essay about resistance to apartheid 1940 to 1960

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Quick Facts
• Flora and fauna
• Conservation
• Ethnic groups
• Rural settlement
• Urban settlement
• Demographic trends
• Agriculture, forestry, and fishing
• Resources and power
• Manufacturing
• Labor and taxation
• Railways and roads
• Air transport and shipping
• Telecommunications
• Constitutions through the 1980s
• The 1996 constitution
• Provincial government
• Municipal government
• Political process
• Health and welfare
• Primary and secondary schools
• Higher education
• Daily life and social customs
• Black literature
• Afrikaans literature
• Anglophone literature
• Multicultural literature
• Cultural institutions
• Sports and recreation
• Media and publishing
• The Early Stone Age
• The Middle Stone Age
• The Late Stone Age
• Pastoralism and early agriculture
• Iron Age sites
• First urban centers
• Europeans in South Africa
• Settlement of the Cape Colony
• Growth of the colonial economy
• British occupation of the Cape
• The Delagoa Bay slave trade
• Emergence of the eastern states
• The Great Trek
• The British in Natal
• Attempts at Boer consolidation
• The Cape economy
• Disputes in the north and east
• The Zulu after Shaka
• The decline of the African states
• Diamonds and confederation
• Afrikaner and African politics in the Cape
• Gold mining
• The road to war
• The South African War (1899–1902)
• Milner and reconstruction
• Convention and union
• Black, Coloured, and Indian political responses
• Union and disunity
• Afrikaner rebellion and nationalism
• Segregation
• The Pact years (1924–33)
• The intensification of apartheid in the 1930s
• World War II

The National Party and apartheid

• Resistance to apartheid
• The unraveling of apartheid
• Transition to majority rule
• The Truth and Reconciliation Commission
• Corruption charges against deputy president Zuma
• Mbeki steps down
• The 2009 national election
• Economic problems, social discontent, Nkandla scandal, and the death of Mandela
• The 2014 national election
• University fees protests
• Controversy: the Gupta family, Nkandla, and corruption charges revisited
• Zuma’s resignation
• Accomplishments and challenges
• The 2019 national election
• “Farmgate” controversy and investigations
• The 2024 national election

• What is Desmond Tutu best known for?
• How did Desmond Tutu change the world?
• When and where was Nelson Mandela born?
• When did Nelson Mandela die?
• What is Nelson Mandela known for?

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Official Site of the Embassy of South Africa in Bern, Switzerland
• National Geographic - South Africa facts!
• Central Intelligence Agency - The World Factbook - South Africa
• South Africa - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• South Africa - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

After its victory the National Party rapidly consolidated its control over the state and in subsequent years won a series of elections with increased majorities. Parliament removed Coloured voters from the common voters’ rolls in 1956. By 1969 the electorate was exclusively white: Indians never had any parliamentary representation, and the seats for white representatives of Blacks and Coloureds had been abolished.

Recent News

One plank of the National Party platform was for South Africa to become a republic , preferably outside the Commonwealth . The issue was presented to white voters in 1960 as a way to bring about white unity, especially because of concern with the problems that the Belgian Congo was then experiencing as it became independent. By a simple majority the voters approved the republic status. The government structure would change only slightly: the governor-general would be replaced by a state president, who would be chosen by Parliament. At a meeting in London in March 1961, South Africa had hoped to retain its Commonwealth status, but, when other members criticized it over its apartheid policies, it withdrew from the organization and on May 31, 1961, became the Republic of South Africa.

The government vigorously furthered its political goals by making it compulsory for white children to attend schools that were conducted in their home language, either Afrikaans or English (except for the few who went to private schools). It advanced Afrikaners to top positions in the civil service , army, and police and in such state corporations as the South African Broadcasting Corporation. It also awarded official contracts to Afrikaner banks and insurance companies. These methods raised the living standard of Afrikaners closer to that of English-speaking white South Africans.

Following a recession in the early 1960s, the economy grew rapidly until the late 1970s. By that time, owing to the efforts of public and private enterprise, South Africa had developed a modern infrastructure , by far the most advanced in Africa. It possessed efficient financial institutions, a national network of roads and railways, modernized port facilities in Cape Town and Durban , long-established mining operations producing a wealth of diamonds, gold, and coal, and a range of industries. De Beers Consolidated Mines and the Anglo American Corporation of South Africa , founded by Ernest Oppenheimer in 1917, dominated the private sector, forming the core of one of the world’s most powerful networks of mining, industrial, and financial companies and employing some 800,000 workers on six continents. State corporations (parastatals) controlled industries vital to national security. South African Coal, Oil, and Gas Corporation (SASOL) was established in 1950 to make South Africa self-sufficient in petroleum resources by converting coal to gasoline and diesel fuel . After the United Nations (UN) placed a ban on arms exports to South Africa in 1964, Armaments Corporation of South Africa (Armscor) was created to produce high-quality military equipment.

The man who played a major part in transforming apartheid from an election slogan into practice was Hendrik F. Verwoerd . Born in the Netherlands, Verwoerd immigrated with his parents to South Africa when he was a child. He became minister of native affairs in 1950 and was prime minister from 1958 until 1966, when Dimitri Tsafendas, a Coloured man, assassinated him in Parliament. (Tsafendas was judged to be insane and was confined to a mental institution after the murder.) Verwoerd’s successor, B.J. Vorster , had been minister of justice , police , and prisons , and he shared Verwoerd’s philosophy of white supremacy . In Verwoerd’s vision, South Africa’s population contained four distinct racial groups—white, Black, Coloured, and Asian—each with an inherent culture . Because whites were the “civilized” group, they were entitled to control the state.

The all-white Parliament passed many laws to legalize and institutionalize the apartheid system. The Population Registration Act (1950) classified every South African by race. The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act (1949) and the Immorality Act (1950) prohibited interracial marriage or sex. The Suppression of Communism Act (1950) defined communism and its aims broadly to include any opposition to the government and empowered the government to detain anyone it thought might further “communist” aims. The Indemnity Act (1961) made it legal for police officers to commit acts of violence, to torture, or to kill in the pursuit of official duties. Later laws gave the police the right to arrest and detain people without trial and to deny them access to their families or lawyers. Other laws and regulations collectively known as “petty apartheid” segregated South Africans in every sphere of life: in buses, taxis, and hearses, in cinemas, restaurants, and hotels, in trains and railway waiting rooms, and in access to beaches. When a court declared that separate amenities should be equal, Parliament passed a special law to override it.

“Grand apartheid,” in contrast, related to the physical separation of the racial groups in the cities and countryside. Under the Group Areas Act (1950) the cities and towns of South Africa were divided into segregated residential and business areas. Thousands of Coloureds, Blacks, and Indians were removed from areas classified for white occupation.

Blacks were treated like “tribal” people and were required to live on reserves under hereditary chiefs except when they worked temporarily in white towns or on white farms. The government began to consolidate the scattered reserves into 8 (eventually 10) distinct territories, designating each of them as the “homeland,” or Bantustan , of a specific Black ethnic community . The government manipulated homeland politics so that compliant chiefs controlled the administrations of most of those territories. Arguing that Bantustans matched the decolonization process then taking place in tropical Africa, the government devolved powers onto those administrations and eventually encouraged them to become “independent.” Between 1976 and 1981 four accepted independence— Transkei , Bophuthatswana , Venda , and Ciskei —though none was ever recognized by a foreign government. Like the other homelands, however, they were economic backwaters, dependent on subsidies from Pretoria .

Conditions in the homelands continued to deteriorate, partly because they had to accommodate vast numbers of people with minimal resources. Many people found their way to the towns; but the government, attempting to reverse this flood, strengthened the pass laws by making it illegal for Blacks to be in a town for more than 72 hours at a time without a job in a white home or business. A particularly brutal series of forced removals were conducted from the 1960s to the early ’80s, in which more than 3.5 million Blacks were taken from towns and white rural areas (including lands they had occupied for generations) and dumped into the reserves, sometimes in the middle of winter and without any facilities.

The government also established direct control over the education of Blacks. The Bantu Education Act (1953) took Black schools away from the missions, and more state-run schools—especially at the elementary level—were created to meet the expanding economy’s increasing demand for semiskilled Black labor. The Extension of University Education Act (1959) prohibited the established universities from accepting Black students, except with special permission. Instead, the government created new ethnic university colleges—one each for Coloureds, Indians, and Zulus and one for Sotho , Tswana , and Venda students, as well as a medical school for Blacks. The South African Native College at Fort Hare, which missionaries had founded primarily but not exclusively for Blacks, became a state college solely for Xhosa students. The government staffed these ethnic colleges with white supporters of the National Party and subjected the students to stringent controls.

The Anti-Apartheid Movement in the 1960s

A DRAMATIC DECADE

The 1960s were a dramatic decade for the Anti-Apartheid Movement. It had high hopes after the success of the boycott month in March 1960, when hundreds of thousands of people refused to buy South African goods. But the AAM’s new campaign for wider economic sanctions against South Africa was blocked by governments convinced that trade and investment in South Africa were vital to the British economy.

The AAM’s campaign for an arms embargo had wide support, but the 1964–70 Labour government implemented only a partial ban. The Movement extended its campaign for the isolation of South Africa to sport, the arts and academia.

THE RIVONIA TRIAL

The high point of the decade was the saving of the lives of Nelson Mandela and his fellow Rivonia trialists. As the world waited for the judge to pass sentence in June 1964, there was a real chance the ANC leaders would be hanged. In response to a worldwide campaign they were sentenced instead to life imprisonment.

RHODESIAN UDI

In 1965 the white minority government in Southern Rhodesia made a unilateral declaration of independence (UDI). The AAM took up the cause of millions of disenfranchised black Zimbabweans. For the rest of the decade it spent as much energy opposing Labour proposals for a sell-out to the illegal regime as it did campaigning against apartheid.

As a wave of student rebellion swept Europe in 1968, the AAM attracted new support from young people fired by the growing success of guerrilla fighters in Mozambique and Angola and by the attempt by the African National Congress (ANC) and Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU) to infiltrate Zimbabwe in the Wankie and Sipolilo campaigns.

SPRINGBOK TOUR

The decade ended on a high note with demonstrations against the 1969–70 Springbok rugby tour. Thousands of protesters disrupted play and joined mass marches at games all over Britain. As the rugby tour ended, the campaign to stop a visit by an all-white South African cricket tour took off. In June 1970 the AAM won its biggest victory so far with the cancellation of the Springbok tour.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ABOUT THE AAM IN THE 1960s

The British Anti-Apartheid Movement was born out of the Boycott Movement in April 1960. After the Sharpeville massacre on 21 March the South African government banned the African National Congress and Pan-Africanist Congress. All paths of peaceful opposition to apartheid inside South Africa were blocked. The liberation movements set about organising an underground resistance, but increasingly they looked for support from overseas. The AAM responded by calling for the international isolation of apartheid South Africa and, together with Christian Action’s Defence and Aid Fund, for support for those imprisoned for their opposition to the white regime.

