JCH 2013 Volume 38 Issue 1

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11660/3206

Browse

Browsing JCH 2013 Volume 38 Issue 1 by Subject "Apartheid"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Alternatiewe tot apartheid? Gespreksgroepe in die Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk (NGK) gedurende die 1980's
    (Faculty of Humanities, University of the Free State, 2013) Van der Merwe, Barend; Oelofse, Marietjie
    During the 1980s, the South African government was struggling to keep violence in the country under control despite the many reforms that the PW Botha regime has brought with it. The days of “’grand apartheid”, associated in particular with HF Verwoerd and the controversial homeland system, was over but certain key apartheid laws were still upheld. The government tried to create the impression that the policy of apartheid was a thing of the past, while on the other hand it was retaining political power. While the government made important changes to the apartheid policy, the Dutch Reformed Church also felt pressure from all sides due to its particular role in the development and sustainment of the apartheid regime. Lacking official channels, frustrated theologians and members of the Church resorted to informal discussion groups to initiate a think tank about the future of the Church and the country as a whole.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Alternatiewe tot apartheid? Gespreksgroepe in die Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk (NGK) gedurende die 1980s
    (Faculty of Humanities, University of the Free State, 2013) Van der Merwe, Barend; Oelofse, Marietjie
    During the 1980s, the South African government was struggling to keep violence in the country under control despite the many reforms that the PW Botha regime has brought with it. The days of “’grand apartheid”, associated in particular with HF Verwoerd and the controversial homeland system, was over but certain key apartheid laws were still upheld. The government tried to create the impression that the policy of apartheid was a thing of the past, while on the other hand it was retaining political power. While the government made important changes to the apartheid policy, the Dutch Reformed Church also felt pressure from all sides due to its particular role in the development and sustainment of the apartheid regime. Lacking official channels, frustrated theologians and members of the Church resorted to informal discussion groups to initiate a think tank about the future of the Church and the country as a whole.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Dirty scapegoats: explaining Israel's ties with South Africa during the 1970s and 1980s
    (Faculty of Humanities, University of the Free State, 2013) Alsheh, Yehonatan
    The article surveys five possible explanations for the ties between Israel and South Africa between the 1970s and 1980s. (1) The Industrial-Military Complex Explanation, arguing that both the Israeli and South African defence establishments and arms industries had much to gain from such a relationship, and enough political influence to ensure that this would indeed happen. (2) The Nuclear Alliance Explanation, arguing that it was in Israel and South Africa’s national interest to forge a nuclear consortium that would enable them to attain and further develop significant nuclear capacities, conceived by both states as the ultimate means for guaranteeing the survival of their chronicallycontested regimes. (3) The Ideological Affinities / similar Regime-Type Explanation, arguing that, while Israel was unable or in any case reluctant to publicly admit it, it was not averse to the South African regime of separate development, mostly because, ever since 1967, it was on a course of constructing its own version of such a regime. (4) The Pariah States Alliance Explanation, arguing that Israel and South Africa shared the same international status of pariah states, hence having no other states they could befriend, and in any case nothing to lose from collaborating with each other. (5) The Politics of International Pariah-Making Explanation, arguing that the concept of the pariah state – which emerged in 1977 and disappeared by the end of the 1980s – was not a naïve scholarly attempt to conceptualize a new type of international actor, but rather an ideological construct, meant to re-justify the United State’s support for some of its more embarrassing client states, while restructuring the precise way in which that support was provided.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Dirty scapegoats: explaining Israel's ties with South Africa during the 1970s and 1980s
    (Faculty of Humanities, University of the Free State, 2013) Alsheh, Yehonatan
    The article surveys five possible explanations for the ties between Israel and South Africa between the 1970s and 1980s. (1) The Industrial-Military Complex Explanation, arguing that both the Israeli and South African defence establishments and arms industries had much to gain from such a relationship, and enough political influence to ensure that this would indeed happen. (2) The Nuclear Alliance Explanation, arguing that it was in Israel and South Africa’s national interest to forge a nuclear consortium that would enable them to attain and further develop significant nuclear capacities, conceived by both states as the ultimate means for guaranteeing the survival of their chronicallycontested regimes. (3) The Ideological Affinities / similar Regime-Type Explanation, arguing that, while Israel was unable or in any case reluctant to publicly admit it, it was not averse to the South African regime of separate development, mostly because, ever since 1967, it was on a course of constructing its own version of such a regime. (4) The Pariah States Alliance Explanation, arguing that Israel and South Africa shared the same international status of pariah states, hence having no other states they could befriend, and in any case nothing to lose from collaborating with each other. (5) The Politics of International Pariah-Making Explanation, arguing that the concept of the pariah state – which emerged in 1977 and disappeared by the end of the 1980s – was not a naïve scholarly attempt to conceptualize a new type of international actor, but rather an ideological construct, meant to re-justify the United State’s support for some of its more embarrassing client states, while restructuring the precise way in which that support was provided.