>>21379971

>DA ties to the Oppenheimer Family

>>21379997

>IFP, DA, African leaders, Ukraine, Brenthurst Foundation, etc. signed “The Gdańsk Declaration: Solidarity for Democracy”

>>21379910

>[ANC] has chosen to form a unity government, joined by the Democratic Alliance (previously the official opposition), the Inkatha Freedom Party, the Patriotic Alliance, Good and the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania.

“Brenthurst Foundation paid for DA leader’s trip into Ukraine” Part 1

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2022-05-07-brenthurst-foundation-paid-for-da-leaders-trip-into-ukraine/

07 May 2022

DA leader John Steenhuisen has confirmed that his six-day “fact-finding mission” to Ukraine, which ended on Friday, 5 May was funded by the Brenthurst Foundation.

John Steenhuisen will arrive back in South Africa on Saturday following a nearly week-long visit to Ukraine on a fact-finding mission.

In a WhatsApp message after his arrival in Warsaw on Friday afternoon, Steenhuisen said it’s “been a very gruelling trip to be honest”.

Steenhuisen earlier refused to disclose details about the funding of his trip or the names of his travel companions.

Brenthurst Foundation director Greg Mills said the foundation funded Steenhuisen’s trip with its photographer Richard Harper.

He said the foundation’s aim was to provide “a level of education” about international issues.

“The role of the foundation is to expose people to best and worst practices,” he said.

The foundation has funded a number of trips for politicians from across the spectrum, such as the monitoring mission during the Somaliland elections last year. The foundation covered that trip as well which Steenhuisen declared in the register of members’ interest.

Steenhuisen came under fire this week as questions were asked about who backed the trip, but he has only been willing to disclose that it was a “private funder”.

Mills cited security reasons for the secrecy while they were in Ukraine. “When you’re in a place like Ukraine you have to be discreet about your movements,” he said. Ukraine has been under attack by Russia for over two months and a lot of the country’s civilian architecture has been destroyed.

Mills had been to Ukraine twice before in two months, and the idea for Steenhuisen to join him had come up while in conversation.

“The importance of taking John is that there is a parliamentary voice. It’s incredibly admirable. How many politicians would put themselves in harm’s way?”

>>21453971

“Brenthurst Foundation paid for DA leader’s trip into Ukraine” Part 2

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2022-05-07-brenthurst-foundation-paid-for-da-leaders-trip-into-ukraine/

07 May 2022

“This is a war for freedom,” [Steenhuisen] said in a video message on his timeline [https://x.com/Our_DA/status/1521170141312126977]. “Ukraine has now become the new frontier of freedom in the world, in the battle against tyranny and imperialism. It is important that we understand, particularly in Africa, what the impact of this war on our continent and especially in South Africa will be.”

Ukrainian ambassador to South Africa, Liubov Abravitova said she saw Steenhuisen when he applied for a visa, but that her government had nothing to do with the organisation of the trip.

She said, however, that there was a longstanding invitation for National Assembly Speaker, Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, from her Ukrainian counterpart to visit.

Steenhuisen failed to inform the South African authorities of his travels – something that is not a legal requirement, but which the Department of International Relations and Cooperation has encouraged citizens to do when they go to conflict zones.

The DA leader said, however, that the department “has actively sabotaged meetings with role-players” before. During his last trip to the Middle East some meetings he had set up in with Palestinian authorities were cancelled due to what he believed to have been South African government interference.

Following the visit he will report back to his party, Parliament, civil society and international foreign policy think-tanks.

The Brenthurst Foundation was established in 2004 by the Oppenheimer family to build on the work of the Brenthurst Initiative, which was a programme that “instigated debate around policy strategies in South Africa to accelerate economic expansion”.

>>21406188

>Marikana

“2024 Marikana Massacre Memorial Lecture” Part 1

https://youtu.be/6oN-tKmn7yc

Streamed live on Aug 7, 2024

“The Marikana Massacre 16/08/2012 exposed South Africa’s Fake Democracy and Fake Revolutionaries” displayed behind the podium. Dr Khanyisile Litchfield-Tshabalala makes an interesting speech.

57:30 – Introducing guest speaker Dr Khanyisile Litchfield-Tshabalala

1:00:50 – Dr Tshabalala starts her speech, it is worth listening to it. Key points:

• “The talk is really aligned to the fake democracy, not just of South Africa but of this continent.”

• She discusses the chronology on what happened leading to 1994, the “Madiba miracle” and “the Rainbow nation, there is not even black in that colour by the way”. This includes;

o 1959 – the international Anti-Apartheid Movement was formed.

o 1960 – British Prime Minister Macmillan addressed the parliament in Cape Town in a speech that was dubbed “The Winds of Change”.

o The same year, 1960, Sharpeville massacre occurred – “Macmillan was in operation”.

o That same year, 1960, the ANC and PAC was banned – “Macmillan was in operation”.

o Jumped to 19 September 1976 – Ian Smith of Rhodesia meets with Henry Kissinger to talk about majority rule in Rhodesia. “Who engineered the so called Mugabe miracle of 1980? America, England and their network of evil.”

o The following year in South Africa 1977, The Urban Foundation dubbed the thinktank was founded by Harry Oppenheimer, Anton Rupert and Clive Menell. This foundation introduced for the first time neoliberal housing. “Before 1977 no African was enslaved what we call a bond. Housing was the responsibility of government. You paid rent which was peanuts really. They introduced it because they were already preparing for the new South Africa.”… “A house of 1 000 000 take 20 years to pay off but it takes a car of 1 000 000 to pay off in 5 years to pay off. Madness.”

o “In 1982, Harry Oppenheimer meets Henry Kissinger to talk about majority rule and transition after Apartheid. I hope you see not even white South Africans are represented here. Its capital talking to a mass murderer who runs capital, Henry Kissinger of the United States.”

o Same year, 1982, Mandela was released from Robben Island to Pollsmoor Prison. “I love history, it does not lie.”

o 1983, Oppenheimer controls the Chamber of Mines. “He is involved in the establishment of the National Union of Mineworkers [NUM] and Cyril Ramaphosa is put in charge after going overseas.”

o Same year, 1983, the UDF (United Democratic Front) was formed. Oppenheimer founded and funded them.

>>21453990

“2024 Marikana Massacre Memorial Lecture” Part 2

https://youtu.be/6oN-tKmn7yc

Streamed live on Aug 7, 2024

o 1984, Hendrik van der Merwe, director for the Centre of Intergroup Studies at UCT begins his mediation between the Apartheid regime and the ANC. “That’s the year we were doing mass funerals in this country. Where Soweto was burying 100s. Pretoria was burying 80. Cape Town was burying 100s. People were dying.”

o Same year 1984, Hendrik van der Merwe, starts meeting Mandela in Pollsmoor Prison.

o 1985 was the era of the ‘young lions’… “We really believed we were going into a revolution. I thing that’s what sad about it.”

o “September 1985, delegation of white businessmen led by Gavin Relly, Anglo America, and Zach de Beer, Progressive Party funded by Oppenheimer. They meet a list of Oliver Tambo, Thabo Mbeki, Chris Hani, Mac Maharaj and Pallo Jordan in Zambia. Why have they not been telling us, I was part of MK then? Why are they not addressing us in the camps and saying guys we are negotiation? You know what they used to say to us in the camps then, “We shall never negotiatiate. We have learned from the mistakes of everybody else. That’s selling out comrades”… That’s what Joe Modise was telling us at the time.”

o “In 1988, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev meet, they sign an agreement. I am trying to show you who is in power. That agreement they signed what took our camps out of Angola to Uganda and Tanzania further away from the enemy we were fighting. Who took the decision? Reagan and Gobachev. We are just parcels but what they use as an excuse? “Let Namibia go.””

o “In 1989, the South African Reserve Bank Act is passed. Can I tell you?… South African Reserve Bank shall operate in secrecy.”

o 1990, the Independent Development Trust (IDT) established, taking over the think tank called the Urban Foundation. Anton Rupert and Clive Menell chairs it.

o 1990, the Gencor Executive Chairman, Derek Keys, is appointed as Minister of Trade and Industry. “It was the first time they allow a minister who’s not National Party trained to ascend the reigns.”

o 1991, they pass the VAT {Value Added Tax).

o Same year 20 December 1991, CODESA starts. “13 April 1992, Mandela shocks us. I’m divorcing Winnie [Mandela] because Winnie was not faithful.” She suggests that the ANC is paying Mandela’s children off to keep quiet. “The big issue of this is when Mandela made that announcement, he then… moves in with the Menell family and Clive Menell is one of the founders of the Urban Foundation which was started in 1977 and also aligned with NUM formation.”

o “September 1992, the former Gencor Executive Chairman and former Minister of Trade and Industry is appointed Minister of Finance. It is said here, “The financial takeover is completed.”… Why do you think we haven’t moved an inch in terms of prosperity since ‘94? Do you know teachers argue that at least during Apartheid you had an increase, some of them say twice a year. It’s not happening… They took a [$850 million] loan from the IMF to pay off the Apartheid debt.”

o “1992, the leader of the South African Communist Party, Joe Slovo, comes with what is called the “Sunset Clause” which means the coalition government will be put in place following the democratic election but it included guarantees and those guarantees were to keep the economic state as is.”