ECONOMIC SANCTIONS

The first challenge faced by the AAM was to translate its call for economic sanctions into a practical political campaign. South Africa was important to the British economy to a degree unimaginable today. Britain supplied over 30 per cent of South Africa’s exports and was the market for nearly 28 per cent of its imports. It had huge investments in South Africa’s mining industry and nearly every major British company had a South African subsidiary. In spite of Prime Minister Macmillan’s ‘wind of change’ speech, the dominant concern of the 1959–64 Conservative government on South Africa was to protect this economic stake.

In November 1962 the UN General Assembly voted for a trade boycott of South Africa. The AAM wrote to all the countries that voted in favour asking them what action they proposed to take, and to those who voted against the boycott asking them to reconsider. It commissioned detailed research on the efficacy of sanctions and held a study conference to persuade opinion makers. In 1964 it sponsored a major international conference on economic sanctions against South Africa, convened by activist and writer Ronald Segal. The conference was a major event chaired by the Foreign Minister of Tunisia, with delegates from over 40 countries. But it was boycotted by the UK, USA and South Africa’s other major trade partners. The British government showed how seriously it took the conference by setting up a special Cabinet working party to rebut its arguments at the UN. But it was determined to thwart any move, at the UN or elsewhere, to impose sanctions.

SOUTH AFRICA AND THE COMMONWEALTH

A more immediate issue in the spring of 1960 was South Africa’s membership of the Commonwealth. With the Africa Bureau, the AAM organised a high profile lobby of Commonwealth prime ministers. In 1961, after voting to become a republic, South Africa had to re-apply for membership. With the help of Labour MP Barbara Castle, the AAM organised a 72-hour non-stop vigil outside the conference and helped ensure that South Africa was not re-admitted. Its departure opened up the Commonwealth as a forum for pressure on the British government and dialogue between the white dominions and the Commonwealth’s new African and Asian members.

THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE

In January 1962, together with the Movement for Colonial Freedom (MCF) and the Council for Freedom in Portugal and its Colonies, the AAM organised a conference on the alliance between South Africa, the Central African Federation and Portugal. The interdependence of the Southern African region was a central tenet of AAM strategy. It also worked to end South Africa’s illegal rule in Namibia. In 1966 it organised a major international conference on Namibia in Oxford, chaired by Olof Palme, then Swedish Minister of Communications, and with Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Zulfikar Bhutto as the keynote speaker.

ARMS EMBARGO

Britain was the main supplier of arms and military equipment to the apartheid government. Facing an impasse on sanctions, the AAM focused on campaigning for a British government ban on the sale of arms to South Africa. The South African police used British Saracen armoured cars in the shootings at Sharpeville and many people who stopped short of supporting a trade boycott were outraged at the use of British weaponry against defenceless protesters. The Conservative government abstained on a UN Security Council resolution passed in August 1963 calling for a voluntary arms ban against South Africa. It then announced an embargo on weapons that could be used for internal repression. In December 1963 it voted in favour of a further UN arms ban resolution, but it had already discussed an arms deal with South Africa’s Minister of Defence.

Early in 1963 the AAM won its first big success. At a rally in Trafalgar Square on 17 March the Labour Party’s new leader, Harold Wilson, urged the government: ‘Act now and stop this bloody traffic in the weapons of oppression’. He pledged that a future Labour government would impose a total arms embargo. The AAM had high hopes of Labour, but was soon disillusioned. When the Labour Party won the October 1964 general election, one of the first acts of the new Prime Minister was to instruct the Board of Trade to stop arms exports to South Africa. But under pressure from Defence Secretary Denis Healey and a powerful civil service he soon backtracked. The headline ban remained. But existing contracts, including the sale of 16 Buccaneer bomber aircraft, were honoured. All equipment with any possible civil application slipped through the embargo, as did ‘spare parts’, including four Wasp helicopters.

The AAM reacted by lobbying Labour MPs and promoting ‘a more detailed and intensive education of the public’ about life under apartheid. It did this in imaginative ways such as a dramatic presentation in Central Hall Westminster staged in February 1964 with stars Annie Ross and Trinidadian actor Edric Connor. It published a detailed exposé of the gulf between Labour’s pre-election pledges and its performance in office, Labour’s Record on Southern Africa .

Partly as a result of the AAM campaign, when a full-blown crisis erupted on Labour’s arms policy in December 1967, the embargo was saved. In response to pressure on Britain’s balance of payments, leading Cabinet ministers, including Foreign Minister George Brown and Chancellor James Callaghan, argued for an end to all restrictions on South African arms sales. The AAM wrote to the Prime Minister and met George Brown. It lobbied MPs and asked members to send telegrams to Wilson. MPs from across the political spectrum signed a House of Commons motion supporting the embargo. On 18 December 1967 Harold Wilson told Parliament that the arms ban would remain.

BOYCOTTING SOUTH AFRICA

The AAM continued to campaign for a consumer boycott. It circulated updated lists of South African products and asked local authorities to ban Outspan oranges and Cape fruit from their premises. For the next 30 years the boycott was the bedrock of anti-apartheid campaigning activity. Rebutting arguments from the left that the boycott was a soft option, the AAM argued that it ‘created interest when events elsewhere in the world tended to supersede South Africa and [was] a way of involving individuals, actively’ 1 . Over the years, the boycott helped the AAM reach out beyond people who took part in conventional politics. Many people who did not think of themselves as politically involved showed their anti-apartheid commitment by refusing to buy South African products.

At the end of 1962 the AAM extended its consumer boycott campaign to other areas. Its new programme identified sport, culture, films and education as ‘subsidiary fronts in the propaganda war, which can have very far-reaching psychological effects’ 2 . It had high profile successes. In June 1963 playwrights – among them Samuel Beckett, Arthur Miller and Harold Pinter – signed a declaration saying they would not allow their plays to be performed in South Africa. Vanessa Redgrave circulated a declaration to actors asking them to pledge that they would not perform in front of segregated audiences. This was taken up by the actors union Equity. On a visit to London, Marlon Brando endorsed the call for film directors to ban the showing of their films in South Africa. The Rolling Stones broke off negotiations for a South African tour and the Beatles announced they opposed apartheid. In 1965 the AAM asked university teachers to sign a declaration pledging that they would not accept posts in South African universities. A year later it had collected over 600 pledges.

On 11 July 1963 the apartheid government arrested Walter Sisulu and other leading members of the African National Congress (ANC) and its armed wing Umkhonto we Sizwe at Rivonia, near Johannesburg. Together with Nelson Mandela, who was already in prison, they were charged with sabotage. There was a real possibility that they would be condemned to death.

The ANC had sent its Deputy President, Oliver Tambo, overseas when the ANC was banned in 1960. He set up an external mission and travelled the world winning support for the anti-apartheid struggle. He now asked the AAM to campaign against the arrests and to set up a special committee ‘with internationally known aims’ 3 . In October the UN General Assembly passed a resolution asking member states to do all they could to press the South African government to abandon political trials.

The result was the World Campaign for the Release of South African Political Prisoners, set up by the AAM, with MPs from the three main political parties as office holders, and composer Benjamin Britten and sculptor Henry Moore among a glittering array of sponsors. The campaign launched a worldwide petition calling for the release of all South African political prisoners, signed by over 194,000 people. It marshalled protests from all over the world – from Belgian, Dutch and Irish parliamentarians, from North Vietnam, Cuba, the Soviet Union, Sweden, the Philippines, the Caribbean and New Zealand. On 9 June 1964 the UN Security Council asked the South African government to grant amnesty to Mandela and his comrades.

As well as sponsoring the World Campaign, the AAM ensured that the South African government was bombarded with messages from Britain. As the trial got underway, it arranged weekly Saturday vigils by writers and actors outside South Africa House. The Committee of Afro-Asian and Caribbean Organisations held a six-day fast on the steps of St Martin in the Fields. There was sympathetic coverage of the trial in the British press. In a prequel to the many honours showered on him in the 1980s, Mandela was elected President of the Student Union at University College, London. On 19 May an AAM delegation met the Minister of State at the Foreign Office to urge the British government to intervene.

LIFE IMPRISONMENT

Immediately after the sentence of life imprisonment was announced on 11 June, 50 MPs marched from the House of Commons to South Africa House and for the next three days hundreds of people demonstrated on the pavement opposite. In centres throughout Britain people showed their solidarity in silent evening vigils. On the Sunday after the verdict, the AAM held a march and rally in Trafalgar Square at which the Bishop of Woolwich called for economic sanctions against South Africa.

The British government had refused to intervene during the trial, but on 18 June voted for a UN Security Council resolution calling on the South African government to free all political prisoners. It then bowed to public pressure and instructed its ambassador in Pretoria to ask for the life sentences to be shortened. When the South African ambassador called at the Foreign Office to denounce this as interference in South Africa’s internal affairs, the Minister told him that, ‘given the strength of feeling in the House [of Commons] … it was in the interests of both Governments that he should have spoken as he did’ 4 .

The World Campaign also tried to save three trade unionists, Vuyisile Mini, Wilson Khayingo and Zinakile Mkaba, who were hanged in 1965, and John Harris, executed the following year. In May 1966 it protested against the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on Bram Fischer, who had gone underground to try and rebuild the resistance networks destroyed in the aftermath of Rivonia.

Paradoxically, the campaign against the Rivonia trial, which marked the suppression of resistance within South Africa for over a decade, helped build the worldwide anti-apartheid movement. In Britain the AAM attracted new members and raised its international profile. The dignified stand of Mandela and his co-accused attracted admiration and sympathy throughout the world. During the trial it seemed likely that they would be condemned to hang. At the time, life imprisonment was seen as a victory.

UDI IN RHODESIA

On South Africa’s northern border, the British colony of Southern Rhodesia was run by a white minority which formed an even smaller proportion of the total population than the whites of South Africa. Southern Rhodesia had formed part of the Central African Federation until Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland won independence as Zambia and Malawi in 1964. Britain refused to grant independence as long as the country’s black majority were excluded from government. Under Prime Minister Ian Smith the white minority stood firm against any concessions. On 11 November 1965 the Smith government made a unilateral declaration of independence (UDI), causing a crisis for the British Labour government and forcing the British AAM to extend its remit to the whole of Southern Africa. For the next 15 years the AAM spent as much time and energy campaigning on Zimbabwe/Rhodesia as on South Africa.

