South Africa 1960 – 1994

a) Political, economic and social factors contributing to the end of apartheid

The policy of total strategy or counter-revolution as it became known did not stop the anti-apartheid groups such as the ANC, PAC and UDF (United Democratic Front) from protesting for political and social equality for all races in South Africa. Poverty for blacks continued in the townships and homelands. Unemployment was on the rise due to sanctions, and education and housing were still of a third world standard.

The state of emergency failed to make South Africa safer for whites. Many whites were suffering loss of liberties under the censorship and rigid laws of the military state. Moreover, the ANC in exile continued to attack ‘soft targets’ in South Africa including shopping centres and post offices. Many whites were becoming disillusioned with apartheid and feeling the rejection of their society and culture by the rest of the world. Many Coloureds and Indians were becoming openly defiant of the white state demanding nothing short of full democracy for South Africa.

The United Democratic Front (UDF)

In 1983 a multi-racial party, the United Democratic Front was formed with the aim of uniting all resistance groups in the fight against apartheid. The UDF was highly successful because its members became a uniting force and it had many high profile members, including church leaders such as Archbishop Desmond Tutu. The UDF supporters also include ANC members such as Winnie Mandela. By 1985 the UDF gained over two million members and was a powerful force in demanding the immediate end to apartheid.

The gradual reforms of the Botha government, delivered no real change in South Africa, only cosmetic changes. South Africa could not change and embrace the modern world while apartheid existed. Many white South Africans and politicians began to feel that apartheid was like ‘living on the back of a tiger and they needed to find a way off without being eaten’.1

b) International factors contributing to the end of apartheid

By 1988 the cost of running the military state was staggering and the economic performance of South Africa was poor. Sanctions had driven the economy into recession; ‘sanction busting’ was failing to fix the problem. South Africa was unable to obtain foreign loans or foreign investment. 2

The impact of the Free Mandela Campaign, sporting sanctions, severe international criticism, military and technical equipment embargos and isolation by other African nations in the OAU (Organisation of African Unity) was crippling South Africa. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 removed the Communist threat which underpinned the existence of apartheid since the end of the Second World War. Festering social, political and economic grievances in all sectors of the South African population left the preservation of apartheid completely untenable by the start of 1990s.

c) Problems facing the National Party and the ANC in the transition to democracy in South Africa

In 1984 during townships riots, P.W. Botha declared, ‘I’m giving you a final warning; one man, one vote in this country is out-that is never!”.3 In 1989 after a mild stroke and the failure of Total Strategy, he resigned as President of South Africa. Botha was replaced by F.W.de Klerk.

On 2 February 1990, de Klerk opened Parliament, and in his maiden speech as President began dismantling the apartheid state. He rescinded the ban on the ANC, the PAC, the South African Communist Party and thirty other political organizations. He freed political prisoners and suspended the death sentence. On the 11 of November de Klerk released Nelson Mandela from prison4. South Africa would have one man one vote.

The transition to democracy was a challenging task. Some historians have called it a ‘miracle’. Both the National Party and the ANC struggled to keep South Africa from sliding into civil war in the early 1990s. Meetings were held to lay out South Africa’s new Democracy entitled A Convention for Democratic South Africa (CODESSA). It was in the CODESSA meetings, that the National Party and the ANC debated their differing visions of democracy. CODESSA 1 ended when the ANC walked out of negotiations5. Finally CODESSA II was able to pave the way for a new constitution and a national election.

Problems facing the National Party

• The traditional rulers of South Africa wanted to hold to power as long as possible. They wanted ‘one man, one vote’ to eventuate slowly to protect the white minority.
  
  
• Right Wing extremists’ elements including the AWB (Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging) vowed to prevent free elections and assassinate Nelson Mandela. They also wanted to create an Afrikaner homeland.
  
  
• Other white extremists were also letting off bombs and interrupting official democracy meetings such as CODESSA.

Problems facing the ANC

The ANC faced a number of difficulties:

• First in dealing with the National Party and with other anti-apartheid parties, especially Inkatha (a political organisation made up of Zulus from the Natal Province)
  
  
• The ANC wanted one person, one vote multiracial democracy immediately, and many of its members were understandably anxious to embrace democracy for the first time.
  
  
• In Natal/KwaZulu Province Chief Buthelezi of Inkatha refused to have anything to do with constitutional negotiations and savage violence between ANC members and Inkatha broke out. This included the assassination of Chris Hani, a national hero of the ANC and member of the South Africa Communist Party. Only a prompt appeal to the nation by Mandela averted a massive reaction.

• The ANC seemed to be losing control of its political base. Many feared that extremist whites were supplying Inkatha with weapons and instigating the fighting between rival black political groups, to prevent South Africa’s march towards democracy.

South Africa’s first democratic Election 27th April 1994

South Africans of all races turned out determined to vote in their first non-racial election on the 27th of April 1994. People lined up in long queues which stretched for miles to cast their historic ballot. The ANC won the election and Nelson Mandela, after spending almost three decades in jail, became President of a free South Africa, F.W. de Klerk became the Deputy President.

At his inauguration as President on the vast lawn of the Union Building in Pretoria Mandela said:

‘Never, never and never again shall it be that this beautiful land will again experience the oppression of one by another… The sun will never set on so glorious a human achievement. Let freedom reign. God bless Africa’.6

Source: NSW HSC Online http://hsc.csu.edu.au © NSW Department of Education and Communities, and Charles Sturt University, 2011

De Klerk: Critical test ahead for SA's rule of law

South Africa's commitment to the rule of law faces a critical test in the coming months, former president FW de Klerk told the British South African Law Association on Wednesday night.

Source: Mail & Guardian

Jailed policeman accuses De Klerk

An apartheid-era South African security police commander says ex-President FW de Klerk knew of gross human rights violations during his term of office. Eugene de Kock, jailed for his role in killing anti-apartheid activists, made the accusation a day after Mr De Klerk said that his conscience was clear. Talking from his prison cell to a radio station, he said the ex-president's hands were "soaked in blood".

De Kock said he was prepared to testify in court against Mr de Klerk. He claimed he could list exact instances where the country's last white president gave the order for specific killings. De Kock was nicknamed "Prime Evil" for his role in ordering the killing and maiming of dozens of anti-apartheid activists, often using very cruel methods. He is serving two life sentences in a maximum-security prison in Pretoria.

On Thursday, Mr de Klerk denied ever condoning the elimination of anti-apartheid activists or any other gross human rights violations during his term of office, which began in 1989 and ended in 1994 when Nelson Mandela became president. "I have not only a clear conscience, I am not guilty of any crime whatsoever," Mr de Klerk said while addressing the media in Cape Town. "I have never myself approved murder or the random killing of anybody, or gross violations of human rights."

There has been speculation about Mr de Klerk's knowledge of human rights violations during his term of office since news first broke last week that his former Police Minister, Adriaan Vlok, would face charges relating to the poisoning of the then secretary general of the South African Council of Churches, Reverend Frank Chikane, in 1989. Mr Vlok has admitted to approving the poisoning of the former church leader as well as other human rights violations. He publicly sought forgiveness by washing Rev Chikane's feet in his office last year.

