opinion translated into direct pressure on sporting events. Source
Economic Pressure and Sanctions
UN Actions and National Legislation
1977: The UN Security Council imposed a mandatory arms embargo, legally binding on member states.
1985–1986: Key Western nations, including the US and UK, passed legislation restricting trade, investment, and financial support.
Corporate Divestment
International corporations and banks faced mounting public pressure to withdraw. By the mid-1980s, major companies reduced or ended operations in South Africa, limiting access to capital and technology.
Consequences of International Opinions
Diplomatic Isolation
South Africa became increasingly marginalised in global forums, excluded from most international sporting, cultural, and economic organisations.
Loss of prestige and diplomatic partnerships eroded the regime’s legitimacy and weakened its negotiating position.
Economic Impact
Sanctions curtailed foreign investment, reduced exports, and restricted access to loans, contributing to a severe economic recession in the mid-1980s.
The declining economy heightened internal unrest, amplifying pressure for reform.
Political and Social Effects
The apartheid government, led by P.W. Botha, attempted limited reforms through the policy of Total Strategy, aiming to appease international critics while maintaining white minority rule.
These reforms failed to halt global condemnation, demonstrating that only substantive change—eventually pursued under F.W. de Klerk—could restore international acceptance.
Empowerment of Resistance Movements
International solidarity strengthened internal opposition:
ANC leaders in exile gained funding and diplomatic recognition.
Global campaigns highlighted figures such as Nelson Mandela, transforming him into a worldwide symbol of resistance.
Demonstration outside South Africa House in London, a focal site for sustained international protest against Apartheid in the late 1980s. The image shows how public opinion in the UK translated into visible, continuous pressure on the regime. Source
Key Points for OCR Study
International opinion evolved from cautious criticism to coordinated diplomatic, economic, and cultural sanctions.
Actions by the UN, Commonwealth, OAU, and Western powers—supported by global grassroots activism—isolated the Apartheid regime.
Economic downturn and loss of legitimacy directly contributed to the eventual negotiations that dismantled Apartheid.
These developments illustrate the nature, development and consequences of international opinions towards Apartheid, as required by the OCR specification.
FAQ
The OAU created a Liberation Committee to fund and support anti-Apartheid groups like the ANC and PAC.
It encouraged African states to close South African embassies and refuse landing rights for South African aircraft.
The OAU also worked to persuade non-African nations to support mandatory UN sanctions, amplifying pressure outside the continent.
Many firms benefited from South Africa’s rich mineral resources, including gold, diamonds, and strategic minerals such as chromium.
They feared financial losses and instability that might disrupt global supply chains.
Only sustained consumer boycotts, shareholder activism, and government legislation in the mid-1980s finally overcame these commercial concerns.
The World Council of Churches funded the Programme to Combat Racism, directly aiding liberation movements.
Religious leaders lobbied governments to adopt sanctions and supported boycotts.
High-profile church figures, including Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s allies abroad, used moral arguments to galvanise public opinion.
Member states shared information on sporting contacts through a dedicated Commonwealth Secretariat.
Regular meetings reviewed evidence of breaches and pressured governments to discourage teams from touring South Africa.
Public shaming of non-compliant sporting bodies, such as rugby unions, helped enforce the agreement without formal legal power.
International musicians, actors, and writers refused to perform or exhibit in South Africa.
Prominent cultural organisations denied South African membership or competition entries, including film festivals and art exhibitions.
These boycotts reinforced the message that Apartheid was morally unacceptable and limited the regime’s ability to project a positive international image.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
Identify two key actions taken by the United Nations in response to Apartheid before 1980.
Mark Scheme
1 mark for each accurate action, up to a maximum of 2 marks.
Acceptable answers include:
Establishment of the Commission on the Racial Situation in the Union of South Africa (1952).
The 1962 call for economic and diplomatic sanctions against South Africa.
The 1963 voluntary arms embargo recommended by the UN.
Award marks only for clearly stated UN actions; vague references to “sanctions” without specifying UN involvement gain no credit.
Question 2 (5 marks)
Explain how international sporting boycotts demonstrated the development of international opinion towards Apartheid.
Mark Scheme
Level 1 (1–2 marks):
Describes basic facts about a sporting boycott with limited explanation.
Example: “South Africa was banned from the Olympics.”
Level 2 (3–4 marks):
Provides detailed examples of sporting boycotts (e.g., IOC ban from the 1964 Olympics, Gleneagles Agreement 1977, protests during the 1981 Springbok Tour) and links them to growing international opposition.
Some explanation of how these actions reflected a shift from simple criticism to active pressure.
Level 3 (5 marks):
Fully explains how sporting boycotts symbolised moral rejection of Apartheid and how they formed part of broader diplomatic and economic isolation.
Clear connection made between grassroots campaigns, government policies, and the cumulative effect of these boycotts on the South African regime’s legitimacy.
