TEXT OF PAGE 2. OF TERM OF REFERENCE 5) TO CHRISTMAS, 1987 REGISTERED LETTER TO THEN-PRESIDENT OF SOUTH AFRICA P.W. BOTHA/ALSO TERM OF REFERENCE 2) OF AUGUST, 1986 REGISTERED LETTER TO THEN-SOVIET GENERAL SECRETARY MIKHAIL GORBACHEV:

2.

You should understand that i refrained from explicitly supporting the call for economic sanctions against South Africa to encourage the dismantling of apartheid because i appreciate the difficulty the Botha Government would have in effecting the end of apartheid--but do not respect the abuses of blacks' human rights in practice of it--and concluded that (as i indicated to Desmond Tutu) a secure basis for dialogue between the Botha Government and the leadership of the blacks should be protected, free from the mutual recriminations and violence practised by both sides, proceeding beyond the implementation of economic sanctions (should they be applied) and with respect for the ultimate legitimate rights of all individuals and parties "affected and concerned."

To put the matter in perspective (as this is an "open letter"), i realize that certain parties internationally have, since 1978, credited me personally with putting forward the idea of applying the economic sanctions against South Africa (to lead to the end of apartheid) and other governments and discernable groups in the international community which practise policies inconsistent with world understanding and agreement maintaining international peace and providing potential for better relations between adversaries.
In general terms, this is correct and cannot be denied because it is well documented and can be substantiated by the United Nations Secretary-General's Office, for instance. (You should note that i discussed this directly with Gorin Ohlin, the U.N. Assistant Secretary-General, during his April, 1986 visit to Vancouver.)
As, therefore, is further realized, proceeding from the 1978 work...eight years ago...i am the original source of "constructive engagement" because the original work and representations stopped short of formally insisting upon the immediate imposition (then) of sanctions.
However, to prevent misunderstanding presently, it should be reiterated that it was made clear in 1978 that personally i favoured sanctions if this "constructive engagement" failed to lead to the end of apartheid and President Carter's equivalent views and disapproval of apartheid were included in my representations at that time. I spoke to his Atlanta office on May 19, 1986 about this matter and they suggested that i proceed presently "independently." The 1978 representation was a legitimate one. Pressures now being applied make it certain that world awareness of our disapproval eight years ago will result. Disputes with the authority will draw Jimmy Carter into the controversy in a leading role despite his present status without holding elected office.
Our present "concerns" apply to whether your government intends to respect the terms of reference central to the 1978 communications or would prefer to risk encouraging the civil war in South Africa it contends it does not seek.
The 1978 communications did make clear that the plans were intended for more than applying pressure on the supporters of apartheid. Hence, the unanswered questions about the attacks on South Africa's neighbours, in this context require answers immediately, with more substantial evidence of the government's plans to end apartheid by peaceful and legitimate means which respect the human rights of the blacks, or it would be assumed that South Africa pursues the domination and oppression of all Africans--giving lie to all its claims to be a democracy and actively pursuing justice for the blacks of South Africa by peaceful and legitimate means as a member of the international community...and particularly, the West.
I believe i am correct in recalling that a statement from me to the South African Government was promised in 1978 regarding this aspect of my "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis," and this can be regarded as such even though i am not prepared presently to state that a definitive policy decision has been made on behalf of those others originally and since represented.
For instance, a submission is being prepared for Prime Minister Thatcher and it is probable that the British decision will be underlined at the August, 1986 meeting of the Commonwealth heads of state.
Therefore, clearly, notwithstanding the recommendations by the Commonwealth eminent persons committee presently, my "influence" in this field continues beyond the end of their work--as i stated to Desmond Tutu in the statement to him which i provide you with the copy of here. And as i must send follow-up statements to "The Organization of African Unity" and other interested parties, it should not be assumed by the Botha Government that its June 21, 1986 "peace talks" will be the last word on the matter if satisfaction is not provided for all those affected.


DON'T THINK THE WISDOM OF THOMAS JEFFERSON IS PASSÉ YET IN WHAT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO FROM YOUR GOVERNMENT? LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD: TAKE A BRIEF SIDESTEP HERE TO SIGN MY GUESTBOOK.


TAKE YOUR NEXT FOOTSTEP HERE.



1