Source: BBC

Jailed policeman accuses De Klerk

An apartheid-era South African security police commander says ex-President FW de Klerk knew of gross human rights violations during his term of office. Eugene de Kock, jailed for his role in killing anti-apartheid activists, made the accusation a day after Mr De Klerk said that his conscience was clear. Talking from his prison cell to a radio station, he said the ex-president's hands were "soaked in blood".

De Kock said he was prepared to testify in court against Mr de Klerk. He said Mr de Klerk's hands were "soaked in blood", and claimed he could list exact instances where the country's last white president gave the order for specific killings. De Kock was nicknamed "Prime Evil" for his role in ordering the killing and maiming of dozens of anti-apartheid activists, often using very cruel methods. He is serving two life sentences in a maximum-security prison in Pretoria.

On Thursday, Mr de Klerk denied ever condoning the elimination of anti-apartheid activists or any other gross human rights violations during his term of office, which began in 1989 and ended in 1994 when Nelson Mandela became president. "I have not only a clear conscience, I am not guilty of any crime whatsoever," Mr de Klerk said while addressing the media in Cape Town. "I have never myself approved murder or the random killing of anybody, or gross violations of human rights."

There has been speculation about Mr de Klerk's knowledge of human rights violations during his term of office since news first broke last week that his former Police Minister, Adriaan Vlok, would face charges relating to the poisoning of the then secretary general of the South African Council of Churches, Reverend Frank Chikane, in 1989. Mr Vlok has admitted to approving the poisoning of the former church leader as well as other human rights violations. He publicly sought forgiveness by washing Rev Chikane's feet in his office last year.

Source: BBC

P. W. Botha, Defender of Apartheid, Is Dead at 90

P. W. Botha, the South African leader who struggled vainly to preserve apartheid rule in a tide of domestic racial violence and global condemnation, died yesterday at his home in South Africa. He was 90. His death was reported by The South African Press Association in Cape Town, quoting the security staff at Mr. Botha’s home on the southern Cape coast.

Mr. Botha was a combative, irascible son of a well-to-do Afrikaner farm family who dropped out of college to work for the right-wing National Party, then rose through the ranks of South Africa’s political establishment, gaining a reputation as the “Old Crocodile” for his ability to charm, outwit and crush his opponents.

In 1978, Mr. Botha became prime minister and proceeded to engineer the creation of a new Constitution, one that held out the promise of limited reform of apartheid policies. When the Constitution came into effect in 1984, Mr. Botha became president. “We must adapt or die,” Mr. Botha told his constituents after becoming prime minister.

As opposition to apartheid spread, Mr. Botha’s room to maneuver shrank. “He was caught in a bind between wanting to show the international community that he was not inflexible, and not wishing to appear weak within his own country,” the journalist Allister Sparks wrote in his 1995 account of the end of apartheid, “Tomorrow Is Another Country: The Inside Story of South Africa’s Road to Change.”

Yet for a while Mr. Botha’s methods seemed to belie Alexis de Toqueville’s dictum that “the most perilous moment for bad government is when it seeks to mend its ways.” Mr. Botha was re-elected in 1987. Two years later, as opposition to his intransigent style grew within his own party, the president suffered a stroke and resigned. He was succeeded by F. W. de Klerk, who legalized opposition parties, freed Mr. Mandela and other political prisoners, and made the agreements that eventually brought apartheid down.

Source: New York Times

HRW Welcomes Release of South African Truth Report

Human Rights Watch welcomed the release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's (TRC) draft report as an important step in establishing the truth about past human rights abuses committed in South Africa.

It is disturbing to see South Africa's political leadership undermine the vitally important work of the truth commission," said Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch. "The draft report offers all South Africans and the world at large the opportunity to learn from South Africa's suffering during apartheid. We call upon those responsible for the abuses committed by all sides to rise to this historical occasion and acknowledge their role in human rights abuses. Such acknowledgment is an essential step in reconciliation."

At a ceremony in Pretoria today, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the chairperson of the Commission, handed over the five-volume report to President Nelson Mandela. The report documents the widespread human rights abuses committed during the apartheid era in South Africa, implicating many apartheid government officials as well as the ANC and other liberation organizations.

Human Rights Watch expressed disappointment with the TRC's decision to excise findings from their draft report implicating the last president of the apartheid era, F.W. De Klerk. Human Rights Watch urged the TRC to take the necessary steps to ensure that all those proved responsible for abuses would be named in its final report.

Human Rights Watch condemned the attempt by the ruling ANC to prevent the release of the draft report, and urged its leadership to take responsibility for the abuses committed during its liberation struggle. ANC Secretary-General Kgalema Motlanthe attempted to block the release of the TRC report through a court application which was rejected early today. In the application, the ANC accused the TRC of "criminalizing the struggle for the liberation of the people of South Africa," and argued that if the ANC had to be bound by the requirements of the laws of war, South Africa's liberation struggle might have failed.

Human Rights Watch emphatically rejects the view advanced by the ANC that it should be held to a lower standard of scrutiny because it was fighting a just war against an oppressive system. The abuses committed by the ANC during its liberation struggle, including the targeting of innocent civilians in bombing campaigns and the torture and summary executions of suspected collaborators at ANC camps, cannot be justified by reference to the justice of its struggle. The objectives of any military or political campaign do not affect the obligations of all parties to respect the rules of war and the principles of international humanitarian law.

"The argument advanced by the ANC that they should not be held accountable for their abuses because they were committed in the furtherance of a legitimate struggle are directly contrary to the principles of international law," said Peter Takirambudde, Executive Director of the Africa Division of Human Rights Watch. "We urge the ANC to take responsibility for the abuses committed by its forces during the apartheid era, and to stop hiding behind the legitimacy of its struggle against apartheid."

Human Rights Watch strongly supports the call by the TRC to prosecute individuals who committed gross human rights violations and did not seek amnesty. Calls for a blanket amnesty should be rejected, as all individuals had the opportunity to seek amnesty from the TRC.

Source: Human Rights Watch

A Bloody Ambush Jolts South Africa Toward New Talks

THE contest for the future of South Africa seems, even on good days, like a duel of schizophrenics. Both the white Government and the African National Congress are torn by conflicting impulses of civility and confrontation. Last week, on a very bad day at a razor-wire checkpoint near the town of Bisho, each side put forward its belligerent half. The outcome was grimly predictable, and sufficiently chilling that now, mercifully, the conciliatory halves may have their turn.

Within the African National Congress, the divide is between the romantic militancy born of the liberation movement that the congress was during its 30 years of banishment, and the prudent pragmatism of the governing party that the congress hopes to become. These are not simply rival factions but rival instincts that coexist to some degree in many congress leaders.

Last week the Bastille-stormers were personified by Ronnie Kasrils, a thickset, kinetic white Communist who fought in the congress's armed underground in the days when ordinary political avenues were foreclosed. The occasion was the sort of "Leipzig option" mobilization that Mr. Kasrils had long promoted, only to be overruled by the pragmatists. But as frustration mounted in the black townships, the congress's mood had swung toward militancy. Top leaders of the congress endorsed a march aimed at occupying Bisho, the campus-sized capital of the ostensibly independent black homeland called Ciskei, and toppling its military dictator.