IN THE WILDERNESS

The early 1960s was a time of hope for the Anti-Apartheid Movement. African resistance within South Africa was still seen as a movement of largely non-violent protest crushed by a brutal regime. Africa was a new and positive force in world affairs. As the economies of its newly independent countries grew, it was expected that they would provide a counterbalance to the West’s stake in South Africa. But by the middle of the decade the vision was fading. In South Africa resistance appeared to have been crushed. Military coups in Nigeria and Ghana and the Biafran war of secession were changing Western perceptions of Africa. In Britain the 1964–70 Labour government was preoccupied with shoring up the balance of payments and was desperate to do a deal on Rhodesia, even if it fell far short of African majority rule.

At the end of 1966 an AAM discussion paper concluded:

After six years of existence, the Anti-Apartheid Movement now has to face a Britain in which disenchantment with African affairs is widespread. The economic crisis is intimidating to proposals for economic sanctions, or indeed any British policy that would threaten this country’s large economic interests in South Africa. Such interest in foreign affairs as there was has increasingly been replaced with a deeply introspective concern with the internal state of Britain 5 .

RACISM IN BRITAIN

There was also the problem of racism in Britain. The Labour government sent out contradictory signals, passing the first British Race Relations Acts in 1965 and 1968 but trying to bar Kenyan Asians from settling in Britain. Throughout its history the AAM faced the question of whether and to what extent it should campaign against racism at home. In April 1968 Anti-Apartheid News took a stand on the Commonwealth Immigration Act by publishing an open letter to the AAM’s former President David Ennals, now a Home Office Minister, accusing him of introducing apartheid into Britain. In general though, the AAM took the position that although it was opposed to racism everywhere, it was a single issue organisation that could not initiate anti-racist campaigns within Britain. At a local level anti-apartheid groups often joined in anti-racist campaigns, but the AAM held back from affiliating to national anti-racist organisations.The issue was a perennial one and came up at nearly every annual general meeting.

As in many organisations with their backs to the wall, debate on the way forward became increasingly acrimonious. After it was announced that British ships would take part in joint naval exercises with South Africa in 1967, the AAM’s national committee voted narrowly to ask former presidents Barbara Castle and David Ennals, now Labour ministers, to resign from the government or the AAM. A debate in Anti-Apartheid News counterposed parliamentary lobbying to ‘a democracy of the streets’. The discussion reflected the new mood of student and worker militancy about to sweep across Europe, climaxing in the Prague spring and the student insurrection in France.

At the end of 1967 the AAM resolved its debates by agreeing on ‘a shift in the emphasis of our work’ away from parliamentary lobbying towards building:

‘… a powerful political base centring not only on political parties but also on the Trade Union Movement, Youth and Student groups and other militant anti-racist organisations’ 6 .

It recast its sanctions campaign, moving away from set-piece presentations to ‘exposure of the role of individual firms in collaboration with apartheid’ and of ‘trade union investments in South African companies or collaborating companies’ 7 . This was a major strategic shift that opened the way for the initiatives of the 1970s, which took the argument for disinvestment not just into trade unions, but into local government, universities, churches and voluntary organisations.

‘SUPPORT THE FREEDOM FIGHTERS’

By the mid-1960s the liberation movements in Mozambique and Angola were fighting a successful guerrilla war against the Portuguese army. In Namibia the South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO) launched an armed struggle against South African occupation in 1966. The ANC’s armed wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe, was frustrated by its inability to infiltrate its cadres back into the country. In July 1967 it joined with guerrilla fighters from the Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU) to try to fight its way down through Zimbabwe in what became known as the Wankie campaign.

Support for the freedom fighters fitted with the new mood of militancy within the anti-apartheid movement and wider sections of British society. In Britain, as elsewhere, the main focus of student radicalism was the American war in Vietnam. But some young people, especially from the National League of Young Liberals and UN Student Association, focused on Southern Africa. Towards the end of the 1960s representatives from these groups joined the AAM National Committee, replacing delegates from MCF and the Africa Bureau. They joined with older AAM supporters, including recently arrived South African exiles, to proclaim the primacy of the armed struggle.

With hindsight the huge optimism with which the AAM greeted the Wankie campaign seems misplaced. ‘The armed struggle … has been revealed for all the world to see as the most important instrument for change in the sub-continent’, declared the AAM’s 1967 annual report. It set about trying to win support for the guerrilla fighters, demonstrating under the slogan ‘Oppose Apartheid – Support African Freedom Fighters’ and featuring pictures of guerrillas on the front page of Anti-Apartheid News . The high point of its campaign was a conference at London’s Round House in July 1969 with speakers from the ANC, ZAPU and MPLA (Movimento Popular de Libertação de Angola) and an analysis by Ruth First of the politics and strategy of guerrilla warfare.

The emphasis on armed struggle was short-lived. The AAM had always been aware that support for guerrilla war would alienate many supporters. Until negotiations in South Africa were clearly on the agenda in the late 1980s, the AAM never diverged from the ANC’s analysis that armed action was an essential part of a multi-faceted liberation struggle. But after 1970 it once more emphasised that the role of a British solidarity movement was to campaign for the isolation of the apartheid regime in order to weaken its capacity to resist. It continued to warn of race war in Southern Africa, but as a threat caused by the West’s failure to rein in South Africa by imposing sanctions. Later, when it publicised the ANC’s sabotage attacks, like the daring raids on the SASOL oil installations in 1980, it presented them as ‘an integral part of the strategy of mass mobilisation’ rather than as the beginning of guerrilla war.

AAM CONSTITUTION AND ORGANISATION

In 1960 the AAM was run by an ad hoc committee made up of South African exiles and representatives of organisations with an interest in campaigning on Southern Africa, such as MCF, Christian Action and the Africa Bureau. In July 1962 it adopted a formal constitution which remained largely unchanged until 1987. This set up a National Committee as the policy-making body, made up of representatives of supporting organisations and up to 30 individual members (from 1966 the individual members were elected by the annual general meeting of members). The Executive Committee consisted of the Movement’s officers and six members elected by the National Committee. This gave representation and a voice to interested individuals and organisations, but provided continuity and a consistent strategy. At the same time the AAM became a membership organisation. Membership grew slowly – from around 1,000 in 1963 to just over 3,000 in 1965; throughout the AAM’s history formal membership never reflected the true extent of support. In the 1960s grassroots support came mostly from students. Labour MP Barbara Castle became its energetic President. She was succeeded by Labour and Liberal MPs David Ennals, Andrew Faulds and David Steel, and in 1969 by Bishop Ambrose Reeves.

The 1962 constitution formalised the AAM’s aims. These were to inform the people of Britain and elsewhere about apartheid; to campaign for international action to bring it to an end; and to co-operate with and support South African organisations campaigning against apartheid. The AAM played a special international role. It initiated campaigns, liaised with anti-apartheid groups in other countries and raised issues in international bodies, particularly the Commonwealth, UN and, in the 1980s, the European Economic Community (EEC). It worked closely with the UN Special Committee against Apartheid. Its constitution committed it to work with all South African organisations opposed to apartheid – the Pan-Africanist Congress (PAC) as well as the ANC. Although the PAC had observer status on the AAM’s National Committee, in practice and especially later on in the 1980s the AAM consulted and campaigned with the ANC.

The AAM received no large grants or government funding and in the 1960s, as later, was financed by membership subscriptions and small donations. From its formation it depended on the dedication of a few staff members who worked long hours for low wages, and on the skills and commitment of volunteers. There was no email or internet – communication was by phone or letters sent through the post. To mobilise supporters for big demonstrations activists handed out thousands of leaflets in shopping centres and transport hubs. In January 1965 the AAM launched a monthly newspaper Anti-Apartheid News , which continued publication until the Movement dissolved itself in 1994.

STOP THE SEVENTY TOUR

One of the AAM’s first campaigns was for a boycott of the 1960 all-white South African cricket tour. Five years later the 1965 cricket Springboks tour was met by demonstrations at every game. The AAM worked with the South African Non-Racial Olympic Committee (SANROC) to ensure South Africa’s exclusion from the 1964 Tokyo Olympics. In 1970 South Africa was finally expelled from the Olympic movement. On a local level there were protests against tours of South Africa by the Welsh Rugby Union and Arsenal Football Club, and students at St Andrews and Newcastle Universities ran on the pitch to disrupt games against the Free State rugby team.In July 1969 a coalition of groups in Bristol disrupted the Davis Cup matches between Britain and South Africa on two separate occasions. On the final day Bristol AA Group organised a march outside the ground and play was interrupted by flour bombs thrown onto the court.

Early in 1969 it became known that an all-white Springbok team would tour England and Wales in the summer of 1970. The AAM wrote to the County Cricket Board and distributed a petition calling for the cancellation of the tour. Then in August news broke that the rugby Springboks would be touring in the autumn. The October issue of Anti-Apartheid News printed the list of fixtures – 23 all over Britain and two in Ireland. Meanwhile on 10 September a press conference in Fleet Street announced the formation of a new organisation bringing together student and youth groups, including the National League of Young Liberals and the National Union of Students. The new group called itself Stop the Seventy Tour (STST). Peter Hain emerged as its charismatic spokesperson.

The demonstrations against the rugby Springboks were remarkable in a number of ways. They involved a wide range of organisations taking a lead in different places, under the dual umbrella of the AAM and STST. They maintained their momentum for over three months – from 30 October to 2 February – and covered 22 venues all over Britain, from Exeter in south-west England to Aberdeen in north-east Scotland, and in Ireland. While the AAM organised mass marches and sent over 200,000 leaflets to sympathetic groups in every town where a match was played, STST concentrated on a new tactic – direct action.

Direct action was a product of the student militancy of the late 1960s. It had antecedents in the Committee of 100, set up to campaign against Britain’s nuclear bomb. The initiative to disrupt the first match, in Oxford on 5 November, came from young trade unionists at Ruskin College, who formed the appropriately named Fireworks Day Committee. The match was moved to Twickenham, where it was played under siege conditions. STST organised pitch invasions at the Springboks match against London Counties and the international against England at Twickenham. In Swansea protesters were beaten up by vigilantes as the police looked on. Meanwhile the AAM mobilised people of all ages and backgrounds on mass marches. Three bishops joined the march to the Twickenham ground before the England International. Altogether it has been estimated that more than 50,000 people took part in protests against the tour.

