Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:44:13.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

South Africa's Strategic Vulnerabilities: The ‘Citadel Assumption’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2014

Extract

In assessing the patterns of conflict in southern Africa, it is commonplace to stress the theme of South Africa's overwhelming strengths against the threat of black nationalist forces. Most observers support this thesis of South African invulnerability by citing the country's enormous mineral resources, impressive military capabilities, continuing strategic importance and economic links with the west. Leonard Thompson (in Thompson and Butler, 1975: 408) ably summarized this popular view, citing other noteworthy domestic and international variables to buttress the point:

In resisting “terrorists” South Africa's government has the ardent support of four million Whites who consider their very survival is at stake. South Africa has a far more powerful industrial base and far more formidable military equipment than any government that has been overthrown by guerrilla forces. It has the capacity to produce atomic weapons; the terrain in the vicinity of its borders is treeless or sparsely wooded savanna, which affords guerrillas scant opportunity for concealment. Moreover, the South African revolutionaries in exile are divided into rival factions; the capacity of Black African states to launch military expeditions against the Republic is limited by domestic economic and political weaknesses, interstate rivalries, and serious logistic problems; and neither the Soviet Union nor the People's Republic of China seems prepared to make a major commitment in southern Africa in the near future. Consequently, although guerrilla groups launched across South Africa's land frontiers may become a continual irritant to the regime, they do not seem likely to be able to overthrow it.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © African Studies Association 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Africa Bureau Fact Sheet. (1975) Number 44: November/December.Google Scholar
Armed Forces. (1976).Google Scholar
Barratt, John. (1976). “Southern Africa: A South African View.” Foreign Affairs (October): 147–68.Google Scholar
Bertram, Christoph. (1975). South Africa in the World Strategic Situation. Pretoria: South African Institute of International Affairs.Google Scholar
CORSO Information Service (n.d.) Apartheid in South Africa.Google Scholar
The Economist.Google Scholar
The Financial Mail.Google Scholar
Foreign Broadcast Information Service. (1976) 8, 200 (14 October): E8.Google Scholar
International Institute for Strategic Studies. (1976) The Military Balance. London.Google Scholar
Interview with Acting Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Edward Mulcahy, August 1975.Google Scholar
Lawrence, R.S. (1976) “Annual Address of the President of the Chamber of Mines of South Africa” (29 July).Google Scholar
The Rand Daily Mail.Google Scholar
Raphael, Arnold. (1976) “Southern Africa: Military Aspects.” African Development 10, 4 (April): 340–43.Google Scholar
Thompson, Leonard (1975) “White Over Black in South Africa: What of the Future,” pp. 400414 in Thompson, Leonard and Butler, Jeffrey (eds.), Change in Contemporary South Africa. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
The Washington Post.Google Scholar
White Paper on Defense and Armament Production. (1975).Google Scholar