As the main column of marchers marked time at the border, Mr. Kasrils was assigned to lead a breakaway group in a flanking maneuver. The group sprinted toward the city center through a gap left -- temptingly, and no doubt deliberately -- in the fence, and straight into an ambush by several hundred machine guns of the Ciskei army.

The white Government of President F. W. de Klerk has its own split personality. There is the Rubicon-crossing, apartheid-disavowing, make-nice Government that craves the world's respect, and that promises majority rule. And there is the Red-baiting, divide-and-rule, make-war Government that shudders at the prospect of rule by the black majority; this is the Government that tolerates (if it does not actually orchestrate) the police torture, vigilante murder and homeland despotism that keep that majority from coalescing.

On Monday, while the make-nice Mr. de Klerk was occupied at a conference on the fine points of federalism in the forthcoming nonracial South Africa, his make-war surrogate at the Bisho border was Brigadier Oupa J. Gqozo, master of Ciskei. Mr. de Klerk supplies the brigadier with guns and comforts and advisers; the brigadier, in turn, does all he can to rattle the African National Congress in a region that has traditionally been its stronghold. When Mr. Kasril's young following charged through that inviting gap in the fence, Brigadier Gqozo's soldiers opened fire with abandon.

In simpler times, the consequences of such a massacre would have been clear-cut: worldwide opprobrium heaped upon Mr. de Klerk, calls from South African white liberals for sanctions against the regime, perhaps a surge of fresh martyrs to the barricades.

But these are more ambiguous times. Although, in fact, little has changed on the ground -- the black majority is still impoverished, separate and disenfranchised -- perceptions have changed profoundly. By disowning the ideology of racial oppression, Mr. de Klerk has persuaded much of the world to judge him in ordinary political terms rather than moral absolutes. By entering the political realm, the African National Congress has conceded that it will no longer be judged solely on the justice of its grand cause; it will be judged on its fitness to govern.

Neither side admits to being even marginally in the wrong at Bisho. Mr. de Klerk, at a press conference Wednesday, never even suggested that firing thousands of rounds without warning into a crowd that is fleeing in panic might constitute excessive force.

Source: New York Times

U.N. Chief Asks Council to Send 30 More Observers to South Africa

Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali recommended to the Security Council today that 30 United Nations observers be sent to South Africa to help existing groups in defusing violence and creating conditions for further negotiations toward "a democratic, nonracial and united" country. He also recommended the creation of undetermined number of operation centers at the major "flashpoints" around South Africa where violence is most likely to occur. The Secretary General said "there is desperate need" for these centers, staffed 24 hours a day and capable at all times of "acting immediately to defuse incipient problems."

The report also urged the immediate release of all political prisoners. This could contribute to "improving the political climate, creating trust and burying the unhappy past," Mr. Boutros-Ghali said. The Secretary General's report was based on the findings of his special envoy, Cyrus R. Vance, who with a small team of specialists from the United Nations Secretariat visited South Africa from July 21 to 31. Mr. Vance's trip was authorized by the Security Council, which had expressed its concern at the break in the negotiations between the white minority Government of South Africa and the African National Congress over a new nonracial constitution.

The new report took note of what the Secretary General called the longstanding capacity for violence by the various political groups in South Africa, he called for "a series of investigations" into the army, the police, Spear of the Nation, the Azanian People's Army, the KwaZulu police and certain private "security firms" and others that, he said, contribute to the violence that "is so central to the lack of trust in the political life of the country." Such investigations, the Secretary General said, would be undertaken by the Commission of Inquiry into Public Violence and Intimidation headed by Justice Richard Goldstone. "Should the Commission need further financing for its expanded work," the Secretary General said, "I would urge the Government to be forthcoming."

Mr. Boutros-Ghali disclosed that he sent seven observers to South Africa last week after Nelson Mandela, the head of the African National Congress, requested them to witness the demonstrations connected with the work stoppage called by the congress. President F. W. de Klerk made it clear that he had no objection to objective observers, Mr. Boutros-Ghali said, and on arriving, they observed the mass action in 11 different parts of the country. The seven joined three United Nations observers already in South Africa.

The Secretary General said the experiences of the 10 observers monitoring last week's demonstrations "could serve a valuable purpose in defining the tasks" of the 30 additional observers he is recommending. He said missions similar to that carried out by Mr. Vance should be "undertaken on a quarterly basis" or more often if the situation warrants, with reports provided to the Security Council.

Source: New York Times

South Africa Talks in Deadlock; De Klerk Confers With Mandela

Negotiations on South Africa's future deadlocked today, prompting President F. W. de Klerk and Nelson Mandela, president of the African National Congress, to meet to try to devise a solution. After the two leaders met with their advisers and then for more than an hour with each other, Mr. Mandela said they would report the outcome on Saturday. He described their meeting as "substantial," the South Africa Press Association reported, but did not say what they had decided. A resolution of the impasse would pave the way for the creation of a transitional government that would draft a new constitution extending political equality to blacks.

The cause of the deadlock was the inability of one of five working groups created by the Convention for a Democratic South Africa, as the negotiating forum is called, to agree on one of the proposed guidelines for a new constitution. The disputed point is the size of the legislative margin of approval for constitutional provisions covering regional issues. The dispute, which erupted in invective between the Government and the congress, blocked the presentation of progress reports by the four other working groups on the country's future. But Mr. Mandela told journalists that it would be naive for anybody to think that there would be no deadlocks in the negotiations. "While there is a will to address problems, there is hope those problems will be solved," said Mr. Mandela, who sounded noticeably more relaxed than his subordinates did earlier today. "We are confident that in the weeks or months that lie ahead we will be able to make good progress," Mr. Mandela said before meeting with Mr. de Klerk.

The convention, which opened last December in a mood of enthusiasm, created the working groups to consider aspects of the transition and submit their plans to the current meeting. But as the second full session of the convention confronted real issues today, the good will soured. The Government and the congress accused each other of derailing the talks, and some smaller parties took sides, splitting the convention nearly down the middle. "The Government continues to lack the will to negotiate seriously," charged Chris Hani, the head of the South African Communist Party, a congress ally. Foreign Minister Roelof F. Botha railed against what he called the "A.N.C.-Communist-Marxist school of belief" that "a winner takes all and grabs the power." Cyril Ramaphosa, the secretary general of the African National Congress, said at a news conference that he saw very little chance that agreement would be reached on the convention floor. "We have become convinced that the South African Government didn't come to today's working group meeting with the clear intent of signing an agreement," Mr. Ramaphosa said.

The Government delegation said the failure to agree on one point should not obscure what its negotiator Tertius Delport called "substantial and very important progress" on other fronts. The Government side proposed that the convention consider the reports of the other working groups, leaving the unresolved issue for discussion later. Mr. Delport cautioned against haste. "We're not dealing with the question at which time the Sunday school will start," he said. "We're dealing with the future of our country." But Mr. Ramaphosa rejected a piecemeal approach and said the entire package must be considered. He and other congress officials accused the Government of trying to postpone the eventuality of majority rule. "We do not want to be caught in a position where the transition goes on forever," said Mohammed Valli Moosa, a negotiator for the congress.

