“It is our historical duty, as the country that voluntarily dismantled its nuclear capacity, to get involved and get Iraqi disarmament without resorting to war,” South Africa’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Aziz Pahad said earlier this week.
Pahad is due to leave on a mission to Iraq today. And as he prepares for his trip, he is receiving assistance from a once inconceivable quarter: Roelof “Pik” Botha. Botha, 70, was South Africa’s foreign minister in 1993 when the white-minority government announced it had developed a “limited nuclear deterrent” of seven weapons–but had disarmed them. Following the announcement, inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) certified that the nuclear weapons program indeed had ended.
Hans Blix, now the chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq, was the director-general of the IAEA who oversaw the South Africa inspections 10 years ago. Last month, he cited South Africa as a model of cooperation for its actions at the time. And Botha, now one of a handful of officials from the former regime who retain political entree into South Africa’s current government, said he would be available as a mediator with Saddam Hussein.
After a meeting in the foreign ministry in Pretoria on Thursday, Botha spoke with NEWSWEEK’s Tom Masland. Excerpts:
NEWSWEEK: Are you going to Baghdad?
Pik Botha: I have just had a meeting with Deputy Foreign Minister Aziz Pahad. We had a very positive discussion, exchanging views. And he is going by himself [Friday] evening. On his return we will have a further meeting.
It’s understood that Minister Pahad will urge Iraq to comply fully with the U.N. inspection regime, as South Africa did.
Did he say that to you? I’m hesitant to divulge the contents of our conversation. It’s an exploratory visit.
Can South Africa actually influence events there?
That we will only know after his visit. He’s going to explore the various possibilities.
Have you been speaking to other officials concerned with the disarmament crisis?
Yes, I had just a very brief exchange yesterday evening with Dr. Hans Blix. That I will follow up now with a further conversation.
He, of course, has brought up the South African example, as a model of cooperation.
Yes, actually the idea [of mediation] originated with him, that they would welcome the same type of attitude and procedures which they had when they came here to do their inspections after we dismantled our nuclear weapons. So I personally believe that we could play possibly a positive role as mediators between the inspectors and the Iraqi government. This, Mr. Aziz Pahad will endeavor to determine now.
Have you spoken with any American officials about this?
No.
How do you respond to the fact that South Africa is suddenly being held up as an example for having given up its nuclear capability? At the time of transition there was a good bit of speculation about the government not wanting to turn over the bomb to a black government.
No, this decision was taken before negotiations started with the ANC [the now-ruling African National Congress party that was banned by the white government until 1990.] This decision was taken within days after the [white] former president, P.W. Botha, resigned. That was the end of ‘89. It was my view then that this was a matter of the highest priority. Because I saw clearly that if we then announced an intention to sign the nonproliferation treaty, which would have to be followed by inspections, that we could come out of it with credibility and with credit. And it happened exactly that way. It was part of a plan to ease tensions and stresses and strains in the whole of southern Africa. Namibia was on the point of achieving independence, which was another historically positive step that we took and which earned us credit–preparing the way for the release of Mr. Mandela [in 1990] and other political prisoners and for the commencement of negotiations with the ANC.
So this was a strategy to bring South Africa back into the international mainstream?
Exactly … It was a step-by-step approach to persuade the world that we were genuine, that we were sincere, at a time when there was severe suspicion that we might just have done this to deceive the world, to draw out and delay negotiations with the ANC and to retain power somehow.
You were very much the public face of the white administration. How have you made the transition to senior statesman, welcome in the corridors of power and discussing policy with an ANC government?
Well, I appreciate the fact that they talk with me. But remember that, already in 1986, in reply to a question at a press conference, I indicated that yes, there would be a black president in this country, and, yes, I would be prepared to serve under him … If you look at the history of my public life you will find that I have been consistent. For me it has not been a difficult transition. Because I foresaw that this would happen.
You have spoken about joining the ANC yourself, I believe.
Yes, I support the ANC. I urged the National Party [the white pro-apartheid party which governed the country from 1948 to 1994] to disband. Economic growth is essential. This government adopted a very credible fiscal policy, which earned it the support of international financial circles. For the first time in our history our economic growth is larger than our population increase. Our exports of manufactured goods exceed our exports of minerals and minerals-related products. There is more than hope for this country. You need to help the government, support it in respect of all these important steps it has taken.
Former president Nelson Mandela said recently that the United States wants to attack Iraq to gain control of its oil resources and that President George W. Bush “can’t think properly.” What do you make of his harsh criticisms of the U.S. over the Iraq crisis?
It is natural that he is upset. The economic effect of a war in Iraq could make it almost impossible for African leaders to govern effectively … Dr.Blix has not found Saddam Hussein guilty of having nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. His report deals with Iraqi noncooperation. If there still exists a possibility that we can use [peaceful] methods to achieve the same objective–namely of disarming or off satisfying the world that those weapons would be dismantled, then obviously we must do our best and leave no stone unturned to try to achieve it in that way. America can then go out and say this could not have been achieved, unless we took the steps that we did. On top of it, Iraq is not destroyed, and the world can breathe again, and we in Africa are not faced with a possible disaster in the development of our economics. I still believe there is another way to achieve the objectives of your president, short of war.
Isn’t it unusually undiplomatic for President Thabo Mbeki to urge South Africans to join in antiwar protests on Feb. 15, some in front of U.S. missions?
This is not a time of diplomacy as usual.