As the rugby tour ended, the campaign to stop the cricket tour took off. While the demonstrations against the rugby Springboks had relied on mass marches and militant protests, the cricket campaign went wider, involving organisations representing every sector of British society except business and the far right. The Labour and Liberal Parties and 23 trade unions called for the cancellation of the tour. Britain’s black community mobilised, with the formation of the West Indian Campaign Against Apartheid Cricket. The Chair of the Community Relations Council warned that the tour would do ‘untold damage’ to race relations in Britain. In April both the British Council of Churches and the TUC called on their followers to boycott matches. The ‘great and good’ of British society joined the protests, with the formation of the Fair Cricket Campaign by cricketing bishop David Sheppard. The campaign had an important international dimension. The Supreme Council for Sport in Africa announced that African countries would pull out of the July 1970 Edinburgh Commonwealth Games if the tour went ahead. By mid-May plans for a huge demonstration at the first match on 6 June at Lords were far advanced and STST was warning of militant action. Faced with an imminent general election, the government instructed the Cricket Council to cancel the tour.

The decade ended on a high note – with the cancellation of the tour the AAM had won its biggest victory so far. After the high hopes of the early 1960s, the trauma of the Rivonia trial and the disillusion caused by the Labour government’s failure to honour its promises, the AAM entered the 1970s with new confidence. Its aim now was to carry forward its success in the field of sport into the more difficult areas of trade and investment.

• AAM Archive, MSS AAM 43, National Committee minutes, 23 October 1965.
• AAM Archive, MSS AAM 45.
• AAM Archive, MSS AAM 43, National Committee Minutes, 30 July 1963.
• National Archive, FO 371/177072.
• AAM Archive, MSS AAM 70, Memo to Executive Committee, 23 November 1966.
• AAM Archive, MSS AAM 13, AAM Annual Report, September 1967, pp. 12–13.

CLICK HERE FOR DOCUMENTS AND PICTURES FROM THE 1960s

60s01. programme of the anti-apartheid committee.

On 21 March 1960 South African police opened fire on a crowd protesting against the Pass Laws at Sharpeville in the southern Transvaal. Sixty-nine people died and at least 180 were injured. The British Boycott Movement renamed itself the Anti-Apartheid Committee and its draft programme proposed a ‘Shun Verwoerd’s South Africa’ campaign that took the radical step of moving from an individual boycott of South African goods to calling for UN economic sanctions and the total isolation of South Africa.

60s02. Emergency in South Africa

After the Sharpeville massacre on 21 March 1960 the apartheid government banned the African National Congress and Pan Africanist Congress and detained hundreds of anti-apartheid activists. This leaflet asked people in Britain to protest and boycott South African goods.

pic6017. Boycott Movement rally, 28 February 1960

Liberal MP Jeremy Thorpe speaking at the rally held  in Trafalgar Square to launch the March Month of Boycott Action. The other speakers were the leader of the Labour Party Hugh Gaitskell, ANC leader Tennyson Makiwane, Lord Altrincham from the Conservative Party, Rita Smythe from the Co-operative Women’s Guild and Trevor Huddleston. During the month, local councils all over Britain banned South African goods and supporters distributed leaflets to shoppers calling for a boycott. 

pic6018. Boycott Movement rally, 28 February 1960

ANC leader Tennyson Makiwane speaking at the rally held in Trafalgar Square to launch the March Month of Boycott Action. The other speakers were the leader of the Labour Party Hugh Gaitskell, Liberal MP Jeremy Thorpe, Lord Altrincham from the Conservative Party, Rita Smythe from the Co-operative Women’s Guild and Trevor Huddleston. During the month, local councils all over Britain banned South African goods and supporters distributed leaflets to shoppers calling for a boycott. 

pic6014. Sharpeville massacre protest, 22 March 1960

In the week following the Sharpeville massacre, there were daily protests outside the South African High Commission in London. Police tried to break up the protests. In this photo a student is manhandled into a police car during a demonstration the day after the massacre.

pic6015. Sharpeville massacre protest, 22 March 1960

In the week following the Sharpeville massacre, there were daily protests outside the South African High Commission in London. London printworkers, seen here in Charing Cross Road with their banner proclaiming ‘South Africa Stinks’,  joined the demonstrations the day after the massacre.

pic6013. Sharpeville massacre protest, 24 March 1960

In the week following the Sharpeville massacre, there were daily protests outside the South African High Commission in London. In this photo a woman is manhandled by police officers trying to clear the area of protestors.

pic6012. Sharpeville massacre protest, 25 March 1960

In the week following the Sharpeville massacre, there were daily protests outside the South African High Commission in London. In this photo a policeman tries to snatch a blood-smeared photograph of the massacre from the hands of a protestor.

pic6005. Sharpeville massacre protest, 27 March 1960

Thousands of people marched through central London on 27 March 1960 to protest against the massacre of 69 unarmed South Africans at Sharpeville on 21 March. The march was organised by the Boycott Movement, together with the Movement for Colonial Freedom and the Committee of African Organisations. It was followed by a rally in Trafalgar Square, organised by the Labour Party. In the days following the shootings, there were scuffles with police outside South Africa House as crowds gathered to protest.

pic6006. Sharpeville massacre protest, 27 March 1960

Twenty thousand people gathered in Trafalgar Square to protest against the massacre of 69 unarmed demonstrators at Sharpeville on 21 March. The rally was organised by the Labour Party. Speakers included African National Congress leader Tennyson Makiwane, Labour’s Colonial Affairs spokesperson James Callaghan and Robert Willis from the TUC General Council. In the days following the massacre crowds gathered spontaneously outside South Africa House.

pic6007. Sharpeville massacre protest, 27 March 1960

James Callaghan, Labour spokesperson on Colonial Affairs, spoke at a 20,000-strong rally in Trafalgar Square on 27 March 1960 to protest against the Sharpeville shootings. The rally was organised by the Labour Party. Also on the platform were African National Congress leader Tennyson Makiwane, Robert Willis from the TUC General Council and Labour MPs Barbara Castle, Anthony Greenwood and Jim Griffiths. In the days following the massacre crowds gathered spontaneously outside South Africa House.

pic6008. Sharpeville massacre protest, 27 March 1960

Part of the 20,000-strong crowd in Trafalgar Square at the rally to protest against the massacre of 69 unarmed demonstrators at Sharpeville on 21 March. The rally was organised by the Labour Party. Speakers included African National Congress leader Tennyson Makiwane, Labour’s Colonial Affairs spokesperson James Callaghan and Robert Willis from the TUC General Council. In the days following the massacre crowds gathered spontaneously outside South Africa House.

60s03. ‘The Whole World is Angry’

Leaflet published soon after the Sharpeville massacre calling for a continuation of the boycott of South African goods. The reverse side reprints the list of South African goods on the leaflet distributed during the March Month of Boycott Action.

60s04. Penny Pledge Campaign

After its March Month of Boycott Action the AAM launched a Penny Pledge Campaign to raise funds and keep the boycott going. It asked supporters to donate one penny and sign a pledge not to buy South African goods.

pic6010. Oliver Tambo and Trevor Huddleston

Oliver Tambo and Trevor Huddleston in London in 1960.

pic6101. Commonwealth conference, 8 March 1961

In 1961 South Africa was forced to withdraw the Commonwealth because of its racial policies. The AAM held a 72-hour non-stop vigil outside the Commonwealth conference at Marlborough House. It organised a rota of people prominent in British public life, who wore black sashes marking the Sharpeville and Langa massacres. 

pic6103. Commonwealth conference march, 1961

 Leaders of the South Africa United Front at the head of a march through central London in March 1961 to demand that South Africa leave the Commonwealth. South Africa was forced to withdraw during the Commonwealth Conference held at Marlborough House. L to r: ANC  Deputy President Oliver Tambo, Fanuel Kozonguizi of the South West Africa National Union, Yusuf Dadoo of the South African Indian Congress, Labour MP Fenner Brockway and Nana Mahomo of the Pan-Africanist Congress. 

60s05. ‘South Africa Out of the Commonwealth What Now?’

In March 1961 South Africa was forced to withdraw from the Commonwealth because of its racial policies, but the British government continued to grant it Commonwealth trade preferences. This leaflet asked AAM supporters to press the government to end arms sales and all trade concessions to South Africa.

60s06. ‘South Africa is out of the Commonwealth – Apartheid Continues’

This leaflet was distributed by anti-apartheid supporters in Leeds. It highlights the key AAM issues in 1961: arms sales and trade with South Africa, South West Africa (Namibia) and apartheid sports teams.

pic6102. ‘Remember Sharpeville’ rally, 19 March 1961

Labour MP Barbara Castle speaking at a rally in Trafalgar Square on the first anniversary of the Sharpeville massacre. This was the first of many such events organised by the AAM to commemorate the victims of the Sharpeville shootings, which took place on 21 March 1960.

pic6104. Trafalgar Square rally, 28 May 1961

AAM supporters met in Trafalgar Square on Sunday 28 May 1961 in support of a strike in South Africa in protest against celebrations of South Africa becoming a republic on 31 May. The strike was called by a specially convened National Action Committee, which asked workers to stay at home on 29, 30 and 31 May. There was massive repression in the run-up to the strike and it had only patchy support. The strike was the last major attempt at mass peaceful protest in South Africa until the mid-1980s.

pic6105. Trafalgar Square rally, 28 May 1961

ANC leader Oliver Tambo speaking at a Trafalgar Square rally on Sunday 28 May 1961. The rally was held to support a strike in South Africa in protest against celebrations of South Africa becoming a republic on 31 May. The strike was called by a National Action Committee, which asked workers  to stay at home on 29, 30 and 31 May. There was massive repression in the run-up to the strike and it had only patchy support. The strike was the last major attempt at mass peaceful protest in South Africa until the mid-1980s.

pic6106. Trafalgar Square rally, 28 May 1961

ANC leader Oliver Tambo in Trafalgar Square at an AAM rally on Sunday 28 May 1961. The rally was held to support a strike in South Africa organised in protest against celebrations of South Africa becoming a republic on 31 May. The strike was called by a National Action Committee, who asked workers  to stay at home on 29, 30 and 31 May. There was massive repression in the run-up to the strike and it had only patchy support. The strike was the last major attempt at mass peaceful protest in South Africa until the mid-1980s.

Pic6107. Trafalgar Square rally, 28 May 1961

AAM stewards hold back right-wingers trying to break up a rally held in Trafalgar Square on Sunday 28 May 1961. The rally was held to support a strike in South Africa organised in protest against celebrations of South Africa becoming a republic on 31 May. The strike was called by a specially convened National Action Committee, who asked workers and students to stay at home on 29, 30 and 31 May. There was massive repression in the run-up to the strike and it had only patchy support. The strike was the last major attempt at mass peaceful protest in South Africa until the mid-1980s.