The disagreement involved the margin of approval that would be needed for constitutional provisions dealing specifically with regional issues. The African National Congress says it should be 70 percent of the votes in a elected constitution-making legislature; the Government has held out for 75 percent. These two key participants reached virtual consensus on other proposed guidelines, but the 5 percent gap has stalled unrelated issues that were scheduled for discussion and approval at the negotiations. Their inability to close the modest 5 percent difference reflected in part their exasperation after hours of negotiations, and also their unwillingness to appear to their constituencies to be giving too much ground. The regional issue is a delicate one. The governing National Party and some of the other 18 political parties and organizations in the talks believe that the interests of minorities, including whites, can be better protected if power is decentralized down to the regional level, even though whites do not form the majority in any region.

The National Party also wants the new Parliament to have a second chamber, called a Senate, whose members would be elected regionally rather than nationally. The African National Congress and the Government had already compromised on the margin by which a constitution-making body should enact legislation. The congress initially proposed a two-thirds majority, while the Government wanted 75 percent. They agreed upon 70 percent for most constitutional provisions and 75 percent for the bill of rights, but differed over the regional issues. Each side also introduced further conditions. The Government said its proposed Senate should have equal authority in approving the constitution, giving it a potential veto over what the first chamber drafted.

And the African National Congress said that if the constitution-making body could not pass its provisions by a sufficient majority, after six months the unresolved issues should be put to a public referendum. The congress and the Government have agreed that the transition take place in two stages, with an appointed executive council supervising the government during the initial stage. They also agreed that an interim legislature elected by universal franchise should draft the new constitution.

Source: New York Times

Ivory Coast and South Africa To Establish Diplomatic Ties

Ivory Coast and South Africa said today that they were establishing full diplomatic ties. Ivory Coast is the first black-ruled African nation to accord Pretoria full diplomatic recognition since President F. W. de Klerk began scrapping apartheid laws two years ago.

Communication Minister Auguste Miremont said Ivory Coast's decision was in response to Mr. de Klerk's moves, which won the backing of the white electorate in a referendum last month.

Source: new York Times

A Mandate For Change

Despite the overwhelming mandate that whites gave President F. W. de Klerk to end their monopoly on political power, South Africa has a distance to travel before blacks inherit the vote and other basic rights flowing from it.

The ringing approval of 68.7 percent of the whites who voted in Tuesday's referendum left little doubt that Mr. de Klerk has their support to negotiate power sharing with blacks.

"The referendum result is close to being unique in the annals of politics," Hermann Giliomee, a political scientist at the University of Cape Town, wrote in The Cape Times newspaper today. "Here the South African whites, who have become a byword in the world for myopic bigotry, endorse a process which is most likely to reduce their political representation in a year or two to a minority in an elected legislature."

"To make it even more exceptional," Professor Giliomee said, "whites have done this from a position of relative strength and in the absence of any sense of imminent defeat."

Source: New York Times

SOUTH AFRICA'S NEW ERA; MANDELA, FREED, URGES STEP-UP IN PRESSURE TO END WHITE RULE

After 27 and a half years in prison, Nelson Mandela finally won his freedom today and promptly urged his supporters at home and abroad to increase their pressure against the white minority Goverment that had just released him. ''We have waited too long for our freedom,'' Mr. Mandela told a cheering crowd from a balcony of Cape Town's old City Hall. ''We can wait no longer.'' ''Now is the time to intensify the struggle on all fronts,'' he said. ''To relax our efforts now would be a mistake which generations to come will not able to forgive.''

Mr. Mandela's 20-minute speech, which he prepared before leaving prison today, constituted his first remarks in public since before he was sentenced in June 1964 to life imprisonment for conspiracy to overthrow the Government and engage in sabotage. He asked the international community not to lift its sanctions against South Africa, despite the recent changes introduced by President F. W. de Klerk, which culminated in Mr. Mandela's release. ''To lift sanctions now would be to run the risk of aborting the process toward ending apartheid,'' he said.

Mr. Mandela's voice sounded firm and his words as eloquently militant as when he defended violence as the ultimate recourse at his political trial in 1964. Though he looked all of his 71 years and was grayer than artists' renditions over the years had depicted, he walked out of Victor Verster prison erect and vigorous. In Washington, President Bush rejoiced over the release of Mr. Mandela, spoke to him by telephone and invited the anti-apartheid leader to visit the White House. Mr. Mandela gave no evidence that his militant opposition to apartheid had been tempered by the more than 10,000 days he spent in confinement. But he also said nothing that would have surprised the Government had he said it during his years of incarceration. Indeed, there appeared to be nothing in Mr. Mandela's initial remarks after his release to give the Government much consolation or encouragement. Although he has been viewed as a potential leader for all South Africans, he stressed time and again that his loyalty lay with the African National Congress, for which he was working underground when he was jailed in August 1962 on charges of incitement and leaving the country illegally. He was serving time on that conviction when he was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1964.

Mr. Mandela told a crowd that he remained a ''loyal and disciplined member'' of the African National Congress and still endorsed its policies, including its use of armed struggle against the white minority Government. He said he saluted the congress's military wing, Spear of the Nation, and its ally, the South African Communist Party, ''for its steady contribution to the struggle for democracy.'' But he also thanked the Black Sash, an organization of white women working to end apartheid, and the predominantly white National Union of South African Students for being ''the conscience of white South Africans.'' And he held out an olive branch to all whites, asking them to join in shaping a new South Africa. ''The freedom movement is a political home for you, too,'' he said.

In his first speech after his release, Mr. Mandela may have taken an orthodox line with a mass audience sympathetic to the African National Congress and might in private discussions eshow greater flexibility on the question of discussions that the Government wants to have with blacks, who are 28 million of the population, compared with the 5 million whites of the ruling minority. He said he was only making some preliminary comments following his release, and would have more to say ''after I have had the opportunity to consult with my comrades.'' By this he meant the leaders of the African National Congress now in exile in Zambia as well as colleagues still based in South Africa. But he appeared to discourage any leading role for himself, such as the Government has in mind, saying, ''A leader of the movement is a person who has been democratically elected at a national conference.''

President de Klerk has invited black leaders to join talks leading to the formulation of a new constitution that would let black South Africans take part at last in their nation's politics.Mr. Mandela acknowledged to the crowd that he had conducted a dialogue with the Government during his last years in prison. But he added: ''My talks with the Government have been aimed at normalizing the political situation in the country. We have not yet begun discussing the basic demands of our struggle. I wish to stress that I myself have at no time entered into negotiations about the future of our country, except to insist on a meeting between the A.N.C. and the Government,'' he said. He described Mr. de Klerk, whom he has met twice since December, as ''a man of integrity. Mr. de Klerk has gone further than any other Nationalist President in taking real steps to normalize the situation,'' Mr. Mandela said. ''But as an organization we base our policy and strategy and tactics on the harsh reality we are faced with,'' he said. ''And this reality is that we are still suffering under the policies of the Nationalist Government.''