>>21453990

>>21453995

>>21379971

>my father [Harry Oppenheimer] would always stay in State House of the guest of President Nyerere

>>21379982

>ANC and other liberation movement military training camps were in Tanzania

>>21439861

>Women/girls are regarded as possessions in Africa

“2024 Marikana Massacre Memorial Lecture” Part 3

https://youtu.be/6oN-tKmn7yc

Streamed live on Aug 7, 2024

o “April ’93, Chris Hani is gunned down in cold blood… It means that Chris Hani was against the “Sunset Clause”. He started opening his big Xhosa mouth.”

o “In April ’94, we ushered into the so-called “Madiba Miracle”.”

o “I put a question to you. Why zoom in on the mines? Why was it formed with Oppenheimer money? Why is being controlled by Oppenheimer? I put a question to you. Has it never crossed your mind the NUM officials, the ANC officials and the Lonmin officials, there was still another hand behind?… I still want to know, who of the worst agreed to this shooting, this cold blooded killing? Because they would not do it if their handlers had not said, “go ahead.”

o “For years COSATU was nothing but a gate keeper… They delayed worker’s struggle… Whoever funds the ANC, funds COSATU.”

o “How is Starbucks making more money out of each cup of coffee than those coffee growers?… How are you paying more for South African gold than the British pay?”

o “How is it that… in all the exile years of the so-called liberation movements of South Africa, the ANC got 99.9% of the lion’s share of support? You know, only China supported the PAC. People were starving in PAC camps in case you were not aware… The whole world supported the ANC.”

o –“You will see they chose for you. You also know that the release campaign was also started by Oppenheimer? I hope you know.”—

o Kwame Nkrumah said, “Do not go the IMF, World Bank route because if you do, you will be enslaves forever.”

o “Only 5% of that money [$30 trillion] is direct government corruption, 30% is criminal activity but 65% are corporate crimes which we don’t call out. Tax evasion, tax avoidance, profit shifting. We started hating Zuma because the Rand started falling but what’s the expose now? The banks colluded from 2006 before he came into power to around 2013 tampering and lowering the Rand.”

o “All that I have read here happens with a very intelligent process called “dumbing down of the mind”. Do you think it is an accident that the pass rate in South Africa is 33%? It’s not… The battle for the mind is the biggest battle.” [Macmillan did mention something similar in his 1960 speech, “Wind of Change”; “The struggle is joined and it is a struggle for the minds of men.” (https://youtu.be/c07MiYfpOMw) Embedded]

o “Neoliberalism… What is it actually?… It is not capitalism. Capitalism was founded by Adam Smith… Neoliberalism came out of the 2nd World War… Before the end of the 2nd World War, 1945, any economist who talked of neoliberalism was classified as an Anarchist. I hope you remember that… Neoliberalism says, [1] government is nothing but a post office between capital and the people… [2] let capital flow… [3] whoever wins the majority, is the one that rules.”

o “Stop making television your outlet for information. That’s in English, it’s called disinformation or misinformation.”

o “The mess in which we live is not accidental. Somebody paid somebody and somebody paid somebody for us to end up in this nonsense that we live in right now called freedom. It happens with every other country… So they have 2 ways to deal with an Africa. If they can change your mind, they will - Mandela’s was changeable. If they can’t change your mind like Steve Biko, they kill you.”

o “The ANC’s given us a youth that more sexual than intelligent. Youth that drinks more than they think. Young people that know more about American than Africa, their own country.”

o “That’s where patriarchy and abuse creeps in exactly. Remember, it happens at country level. Whoever pays for the South African election, owns us. Whichever man pay for you, owns you women.”

o “Can we continue fighting to make sure that every known official… every Lonmin official, every ANC official that was involved in this murder is finally brought to book… Can we bring Marikana back to the table? They want us to forget about it. Marikana is proof that the ANC anti-black. They want it silenced.”

>>21453990

>>21453995

>“In 1988, Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev meet, they sign an agreement. I am trying to show you who is in power. That agreement they signed what took our camps out of Angola to Uganda and Tanzania further away from the enemy we were fighting. Who took the decision? Reagan and Gobachev. We are just parcels but what they use as an excuse? “Let Namibia go.””

>>21454006

>>21380026

>“All the research was done by very clever people in Anglo like Michael O’Dowd and Bobby Godsell and by a superb London team led by one of the great futurists in the world, Pierre Wack, a Frenchman who had been head of scenario planning at Royal Dutch Shell.”

Additional chronology of South Africa before 1994:

• 1961, South Africa received its so-called Independence, a year after MacMillan’s “Wind of Change” speech

• https://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/chronology-meetings-between-south-africans-and-anc-exile-1983-2000-michael-savage

1985 Chairmen of leading corporate groups (Sir Timothy Bevan (Barclays Bank), Lord Barber (Standard Bank), Evelyn de Rothschild (Chair of Rothschild’s), George Soros, with representatives of Shell, Courtaulds, BP and Gold Fields and (from SA) Tony Bloom (Premier Group) and Chris Ball (Barclays), invited by Anthony Sampson to lunch at the Connaught Rooms, London, to meet with Oliver Tambo, in London.

(Anthony Sampson, The Anatomist, p. 228).

Sampson followed the Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan, on several trips abroad, including his tour of Africa in early 1960, reporting for the Observer. He was later to write the first biography of Macmillan (Macmillan: A Study in Ambiguity (London: Allen Lane, 1967).

https://archives.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/repositories/2/resources/3302

• Date: May 29, 1988

Place: Foreign Ministry Guest House, Moscow

Participants: Chester Crocker, Assistant Secretary, US Dept. of State

Anatoly Adamishin, Deputy Ministre, USSR MFA

Priscilla Clapp, A/PolCouns, US Embassy, Moscow

Vasillen Vasev, Director, 3rd African Dept., USSR MFA

Soviet interpreter

In Fact, Admishin said, Luanda has asked Moscow to tell the U.S. during the Summit that Angola was ready for trilateral economic cooperation with the U.S. and Soviet Union in three specific areas: diamonds, gold, and ferrous metals. (Adamishin asked that Crocker keep this to himself until it had been raised at higher levels in the course of the Summit.)

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/16874-document-02-memorandum-conversation-between

• 1990: “Lastly, that edition of Optima commented on the “valiant efforts” (Barber 1987a, p. 68) of Dr. Chester Crocker, the then American Assistant Secretary of State for Africa. Both De Beers and Anglo American were obviously enormously enamored with Crocker. By 1990 [the year Mandela was released], they had appointed him as a director of Minorco, which was based in Luxembourg and “the main overseas investor for Oppenheimer funds” (Kanfer 1993, p. 362). A high-profile appointment to such an entity suggests a very different imperative to that which Oppenheimer voiced in his interview with Nielsen (1985) regarding investing beyond South Africa.”