60s07. Southern Africa – the Unholy Alliance

Leaflet advertising a conference on the alliance between South Africa, the Central African Federation of Northern Rhodesia, Southern Rhodesia and Malawi, and Portugal. This was a central theme in AAM campaigns until the Portuguese colonies won their independence in 1975. The conference was attended by around 300 people. It was organised by the AAM, the Movement for Colonial Freedom and the Council for Freedom in Portugal and its Colonies, the precursor of the Committee for Freedom in Mozambique, Angola and Guinea Bissau.

60s08. The Unholy Alliance

In the early 1960s the white minority governments of Southern Africa entered into an informal alliance as the rest of Africa gained its independence. Western companies made big profits from mining in South Africa, Rhodesia and Katanga (southern Congo). This pamphlet, by AAM founder member Rosalynde Ainslie, showed how Britain supported white minority rule. It was launched at a press conference in London in 1962 by Irish writer and diplomat Conor Cruise O’Brien.

gov01. Memorandum on the South Africa Bill

After South Africa left the Commonwealth in 1961 the British government passed a ‘standstill Bill’ postponing the removal of Commonwealth trade preferences. In March 1962 the AAM organised a lobby of Parliament against the renewal of the Bill. This memo briefed lobbyists and listed the Conservative MPs most likely to oppose the Bill.

arm01. ‘No Arms for Verwoerd’

Leaflet publicising a rally in Trafalgar Square on 3 June 1962.

60s09. Message from Nelson Mandela

In 1961 Nelson Mandela went into hiding and then left South Africa secretly to meet leaders of independent African countries. He returned to South Africa in July 1962. Shortly afterwards he was arrested and charged with incitement to strike. The Anti-Apartheid Movement organised protests and messages of support. In this telegram he thanks the AAM and says his message is intended as ‘a very firm, warm and hearty handshake from us’.

60s10. Are We Guilty?

This leaflet stressed Britain’s complicity in the apartheid government’s repression of black South Africans. Thousands were distributed during the AAM’s boycott campaign in October 1962.

60s11. ‘Boycott South Africa’

Leaflet publicising a meeting calling on the British government to support UN sanctions against South Africa in October 1962.

60s12. AAM membership form, 1962/63

In July 1962 the Anti-Apartheid Movement adopted a constitution which set up a democratic structure under which policy was decided by individual members and affiliated organisations. This leaflet sets out its three aims. The constitution was largely unchanged until 1988, when a new category of local members was set up and the annual meeting became a delegate conference.

arm02. ‘No British Arms for South Africa’

Leaflet publicising a rally against British arms sales to South Africa on 17 March 1963. The main speaker was the Labour Party’s new leader Harold Wilson. He told the Conservative government ‘Act now and stop this bloody traffic in the weapons of oppression’. When Labour came to power in October 1964 it announced a limited embargo, but fulfilled a contract for 18 Buccaneer bomber aircraft and continued to sell spare parts to the South African Defence Force.

pic6301. ‘No British Arms for South Africa’ march

Thousands of people marched through central London to protest against British arms sales to South Africa on 17 March 1963. The main speaker at a rally in Trafalgar Square was the Labour Party’s new leader Harold Wilson. He told the Conservative government ‘Act now and stop this bloody traffic in the weapons of oppression’. When Labour came to power in October 1964 it announced a limited embargo, but fulfilled a contract for 18 Buccaneer bomber aircraft and continued to sell spare parts to the South African Defence Force.

pic6302. ‘No British Arms for South Africa’ rally

Part of the crowd at a rally in Trafalgar Square against British arms sales to South Africa on 17 March 1963. The main speaker was the Labour Party’s new leader Harold Wilson. He told the Conservative government ‘Act now and stop this bloody traffic in the weapons of oppression’. Also on the platform were African National Congress General Secretary Duma Nokwe and Labour MP Barbara Castle, President of the Anti-Apartheid Movement.

pic6305. ‘No British Arms for South Africa’ rally

Part of the crowd at a rally in Trafalgar Square against British arms sales to South Africa on 17 March 1963. The main speaker was the Labour Party’s new leader Harold Wilson. He told the Conservative government ‘Act now and stop this bloody traffic in the weapons of oppression’. Also on the platform were African National Congress General Secretary Duma Nokwe and Labour MP Barbara Castle, President of the Anti-Apartheid Movement. 

pic6304. ‘No British Arms for South Africa’ rally

Labour Party leader Harold Wilson at a rally in Trafalgar Square against British arms sales to South Africa on 17 March 1963. He told the Conservative government ‘Act now and stop this bloody traffic in the weapons of oppression’. When Labour came to power in October 1964 it announced a limited embargo, but fulfilled a contract for 18 Buccaneer bomber aircraft and continued to sell spare parts to the South African Defence Force.

pic6307. ‘No British Arms for South Africa’ rally

ANC Secretary-General Duma Nokwe speaking at a rally in Trafalgar Square against British arms sales to South Africa on 17 March 1963. The main speaker was the Labour Party’s new leader Harold Wilson. He told the Conservative government ‘Act now and stop this bloody traffic in the weapons of oppression’. Also on the platform was Labour MP Barbara Castle, President of the Anti-Apartheid Movement.

pic6303. ‘No British Arms for South Africa’ rally

Labour MP Barbara Castle at a rally in Trafalgar Square against British arms sales to South Africa on 17 March 1963. The main speaker was the Labour Party’s new leader Harold Wilson. He told the Conservative government ‘Act now and stop this bloody traffic in the weapons of oppression’. When Labour came to power in October 1964 it announced a limited embargo, but fulfilled a contract for 18 Buccaneer bomber aircraft and continued to sell spare parts to the South African Defence Force.

60s17. Playwrights Against Apartheid

In June 1963 48 British and American playwrights signed a declaration that they would not allow their plays to be performed before segregated audiences in South Africa. This was part of a wider cultural boycott. The actors union Equity already insisted that if members performed in South Africa they must perform in ‘non-white’ venues. The union later took up a declaration promoted by Vanessa Redgrave where members pledged they would not perform in front of segregated audiences.

60s33. ‘We Sing of Freedom’ programme

Programme for a fundraising concert with folksingers Ewan MacColl and Peggy Seeger and South African musician Todd Matshikiza. This was the first of many folk concerts and theatre presentations held to raise funds for the AAM in the 1960s.

60s32. ‘We Sing of Freedom’ leaflet

Leaflet advertising a fundraising concert with folksingers Ewan MacColl and Peggy Seeger and South African musician Todd Matshikiza. This was the first of many folk concerts and theatre presentations held to raise funds for the AAM in the 1960s.

Pic6306. ‘Save Sisulu and Mandela’

Yusuf Dadoo and Joe Slovo on the march that launched the AAM’s ‘Anti-Apartheid Month’ on 3 November 1963 in response to increasing repression in South Africa and the arrest of Nelson Mandela and his comrades in July.

60s14. Anti-Apartheid Month, November 1963

The Anti-Apartheid Movement launched an ‘Anti-Apartheid Month’ in November 1963 in response to increasing repression in South Africa and the arrest of Nelson Mandela and his comrades in July. Its three main demands were an end to arms sales to South Africa, asylum for political refugees and the release of political prisoners. Anti-apartheid meetings were held all over Britain during the month, most of them organised by university anti-racialist societies and addressed by recently arrived South African refugees like Joe Slovo.

po002. March Against Apartheid, 3 November 1963

 The AAM launched an Anti-Apartheid Month in November 1963 with a march led by its president, Labour MP Barbara Castle. Speakers in Trafalgar Square included Vanessa Redgrave, Humphrey Berkeley, Woodrow Wyatt, Rev. Nicholas Stacey and Robert Resha of the ANC. The rally coincided with a UN Security Council debate on South Africa. Anti-apartheid meetings were held all over Britain during the month, most of them organised by university anti-racialist societies and addressed by recently arrived South African refugees like Joe Slovo.

po003. Release South African political prisoners

Poster calling for the release of South African political prisoners, one of three campaign themes of the AAM’s Anti-Apartheid Month in November 1963. The other themes were arms sales to South Africa and protection for refugees.

po186. ‘No Arms for Apartheid’

The AAM launched an ‘Anti-Apartheid Month’ in November 1963 in response to increasing repression in South Africa and the arrest of Nelson Mandela and his comrades in July. This poster, calling for an end to arms sales to South Africa, was part of the publicity for the month. The AAM asked for an end to arms sales to South Africa, asylum for political refugees and the release of political prisoners. The campaign was launched with a march through London on 3 November. Meetings were held all over Britain during the month, most of them organised by university anti-racialist societies and addressed by recently arrived South African refugees like Joe Slovo.

60s15. ‘Free the Prisoners’

Leaflet calling for the release of South African political prisoners distributed during the AAM’s  November 1963 Anti-Apartheid Month.

arm03. No British Arms for South Africa

In the early 1960s Britain was South Africa’s main arms supplier. The call for it to stop supplying arms for apartheid was one of the AAM’s main campaigning issues.

60s16. Finchley public meeting, 1963

Leaflet for a public meeting organised in Finchley, north London, as part of the AAM’s November 1963 Anti-Apartheid Month. Margaret Thatcher was the local MP.

pri01. Declaration calling for the release of South African political prisoners

This Declaration was signed by 160 world figures prominent in the arts, churches, academia, trade unions and politics. It called for the release of South African political prisoners, including Nelson Mandela and others arrested at Rivonia and PAC leader Robert Sobukwe. It was launched by the World Campaign for the Release of South African Political Prisoners, set up in response to a UN General Assembly resolution passed in October 1963.

pri03. Vigil for political prisoners

The AAM organised a weekly vigil opposite the South African Embassy in the winter of 1963/64 during the trial of Nelson Mandela and his co-accused. Different groups – writers, actors, church people, politicians – took part each week. The campaign was run under the auspices of the World Campaign for the Release of South African Political Prisoners, set up in response to a UN General Assembly resolution passed in October 1963.

pri04. Vigil for political prisoners

pri06. Petition for the release of South African political prisoners

This petition was signed by nearly 200,000 people all over the world during the trial of Nelson Mandela and his co-accused in 1964. It was launched by the World Campaign for the Release of South African Political Prisoners, set up in response to a UN General Assembly resolution passed in October 1963. The campaign played a big part in preventing the death sentence being passed on the accused.