The National Party, which Mr. de Klerk now leads, instituted apartheid after taking power in 1948. Mr. Mandela said the Government had to take further steps before negotiations could begin. As a prerequisite for negotiations, he reiterated two demands that he had conveyed from prison through recent visitors. These are are the lifting of the state of emergency, which was imposed in June 1986, and the release of all political prisoners, including those accused of crimes committed in the struggle against apartheid. ''Only such a normalized situation which allows for free political activity can allow us to consult our people in order to obtain a mandate,'' Mr. Mandela said. He said the people had to be consulted about who would represent them in talks with the Government. ''Negotiations cannot take place above the heads or behind the backs of our people,'' he said. ''It is our belief that the future of our country can only be determined by a body which is democratically elected on a nonracial basis.''

Mr. Mandela appeared to allude to a formula under which a constituent assembly, in effect supplanting the existing Parliament, would draft a new constitution. Such a plan would mean the creation of an interim government in South Africa and has previously been rejected by Mr. de Klerk for the foreseeable future. Mr. Mandela walked out of Victor Verster Prison near Paarl at 4:15 P.M., 75 minutes later than the release time announced Saturday afternoon by Mr. de Klerk. Acquaintances of the Mandela family said his departure from the prison was delayed by family discussions. He was greeted by about 5,000 supporters lining the asphalt road outside the prison farm where he has been held since December 1988. Some waved the black, green and yellow flags of the African National Congress, from which Mr. de Klerk removed a ban on Feb. 2. Mr. Mandela was then driven 40 miles from Paarl to Cape Town, passing several hundred people who had parked by the roadside or waited on overpasses in hope of seeing him. They held homemade signs, some of which read simply, ''Welcome home.'' A huge crowd, which organizers said reached 250,000 people, assembled in the square in front of the old City Hall in Cape Town to greet Mr. Mandela. Reporters covering the rally put the crowd's size at only 50,000 people at its peak. They became impatient and sometimes unruly, waiting up to six hours in the hot sun and had dwindled to about 20,000 by sunset, when Mr. Mandela finally appeared.

In the 1950's it was Government policy to prevent blacks from settling in the Western Cape, so they are not in the clear majority in Cape Town, where Mr. Mandela was released. People of mixed race, known as ''coloreds,'' are the largest population group in Cape Town, where whites also outnumber blacks. Blacks, who account for nearly 75 percent of the population in the country as a whole, are in the overwhelming majority in the Johannesburg region, where Mr. Mandela can expect his most tumultuous welcome.

The festive occasion was marred by violence after some youths who had been drinking on the fringes of the rally started breaking windows and looting shops in downtown Cape Town. The police tried to disperse them by firing shotguns and tear gas, and some of the youths retaliated by throwing bottles and stones. At one point, drunken protesters invaded a Chinese restaurant, snatched up the liquor and wine and threw bottles at the police from the rooftop. One man in the crowd was also injured in a knife fight.

The South African Press Association reported tonight that 2 people had been killed and 13 wounded in the confrontations. A physician treating casualties on the scene estimated that 100 people had been wounded, mostly by buckshot. Most suffered only light injuries, including three journalists covering the rally. Cheryl Carolus, a spokeswoman for the United Democratic Front, which helped organize the rally, attributed the violence to outsiders who, she said, were ''beyond our usual crowds, or who supported the rival Pan-Africanist Movement.''' At times, some supporters at the rally had to scramble for cover as the police chased or fired at looters and stone-throwers. The Rev. Allan Boesak, a prominent figure in the anti-apartheid movement, pleaded for more than 45 minutes with the crowd to maintain discipline and move back.

Dullah Omar, a lawyer representing the Mandela family, said Mr. Mandela had been unaware of the violence. This evening, Mr. Mandela failed to appear at a news conference arranged by the reception committee that is handling his schedule. A representative said Mr. Mandela would meet the press later this week in Johannesburg. Mr. Mandela and his wife, Winnie, are expected to fly to Johannesburg on Monday and proceed to their home in the black township of Soweto. One of the organizers, Saki Mocozoma, said security considerations precluded him from revealing where the Mandelas were spending their first night.

Mr. Mandela also paid tribute to his wife, who has lived apart from him for more than 27 years, and their children. ''I am convinced that your pain and suffering was far greater than my own,'' he told them.

Source: New York Times

SOUTH AFRICA'S NEW ERA; SOUTH AFRICA'S PRESIDENT ENDS 30-YEAR BAN ON MANDELA GROUP; SAYS IT IS TIME FOR NEGOTIATION

President F. W. de Klerk today lifted a 30-year ban on the African National Congress, the movement that has been fighting to bring down white minority rule in South Africa, and promised that Nelson Mandela, who has been imprisoned for nearly 28 years, would be freed soon. The moves were disclosed in a package of sweeping changes that Mr. de Klerk announced in a speech at the opening of Parliament today. Mr. de Klerk's program, which went beyond what virtually all his critics expected, appeared intended to clear the way for negotiating the country's future with his strongest black opponents, and also to put the onus for the next move on the opposition.

The African National Congress followed a policy of nonviolent resistance to white rule for decades before it was declared illegal in 1960. Thereafter, it organized a military force in exile and waged a campaign of bombings with underground operatives inside South Africa. Although the group was banned, its influence continued to grow in recent years, to the point that not only black leaders from inside South Africa but white business executives and politicians began flying regularly to Lusaka, Zambia, to meet with its exiled leaders. By legitimizing the movement's role in South African political life, President de Klerk appeared to be seeking an end to the era of violent confrontation. But he left uncertain the distance he was prepared to travel toward the movement's goals of ending white dominance and dismantling the legal structure of apartheid.''Hostile postures have to be replaced by cooperative ones, confrontation by contact, disengagement by engagement, slogans by deliberate debate,'' Mr. de Klerk told Parliament in calling for the Government's opponents to join the negotiations he has proposed. ''The season of violence is over,'' the President said. ''The time for reconstruction and reconciliation has arrived.''

Thousands of people took to the streets of major cities to cheer the announcement and call for more change. The demonstration here concluded peacefully, but in Johannesburg, police officers acting under regulations that remain in force broke up a march into the city center with tear gas and night sticks. Prominent critics of apartheid praised Mr. de Klerk's move, although they stressed the need for more concessions by the Government. But Mr. de Klerk's announcement was criticized by the country's most prominent right-wing white leader, who called for new elections.

Mr. de Klerk promised that Mr. Mandela, the imprisoned leader of the African National Congress who is a hero to much of the country's black majority, would be freed soon but declined to say when. His release has been seen by Pretoria's opponents at home and abroad as a major test of Mr. de Klerk's intentions to move away from apartheid, the system of racial segregation and white domination. ''I wish to put it plainly that the Government has taken a firm decision to release Mr. Mandela unconditionally,'' Mr. de Klerk said. ''I am serious about bringing this matter to finality without delay. The Government will take a decision soon on the date of his release. Unfortunately, a further short passage of time is unavoidable.'' Mr. de Klerk attributed the postponement of Mr. Mandela's freedom to ''factors in the way of his immediate release, of which his personal circumstances and safety are not the least.'' The President, as well as other Government ministers, refused to explain further. But Stoffel van der Merwe, Minister of Development Aid and Education, which encompasses the education of blacks, briefed reporters on Mr. de Klerk's speech today and told them that ''I don't think we will see Christmas with Mr. Mandela in jail.'' Others informed about the Government's thinking expect Mr. Mandela's release to come within weeks, if not days.