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2655201 [As posted on previous SA threads but the document is now removed from the internet]

From 1981-1989, [Chester Crocker] was U.S. assistant secretary of state for African affairs. As such, he was the principal diplomatic architect and mediator in the prolonged negotiations among Angola, Cuba, and South Africa that led to Namibia’s transition to independence, and to the withdrawal of Cuban forces from Angola.

https://www.usip.org/publications/2007/01/leashing-dogs-war

>>21453990

>Dr Khanyisile Litchfield-Tshabalala

>>21453995

>>21454006

Khanyisile Litchfield-Tshabalala Biography

https://mamakhanyisilelt.com/

I am Khanyisile, Litchfield-Tshabalala (Dr – PhD and Rear Admiral Junior Grade, Retired); a Facilitator, Trainer, Public Speaker, Writer, and a Consultant on Illicit Financial Flows and Tax, International Finance Institutions’ transparency, accountability, and community engagement. This includes social accountability. What sets me apart from my peers, is that I love Afrika above my own family. And this is a known fact to all who have interacted or worked with me. A veteran of uMkhonto WeSizwe, and an exiled freedom fighter, I came back and joined the SA Navy, where I rose to being the first Female Admiral in the history of the SA Navy. I am now a Retired Admiral.

https://www.pa.org.za/person/khanyisile-litchfield-tshabalala/

Ms Litchfield-Tshabalala was a member of the ANC before joining the EFF.

She also has a masters degree in criminology from UNISA, and is in the process of completing her PhD with the Atlantic Internation University in Hawaii [Now completed].

>>21453995

>Gencor Executive Chairman, Derek Keys

>>21454006

>We started hating Zuma because the Rand started falling but what’s the expose now? The banks colluded from 2006 before he came into power to around 2013 tampering and lowering the Rand.

Take note; the Rand value dropped prior to Mandela changing his mind about nationalism.

“Keys to unlock the South African economic shackles: The former head of Gencor is trying to bring Pretoria and the ANC together to repair the country's battered economy, John Carlin reports” [1992]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/keys-to-unlock-the-south-african-economic-shackles-the-former-head-of-gencor-is-trying-to-bring-pretoria-and-the-anc-together-to-repair-the-country-s-battered-economy-john-carlin-reports-1560461.html

Friday 30 October 1992 00:02 GMT

DEREK KEYS, South Africa's Minister of Finance, Trade and Industry, has a stack of filthy pictures. Nothing that would be sold next to a certain book by Madonna, you understand, just a stark representation of how bad the state of his country's economy is.

The pictures - graphs of dire economic trends actually - have proved formidable shock tactics, helping Mr Keys to earn a good deal of respect and trust from Nelson Mandela.

Last month, the president of the African National Congress told the Johannesburg Star of a briefing he had received from the head of the ANC's economics department after a meeting with Mr Keys. 'He brought a statement from Keys which is well- considered and spells out in detail the actual state of our economy. And I got frightened,' Mr Mandela said. This from the man who precipitated a stock- market crash two days after his release from prison in early 1990 when he reaffirmed the commitment of his movement to nationalisation. Today, Mr Mandela has dropped the dreaded 'N-word' from his lexicon altogether.

'When Mr Mandela made his first speech after coming out, everybody immediately had to reassess their positions. Since then there's been a great improvement in the ANC focus in terms of economic systems. And that has come about because they have got acquainted with what the problem is, what means are likely to be at their disposal for addressing it.'

Mr Keys came to the job - and politics - in May, responding to a request from President F W de Klerk to give up his post as executive chairman of Gencor, South Africa's second-largest mining finance house, and take over the management of the national economy.

There is a strong sense that, while Mr Keys is not privy to all the secrets of state concerning the National Party's central obsession with retaining a strong grip on power in 'the new South Africa', he is left very much to his own devices in the economic terrain.

One task he has set himself - and he defined its resolution as critical to the pursuit of economic growth - involves active political engagement 'to stop the economic civil war'.

The way to stop the war, Mr Keys believes, is through consultation. 'In my maiden speech I mentioned 'the golden triangle' which is a hallmark of all societies that have managed to turn in above-average economic performances - by which I mean the establishment of a consensus between business, labour and the state.'

Substantial difficulties exist in realising this concept at this time, Mr Keys said - specifically, political difficulties. But progress is being made. He recently met leading representatives of business and the ANC-allied Congress of South Africa Trade Unions, with the objective of establishing a national economic forum, a notion rejected by the government before Mr Keys assumed his position.

Mr Keys said he was particularly encouraged on this score last month when he and Tito Mboweni [who later became the Governor of the South African Reserve Bank], a leading ANC economist, shared a platform at a conference in London. 'When it came to the aspect of looking towards the future, his and my speech could have been exchanged without anyone in the audience noticing.'

>>21454054

>Derek Keys: "to stop the economic civil war"

>>21380026

>“All the research was done by very clever people in Anglo like Michael O’Dowd and Bobby Godsell and by a superb London team led by one of the great futurists in the world, Pierre Wack, a Frenchman who had been head of scenario planning at Royal Dutch Shell.”

>>21453995

>“In 1989, the South African Reserve Bank Act is passed. Can I tell you?… South African Reserve Bank shall operate in secrecy.”

“Gencor fades, but scars remain”

https://www.iol.co.za/business-report/economy/gencor-fades-but-scars-remain-743970

Published Feb 5, 2006

Cape Town - Gencor, the now dormant investment holding group, is a pale shadow of its former self.

On January 16 the company announced that it would seek voluntary winding up now that a high court bid by a tribal authority to force it to pay for the environmental rehabilitation of the asbestos-contaminated town of Heuningvlei and the Bute mine in North West had been settled.

The company was no stranger to empowerment; in the 1960s, Afrikaner nationalists [a select few] encouraged Anglo American to sell assets to a forerunner of Gencor, which went on to produce Sappi, Gold Fields and Implats, among others.

[In 1953, Sanlam, FVB and Bonuscor established Federale Mynbou to facilitate the entry of Afrikaners into mining (Sanlam, 2021). The breakthrough was the takeover of Genmin by Federale Mynbou in 1964 through the assistance of Anglo. Fine and Rustomjee (1996: 161) say the move that signaled “a conscious accommodation of Afrikaner by English capital or compromise in the face of conflict”. (https://www.wits.ac.za/media/wits-university/faculties-and-schools/commerce-law-and-management/research-entities/scis/documents/BEE%20Transactions%20in%20SA%20after%201994.pdf)]

With the prospect of an ANC-led government coming to power in 1994, Gencor was unbundled and its assets sold off.

Derek Keys, a former Gencor chief executive and the finance minister in the government of national unity, persuaded the then governor of the Reserve Bank, Chris Stals, to authorise Gencor to ship $2.1 billion abroad to buy Billiton from Royal Dutch Shell.

Months later Keys retired as finance minister to become the chairman of Billiton. After several asset shuffles and purchases, Billiton became BHP Billiton, one of the world's largest minerals companies.

Yet it was not for the enormous wealth that it generated that Gencor would be remembered in its dying days. The company had an appalling record of human rights abuses and an equally terrible safety record. As a gold producer, it had among the highest numbers of deaths and disabling injuries.

>>21454006

>So they have 2 ways to deal with an African. If they can change your mind, they will - Mandela’s was changeable. If they can’t change your mind like Steve Biko, they kill you.

>>21379971

>my father [Harry Oppenheimer] would always stay in State House of the guest of President Nyerere

>>21379982

>ANC and other liberation movement military training camps were in Tanzania

>>21416552

It reminds me of this…

“THE ASSASSINATION OF DR. H.F. VERWOERD: British-American Scheming and The Founders of the New South Africa” [1994] Part 1

https://www.radiofreesouthafrica.com/dr-hf-verwoerds-murder-haunting-naspers/

By Jaap Marais

Excerpts below

The revolutionary developments in South Africa culminating in the April 27, 1994 general elections and the handing over of political power to the Communist-controlled ANC have been gaining momentum since the assassination on the 6th September 1966 of Dr H F Verwoerd, the South African Prime Minister, by the Communist Demetrio Tsafendas. And it is therefore well to look afresh at the developments in their historical contexts.

How successful this government was, may be seen from the evidence by opponents and enemies of Dr Verwoerd, for example that of the now defunct Rand Daily Mail, which on July 30, 1966 (five weeks before the assassination of Dr Verwoerd) wrote as follows:

Surfeit of Prosperity

Rand Daily Mail – July 30, 1966 [Rand Daily Mail was owned by Anglo American. (https://hsf.org.za/publications/focus/issue-39-third-quarter-2005/the-rand-daily-mail-convenient-scapegoat)

“At the age of nearly 65 Dr Verwoerd has reached the peak of a remarkable career. No other South African prime minister has ever been in such a powerful position in the country. He is at the head of a massive majority after a resounding victory at the polls. The nation is suffering from a surfeit of prosperity and he can command almost unlimited funds for all that he needs at present in the way of military defence. He can claim that South Africa is a shining example of peace in a troubled continent, if only because overwhelming domestic power can always command peace.