60s18. Sanctions against South Africa

Cover of a Penguin Special that reprinted the papers produced for the International Conference on Economic Sanctions against South Africa held in London in April 1964. The conference was organised by Ronald Segal, with the backing of the AAM and the ANC. It was a major international event, chaired by Tunisian Foreign Minister Mongi Slim, with delegates from over 40 countries and papers from academic experts. They concluded that sanctions were ‘necessary, urgent, legal, and practical’. The papers were considered by a committee set up under a UN Security Council resolution.

pri08. World Campaign, May 1964

Five issues of this broadsheet were published by the World Campaign for the Release of South African Political Prisoners in 1964. The broadsheet reported on the world campaign to save the lives of Nelson Mandela and his co-accused in the Rivonia trial. The campaign played a big part in preventing the death sentence being passed on the accused.

pri09. World Campaign, June 1964

pri10. World Campaign, September 1964

pri11. World Campaign, November 1964

pic6401. ‘Save These Lives’, 1964

After Nelson Mandela and seven of his co-accused were convicted of sabotage on 11 June 1964 there was a real danger that the trial judge would impose the death sentence. Supporters in London kept up a three-day vigil opposite South Africa House and 50 MPs marched from the House of Commons to present a petition to the South African ambassador. The vigil culminated in a rally in Trafalgar Square on 14 June. When the sentence of life imprisonment was announced on 12 June it was seen as a victory for the international campaign to save the lives of the eight men.

mda47. Leaflet calling for Rivonia trial protests, June 1964

This leaflet asked people to join a three-day vigil outside South Africa House when the verdict on the Rivonia accused was announced on Thursday 11 June 1964, followed by sentencing on the following day. It also advertised protests in Birmingham, Edinburgh, Manchester, Reading University and Ireland.

pic6405. ‘Do You Believe People Should Die?’

After Nelson Mandela and seven of his co-accused were convicted of sabotage on 11 June 1964 there was a real danger that the trial judge would impose the death sentence. Supporters in London protested outside South Africa House and 50 MPs marched from the House of Commons to present a petition to the South African ambassador. The actions culminated in a rally in Trafalgar Square on 14 June. When the sentence of life imprisonment was announced on 12 June it was seen as a victory for the international campaign to save the lives of the eight men. 

pic6402. Students march for Rivonia trialists

Sussex University students marched from Brighton to London on 12 and 13 June 1964, on the eve of the sentencing of Nelson Mandela and his co-accused. The march was organised by Thabo Mbeki, whose father Govan Mbeki was one of the accused.

pic6403. Protesters at Wimbledon, 1964

AAM supporters protest at a match played by a white South African tennis player at Wimbledon. On the right is Dorothy Robinson, Anti-Apartheid Movement Secretary in the early 1960s. Also in the photograph is AAM founder member Rosalynde Ainslie.

pri13. ‘Jailed for Life’

It was widely expected that Nelson Mandela and his co-accused in the Rivonia trial would be condemned to death. The campaign for their release was launched immediately after they were sentenced to life imprisonment in June 1964. This leaflet asked AAM supporters to write to the South African Ambassador and British Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home protesting against the sentence. 

pic6404. Marlon Brando and Abdul Minty

Marlon Brando asked film directors, actors and producers to forbid the screening of their films before segregated audiences in South Africa on a visit to London in 1964. In the photograph he is at a press conference with the AAM’s Hon. Secretary Abdul Minty. He also took part in a vigil outside South Africa House calling for the release of political prisoners.

60s20. ‘What Sort of Hypocrites Are We?’

In 1964 the AAM moved into new offices at 89 Charlotte Street and published a pamphlet, The Collaborators, and new promotional leaflets. This leaflet highlights Britain’s voting record at the UN and makes the case for sanctions against apartheid. 

60s13. The Collaborators

The Collaborators set out the case for international sanctions against South Africa. It explained how British companies profited from apartheid and how lobby groups like the South Africa Foundation defended the South African government. The pamphlet called for an immediate arms embargo and for Britain and the USA to support UN sanctions against South Africa. 

60s19. Who Cares?

In 1964 the AAM moved into new offices at 89 Charlotte Street and published a pamphlet, The Collaborators, and new promotional leaflets. This leaflet appealed to people to join the AAM on humanitarian grounds.

60s21. Anti-Apartheid Movement recruitment leaflet, 1964

Leaflet setting out the AAM’s aims and campaigns.

gov02. Memorandum to HM Government

The AAM prepared this memorandum for the Labour government elected in October 1964. It asked the government to support UN sanctions against South Africa, commit itself to freedom for South West Africa (Namibia) and contribute to the Defence and Aid Fund. It also pressed for a more stringent arms embargo.

arm04. ‘No British Arms for South Africa’

The Labour government elected in October 1964 continued to supply spare parts for South African military equipment and to train SADF personnel. It also supplied 18 Buccaneer aircraft under a contract signed by the Conservative government. The AAM campaigned against this as a betrayal of Labour Leader Harold Wilson’s pledge to ‘stop this bloody traffic in the weapons of oppression’.

60s26. Anti-Apartheid News flyer

In January 1965 the AAM launched a monthly newspaper, Anti-Apartheid News. It told the British public about life under apartheid and publicised AAM campaigns. AA News was published 10 times a year without a break until 1994.

60s22. Lobby of Parliament postcard

The AAM had high hopes of the Labour government elected in 1964, but was soon became disillusioned by its failure to impose a total arms embargo against South Africa. On 8 March 1965 it organised a lobby of Parliament. It printed 30,000 of these postcards with a picture of the Sharpeville massacre for supporters to send to the Prime Minister.

60s24. AAM Programme, 1965

Leaflet setting out the AAM’s campaign programme, February to June 1965.

60s25. ‘Fight apartheid with your shopping basket’

This leaflet asking shoppers to boycott South African goods was produced as part of the AAM’s 1965 campaign.

pic6501. Vigil to remember the victims of Sharpeville

Anti-apartheid supporters outside the South African Embassy in London holding wreaths in memory of the 69 people shot at Sharpeville, on the fifth anniversary of the massacre in 1965. An ‘in memoriam’ book was signed by 3,500 people in St Martin’s in the Fields and a public meeting was held there to commemorate the anniversary. Students at University College London held a South Africa week and Cambridge City Council voted to ban South African produce from its civic restaurant.

60s23. South Africa Freedom Day

In June 1965 the AAM presented a dramatisation of life under apartheid. This leaflet advertised the event and set out campaign priorities for 1965.

pic6502. Launching an academic boycott of South Africa

Philosophers Isaiah Berlin and A J Ayer were among the supporters of an academic boycott of South Africa launched in 1965. The boycott pledge was signed by 509 British academics. Left to right: Professor K W Wedderburn from the London School of Economics, AAM President David Ennals MP, and novelists Angus Wilson and Iris Murdoch at the launch of the boycott in the House of Commons.

Pic6505. Protest against the South African cricket tour, 1965

AAM supporters in London called for a boycott of the all-white Springbok cricket team’s tour of England and Wales in 1965.

po193. ‘It’s Not Cricket’, 1965

Poster calling for a boycott of the 1965 South African Springbok cricket tour. Demonstrations were held at every game. The AAM sent a delegation led by Labour MP David Ennals to the MCC on the first day of the test match at Lords. The Queen and Prime Minister Harold Wilson broke with tradition and did not attend the game.

spo02. ‘Apartheid isn’t Cricket’, 1965

Leaflet calling for a boycott of the 1965 South African Springbok cricket tour. Demonstrations were held at every game. The AAM sent a delegation led by Labour MP David Ennals to the MCC on the first day of the test match at Lords. The Queen and Prime Minister Harold Wilson broke with tradition and did not attend the game.

pic6503. Protest against the South African cricket tour, 1965

AAM supporters asked spectators to boycott the Springboks v Glamorgan cricket match at St Helen’s ground, Swansea on 31 July 1965. They handed out leaflets outside the ground and balloons with anti-apartheid slogans. Inside the ground the all-white South African cricket team was playing Glamorgan. The AAM in South Wales protested against the attendance at the match of Swansea's Mayor, Alderman F C Jones.

pic6504. Protest against the South African cricket tour, 1965

This young anti-apartheid supporter was asking cricket fans to support an arms embargo against South Africa outside St Helen’s ground in Swansea on 31 July 1965. He was one of around 30 protesters who handed out leaflets to spectators and balloons with anti-apartheid slogans. Inside the ground, the all-white South African cricket team was playing Glamorgan County Cricket Club. South Wales AAM protested against the attendance at the match of Swansea's Mayor, Alderman F C Jones.

zim02. The Unholy Alliance

Leaflet produced for the AAM’s campaign to pressure the Labour government to impose stronger measures against the illegal Smith regime immediately after UDI. It showed how South Africa and Portugal were helping Rhodesia hold out against sanctions. The leaflet argued that the alliance of the three white minority regimes would lead to race war in Southern Africa.

zim01. A Manifesto on Rhodesia

Manifesto calling on the Labour government to break off the talks with Ian Smith opened in May 1966 and ask the UN to impose mandatory sanctions against Rhodesia. It was circulated to local Labour parties, but received a poor response.

nam01. South West Africa

From its formation in 1960, the Anti-Apartheid Movement campaigned for an end to South Africa’s illegal rule in Namibia (South West Africa). In March 1966 writer Ronald Segal convened an international conference with the support of the AAM. This pamphlet set out the background to the conference and explained how South Africa had contravened its League of Nations mandate. It called for political action at the UN and showed how the Western powers were blocking any steps to end South Africa’s control of the territory.

60s35. ‘Anatomy of Apartheid’

Leaflet advertising ‘Anatomy of Apartheid’, a dramatic presentation staged at Central Hall, Westminster on 21 March 1966. The show drew on court case records and personal affidavits from people who had suffered under apartheid. It was scripted by John Hales and Christopher Williams from the Royal Shakespeare Company and starred Joss Ackland, John Bird and Eleanor Bron. The show led to a big increase in the membership of the Anti-Apartheid Movement.

nam02. International Conference on South West Africa

From its formation in 1960, the Anti-Apartheid Movement campaigned for an end to South Africa’s illegal rule in Namibia (South West Africa). In March 1966 writer Ronald Segal convened a international conference on the territory, sponsored by the AAM and the Africa Bureau, and chaired by the future Prime Minister of Sweden, Olaf Palme. The conference published papers on South Africa’s violation of its mandate, economic and legal issues, and the responsibility of the international community.

zim04. ‘Freedom for Rhodesia’ rally

On 26 June 1966 a crowd estimated at between 3,000 and 5,000 people joined a rally in Trafalgar Square to hear speakers, including British Council of Churches representative Rev. Bill Sargent, speaking on behalf of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Judy Todd, call for majority rule in Rhodesia. At a press conference before the march the AAM released a Declaration on Rhodesia signed by 41 ‘eminent people’, including writers Brigid Brophy and Iris Murdoch, pianist Fou T’Song, naturalist Peter Scott, and academics and trade unionists.

zim03. ‘March behind the student banner’

On 26 June 1966 a crowd estimated at between 3,000 and 5,000 people attended a rally in Trafalgar Square calling for majority rule in Rhodesia. This leaflet urged students to join the demonstration. At a press conference before the march the AAM released a Declaration on Rhodesia signed by 41 ‘eminent people’, including writers Brigid Brophy and Iris Murdoch, pianist Fou T’Song, naturalist Peter Scott and academics and trade unionists.

zim06. Rhodesia Betrayed?