The 71-year-old anti-apartheid leader, who is living on a prison farm outside Cape Town, has been quoted by recent visitors as demanding that the Government improve the political climate before he leaves prison. The conditions mentioned included the legalization of the African National Congress, the release of political detainees, the lifting of the national state of emergency decree and an end to political trials and executions.

Mr. de Klerk appeared to cover most of those demands as he repeated his willingness to discuss a new constitution that would give political rights to the black majority without forcing the white minority to relinquish power. ''With the steps the Government has taken, it has proven its good faith and the table is laid for sensible leaders to begin talking about a new dispensation, to reach an understanding by way of dialogue and discussion,'' Mr. de Klerk said. The other changes announced by Mr. de Klerk included these:

* Emergency regulations curtailing the freedom of press will be repealed, except for unspecified conditions limiting photographic and television coverage of racial unrest.

* Restrictions on 33 organizations whose activities were curtailed under the national state of emergency decree will be lifted.

* Restrictions on the movements and contacts of 374 people released from detention are to be lifted and the regulations hampering their freedom are to be abolished.

* Political detentions will be limited to six months, and detainees will have the right to legal representation and a doctor of their choice.

Opponents of apartheid have estimated that 30,000 people have been detained since the national state of emergency decree was imposed in June 1986, and many of those were held indefinitely without access to a lawyer or doctor. In addition to the African National Congress, the most prominent groups whose activities will no longer be restricted are the South African Communist Party, a longtime ally of Mr. Mandela's group, and a rival, the Pan-Africanist Congress, which places greater stress on the role of black leadership in the anti-apartheid struggle.

The list also includes the United Democratic Front, a coalition of anti-apartheid parties, the South African National Students Congress, the Congress of South African Trade Unions, a labor federation active in the struggle against apartheid, the National Education Crisis Committee, and the White Freedom Movement, a right-wing paramilitary group promoting white racial supremacy, which was banned in December 1989.

Mr. de Klerk acknowledged that the national state of emergency regulations remained in force, but said they would now inhibit only those who used chaos and disorder as political weapons. ''It is my intention to terminate the state of emergency as soon as circumstances justify it and I request the cooperation of everybody toward this end,'' the President said. The changes announced today, while probably the most dramatic announced by any South African President in a single speech, leave in place the basic structures of apartheid, including the Population Registration Act, which classifies every South African by race, and the Group Areas Act, which enforces the segregation of neighborhoods. Blacks also remain largely excluded from the political process.

The country is governed by a three-chamber Parliament, representing whites, Asians and people of mixed race, and a President elected by the legislators. Blacks, who represent about 75 percent of the total population of 38.5 million, have no representation. But Mr. de Klerk said the Separate Amenities Act, which has allowed municipal officials to bar blacks from publicly owned centers, installations and facilities, would be repealed by Parliament in its current session, as he had promised late last year. Mr. de Klerk further announced that the Government would confine the use of the death penalty to what he called ''extreme cases,'' in part by allowing judges greater discretion in imposing it. ''The net of extenuating circumstances will be substantally increased,'' Foreign Minister Roelof F. Botha, a confidant of Mr. de Klerk, told reporters. Under current South African law, a judge is required to sentence a defendent to hang if the defendant is convicted of a capital crime.

Critics of apartheid have viewed the death penalty as an instrument of repression, because blacks account for most condemned prisoners and because capital punishment has been applied in politically motivated crimes. Mr. de Klerk said those sentenced to death would automatically be granted the right to appeal their sentences, which is now at the judge's discretion. Those changes, he said, would be extended to those currently on death row. ''Therefore, all executions have been suspended and no executions will take place until Parliament has taken a final decision on the new proposals.'' he said. ''In the event of the proposals being adopted, the case of every person involved will be dealt with in accordance with the new guidelines.''

Taken altogether, the changes announced by Mr. de Klerk amount to a significant reconsideration of the Government's policy toward dissent, because they appear to address most of the complaints by the anti-apartheid movement about Government repression. Prominent members of the anti-apartheid movement reacted with optimism tempered by caution. They attributed the changes to the domestic and international pressure applied against Pretoria, not to Mr. de Klerk's boldness.

At a news conference called here by the United Democratic Front, its publicity secretary, Patrick Lekota, said Mr. de Klerk's speech showed that international sanctions against South Africa worked and that the measures should be maintained and intensified. ''To lift sanctions now will be to run the risk of aborting the process toward democracy,'' Mr. Lekota said. But Dr. Andries P. Treurnicht, leader of the right-wing Conservative Party in Parliament, called Mr. de Klerk's speech shocking. He demanded that Mr. de Klerk, whose National Party was returned to power last September, hold a new election to see how much support whites would give him now.

The regulations enacting most of the changes, which take effect immediately, are to be published in the Government Gazette beginning tomorrow. Mr. van der Merwe said the Government had not set any conditions on the legalization of the African National Congress, which has been outlawed since 1960, or on its resumption of political activity. He also said members of the organization living in exile could return home without fear of punishment, as long as they had not been charged with criminal offenses. And he said members held in South African jails for illegal political activity, though not crimes, would be released.

Source: New York Times

De Klerk and Mandela Discuss Future

President F. W. de Klerk discussed South Africa's future with Nelson R. Mandela today, raising the expectation that the imprisoned anti-apartheid leader may be released early next year. Mr. de Klerk received Mr. Mandela, South Africa's most prominent political prisoner, at Tuynhuys, the President's office in Cape Town. Mr. Mandela, who has been in jail since 1963, is being held at a prison farm near Paarl, outside Cape Town.

Justice Minister Hendrick J. Coetsee, who attended the meeting, said that it was requested by Mr. Mandela and welcomed by Mr. de Klerk, who says he wants to create a climate for negotiations that would give the country's disenfranchised black majority a limited degree of political power. Taking Measure of Each Other In a cautiously worded statement, Mr. Coetsee said the meeting with Mr. Mandela ''fitted in with Mr. de Klerk's program to consult with the full spectrum of political opinion concerning the mutual future of all South Africans.'' The discussions between Mr. de Klerk and Mr. Mandela, he said, included ''ways and means to address current obstacles in the way of meaningful dialogue.'' Mr. Coetsee declined to give more details, saying further statements ''would serve no positive purpose.'' But Mr. Mandela's release has been a consistent precondition of black leaders across the political spectrum for talks with the white minority Government.