This strong position was achieved by Dr Verwoerd under a policy of separate development (apartheid). The living standards of blacks were rising at 5,4% per year against that of the Whites at 3,9% per year. In 1965 the economic growth rate was the second highest in the world at 7,9%. The rate of inflation was 2% per annum and the prime interest rate 3% per annum. Domestic savings were so great that South Africa needed no foreign loans for normal economic expansion.

It was plain that in these circumstances South Africa was poised to become the dominating and unifying force in Southern Africa against the British-American-supported terrorist onslaught on the Portuguese territories of Mozambique and Angola and on Rhodesia and South West Africa.

It is well to recall that, for instance, the Frelimo terrorists received substantial financial support from the Ford Foundation of the USA, acting most likely as a front for the CIA and the State Department and that the ANC, while banned in South Africa, had its head office in London; and almost every Communist who left South Africa for safer ground, did not go to the Kremlin, but to London. And unquestionably, the Anti- Apartheid Movement (more correctly: the Anti-Afrikaner Movement) in Britain was a British Secret Service operation against South Africa – not forgetting that the US and Britain in an act of war already in 1961 instituted an arms boycott against South Africa; and that the USA was behind Liberia and Ethiopia’s application to the International Court in 1961 to break South West Africa’s ties with South Africa.

>>21454149

“THE ASSASSINATION OF DR. H.F. VERWOERD: British-American Scheming and The Founders of the New South Africa” [1994] Part 2

https://www.radiofreesouthafrica.com/dr-hf-verwoerds-murder-haunting-naspers/

By Jaap Marais

Notwithstanding the British and American influence in international affairs, South Africa was growing stronger and stronger.

From the Book – Verwoerd is Dead by Jan Francois Botha

In the history of South Africa his name will live for ever as the leader, who, when his country was threatened with internal disorder and with economic sanctions, boycotts and open aggression from overseas, stood as a symbol of defiance, and the will and determination to survive.”

It was evident that the British-American tactics had failed and that the direct opposite of what they were trying to achieve was actually taking place.

Dealing with the anticipated decision for the return of South Africa to the Commonwealth after the April 27 election, the author (Jack Viviers) said that if FW de Klerk would be a party to such a decision “it would remove a large part of the hate from the view held by a considerable number of influential Britons on Afrikaners”. This animosity is a seldom acknowledged fact, the usual thing being to accuse the Afrikaners of “still fighting the Boer War”. The article reads further: “The attitude of the British, particularly the mandarins of the British Foreign Office, who were in the vanguard of the fight against the National Government, was explained to me by an equally influential Brit… Lord Deedes, former editor of the Daily Telegraph… ” So the British government was fighting the South African government – a continuation, by other means, of the Boer War. [Does this explain the farm murders that continue until today/]

What follows this remarkable admission by Lord Deedes is even more remarkable. “While South Africa grew to become the economic giant of the continent, the other members of the Common-wealth virtually sank into poverty. This was the complete opposite of what they had hoped. That South Africa, under an Afrikaner government with their policy of apartheid, and no relations with the Commonwealth, should have become the economic giant of Africa was making the British Foreign Office and the US State Department to think what they had thought was unthinkable.

It was evident that Dr Verwoerd was winning the cold war conducted against the Afrikaner government of South Africa from the British Foreign Office and the US State Department.

South Africa’s increasingly powerful position in the sub-continent foreshadowed a Southern Africa of White-controlled governments, economically and militarily equal to any threat or adventure from outside and also to the challenge of the communist-led and British-American supported terrorists operating in Southern Africa. (Significantly, the first terrorist attack by Swapo took place within three weeks after the assassination of Dr Verwoerd, as if they were waiting for the event).

As has been the practice of imperialists even in the days of the Roman Empire, the present-day American and British imperialists latch on to the rich minorities in other countries. And this was also done in South Africa. The representative of the New York Herald Tribune, Arnold Beichman, wrote in the Johannesburg Sunday Times (20th June, 1965) that ‘prominent businessmen and industrialists in South Africa exert great pressure on the Prime Minister in the hope that he and his Cabinet would stop their anti-American speeches… Among the business groups which have expressed their dissatisfaction in private circles were prominent insurance companies, banks and liquor undertakings in Cape Town and Johannesburg.

>>21454149

>>21454157

“THE ASSASSINATION OF DR. H.F. VERWOERD: British-American Scheming and The Founders of the New South Africa” [1994] Part 3

https://www.radiofreesouthafrica.com/dr-hf-verwoerds-murder-haunting-naspers/

By Jaap Marais

Having identified these three types of businesses, Beichman came so close to naming the specific businesses that it was not necessary to say that the spokesmen were A D Wassenaar of SANLAM (insurance), Jan Marais of Trust Bank, and Anton Rupert of Rembrandt (liquor) – all three having had strong British and American connections. Wassenaar was married to the daughter of a former Lord Mayor of London, and he was a founder member of the Council of Foreign Relations front organisation, the United States-South Africa Leader Exchange Programme (USSALEP). Jan Marais boasted that his bank was run on American lines and that he was constantly visiting the USA.

Rupert was not only a founder member of USSALEP, but the key figure in its founding. He was financed by the Rothschild group in getting his tobacco concern on a sound basis and in acquiring tobacco interests such as Rothmans in Britain. Although strongly anti-British during World War II, he soon loosened his ties with the Afrikaner nationalists and became an exponent of a Pax Americana, hosting Bobby Kennedy on his visit to South Africa in 1961 and in various ways demonstrating his identification with British-American objectives.

These Afrikaans-speaking businessmen, in their movement away from their Afrikaner nationalist compatriots, inevitably moved closer to the internationalist Anglo-American financial interests, represented by Harry Oppenheimer’s Anglo- American Corp., which constituted the core of hostility to Afrikaner nationalism, and which was the successor to the financial interests that forced Britain in the war against the Boer republics in 1899-1902. (See J A Hobson: The War in South Africa, James Nisbetl, London, 1900)

Dr Verwoerd had been preparing to meet the challenge from these quarters and for this reason he unofficially instituted an investigation into the Anglo-American Corp. under the leadership of Prof Piet Hoek. The Hoek report was a very thorough job, and was privately circulated late in1965, early 1966, and evidently Oppenheimer, Rupert and others had been aware of the investigation. When Dr Verwoerd, on the 25th January 1966 said in Parliament: “We shall oppose the power concentrations and monopolies which occur in our country, and which constitute a real danger”, it was an oblique but unmistakable reference to the Hoek Report. Those who were involved in ‘the power concentrations and monopolies” knew what this would mean to their interests. And consequently they would have thought of ways to stop it.

The Oppenheimer empire had complete control of the English newspapers in South Africa, and they dutifully conformed to the requirements of protecting the money power interests and of promoting the British-American objectives in Southern Africa against Afrikaner nationalism.

These were the forces and the most prominent persons ranged against Dr Verwoerd and the policy of separate development in the ‘sixties. Dr Verwoerd was at the peak of his power, having successfully overcome the diplomatic and economic effects of leaving the Commonwealth in1961; uniting the white nation as never before; succeeding in creating an economic boom of unprecedented proportions; launching a program of military preparedness; crushing the Rivonia Slovo-Mandela-Communist plan of overthrowing the government by violent means; refusing to institute economic sanctions against the Rhodesian government of (an Smith after UDI and giving the Rhodesians moral and other support; practically annihilating the parliamentary opposition in the March 1966 general elections; and, very important, having the possibility of foreign intervention eliminated as a result of the International Court verdict in South Africa’s favour on the South West Africa issue.

