The uncertainty that has shrouded South Africa in gloom for months is beginning to lift with the announcement of a provisional election date next April.
But in many ways, naming a date has changed little. The questions hanging over South Africa’s future that remained unanswered last week will continue to linger long into the election campaign:
How far will white right-wingers be prepared to go to thwart change? Will the Inkatha Freedom Party of Zulu Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi accept an election next year or will it seek to disrupt the process? Will violence escalate as political and ethnic groups unaccustomed to a climate of tolerance vie for votes in previously disenfranchised communities?
But at least there is now an end in sight to the seemingly interminable era of talks about a new constitution and other impenetrable issues in which most blacks and whites had lost confidence.
The date-April 27, 1994-is only provisional, but already it has taken on a life of its own. “Poll date set,” screamed the headlines in Friday’s newspapers, which only later mentioned in their stories that the date is subject to final endorsement in June. After raising expectations so high, it will be hard to return to the former state of limbo without risking a serious backlash among blacks.
But much remains to be done, whenever the election is held. South Africa is preparing to shed itself of one of the most skewed and unjust political systems ever devised. If the elections are to be truly free and fair, many of the lingering vestiges of apartheid are going to have to be redressed before a democratically elected government is in place.
The African National Congress talks about the need to “level the playing field.” But despite changes brought about by the abolition of apartheid laws, South Africa is still one of the most lopsided fields on which politics ever has been conducted. Practically every instrument of state, whether it is the police force or television, is in the control of the white government.
Above all, some form of accommodation is going to have to be reached on control of the white-dominated security forces, which for decades were the means by which a white minority enforced its will on the black majority.
The risk of violence in the run-up to elections is immense, so the need for an impartial and able police force is even more crucial than it might be under normal circumstances.
But history has shown that blacks regard the South African security forces as anything but impartial. It is also clear that the security forces themselves are having difficulty adjusting to the new reality that blacks too have rights in a supposedly democratic country.
It already has been agreed that some form of multiparty control over the security forces will be necessary, with the ANC having at least a supervisory and advisory role during the election campaign. But no details have been finalized, and the government seems reluctant to surrender control of its security forces.
“It’s the critical question. The level of multiparty control over the security forces will be crucial in determining whether the election turns nasty,” said Graeme Simpson of the Project for the Study of Violence at Johannesburg’s Witwatersrand University.
The white state apparatus remains hugely powerful in other areas too. Although apartheid laws officially have been abolished, white authorities in small towns across the country still deny blacks access to town halls and to public facilities. If black parties are to be given equal rights to campaign freely, huge changes are going to have to take place at the grass-roots level.
Access to the media is also a thorny issue.
For years, the state-run television station was tightly censored and controlled by whites. Last week, a new, multiracial and independent board was appointed to oversee the activities of the South African Broadcasting Co.
But President F.W. De Klerk vetoed seven of the names selected, including the board’s black chairman. The ANC has withdrawn its support from the new board, and South Africa’s first experiment in leveling playing fields is in a shambles.
On the practical side, millions of poor and illiterate blacks who have been denied political empowerment for generations will have to be taught the significance of voting-and how to do it.
There are extensive voter education programs already in place, but the ANC in particular is concerned that intimidation nonetheless will be rife in remote areas.
The deputy chief of the ANC’s election commission, Patrick Lekota, says farmers already are telling their laborers that they will lose their jobs if they don’t vote the way they are told.
“They’re telling them, the computer will see how you vote,” he said. “There’s no understanding of the concept of a secret ballot.”
Altogether, 22 million people are expected to vote, about 17 million of whom are blacks voting for the first time.
There are still an estimated 3.5 million blacks who do not have the official identity books that will be needed to vote, according to government statistics. Although the government says it is issuing 60,000 new identity books a week, the ANC is concerned that the government might try to issue as few new documents to blacks as possible.
Some fear there is still too much to be done, and too much lingering hostility between the competing parties, for the election to take place in slightly more than 10 months.
“We’ll be lucky to have an election by next April. We’d even be lucky to have one in November after that,” said Professor F. Van Zyl Slabbert, a prominent liberal activist.
An agreement on an election date now could always be replaced later by an agreement to suspend the date, he warned.
But others believe it is too late to turn back the clock. “It’s not going to be easy. But 10 months is a sensible period of preparation,” said Tom Lodge, a political science professor at Witwatersrand University. “Delaying any longer would only make things worse.”
