Saving lives. One word at a time.
The modern state of South Africa is a conglomerate of ethnically and religiously diverse people. The peaceful transition from apartheid to democracy was viewed a huge success globally and Nelson Mandela’s dream of a non-racial rainbow nation was finally a reality. However, when the ANC took power, they were confronted with the problem of successfully governing a multi-ethnic state while consolidating power and governing efficiently.
The ANC immediately drew upon their militant struggle disposition for managing ethnic politics in a manner similar to that of their communist allies, such as Fidel Castro and Muammar Gaddafi. Nelson Mandela was a committed communist and wrote the manuscript: How to be a good communist.
They embarked on a rapid transformation process and replaced key private sector, civic and civil figures with political allies. They then implemented Affirmative Action (AA) and Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) legislation which translated into widespread corruption and nepotism.
The true social cost of this rapid transformation process is now becoming evident as the poor got poorer and leading to social unrest. This social friction paves the way for unscrupulous political aspirants such as Julius Malema, to a point where voices of concern are rising from both within the ANC and international allies. It is within this context that an environment ripe for genocide of the South African European Minority (SAEM) developed. Their defenses disarmament and economic marginalization led to the displacement of approximately a million people and the brutal rape, torture and murder of tens of thousands. The true magnitude can only be established through an independent investigation, such as the Stanton Commission of Inquiry (SCI).
The West selected to turn a blind eye to the human rights situation in South Africa, encouraging instead the continued territorial integrity and stability of nation states most of which they had helped to create. It is with implied blessing from the global community that the ANC is able to inflict grievous harm on not only the very people who were supposedly liberated but also the SAEM. Notwithstanding that they also have a responsibility to protect when the state fails to as per the R2P framework .
In view of the collective brutal assault on the SAEM, we need to take the South African Constitution’s founding principles, at face value as well as our association and commitment with the process that led to the adoption of a non-racial Constitution. Especially in terms of Section 36, that provides that “the rights in the Bill of Rights may be limited only in terms of a law of general application to the extent that the limitation is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom…”
It is clear that the assaults on the SAEM are not strategies of redistribution of wealth or empowerment of the previously oppressed minority, but instead a sustained and coordinated campaign aimed at the destruction of this minority group, as has been the case of “retributive” genocide in Rwanda. The gross human rights abuses witnessed since 1992, when European South Africans voted overwhelmingly in Referendum to continue with the transformation from Apartheid to Democracy have been attributed to a ‘third force’, ‘Xenophobia’ and ‘crime’. In fact, the South African President persistently claims that it is just crime when confronted with the brutality of these heinous acts.
However, the brutal murder and torture of the remaining members of the minority in South Africa remain unchecked and are even encouraged through blatant hate speech by the current President of South Africa himself. In recent months, despite a high court judgment to the contrary, the President continues to sing “Kill the Boer” at political gatherings. This particular song is reminiscent of the Pan African Congress’, “One settler, one bullet”. Not only has inflammatory speech proven to be incitement to genocide but also proven detrimental to any prospects for national reconciliation and the peaceful transition process initiated 20 years ago.
As of today, indications are that in excess of 4000 members of the Commercial European farming community have been murdered since 1992. That equates to roughly one murder, every second day, in this subsection of the minority alone, notwithstanding the unknown amount of murders and attacks on the rural and city communities. The situation has been further exacerbated by expropriations, land invasions and strangling of financial resources available to the European minority.
Even if allowance is made for a substantial margin of error in recorded estimates, there can be no doubt that this is just the tip of the iceberg, as the government institutionalized various mechanisms to prohibit the collection of credible data and in many cases data have been perverted by the police themselves. The nature of the evidence is profoundly disturbing, not only for the victims, but also for the volunteers who have taken it upon themselves to collect credible data. They are working tirelessly and have to absorb large quantities of distressing information without any support and with tremendous opposition. Even in view of this consorted effort, the system to collect data remains fragmented and informal.
We are not suggesting in any way that the SA Constitution is inadequate in terms of its provision for a human rights framework, in fact, it is rated as one the most democratic constitutions in the world. However, not only are these atrocities in direct contradiction with the said constitution, but also the denial by the government that any minorities exist in South Africa and they should not expect any special privileges. This is in clear contradiction with Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which explicitly states that the right to identity is directly related to minority protection. Not only is the government denying the European Minority their identity, but they wish to indicate that basic human rights are special privileges, again in contradiction with International Human Rights Law and the Declaration of human Rights.