>>21454149

>>21454157

>>21454162

“THE ASSASSINATION OF DR. H.F. VERWOERD: British-American Scheming and The Founders of the New South Africa” [1994] Part 4

https://www.radiofreesouthafrica.com/dr-hf-verwoerds-murder-haunting-naspers/

By Jaap Marais

They had been so sure of getting a verdict against South Africa on the South West Africa [now Namibia] issue that three days before the announcement of the Court’s verdict on the 18th July, 1966, the American Ambassador to South Africa delivered an aide memoire to Dr Verwoerd’s government that the USA would accept the Court verdict and expected the contending parties to abide by it.

The implication of this was that if Dr Verwoerd had refused to abide by an adverse verdict it would have constituted cause for military intervention by the USA in the guise of the United Nations Organisation, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in anticipation of a court verdict against South Africa having the year before provided what the Chicago Tribune had called a “battle blueprint” entitled “Apartheid and United Nations Collective Measures” by Amelia Leiss for military operations against South Africa. The Carnegie Endowment has been documented “as a powerful policy- making force inside the State Department” (Freeman Digest, June, 1984).

With the court verdict going against the US expectations, the whole elaborate scheme devised for acting against South Africa with the object of ending Dr Verwoerd’s rule, came to an abrupt end, leaving Dr Verwoerd very much stronger than before and his opponents completely frustrated.

This development must be seen as the failure of the ultimate plan for stopping Dr Verwoerd, all other possibilities having been previously eliminated: the parliamentary opposition of the former United Party and the former Progressive Party, enjoying American and British support, had been rendered impotent through the loss of support; the Communist-inspired plans of overthrowing the government by violent means had been effectively thwarted by the clean-up of the Rivonia gang, ending in the conviction of Nelson Mandela and his cohorts; the break-up of the SA Communist Party cells and the arrest and conviction of its leader, ex-Rhodes scholar, Abraham Fischer, The only remaining option for stopping Dr Verwoerd was foreign intervention on the question of South West Africa, on the grounds of an anticipated international Court verdict against South Africa.

>>21454149

>>21454157

>>21454162

>>21454171

“THE ASSASSINATION OF DR. H.F. VERWOERD: British-American Scheming and The Founders of the New South Africa” [1994] Part 5

https://www.radiofreesouthafrica.com/dr-hf-verwoerds-murder-haunting-naspers/

By Jaap Marais

When this failed in July 1966, there was only one option left – put an end to Dr Verwoerd’s life. Cillie – Rupert and “Verwoerd must go” plan.

Nine days before the assassination of Dr Verwoerd The Sunday Tribune (Durban) published a front page report banner headlined ‘Verwoerd must go’ plan: Cape Nats back Anton Rupert” It will be noticed that it is alleged that Piet Cillie, editor of Die Burger spearheaded the campaign and that Rupert was to replace Dr Verwoerd. It is stated that “There has been a carefully planned operation to isolate Dr Verwoerd and force a show-down” Neither Rupert nor Cillie ever repudiated this sensational report in public.

Paragraph 86: “lt is impossible to establish with any certainty exactly what was said. However there is no doubt that Dr Verwoerd’s death was mentioned on that morning, three days before his death. What makes these incidents more than a coincidence is the fact that this was said at the ship which was visited daily for almost 40 days by the man who killed Dr Verwoerd, where he bought a pistol and tried to buy a knife which he wanted to use – according to at least one statement made by him subsequently – to kill Dr Verwoerd.

The fact that Dr Verwoerd’s death was mentioned at that ship was probably more than pure coincidence’. Although significantly saying: ” That the fact that Dr Verwoerd’s death was mentioned at that ship was probably more than pure coincidence”, the Commissioner, strangely, did not go into this any further! If it was not coincidence, then of course it pointed to prior knowledge of Dr Verwoerd’s impending death. Yet the Commissioner just left it at that, and for instance did not even inquire into the connections of the Eleni, which incidentally left Table Bay harbour on the day of the assassination.

This was made more intriguing by another incident. On the day of the assassination, September 6, The Evening Standard of London carried the following report: “Young man on Dieppe-Newhaven ferry asked if there was any news of the Verwoerd’s assassination – last Friday (i.e.2nd September). Man he asked was Mr Allan Lomas, New Liberal candidate for Islington East in last General Election. Mr Lomas said today: “I was waiting to buy newspaper and coffee when young man asked – because he had no change to buy a paper – whether there was any report on Verwoerd assassination. I scanned paper and said he could borrow it as I was finished. I looked in Sunday papers and made inquiries about any attempts on Dr Verwoerd’s life but of course found nothing.”

In May 1959 he went to Britain and while there he was noticed in the company of leftists. Tsafendas said that some of these persons in private raised the possibility of having the Prime Minister of South Africa shot. Less than a year later in April 1960 Dr Verwoerd was, at short range, shot twice in his face by David Beresford Pratt, who had also been to Britain and had been involved in political activities of the Liberal Party. Miraculously Dr Verwoerd survived this attempt on his life.

>>21454149

>>21454157

>>21454162

>>21454171

>>21454177

“THE ASSASSINATION OF DR. H.F. VERWOERD: British-American Scheming and The Founders of the New South Africa” [1994] Part 6

https://www.radiofreesouthafrica.com/dr-hf-verwoerds-murder-haunting-naspers/

By Jaap Marais

This is of the same quality as the second paragraph of the Chapter of the Commission’s report entitled “Were there accomplices?” It reads as follows: “The Commission could find no evidence which could justify a finding that there were accomplices”.

In itself this would have caused eyebrows to raise, but what made it more suspect was the remarks of the man who had appointed the Commission, B J Vorster, Dr Verwoerd’s successor. The day after the assassination (September 7) The Star (Johannesburg) had a headline: “No sign of assassination plot. This was the work of a lone killer says Vorster”.

Apart from this flagrantly irresponsible and grave infringement on the province of the subsequently appointed Commission of Enquiry, Vorster’s role as Minister of Justice and therefore of Security, making him responsible for the security of Dr Verwoerd, is extremely questionable. It is the more questionable in view of his role in subsequently systematically destroying the foundations upon which Dr Verwoerd had built.

Another example of his handling of the events after the assassination centred on a press report that the Security Police had had a file on Tsafendas, and that when the head of the Security Police was phoned on the day of the assassination he in a short while had a file with him. The amazing thing that then happened was that Vorster issued a statement that “the report that the Security Police had a file on Tsafendas was devoid of all truth’. This was an evident cover-up as it was later revealed that the Security Police had had no less than four files on Tsafendas.

But only one was available from a room with “dead files”. One had been destroyed without authority, another had also been destroyed, and the fourth was completely missing. Vorster’s statement denying that there was a file was therefore calculated to mislead the public Vorster protected.

The revelations about the various files came only after Vorster, in the emotional atmosphere subsequent to the assassination, had been elected to succeed Dr Verwoerd.

>>21454149

>>21454157

>>21454162

>>21454171

>>21454177

>>21454182

>>21453990

>In 1982, Harry Oppenheimer meets Henry Kissinger to talk about majority rule and transition after Apartheid.

“THE ASSASSINATION OF DR. H.F. VERWOERD: British-American Scheming and The Founders of the New South Africa” [1994] Part 7

https://www.radiofreesouthafrica.com/dr-hf-verwoerds-murder-haunting-naspers/

By Jaap Marais

Vorster, unknown to most of his supporters, was on friendly terms with Anton Rupert, who was allegedly involved in the “Verwoerd must go plan”. And Vorster, Rupert and other financial imperialists subsequently worked together in destroying what Dr Verwoerd had built.

It was later revealed in two books – South Africa Inc. and E Oppenheimer and Son – that Vorster had had cordial relations with Harry Oppenheimer of Anglo-American – something that would have destroyed his chances of succeeding Dr Verwoerd, had it been known to the majority of the National Party Caucus.

who benefited from the death, then there are several obvious candidates.

The first is Vorster and his immediate associates, who were put at the levers of power – an immense gain both personally and politically. The second group is the Verwoerd opponents in the National Party, like Anton Rupert and Piet Cillie. The third is the money powers with in the lead Harry Oppenheimer and Anton Rupert, who opposed Dr Verwoerd and knew that he was going to limit their monopolistic operations.

Most Important

The fourth, and perhaps the most important is the British-American powers behind the ANC, who were out to break the Afrikaners’ political power and get South Africa in line with the other Communist-controlled Southern African States of Mozambique, Angola, Zimbabwe and Namibia.