Postcard circulated to local anti-apartheid committees and student groups in November 1966 and August 1967. Local groups collected signatures to the postcard on high streets and in student unions and thousands were sent to the House of Commons.

60s27. ‘The Crisis in Southern Africa’, conference

The morning session of this conference highlighted South Africa’s alliance with the Smith regime in Rhodesia and Portugal, the colonial power in Angola and Mozambique. The afternoon session reflected the AAM’s disillusion with the Labour government. Similar conferences were held in Manchester in February and Birmingham in June 1967.

pic6701. MPs protest at naval visit

A delegation of MPs on their way to 10 Downing Street to hand in a letter protesting at a visit by three British warships to Cape Town in June 1967. A motion ‘regretting the visit’ was tabled in the House of Commons and a lobby of Parliament took place on 31 May. Left to right: Liberal MP and President of the AAM David Steel, Liberal MP John Pardoe, Labour MPs Joan Lestor, Joyce Butler and Hugh Jenkins, Lord Brockway, and Labour MPs Frank Judd, Michael Barnes and Andrew Faulds.

gov03. Letter from S Abdul (Abdul Minty) to Harold Wilson

In November 1967 reports in the British press suggested that the Labour government was about to lift its arms embargo against South Africa. The AAM wrote to Foreign Secretary George Brown, who agreed to meet an AAM delegation, but failed to give assurances that the arms ban would be maintained. After protests from Labour MPs and three crisis Cabinet meetings, Prime Minister Harold Wilson announced that the arms embargo would stay. 

60s28. Are You a Collaborator?

The AAM declared the ZAPU-ANC armed incursion into Rhodesia in August 1967 as the opening of a ‘historic new phase of armed resistance’. It responded by stepping up its campaign against all forms of British support for ‘race rule’ in Southern Africa. This leaflet was part of the campaign and was widely distributed. For the first time the AAM targeted two particular companies, Garfield Weston and Cyril Lord. In December 1967 it picketed their headquarters to draw attention to their involvement in South Africa.

po005. Stop Collaboration Support Resistance in Southern Africa

In 1967–68 the AAM campaigned against the ‘unholy alliance’ of South Africa, Portugal and Rhodesia. It supported the attempt by groups of ANC guerrillas to infiltrate South Africa via Rhodesia in alliance with the Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU), and the guerrilla struggle of FRELIMO in Mozambique. It called for an end to British military support and investment in the white minority regimes.

po004. Rally June 23: Oppose Apartheid: Support African Freedom Fighters

Poster publicising an AAM march and rally on 23 June 1968. In 1967 and 1968 guerrilla units from the African National Congress (ANC) and Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU) joined forces to try and fight their way through Zimbabwe to South Africa. The AAM hailed the armed incursions into Zimbabwe as a new stage in the liberation struggle. This demonstration was part of its campaign to mobilise support for the guerrilla fighters in Britain.

pic6801 ‘Oppose Apartheid, Support African Freedom Fighters’

On the march to an AAM rally in Trafalgar Square, 23 June 1968. The rally took place after ANC/ZAPU guerilla units had infiltrated Rhodesia in what became known as the Wankie and Sipolilo campaigns. In his speech, Oliver Tambo asked people in Britain to support the South African freedom fighters. The rally was chaired by Liberal MP David Steel and the other speakers were British Council of Churches representative Paul Oestreicher, trade union leader Jack Jones, Labour MPs Joan Lestor and Andrew Faulds and Young Liberal George Kiloh. The march was organised by an ad hoc youth and students committee.

pic6802 ‘Oppose Apartheid, Support African Freedom Fighters’

Part of the crowd at an AAM rally in Trafalgar Square, 23 June 1968. The rally took place after ANC/ZAPU guerilla units had infiltrated Rhodesia in what became known as the Wankie and Sipolilo campaigns. In his speech, Oliver Tambo asked people in Britain to support the South African freedom fighters. The rally was chaired by Liberal MP David Steel and the other speakers were British Council of Churches representative Paul Oestreicher, trade union leader Jack Jones, Labour MPs Joan Lestor and Andrew Faulds and Young Liberal George Kiloh. A march to Trafalgar Square was organised by an ad hoc youth and students committee.

60s34. ‘Come Back Africa’ programme

Programme for a fundraising concert in the Royal Albert Hall to mark the UN Human Rights Year and South Africa Freedom Day on 26 June 1968. The concert was arranged by the International Defence and Aid Fund (IDAF). Contributors included Marlon Brando, Warren Mitchell and ‘the Alf Garnett family’, Jonathan Miller and guitarist John Williams. The concert was supported by the Anti-Apartheid Movement.

zim07. Zimbabwe-Rhodesia – Britain’s Vietnam?

Leaflet advertising a march organised by the Zimbabwe Solidarity Action Committee on 12 January 1969. Demonstrators, mostly students and young people, tried to occupy Rhodesia House but were driven back by mounted police. Marchers then moved on to South Africa House, where only one policeman was stationed at the side entrance, and smashed the windows looking onto Trafalgar Square. Before the march, a group of writers had already infiltrated Rhodesia House and two climbers had scaled its flagpole to replace the flag of the illegal regime with the Union Jack.

zim08. ‘No Munich in Rhodesia’

In October 1968 British Prime Minister Harold Wilson met Ian Smith on board HMS Fearless to put new proposals for a settlement in Rhodesia which fell far short of ‘no independence before majority rule’ (NIBMAR). The negotiations broke down but the British government did not withdraw the Fearless plan.  At the Commonwealth conference in London in January 1969 the AAM held a vigil calling for NIBMAR.

pic6922. Zimbabwe vigil at the Commonwealth conference, 1969

Vigil calling for ‘no independence before majority rule’ (NIBMAR) in Zimbabwe in January 1969. The vigil took place during the 1969 Commonwealth conference. In October 1968 British Prime Minister Harold Wilson met Ian Smith on board HMS Fearless to put new proposals for a settlement in Rhodesia which fell far short of NIBMAR. The negotiations broke down but the British government did not withdraw the Fearless plan. In the photo is Liberal Party leader Jeremy Thorpe MP.

pic6901. World Council of Churches Consultation on Racism, May 1969

The Consultation on Racism held in Notting Hill, London, 19–24 May 1969 led to the setting up of the WCC’s Programme to Combat Racism (PCR). The consultation concluded that force could be used to combat racism in situations where non-violent political strategies had failed. The PCR gave grants for humanitarian use to the Southern African liberation movements and other anti-apartheid organisations, including the AAM. In the centre of the photograph are the Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey and Trevor Huddleston.

pic6902. World Council of Churches Consultation on Racism, May 1969

Trevor Huddleston, then Bishop of Stepney, London, and ANC president Oliver Tambo at the World Council of Churches Consultation on Racism, held in Notting Hill, London, 19–24 May 1969. The consultation concluded that force could be used to combat racism in situations where non-violent political strategies had failed. The PCR gave grants for humanitarian purposes to the Southern African liberation movements and other anti-apartheid organisations, including the AAM.

pic6917. Davis Cup tennis protest, Bristol, July 1969

Protesters from the National League of Young Liberals and Young Communist League stopped play in the Britain v South Africa Davis Cup Inter-Zone semi-finals on 17 July 1969. The demonstrators ran onto the court with banners and leaflets and then sat down, delaying the game for several hours. Eventually they were carried off by police.

60s31. Conference on liberation and guerrilla warfare, 1969

In 1967 and 1968 ANC and ZAPU guerrilla units joined forces to try and fight their way through Zimbabwe to South Africa. This leaflet advertised an AAM conference that emphasised armed struggle as the main strategy for achieving liberation in Southern Africa. It gave a platform to representatives of the liberation movements from all the countries of the region. The conference took place in the climate of youth militancy that followed the 1968 student demonstrations in France and other European countries.

60s36. Conference on liberation and guerrilla warfare, 1969

Background paper setting out the aims of the AAM conference on liberation and guerrilla warfare held on 6 July 1969. For a brief period in the late 1960s the AAM emphasised armed struggle as the main strategy for achieving liberation in Southern Africa. The conference gave a platform to representatives of the liberation movements from all the countries of the region. It followed the attempt by ANC guerrilla units to fight their way through Zimbabwe to South Africa in the Wankie and Sipolilo ‘incursions’ in 1967 and 1968, and took place in the climate of youth militancy that followed the 1968 student demonstrations in France and other European countries.

60s37. South Africa Freedom Day concert, 1969

This leaflet advertised a fundraising event held on the evening of the AAM’s conference on liberation and guerrilla warfare, at the Round House in Camden, north London. It featured a film about Bob Dylan’s England tour ‘Don’t Look Back’ and poetry and music groups The Scaffold, Yes and Dry Ice. 

