by RONNIE KASRILS
“South Africa’s topography, lack of a friendly border, large white population rooted in the country, huge security apparatus, powerful resources backed-up by Western supply and support, speedy communication network and level of development by no means suited classical guerrilla war.”
The Turn toAarmed Struggle in Southern Africa
The people’s patience is not endless. The time comes in the life of any nation when there remain only two choices: submit or fight. That time has now come to South Africa. We shall not submit and we have no choice but to hit back by all means within our power in defence of our people, our future and our freedom.
Thus ran the clarion call of the Manifesto of Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) clandestinely posted in public places in South Africa as the first bomb blasts heralding its existence exploded at apartheid offices and installations on December 16, 1961.
The birth of MK was a culmination of the violence and brutality of the apartheid system manifested in the 1960 Sharpeville massacre; the outlawing of the ANC and PAC; the closing down of all means of non-violent struggle; the fact that change was seen as impossible unless revolutionary force was utilised. The ANC — and with it the South African Communist Party, which played a significant role in the establishment of MK (see, for example, Isu Chiba’s interview in Men of Dynamite, cited below) — faced the same question as the other racially and colonially enslaved countries of the region so the resort to arms was not exceptional to South Africa.
The 1960s saw the similar turn to armed struggle in Angola, Mozambique, Namibia and Zimbabwe — and further afield to Guinea-Bissau and earlier in Kenya and Algeria. Mozambique and Angola’s terrain with vast forests was highly suited to guerrilla warfare; Zimbabwe’s conditions were favourable once the shared borders with Zambia and then Mozambique opened up to its freedom fighters; while Namibia’s inhospitable topography did not deter that country’s insurgents. And neither did South Africa’s lack of forested areas nor lack of friendly borders deter MK – not even in almost thirty years of endeavors. There are other factors, as Amilcar Cabral noted, “Our people are our mountains.”
The resort to arms showed that the liberation movements had a great deal in common, including a common enemy, and consequently cooperated and assisted one another to a great degree in the spirit of fraternal solidarity. They were all able to overcome tremendous odds and achieve the mutual objective of freedom and independence. Much has been written and debated about MK’s contribution over three decades to the liberation of South Africa. And much more will still be written and debated not as an academic game but rather to clarify the lessons and preserve the heritage for today’s and future generations of our people. That is why developing a people’s history is so important.
What is historiography?
Black Agenda Report for more