Tsafendas undoubtedly was a Communist, but it is not to the Soviet and the KGB that one must look for clues to the assassination of Dr Verwoerd. Tsafendas’ Communist leanings was a useful shield behind which others in Britain, the USA and probably also Israel, as well as some in South Africa operated. For all of these Dr Verwoerd constituted a stark obstacle to their aims. In his adherence to principles he was gaining in power and international stature.

All but Black majority rule

What must be noted is that the government formed by the new State President is all but representative of Black majority rule. The government presently consist of 27 ministers and 12 deputy ministers, apart from the President and two deputy presidents. Of the 18 ANC representatives in the Cabinet appointed by the President at least 10 are members of the Communist Party, and several more suspected Communists. And of the nine deputy ministers representing the ANC at least four are Communists. The significance of this is that the South African Communist Party (SACP) on its own would not have been able to get a single member of parliament elected, yet it is in a commanding position in the government – in the name of majority rule!

>>21454149

>>21454157

>>21454162

>>21454171

>>21454177

>>21454182

>>21454191

“THE ASSASSINATION OF DR. H.F. VERWOERD: British-American Scheming and The Founders of the New South Africa” [1994] Part 8

https://www.radiofreesouthafrica.com/dr-hf-verwoerds-murder-haunting-naspers/

By Jaap Marais

This is of particular significance in view of the existence and operations of “the creeping coup” in the SACP revealed by The International Freedom Foundation in April 1991. It was initiated in the early eighties by Slovo, Maharaj, Kasrils and the deceased Hani “to capture every senior position within the ANC”. international Freedom Foundation said that this process was “virtually complete”.

The Foundation revealed that only eight of the 35 member National Executive Committee (NEC)of the ANC were not Communists before the release of Mandela. After Mandela and Sisulu had joined the NEC the ratio was 26 Communists against ten non-Communists. The operations of this “creeping coup” are probably behind the late appointments of Communists as Ministers and deputy ministers.

Oppenheimer further said that Mandela had sought his approval of two Cabinet appointments -probably those of Derek Keys and Pik Botha, the former having come from one of the companies closely associated with Oppenheimer and the latter being a Freemason who is a holder of The Order of Malta (in the company of Dr Piet Koornhof, former Cabinet Minister and ambassador). Both departments – Finance and Mineral and Energy Affairs – are close to the heart of the money powers in South Africa and it is most likely that Oppenheimer would have sought to have “his men” appointed.

The national unity of the government trumpeted by Mandela is a fiction, as may be seen from the fact that in the April election only 2% of Blacks voted for the NP, the Democratic Party and the Freedom Front, while only 3% of Whites voted for the ANC. The near disastrous economic position of the country and the absence of respect for law and order in the wake of incessant “change” and “reform” make an orderly transition to a radically new constitutional set-up impossible.

The “government of national unity” is doomed to fall apart. The new situation presents a formidable challenge to the Afrikaners and their English speaking White compatriots. The hardcore of the Afrikaner people is accepting that the new constitutional set-up will not last long and will lead to ethnic friction and political disintegration, a matter to be dealt with separately in a subsequent review.

The spirit of rejection and resistance among Afrikaners, which was treacherously deflected by Gen Constand Viljoen and his cronies, is again rising. And there is capable leadership outside Parliament to wield it into a force.

>>21454162

>Dr Verwoerd had been preparing to meet the challenge from these quarters and for this reason he unofficially instituted an investigation into the Anglo-American Corp. under the leadership of Prof Piet Hoek. The Hoek report was a very thorough job, and was privately circulated late in1965, early 1966, and evidently Oppenheimer, Rupert and others had been aware of the investigation.

>>21416431

>“The company… is the most important citizen in every country in the world”

1966 Hoek Report about Anglo American Part 1

https://archive.org/details/HOEK-REPORT/page/n5/mode/2up

https://ia904703.us.archive.org/28/items/HOEK-REPORT/HOEK-Verslag-prof-1966.pdf

Also attached

Description

The Hoek Report/ Die Hoek Verslag covers an audit into capitalist ownership of the South African Economy. It was to be chaired in the South African Parliament on the 6th September [1966] by President Hendrik Verwoerd but he was assassinated on the day and the National Party hid the document's findings from the public.

First page of the document is an article, a portion is translated;

In the Stock Exchange Yearbook of 1975, the following facts came to light in connection with some of the Oppenheimer companies:

• Anglo-American Corporation paid more than 10 percent tax in just one year in the period 1970 to 1974. On a profit of R83 million in 1974, he paid less than R5 million tax – about 6 percent instead of the normal company tax of 49 percent.

• Rand Selections did not even pay 2 percent tax in any single year of the period 1970 to 1974. In 1974 its profit was R46 million.

The Hoek report was completed in 1968, but it was never allowed to circulate in wide circles. Prof Piet Hoek, deputy manager of Yskor, was the compiler.

He was instructed to investigate Mr. Oppenheimer's money power in the sixties by the late Dr. H.F. Verwoerd. The report was completed after Dr. Verwoerd's death.

Reportedly, Mr. Vorster later completed interest for the report. Furthermore, it was learned that Gen. H.J. van den Bergh, head of Boss, multiplied the report.

When the report was used at a meeting in the Northern Transvaal in the 1970 election, a court order against an English Sunday newspaper prohibited them from publishing anything about the report.

>>21454242

>>21379971

>Under his chairmanship, Anglo American and De Beers went through successful and difficult times, but they both remained – and still remain – true to his, and his father’s, tenet of faith. Business had to do with more than just making money – especially in Africa and other developing countries – it had to make a real contribution to development.

>>21379997

>IFP, DA, African leaders, Ukraine, Brenthurst Foundation, etc. signed “The Gdańsk Declaration: Solidarity for Democracy”

>>21454162

>When Dr Verwoerd, on the 25th January 1966 said in Parliament: “We shall oppose the power concentrations and monopolies which occur in our country, and which constitute a real danger”, it was an oblique but unmistakable reference to the Hoek Report.

1966 Hoek Report about Anglo American Part 2

https://archive.org/details/HOEK-REPORT/page/n5/mode/2up

https://ia904703.us.archive.org/28/items/HOEK-REPORT/HOEK-Verslag-prof-1966.pdf

Portion of the Hoek Report translated into English:

1. (2) The demand for labour is necessarily where the work is and in terms of factory, construction and services, the employment is mainly where capital is invested in activity.

Through a mode of functioning that makes it practically impossible to be publicly noticed and exposed without comprehensive coordinated scrutiny, a large capital and activity power concentration group, notably the AAC [Anglo American Corporation] group, as will be demonstrated herein, has acquired a position in our country where it has engaged more than 900 companies under their sphere of influence that include some of the largest in our country. For practical purposes, this group gained control over the mobilisation of probably the bulk of the private sector's capital, with its consequent influence on the influx into and concentration of Non-Whites in particular areas.

Not only the well-known political views of the controllers of AAC in Southern Africa, but also the international financial interests in its share capital that undoubtedly have controlling influences in AAC, will have no loyalty to the interests of separate nations in Southern Africa; on the contrary, it may pose further dangers, especially if the historical actions of international banks and international capital are related to revolutions and riots, for example, the organising and financing of the Russian Revolution in 1917 and where it is related to the preoccupation of international capital with the eradication of national borders and distinctions. In short, the international capitalist's philosophy makes nations work for international capitalism—the philosophy of the nationalist makes capital work for the nation.

>>21454242

>>21454308

More Portions of Hoek Report Part 1

[Here are more portions of the document. People already knew the outcome then]

[Below, the author took an excerpt from the 1965 year report of Anglo American Corporation of South Africa Limited: pg 47 (No translation was necessary)]

“The resources of the Group are mainly in mining in Southern and Central Africa – gold, diamonds, copper, coal and other minerals. In recent years, while the Group has opened offices in Salisbury, Lusaka, New York, Melbourne and Toronto. It has made a substantial investment in the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company, a leading Canadian producer of copper and zinc, and through Charter Consolidated in Tronoh Mines, an important mining company in Malaysia. The Group is prospecting for minerals in many countries in Africa and also on a considerable scale in North American and Australia. It has interests outside mining in the United Kingdom and on the continent of Europe. In Southern Africa the Group has greatly broadened the range of its interests in basic and manufacturing industries and has developed substantial new interests in construction and engineering, merchant banking and investment trusts, property development and other commercial fields.

