SOUTH AFRICA APARTHEID NO LONGER FEASIBLE : Demographics Tilt Toward Change : The process is inevitable and irreversible. To continue sanctions only assists the ideologies of radicals on the left and the right.

February, 1990, will be recorded by historians as the month in which South Africa finally discarded the ideology of apartheid. South Africa is not simply reforming its political system, it is in fact changing fundamentally.

These changes are inevitable and irreversible. In this new climate, a strong bill of rights and prudent, democratic, principled political management will be essential. The process of reconciliation among all South Africans will be equally important.

But why is South Africa changing? Why is apartheid no longer feasible? Who should take credit for these changes?

The fact is that forces such as population growth, urbanization, economic growth and skilled-labor shortages have created the most important pressures for change.

The demographic landscape is changing rapidly. The current population within the country’s historical borders of 1910 is estimated at 35 million, of which 5 million are white. Forty percent of the total population is younger than 15. The population is expected to reach 45 million in the year 2000, given an annual increase of 2.5%. (If current growth trends continue, four out of every five high school graduates will be black by the year 2000.)

The number of urban blacks is expected to rise from 12 million to 25 million during the same period. The black urban population will thus be three times that of whites, people of mixed race and Asians combined. No wonder that the shortfall in black housing is already such that about 2 million new units would have to be built by the year 2000 to meet the increase in demand.

Since 1970, the surplus of white skilled labor has dried up and the government has faced the choice of allowing the economy to stagnate or permit black people to be trained for skilled jobs to meet the demands of an expanding economy. It chose the latter course, and this shift from the existing apartheid doctrine to cautious pragmatism was the turning point.

At the same time, white growth was beginning to tail off and businesses increasingly looked to blacks to keep their sales buoyant. In one sector after another black-consumer spending was catching up and overtaking that of whites.

Since the late 1970s, the government has thus been forced to make sociopolitical adjustments to manage these demographic and economic demands. Consequently, several key reforms were implemented before the United States imposed sanctions in 1986: black trade union rights, 1981; sports integration, 1982; integrated universities and colleges, 1984; tricameral constitution, 1984; repeal of the prohibition against mixed marriages, 1985; non-discriminatory immigration, 1986; integration of business districts, 1986; abolition of influx control and the pass laws, 1986; introduction of uniform identity documents, 1986; restoration of uniform South African citizenship, 1986; full property ownership rights for urban blacks, 1986; integration of hotels, restaurants, cinemas and theaters, 1986, and the abolition of job restrictions on blacks, 1986.

These changes, despite their inherent inadequacies, are testimony to the evolutionary process of fundamental political adjustment set in motion in the late ‘70s.

The full enfranchisement of all South Africans can be hastened or delayed by extraneous factors but it cannot be called into question. Disinvestment and sanctions may shorten the life of the old order, but this will be marginal at best. It will, however, unquestionably weaken the viability and prospects of the new order. To continue sanctions at this juncture serves only to assist the ideologies of radicals on the left and the right in South Africa. We should also remind ourselves that one of the greatest impediments to liberty in the world remains economic poverty.

It would also be wrong for the proponents of U.S. sanctions to claim substantial credit for the changes made by President Frederik W. de Klerk. He has to manage a country that has changed dramatically since 1948, when the National Party took office. Political pragmatism and decision-making based on socioeconomic realities has therefore become imperative.

The government is committed to the creation of a new democratic political constitution through negotiations in which all South Africans will have A-class citizenship with equal rights.

There are no grounds to doubt President De Klerk’s sincerity. The President and his government are taking enormous political risks. The radicalization of right-wing whites is testimony to this. The time has therefore arrived for all political organizations, and the African National Congress in particular, to abandon their war talk and reciprocate the government’s moves. International pressure should be exercised proportionally on all political groups in South Africa to go to the negotiation table. The agenda is open-ended.

There is a strong desire to reach political agreement in South Africa and to survive with goodwill. In this process, mediation, negotiation and conciliation are essential. Ultimately, only South Africa’s people can make her a winning nation.