50th Anniversary of the Dar es Salaam Declaration of 1975

50th Anniversary of the Dar es Salaam Declaration of 1975

From 7 to 10 April 1975, the Extraordinary Session of the Council of Ministers of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) meeting in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, made an in-depth study of the developments in Southern Africa in general and the situation in South Africa in particular. This evaluation was made with the specific objective of devising ways and means of realising Africa’s long cherished objective in the region, namely, the total liquidation of the twin evils of colonialism and racism.

Though Africa’s position on these problems was repeatedly made clear, the fast-changing events in Southern Africa made it imperative for Africa to re-examine its strategy. Such a reassessment was particularly crucial in the light of deliberate and calculated attempts by Africa’s enemies to sow confusion among its ranks, and employing diversionary tactics with the view of undermining Africa’s stand. It was therefore to the re-examination of Africa’s strategy for the liberation of Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) and Namibia as well as the abolition of the inhuman system of apartheid in South Africa that the Ministers devoted their Extraordinary Session in Dar es Salaam. And they accordingly declared as follows:

The decisive defeat of Portuguese colonialism by the African liberation movements and the then imminent independence of Mozambique and Angola had radically altered the balance of forces in Southern Africa. The resultant fatal blow inflicted on the ‘Unholy Alliance’ of the apartheid government in Pretoria with the Smith regime and the Portuguese colonialists had seriously undermined the geopolitical position of the South African regime.

Freedom came to the borders of South Africa and Namibia with the independence of Mozambique and Angola respectively. The buffer zones for the consolidation of colonialism and racism ultimately crumbled. Vorster’s government was faced with intensified international isolation as demonstrated by the decision of the United Nations General Assembly to bar the South African delegation from taking part in the proceedings of the twenty-ninth Session.

Recognising that the liberation of Angola and Mozambique brought with it a radical change in the geography of the African freedom struggle resulting in the intensification of the struggle against colonialism in Rhodesia and Namibia, South Africa was forced to review its policies towards Namibia and its client state of Rhodesia. The apartheid regime was engaging in new manoeuvres in an attempt to reduce, if not neutralise, the impact of the revolutionary changes that were taking place in the region. It was desperately attempting to undermine international opposition to its illegal occupation of Namibia.

South Africa was trying to camouflage the reality of the obnoxious system of racial oppression in South Africa by resorting to such highly orchestrated propaganda on the removal of ‘petty apartheid’. The aim of Vorster’s government in this exercise of white-washing apartheid was clear: to deceive the world public opinion into believing that some radical changes were taking place in the Republic and thus reduce the regime’s international isolation.

Africa’s full commitment to the objective of total liberation of the continent was unequivocal and unquestionable. There could never be any surrender or compromise on this goal. But the developments in Southern Africa necessitated Africa to re-evaluate its tactics for the purpose of achieving the desired goal. Such re-examination became all the more urgent by the evidence of new tactics on the part of Vorster’s government in South Africa.

Above all, it was of the utmost importance that such a reassessment had as its important prerequisite the maintenance and strengthening of unity and solidarity of Africa in confronting the new situation in Southern Africa. The enemies of Africa realised that this unity was the most powerful weapon in the continent’s arsenal. It was that unity and solidarity which Vorster, with his collaborators and supporters, were attempting to undermine. Therefore, Africa’s urgent need (at the time) to close its ranks in facing South Africa’s new tactics became self-evident.

There were two main areas of conflict in Southern Africa. The first was the confrontation with colonialism. The second was the conflict with the system of apartheid which was rightly declared by the United Nations as a crime against humanity. But whether Africa’s was dealing with the struggle against colonialism in Rhodesia or the illegal occupation of Namibia or racist domination in South Africa, the main opponent in Africa was the same: the apartheid South African regime and the power it wielded in the three areas. Thus, the Southern Africa problem was firstly South Africa as a colonialist power, and secondly South Africa as a racist society.

Africa’s objectives in Rhodesia, Namibia and South Africa had never changed. These objectives flowed from Africa’s commitment to achieve the total independence on the basis of majority rule with respect to the two colonial territories. Concerning South Africa, the objective was the ending of apartheid and the total elimination of racial discrimination. Africa had on many occasions declared its desire and willingness to promote peaceful settlement to the problems of Southern Africa, including that of South Africa. But Africa, also made it clear that while peaceful progress towards its objective was blocked, Africa would support the armed struggle carried out by the peoples of the oppressed area. This remained the unshakeable position of the African States.

Africa repeatedly warned that the apartheid regime constituted a serious threat to international peace and security. That threat assumed graver proportions as the apartheid regime felt insecure. Confronted with the unabashed determination of the apartheid regime to maintain its white supremacist system, Africa’s responsibility was clear. Africa had to ostracize, and urged the rest of the world to ostracize, the South African regime as it was organised. Africa had to maintain the economic, political and cultural boycott of South Africa. The OAU and the United Nations had to work in concert for the extension of the boycott… to …work for the total isolation of the apartheid regime.

The Council of Ministers of the Organisation of African Unity resolutely reaffirmed free Africa’s total rejection of apartheid and all its ramifications. Free Africa was determined to capitalise on the opportunities in order to bring closer the day when every inch of African soil was to be free from colonial and racist domination. While being cognisant of the fact that South Africa stood as the final major obstacle to Africa’s march to liberation, the Council of Ministers reaffirmed their unflinching determination to realise the freedom and independence of Rhodesia and Namibia and the total destruction of apartheid and racial discrimination in South Africa.

The Council of Ministers, conscious of the important contribution made by African friends and supporters all over the world in its quest for the liberation of the continent, launched a fervent appeal to them by urging them to continue and intensify their support for SOLIDARITY with the liberation of Zimbabwe and Namibia as well as for ending of the inhuman system of apartheid South Africa.

Source:
Sechaba Columnist, “The Dar es Salaam Declaration”, Sechaba, Vol. 9 No’s 6/7, June/July 1975.

Castro Khwela
Good day fellow Compatriots!