The Corporation’s investments are held mainly through a number of investment companies with specific fields of interest – Anglo American Investment Trust for the diamond mining and marketing companies; Orange Free State Investment Trust and West Rand Investment Trust for the gold mining companies in those areas; Anglo American Industrial Corporation which was formed in 1963 to consolidate the industrial holdings of the Group; and, on a geographical basis, Zambian Anglo American and Anglo American Rhodesia. Coal interests are held chiefly through African and European and Vereeniging Estates, while Rand Selection Corporation hold a diversified spread of investments similar to those of the Corporation itself.”

[Below is an English translation.]

It is regularly reported in the Press that British and American investments in South Africa yield a very favourable return compared to the return on their investments in other countries. It has also been referred to in previous paragraphs to the appreciation of the shares of many investment companies and that this appreciation is in no small part due to withheld profits (additionally tax-free in the case of investment companies) and the resulting growth. Foreign shareholders can therefore also make large so-called "capital gains" on shares in South African companies, at the expense of the South African taxpayer.

>>21454242

>>21454308

>>21467416

“World Citizen | Leadership Development Qualities - AIESEC”

https://youtu.be/1E-YEj-6ZWU

Jul 10, 2020

More Portions of Hoek Report Part 2

[English translation below. Sound familiar? South Africa became a “bantustan” controlled by the international capitalists.]

With regard to capital, it is felt that white suffrage-carrying private capital should not be allowed in the bantustans, for the following reasons:

a) This would be an unnecessary and dangerous departure from existing Government policy.

b) It would grant established rights to whites which cannot be eliminated without unrealistic countermeasures and artificial fixation of terms, after which the white man would have to withdraw and the bantu will take over. At the end of a set term, a successful business may go to waste very quickly through the unavailability of competent bantu entrepreneurs. Due to the variety of industries that make up a country's economic development, a variety of knowledge and management capacities are needed, about which there can be no certainty that the bantu will possess it upon expiry of a predetermined term. The need for a set term can only apply to short-term projects, and will undoubtedly result in overcropping.

c) With the ability, as a entrepeneur, that the bantu has so far revealed, white capital participation, either in full or on a "partnership basis," may not be withdrawn for centuries without suffering bankruptcies and unemployment, unless the white capital enterprises are just taken over again by other whites. This may presuppose permanence. Especially developmental interests that sometimes have to be of a long-term nature to become successful will hardly attract white entrepreneurial capital if it is forced to retire even after a fairly long term and even at market value.

If white capital were allowed on a "partnership basis" without provision for eventual withdrawal, it would inevitably lead to integration and thwarting of our policies; it would negate our country policy.

d) With our knowledge of the bantu's governance capacity and lack of knowledge, white private capital, even with whatever reservations, would eventually take on a permanent nature and any restrictions or reservations would become meaningless, so that the economy of the territories would then be in danger of being controlled by large investors and possibly internationalists or "world citizen" institutions over time.

e) White private capital allowed on such a basis would not allow the bantu entrepreneur any chances of concurrence and he would be left with no possibilities to play a role other than an artificial or subordinate in his territory's economy. That the ex-Protectorates are throwing themselves open to private investment does not mean that the RSA should do so in its bantu areas. We protect the bantu from unwarranted competition against him, with his limited development, he will not be up to it; And our policy is pertinently aimed at preserving for him his own homeland and the institutions that will be brought about by its development, as opposed to permanent or prolonged integration into projects in which the white man remains the boss.

>>21454242

>>21454308

>>21467416

>>21467430

“South Africa’s state owned companies: a complex history that’s seldom told” Part 1

https://theconversation.com/south-africas-state-owned-companies-a-complex-history-thats-seldom-told-120152

Published: July 18, 2019 4.40pm CEST

The problems of South Africa’s state owned enterprises are in the headlines every day. Yet many have existed for over 80 years.

Why were they established in the first place and how have they survived this long? Their histories provide clues for their successes and failures.

State owned enterprises in South Africa date back to the 19th century when Paul Kruger’s Zuid Afrikaansche Republiek tried to promote local industries to stave off British control. Kruger’s government erected high tariffs against imports of many consumer goods as well as industrial goods used by the mining industry. At the same time it handed out monopoly concessions for local manufacture. In most cases, foreign capital still managed to control these enterprises – the most important for railway service and electricity generation for the mines.

Kruger’s aim of fostering economic independence through local industries was utterly defeated with the British victory in the [Anglo-Boer] War in 1902. But the connection between economy and state lived on through the railway and electricity concessions. By the 1920s, the expanding railway enterprise – the South African Railways and Harbours, now Transnet – needed more and cheaper electricity, and steel for rails. In 1923, the Smuts government established the Electricity Supply Commission (now Eskom) in part to serve the railways and also the growing mining industry.

In 1928, Prime Minister Barry Hertzog established the Iron and Steel Corporation (ISCOR [or YSKOR]) to produce cheap steel rails for the South African Railways and Harbour and to create some independence from the profit-seeking European steel makers.

Although both Eskom and Iscor were established under state auspices, they enjoyed only tepid government support and faced stiff competition. They were established at a time when nearly all industrial goods and many consumer goods were imported at great cost. In the case of electricity, the major market – the Rand gold mines – was already under contract to the private Victoria Fall Power Company . And in the case of steel, a European cartel of steel makers was ready to dump cheap steel on the South African market in order to kill off local production. Some foreign firms established small operations inside the country, but with profits still flowing back to overseas investors.

>>21467438

“South Africa’s state owned companies: a complex history that’s seldom told” Part 2

https://theconversation.com/south-africas-state-owned-companies-a-complex-history-thats-seldom-told-120152

Published: July 18, 2019 4.40pm CEST

By 1948, Eskom had succeeded in expropriating the private company with assistance from the largest mining company in the country – Anglo-American Corporation – which provided money for the buy-out. Eskom then linked all power stations in the country into a national grid allowing for cheaper production of electricity and lower prices to its customers.

Similarly, Iscor was able to eliminate competition through partnerships with the Anglo American Corporation. Iscor needed to find local engineering firms that would process its raw steel into war materiel. Many were either foreign or were owned by the Lewis and Marks investment company that also operated a competing steel company, Union Steel.

In 1945, Anglo American – which became Iscor’s partner in all of the major engineering firms – bought out the company. Since Anglo was principally a customer for their goods, it was interested in low prices and not in reaping profits through steel manufacture.

The change of government in 1948 led to a brief change in policies toward the state corporations. The Nationalist government, wary of foreign and even local capital and suspicious of the state corporations’ ties to Anglo American, initially refused to provide the funds for further expansion of either Iscor’s or Eskom’s facilities. Partnerships with the local engineering firms were likewise ditched.

But by the early 1950s, realising the advantages to such arrangements, the government relented and the old ties were renewed, leading to massive increases in production by both firms. In addition, the government looked the other way as it became apparent that black workers were being used extensively at both firms – and even as semi-skilled workers at Iscor – yielding a wage bill that was less than a quarter what it was for whites.

Yet this structure could not survive the flight of capital and the enfranchisement of the workforce that followed the democratic transition of the 1990s.

Iscor’s former partners fled to more lucrative parts of the world and the steel corporation was sold to private interests; and Eskom faced an expanding demand for residential electricity without the financial and marketing support of the mining houses.

This article is based on a book – Manufacturing Apartheid: State Corporations in South Africa – written by Nancy L Clark. Published in 1994, it is now out of print.

>>21454242

>>21454308

>>21467416

>>21467430

>>21467438

>>21467459

>>21380005

>It was against this background that, representing the In Transformation Initiative, I [Roelf Meyer] became involved in the development of the scenarios outlined in this book, along with the Brenthurst Foundation.