The state-run South African Broadcasting Corporation, in reporting news of the meeting on the television evening news, showed an old photograph of Mr. Mandela, indicating a departure from the official position that his photograph not be shown or published because South African law treats him as a banned person. Today's meeting created the opportunity for the most prominent white and black South Africans to take personal measure of each other. Mr. Coetsee did not say how long the meeting lasted. The Justice Minister said follow-up talks between Mr. de Klerk and Mr. Mandela were envisioned in the new year, a statement that indicated Mr. Mandela would not be freed this month. Criticism From the Right

During a visit to the Ivory Coast on Dec. 2, President de Klerk told reporters that the question was not whether Mr. Mandela would be released but when and under what circumstances. Today's meeting was criticized by Andries Treurnicht, the leader of the right-wing Conservative Party, who said that it amounted to an unbanning of the outlawed African National Congress, to which Mr. Mandela has belonged for 45 years. But the liberal Democratic Party welcomed the meeting. In a statement, its co-leader, Denis Worrall, said Mr. Mandela's request to see President de Klerk ''suggests Mr. Mandela understands what an important role he has to play and how deeply his initial approach will influence in particular white South African attitudes.''

There have been reports that Mr. Mandela was remaining in prison by his own choice in order to get more jailed comrades released and to work out details for negotiations with the Government. But Dullah Omar, a Cape Town attorney, discounted such suggestions after lunching yesterday with Walter and Albertina Sisulu. Mr. Sisulu, a comrade of Mr. Mandela in both the outlawed African National Congress and in prison, visited Mr. Mandela for three hours yesterday.

Mr. de Klerk freed Mr. Sisulu and seven other long-term political prisoners, six of whom belonged to the Congress, on Oct. 15 in a gesture seen as a rehearsal for Mr. Mandela's release. Mr. Omar said Mr. Sisulu told him that of the issues he and Mr. Mandela discussed, ''the most relevant one was Mr. Mandela's continued imprisonment. Mr. Mandela emphatically denies that he has chosen not to be released now.'' ''He says he does not know why he has not been released with the others,'' Mr. Omar continued, according to a report by the South African Press Association. ''He has the right to be released but is not prepared to beg for his release.''

New York Times

De Klerk Becomes Pretoria President

F. W. de Klerk was sworn in today as Acting President of South Africa and said that the country was about to enter an era of change. Mr. de Klerk reaffirmed his promises to phase out white rule and involve blacks in talks about South Africa's future, but without submitting whites to what he has called majority domination. ''There is no doubt that we stand on the threshold of a new era in South and southern Africa,'' Mr. de Klerk, the National Party leader, said in a prepared statement. ''History, I believe, offers us a unique opportunity for peaceful solutions.'' Expected to Be President

Mr. de Klerk is widely expected to become President if the National Party wins the parliamentary elections on Sept. 6, as seems probable. The low-key inauguration, in the presidential wing of the Union Buildings, was attended only by his wife, Marike, other Cabinet ministers and a few dozen journalists. At a news conference afterward, Mr. de Klerk paid tribute to his predecessor, P. W. Botha, who resigned on Monday after losing a confrontation with Mr. de Klerk and other members of his Cabinet. Mr. Botha refused to appoint a successor, so Mr. de Klerk was unanimously chosen by his colleagues to fill the vacancy.

Mr. de Klerk said Mr. Botha's ''greatest gift to South Africa'' was that ''he has put our country on the road to fundamental reform, that he successfully started pulling South Africa out of its dead-end streets and that he guided us in the direction of a totally new dispensation.'' A Contrast in Tone Mr. de Klerk's magnanimity contrasted conspicuously with the tone of Mr. Botha's address on Monday night, when he complained that his Cabinet ministers were ignoring him and that Mr. de Klerk was to travel to Zambia to meet President Kenneth D. Kaunda without his permission. Mr. Botha met with Mr. Kaunda in April 1982. Mr. de Klerk told reporters today that his new responsibilities might preclude the visit to Zambia. But tonight, it was disclosed that he had written President Kaunda, saying that he and Foreign Minister Roelof F. Botha would meet the Zambian leader as scheduled in Livingston on Aug. 28. The Foreign Minister's office released the text of a letter that Mr. Kaunda had written earlier assuring President Botha that he did not mean to undercut him but wanted to meet Mr. de Klerk as a person who would occupy a leadership position in the region.

In response to another question, Mr. de Klerk also said that Nelson R. Mandela, South Africa's best-known political prisoner, would not be released before a President was chosen by the electoral college on Sept. 14, a day after the new Parliament is to be convened. Mr. de Klerk said he should not ''in any way whatsoever try to arrange the future'' in his temporary capacity. Frosty Relations Since February Political analysts here said that President Botha, in taking his leave of politics, had tried to hurt Mr. de Klerk and the National Party by sowing doubts about their motives among the white electorate. Mr. de Klerk replaced Mr. Botha as party leader in February after Mr. Botha suffered a stroke, and their relations have been frosty since.

The reaction today of the South African press and public to Mr. Botha's resignation appeared to be one of relief. Business Day, the country's leading financial newspaper, said that ''seldom, if ever, has this country had a leader more widely detested,'' and added, ''It is well that he is gone.'' But one political analyst noted that Mr. Botha still commanded respect among some traditional National Party constituencies and that some whites might vote for the opposition, the right-wing Conservative Party, if they felt the retiring President had been ill used by his party. When a reporter asked Mr. de Klerk about his plans, he replied, ''We want to build a new South Africa in which all people will participate in decisions affecting their lives at all levels of government, but in such a way that no one group amongst the diversity which we have in South Africa will be in a position to dominate others.''

Source: New York Times

Botha, Rebuffed by His Party, Quits South Africa Presidency

P. W. Botha quit under pressure tonight as South Africa's President, complaining that his Cabinet ministers were ignoring him. His announcement, delivered in a disjointed and rambling address in Afrikaans on national television, followed a Cabinet meeting this morning in which the 73-year-old Mr. Botha lost a confrontation he had forced with F. W. de Klerk, his successor as leader of the governing National Party.

At issue was Mr. de Klerk's right to travel to Zambia later this month to meet President Kenneth D. Kaunda without getting Mr. Botha's approval first. But this was overshadowed by a wide perception among politicians, journalists and ordinary South Africans that the President had been trying to undercut Mr. de Klerk since the latter succeeded him as National Party leader about six months ago. President Botha said he would not approve Mr. de Klerk's trip to Zambia because President Kaunda has given refuge to the outlawed African National Congress, which is seeking to overthrow the white Government in Pretoria, and has encouraged foreign pressure on South Africa. ''I am of the opinion that it is inopportune to meet with President Kaunda at this stage,'' Mr. Botha said.

The President announced his resignation 23 days before the next parliamentary elections, which are the toughest the National Party has faced since it came to power in 1948. Mr. de Klerk has been trying to rally the party against its opponents, the right-wing Conservative Party and the liberal Democratic Party, in what has so far been a lackluster campaign for control of the white house of Parliament, and thus the Government. Had Mr. de Klerk not stood up to Mr. Botha today, his credibility as the leader of a party under fire would have been compromised and the likelihood of becoming the next President diminished. In his remarks, Mr. Botha disclosed that Mr. de Klerk and his allies proposed at today's Cabinet meeting that the President, who suffered a stroke in January, retire on grounds of ill health. Mr. Botha said he replied that could not leave ''with such a lie. It is evident to me that after all these years of my best efforts for the National Party and for the Government of this country as well as the security of this country, I am being ignored by ministers in my Cabinet,'' the South African President said. ''I consequently have no choice other than to announce my resignation.''

Mr. Botha, who submitted his resignation to Chief Justice Michael Corbett, did not name a successor. Foreign Minister Roelof F. Botha, who is not related to the President, indicated in a television interview tonight that Mr. de Klerk would be sworn in on Tuesday. The South African Constitution says that a Cabinet minister chosen by his colleagues may be acting President. It is expected that Mr. de Klerk will be elected President after the elections on Sept. 6. In a television interview after President Botha's announcement, Mr. de Klerk and Foreign Minister Botha took polite exception to the President's remarks. ''We are sad that a man who has done so much for his country has to retire under these unhappy circumstances,'' Mr. de Klerk said. Effects on Nation's Politics

He confirmed that the Cabinet ministers had suggested that Mr. Botha resign on grounds of poor health. ''We felt that his state of health justified this,'' Mr. de Klerk said, reinforcing a public perception that the stroke had affected the President more than he admitted. It appears likely that the National Party will win the election, but with a smaller majority in Parliament. The resignation was expected to help the party by reinforcing the image it is cultivating as a force for evolutionary change in South Africa.

The change in leadership is unlikely to immediately affect the situation of the black majority, which is excluded from the parliamentary elections. Though Mr. de Klerk is perceived as more enlightened than President Botha, he still supports the basic concept of racially separate groups and has promised that an end to white control will not lead to domination by the black majority. It was an ignominious finish to the career of a politician who began as a National Party organizer 54 years ago. Mr. Botha was elected to Parliament in 1948. He became Defense Minister in 1966, Prime Minister in 1978 and President in 1984 under a new constitution that combined the duties of heads of state and government. For a decade, he was simultaneously the National Party leader.

Under his rule, the South African Army became the most powerful military force in Africa. But Mr. Botha also promised political change and expanded the whites-only Parliament to include smaller chambers representing South Africans of mixed race and of Asian descent. After the President suffered his stroke on Jan. 18, his aides described it as a mild one. But Mr. Botha sent a letter to National Party members of Parliament on Feb. 2, announcing that he was stepping down as National Party leader, though not as President, and asking them to choose a successor. The legislators elected Mr. de Klerk.

Mr. Botha, who was understood to have preferred Finance Minister Barend du Plessis, never publicly congratulated Mr. de Klerk. And he remained as President, in a position to block any decisions by Mr. de Klerk. Old Scores Settled But Mr. de Klerk quickly won the loyalty of the party's members of Parliament, who had chafed under Mr. Botha's sometimes autocratic leadership. After Mr. Kaunda announced last Thursday that he would meet Mr. de Klerk, President Botha called a special Cabinet meeting for today to discuss the offer. Mr. de Klerk outflanked him by getting the backing of the other Cabinet ministers.

The President, in objecting to Mr. de Klerk's plans to meet President Kaunda, made no mention of his own meeting with the Zambian leader on South Africa's frontier with Botswana on April 30, 1982, when Mr. Kaunda was, if anything, even less sympathetic toward Pretoria. But his portrayal of Mr. de Klerk's pending trip to Zambia as unpatriotic did not seem likely to scuttle it, unless President Kaunda chooses to take umbrage at Mr. Botha's criticism or Mr. de Klerk decides it would hurt the party in the coming elections. Foreign Minister Botha observed that ''in every other African state except Lesotho and Swaziland, there is an A.N.C. presence.''

Source: New York Times

South Africa's Tide Shifts

Nelson Mandela holds the keys. He is South Africa's true jailer, and the country's white leaders his prisoners. That is the pronounced significance of Mr. Mandela's visit from prison to President Pieter W. Botha and the trek of Frederik W. de Klerk, Mr. Botha's heir-in-waiting, to the capitals of Europe. Soon Mr. de Klerk will visit Washington. A major U.S. initiative is possible.

Mr. Mandela's tea with President Botha need not mean his imminent release from detention after 26 years. Nor does his recent family birthday party in prison, his comparatively comfortable accommodations there and the attention being paid to him and his movements by all South Africans. Nevertheless, the gradual shift of Mr. Mandela, 71, from antihero to hero, is intended by the white-minority Government to confer a new legitimacy on him and, according to a recent speech by Mr. de Klerk, also on the African National Congress, Mr. Mandela's exiled and banned guerrilla movememt.

Mr. Botha, Mr. de Klerk and most other white political leaders now know that Mr. Mandela and the A.N.C. are essential to any solution of South Africa's color crisis. Mr. Botha wanted, in the last three months of his tenure as President, to measure the mettle of his foremost adversary. He and Mr. de Klerk at last well appreciate that he must be released. But when? And how? To free Mr. Mandela before the national election on Sept. 6 (from which black voters are excluded), would adversely affect the fortunes of Mr. de Klerk's ruling National Party. Mr. Botha might release him during those few weeks after the election when he is still in power, before turning the presidency over to Mr. de Klerk. But a new government would be ill-equipped to deal with the tumultuous result. Moreover, the National Party is also intensely interested in the results of the Constituent Assembly election in neighboring Namibia. The election there will be held Nov. 1, and the National Party hopes to obtain as many votes as possible for the white-led Democratic Turnhalle Alliance in its competition with the South West Africa People's Organization. Although there is a conference of Commonwealth heads in late October, and Mr. Mandela's release would prevent any renewed threat of sanctions and gain South Africa the backing of Britain, the impact of such a release on the Namibian election would prove more decisive for South Africa. For these reasons, and because Mr. de Klerk will, understandably, want carefully to prepare South Africa for Mr. Mandela's release, the beginning of the end of apartheid is not yet at hand.

The fact that white South Africa courts Mr. Mandela, may even be negotiating at a low level with the A.N.C. and hardly tries to prevent large delegations from making the trek to Lusaka, Zambia, to meet and be impressed by the A.N.C. leaders, adds excitement and new hope to those who seek peace in South Africa. Certainly the African National Congress, having largely shed its rampant Marxism in the post-Gorbachev era, is ready to help plan South Africa's future with whites. Both sides are studying constitutional options anew. Once Mr. Mandela is free, other political prisoners are released and the A.N.C. unbanned, then the guerilla movement, internal African opponents of apartheid and the Government will be able to negotiate.

That scenario, once a fantasy, is now - according to the representatives of the Government and A.N.C. -very much closer at hand than at any time since 1948. No one believes the National Party wants to give up all its power, but a weariness of combat and miserable economic forecasts impel change. South Africa has severe balance of payments problems, high inflation, a falling index of business confidence and little room for maneuver. Only a political settlement can permit a return to positive rates of growth. Mr. de Klerk will come to power knowing that Mr. Mandela's freedom and negotiations with the A.N.C. are the costs of prosperity.

When Mr. de Klerk visits Washington this month to see Secretary of State James Baker, many Congressmen and perhaps President Bush, he can be reminded how much the U.S. wants to see a negotiated settlement. More than that, Mr. Baker or Mr. Bush can offer to convene and preside over a Camp David session for South Africa. It might even make sense for President Bush to offer to preside with Mikhael Gorbachev, who also wants a negotiated peace in South Africa. The African National Congress is ready to talk, and so might whites be also willing to talk, realistically in a prestigious setting about their future in a united South Africa.

Source: New York Times