“The Role of the Business Elite in South Africa’s Democratic Transition: Supporting an Inclusive Political and Economic Transformation”

https://berghof-foundation.org/files/publications/South_Africa_Paper_8_Final_Layout_v2.pdf

2015

This paper provides insight into the role played by a part of the private sector which came to constitute a fairly unique elite in supporting the negotiation of a new political settlement in post-apartheid South Africa. To support this process, and to help engineer a political settlement that supported statebuilding in the interests of a peaceful political and smooth economic transformation, business steadily became both a conduit and part of negotiations, the political settlement that ensued, and the statebuilding efforts that followed the first democratic elections in 1994 and continue to this day. In the process, its role and position has evolved and a myriad of positive contributions have been made en route, however, but persistent socio-economic deficits belie the full-bodied success of the transformation that both enabled the inclusivity of the process itself and promised prosperity and development as tangible outputs.

About the Publication

This paper is one of four case study reports on South Africa produced in the course of the collaborative research project ‘Avoiding Conflict Relapse through Inclusive Political Settlements and State-building after Intra-State War’, running from February 2013 to February 2015. This project aims to examine the conditions for inclusive political settlements following protracted armed conflicts, with a specific focus on former armed power contenders turned state actors. It also aims to inform national and international practitioners and policy-makers on effective practices for enhancing participation, representation, and responsiveness in post-war state-building and governance. It is carried out in cooperation with the partner institutions CINEP/PPP (Colombia, Project Coordinators), Berghof Foundation (Germany, Project Research Coordinators), FLACSO (El Salvador), In Transformation Initiative (South Africa), Sudd Institute (South Sudan), Aceh Policy Institute (Aceh/Indonesia), and Friends for Peace (Nepal). The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the Berghof Foundation, CINEP/PPP, or their project partners. To find more publications for this project please visit www.berghof-foundation.com. For further information, please contact the project research coordinator, Dr. Véronique Dudouet, at v.dudouet@berghof-foundation.org.

About the Authors

Nel Marais is a former senior intelligence officer. He was seconded to the Department of Constitutional Affairs, South Africa, in the early 1990s, where he served the negotiation process and structures with intelligence assessments on developments that could have disrupted the political transformation process in South Africa. He currently heads Thabiti, an international risk consultancy company.

Jo Davies has worked as a lecturer at the University of the Transkei; a translator at the South African Department of Arts and Culture; and a researcher and operational analyst within the post-1994 South African intelligence services. She is currently an independent consultant and analyst on a range of political and social issues.

This project has been funded with support from the International Development Research Center in Ottawa.

>>21467487

> About the Author: Nel Marais

Brenthurst Foundation: Our people: Dr Nel Marais

https://www.thebrenthurstfoundation.org/people/dr-nel-marais/

Managing Director, Thabiti

After working as a researcher and lecturer at the University of Pretoria and the Institute for Strategic Studies, Nel Marais joined the South African Defence Force where he served as a Military Intelligence officer. During the 1980s, he joined the South African National Intelligence Service, during which time he specialised in both political and economic intelligence issues. He obtained his doctorate in 1986.

Later, Nel was seconded to the Department of Constitutional Affairs where he served the negotiation process and structures with intelligence assessments. In 1994 he became a member of the newly-formed South African Secret Service (SASS). In his capacity as Research and Analysis Manager, he interacted with numerous foreign intelligence services, political leaders and members of the South African government.

Nel resigned from government at the end of 2000 and established his own consultancy company called Thabiti. The company focuses on risk management, business intelligence, as well as business facilitation. He works closely with government officials and private business entities in Africa and other parts of the world.

>>21454242

>>21454308

>>21467416

>>21467430

>>21467438

>>21467459

>>21467487

>>21467502

“Reflections on South Africa’s Restructuring of StateOwned Enterprises”

https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/suedafrika/07164.pdf

March 2002

Critics and supporters of privatisation both point out that the last decade has seen the increased use of privatisation as a policy instrument for economic development throughout the world. This process has been part of a broader process of economic restructuring that has taken place over the last two decades (Rondinelli & Iacono, 1996:1; Van der Hoeven & Sriraczki, 1997:1; Pape, 1998; Reconstruct, 1998). Rondinelli and Iacono (1996) estimate that at least 80 countries went through a privatisation process in the late 1980s and early 1990s. This process of economic restructuring is often referred to as globalisation or, by critics on the left, as neo-liberal globalisation (Pape, 1998; Reconstruct, 1998).

A common term used for these processes, in developing countries and countries in transition from a command economy to a market economy, is “structural adjustment programmes” (SAPs) (Rondinelli & Iacono, 1996:1). In the industrialised countries these programmes go by different names. One term used very often refers to the “austerity programmes” implemented in industrialised countries (Reconstruct, 1998; Pape, 1998).

In South Africa privatisation arrived in 1987, when the then National Party government started a process of selling off many state-owned enterprises (SALB, 1989). The ANC-led government in the post-apartheid period included privatisation as part of its economic policy instruments and provided continuity to the process started in 1987.

The global economy of the 1990s was, and still is, dominated by the forces that drove market economies after the collapse of the socialist economies in Eastern Europe. This, combined with the prevalence of conservative neo-liberal governments in the North, home of many multinational enterprises, placed many constraints on the South African government and contributed to determining the way it would interpret the role of the state and government (Pape, 1998).

>>21467430

> It would grant established rights to whites which cannot be eliminated without unrealistic countermeasures and artificial fixation of terms, after which the white man would have to withdraw and the bantu will take over. At the end of a set term, a successful business may go to waste very quickly through the unavailability of competent bantu entrepreneurs.

”Some of the fallacious policies implemented by the ANC, [Moeletsi] Mbeki maintains, include BBBEE and affirmative action”

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2024-02-17-the-ancs-five-deadly-sins-and-what-the-future-holds-for-sa-beyond-the-2024-elections/

17 Feb 2024

His late father was Govan Mbeki and his brother is former president Thabo Mbeki, both leading intellectuals and important figures in the formation and growth of the ANC. However, businessman and independent political analyst Moeletsi Mbeki is adamant that the ANC has committed what he calls five “mortal sins” during its 30 years in power.

Some of the fallacious policies implemented by the ANC, Mbeki maintains, include BBBEE and affirmative action. These, he says, have broadened the black middle class, but have alienated all the other races and led to stagnation in the economy.

“The ANC adopted the BBBEE policies that were started by business to ingratiate itself with the new ANC rulers by giving money and shares to individuals like Dr Nthato Motlana, Cyril Ramaphosa, Patrice Motsepe, Saki Macozoma, Tokyo Sexwale and other individuals connected to the ANC.

“It also created a black middle class using affirmative action policies by creating jobs and perks in the state, and offering early severance packages to whites who were in the public sector. Those who took up those jobs did not have the capacity or skills to run the departments that they were now in charge of.

“You see this when things are falling apart in the public sector. The classic example of this failure is in municipalities – many in this country are on the verge of collapse, and others have already collapsed and cannot deliver services,” said Mbeki.

“The ANC could still have created the black middle class by making available opportunities for them to be productive industrialists, farmers, artisans and small business owners who would build the country, and create wealth at the same time.

“The current forms of BBBEE and affirmative action, as implemented, confirms the stereotype that blacks are inferior to whites and they cannot create wealth on their own, and thus need white handouts to survive.”

>>21467590

“Billions in bailouts for failing SOEs in South Africa – Government’s latest spin”

https://businesstech.co.za/news/government/736287/billions-in-bailouts-for-failing-soes-in-south-africa-governments-latest-spin/

6 Dec 2023

The government plugging billions of rands in bailouts into failing state-owned enterprises is a sign of its commitment and “strategic intent” to turning things around and making these groups financially sustainable, says Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan.

The South African government has injected billions of rands into state companies over the years, but continues to get very little out of them. The latest findings by the Auditor General of South Africa delivered only one clean audit for the country’s state-run companies.

Auditor General Tsakani Maluleke, on 29 November 2023, tabled the audit outcomes for the national and provincial government for the year to end March 2023.

The audit highlighted that while there was a trend of improvement for smaller parastatals and some government departments, SA’s key SOEs again underperformed.

Out of the 19 major SOEs that are expected to operate like businesses and generate profits, only one – the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) – managed to receive a clean audit.

>>21467590

“African governments incompetent and unethical – Senou”

https://youtu.be/55Bl2qCLPgQ

Aug 22, 2024

Over the past year, Africa has seen a surge in civilian-led resistance movements, with the most recent anti-government protests seen in Kenya. The Holding Opinion and Public (THOP) founder Kwame Senou says governments are not trusted because they are not seen as competent and ethical.