60s30. South Africa Freedom Day, 1969

The Southern Africa Solidarity Committee was a coalition of youth and student groups set up in 1969 in the wake of the 1968 student demonstrations in France and other European countries. This leaflet publicised a march past the headquarters of companies involved in Southern Africa. It also advertised a conference on guerrilla warfare organised by the AAM and asked supporters to demonstrate against all-white South African sports teams.

po204. ‘Smash British Capitalist Collaboration with Southern African Fascism’

Poster publicising a march past the headquarters of companies involved in Southern Africa – Unilever, Anglo American, the Daily Telegraph, Shell, Plessey and Barclays Bank – on 28 June 1969. The march was organised by the Southern Africa Solidarity Committee, a coalition of militant youth and student groups set up in 1969 in the wake of the 1968 student demonstrations in France and other European countries. 

pic6903. Conference on liberation and guerrilla warfare, 1969

The AAM marked its 10th anniversary with a conference on guerrilla warfare in Southern Africa on 6 July 1969. Speakers included historian Basil Davidson and representatives of ZAPU, MPLA and ANC. The conference was a turn to the left for the AAM. Paul Foot argued that it should stress the links between ‘exploiters in South Africa and in the UK’. Ruth First stressed the ‘indivisibility’ of the guerrilla struggle in Southern Africa and of the white response. Left to right: Tennyson Makiwane (ANC), Edward Ndhlovu (ZAPU), Basil Davidson.

pic6905. Springboks v Oxford University

Police removed demonstrators from the pitch at the Springbok v Oxford University game at Twickenham on 5 November. The game was moved from Oxford after the police found out about plans to disrupt the game. Throughout the match demonstrators taunted the players with Nazi salutes and chanted ‘Sieg Heil’. There were protest demonstrations at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6921. Springboks v Midland Counties East

Thousands joined a march to Welford Road rugby ground in Leicester on 8 November 1969, to protest against the Springboks game against Midland Counties East. They included students and a big contingent from Leicester’s Afro-Caribbean community. Later, demonstrators tried to stop the game by running onto the pitch and two people were wounded in clashes between the police and protestors. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6907. Springboks v Midland Counties East

Outside Welford Road rugby ground before the Springboks v Midland Counties East game at Leicester on 8 November. Thousands joined a march to the ground before the match. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6918. Springboks v Midland Counties East

Demonstrators tried to break through a police cordon around Welford Road rugby ground in Leicester before the game between the Springboks and Midland Counties East on 8 November 1969. Two people were wounded in clashes between the police and protestors. Thousands joined a march to the ground before the match. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6906. Springboks v Midland Counties East

Police drag a protester off the pitch at the Springboks v Midland Counties East game at Leicester on 8 November. Thousands joined a march to the ground before the match. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6908. ‘Stop the Springboks’

Anti-apartheid members handed out leaflets outside Cardiff Arms Park on 11 November 1969 asking rugby supporters to boycott the Springboks rugby tour. The Springboks were scheduled to play Newport next day. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6909. Springboks v Swansea

Stewards dragging a protester off the pitch at the Springboks v Swansea rugby match at St Helen’s ground on 15 November 1969. Police turned a blind eye while stewards assaulted demonstrators and many were badly injured. There were demonstrations at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

arm05. South Africa’s Defence Strategy

This pamphlet detailed South Africa’s arms build-up in the 1960s and argued that Western military support for apartheid could lead to a global racial conflagration. It was widely distributed and ran into several editions.

pic6910. Springboks v London Counties

Police lined the pitch at Twickenham at the Springboks game against London Counties on 22 November.

pic6920. Springboks v North West Counties

Members of the rugby club at UMIST (University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology) joined the 7,000-strong march at the North West Counties v Springboks game in Manchester on 26 November 1969. The march also included local priests and members of the university Conservative Association. It was led by students carrying a coffin painted with the words ‘Remember Sharpeville’.

pic6911. Springboks v Scotland

Police carry a demonstrator off the pitch at the Springboks v Scotland rugby match at Murrayfield on 6 December 1969. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6912. Springboks v Cardiff

Thousands of anti-apartheid supporters set out from Cardiff Civic Centre to march to Cardiff Arms Park in protest at the Springboks v Cardiff rugby match, 13 December 1969. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6913. Springboks v Cardiff

Anti-apartheid supporters marched from Cardiff’s docks area of Bute Town to protest at the Springboks v Cardiff rugby match, 13 December 1969. On the way to the ground they joined up with marchers from Cardiff City Centre. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6914. Springboks v Cardiff

Anti-apartheid supporters on the march to Cardiff Arms Park to protest at the Springboks v Cardiff rugby match, 13 December 1969. At the junction of Castle Street and Westgate Street they were barred by police to stop them reaching the rugby ground. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the 1969/70 Springbok tour of Britain and Ireland.

pic6919. Springboks protest

An anti-apartheid protestor chained himself to the steering wheel of the bus bringing the Springbok rugby team to Twickenham for their international against England on 20 December 1969. He was removed from the bus by the driver and a policeman, the chain still attached to his wrist.

pic6915. Springbok sit-down, 1969

Stop the Seventy Tour (STST) supporters blocked the coach taking the Springbok rugby team to Twickenham for their international against England on 20 December 1969. Earlier the team returned to their hotel after a protester chained himself to the steering wheel

pic6916. ‘Wales Rejects Apartheid’

Masked anti-apartheid supporters protest before the Springboks v Wales game in Cardiff, 24 January 1970. There were anti-apartheid protests at all 24 games in the Springboks 1969/70 tour of Britain and Ireland.

int18t. Lord David Steel transcript

David Steel was first elected to Parliament as the Liberal MP for Roxburgh, Selkirk and Peebles in 1965 and was the Leader of the Liberal Party, 1976–88. He served as President of the Anti-Apartheid Movement, 1966–1969 and as a Vice-President until its dissolution in 1994. He now sits in the House of Lords as Lord Steel of Aikwood.

This is a complete transcript of an interview carried out as part of the ‘Forward to Freedom’ AAM history project in 2013.

int14a. Mike Gerrard interview clip

Mike Gerrard joined the Anti-Apartheid Movement in the early 1960s and was a member of its Executive Committee.

In this clip Mike Gerrard describes the attitude of the British labour movement to the decision by the Southern African liberation movements to take up armed struggle.

int07t. Dorothy Robinson transcript

Dorothy Robinson joined the Boycott Movement soon after its formation in 1959. From 1960 to 1966 she worked as the Administrative Secretary of the Anti-Apartheid Movement. She later joined the staff of the International Defence and Aid Fund (IDAF).

This is a complete transcript of an interview carried out in 2000 by Håkan Thörn.

int07a. Dorothy Robinson interview clip

In this clip Dorothy Robinson describes the problems of finding new accommodation after the AAM’s office was damaged in a right-wing arson attack in 1961.

int36a1. Peter Brayshaw interview clip 1

Peter Brayshaw joined protests against UDI in Rhodesia as a student in the mid-1960s. He joined the Committee for Freedom in Mozambique, Angola and Guinea and travelled to Angola soon after MPLA declared independence in 1975. On his return to Britain he campaigned for international recognition of the MPLA government and later became Chair of the Mozambique Angola Committee. He later served as Vice Chair of Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA) and as a Labour Councillor in the London Borough of Camden. 

In this clip Peter Brayshaw describes the mood of support in Britain for armed liberation struggles in the late 1960s. 

CLICK HERE TO READ ANTI-APARTHEID NEWS, 1965–69

Aa news january 1965.

The Anti-Apartheid Movement’s monthly newspaper was launched in January 1965. First published as ‘Apartheid News’, its title was changed in February 1966 to ‘Anti-Apartheid News’. The first issue set out the AAM’s aims for 1965, reported on trials under South Africa’s Terrorism Act and carried news of the activities of anti-apartheid activists all over Britain. It included a short play by jazz singer George Melly and reported on the setting up of a new group, Merseyside Artists Against Apartheid. 

AA News February 1965

The February issue exposed the Labour government’s failure to impose an effective arms ban on South Africa and outlined the AAM’s campaign plans, culminating in a dramatic presentation of life under apartheid and mass rally in Trafalgar Square in June 1965. It reported on how Bram Fischer had jumped bail in his trial under the Suppression of Communism Act and carried an exposé of South Africa’s segregated health care system.

AA News March-April 1965

AA News argued that the imposition of sanctions against South Africa was the only way to forestall race war in the Southern African region. This issue also reported on the World Campaign for the Release of Political Prisoners and the prospects for Britain’s three Southern Africa protectorates on the eve of their independence. It highlighted protests against visits by all-white South African sports teams and church action against apartheid.

AA News May 1965

This issue featured South West Africa (Namibia) and attacks on South African trade unions. It published a timetable for protests against the 1965 Springbok cricket tour and an article by British trade union leader Jack Jones on sanctions against South Africa.

AA News June 1965

The lead story in the June 1965 issue featured white emigration from Britain to South Africa. The edition advertised the AAM’s June rally in Trafalgar Square and explained the history of South Africa Freedom Day, 26 June. It also carried features on South Africa’s segregated education system and the apartheid economy. Under the headline ‘Jazz Quartet Hits London’, AA News welcomed Dudu Pukwana, Chris McGregor and their fellow jazz musicians to London.

AA News July-August 1965

The 1965 Springbok cricket tour was the focus of widespread protests. AA News appealed to all cricket fans to boycott the matches. This issue reported on the AAM’s 26 June rally and on celebrations of South Africa Freedom Day over the world. It exposed loopholes in the British arms embargo and reported on the International Court of Justice case on South Africa’s violation of its mandate on South West Africa (Namibia). Under the heading ‘Heroes of Our Time’, it reviewed ‘No Easy Walk to Freedom’, a compilation of Nelson Mandela’s  speeches edited by Ruth First.

AA News September 1965

This issue led on Lawrence Gandar’s exposé of the South African prison system. It also headlined an appeal to Labour Party Conference to support a comprehensive arms embargo against South Africa. It exposed torture in South African prisons and ‘forgotten trials’ in the Eastern Cape. Special features explained race classifications under apartheid and focused on the ‘unholy alliance’ between South Africa, Rhodesia and the Portugal. The issue also reported on the British Screenwriters Guild’s call for a government ban on the distribution of British films in South Africa.

AA News October 1965

The editorial in this issue of AA News set out immediate steps the UN should take against apartheid South Africa short of mandatory sanctions. It carried an article on student action against apartheid by the President of the NUS and reported on South Africa’s refusal to allow Maori rugby players to tour South Africa. It exposed the myth of South Africa’s independent judiciary and showed how all education there was segregated. 

AA News November 1965

This issue deplored the failure of the Labour government to fulfil its promise to make a stand against racism in Britain and in Southern Africa. It reported on a giant art exhibition held in London to raise funds for the families of South African political prisoners. It announced plans for an international conference on South West Africa (Namibia) and carried an article on a new right-wing Africa lobby group in the USA.

AA News December 1965–January 1966

Following Rhodesia’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence in November 1965, AA News argued that sanctions against the Smith regime in Rhodesia would fail unless measures were also taken against South Africa and Portugal. This issue also reported on the launch of a boycott by British academics of posts in South African universities. It reviewed the past year, arguing that the Nationalist Party in South Africa had consolidated its position, but that the spirit of resistance had been kept alive by courageous political prisoners.

AA News February 1966

This issue marked the first anniversary of the launch of AA News by setting out the AAM’s aims for 1966: to impose sanctions on South Africa as well as against the Smith regime in Rhodesia. It highlighted two AAM conferences – against the ‘unholy alliance’ between South Africa, Rhodesia and Portugal, as the colonial power in Angola and Mozambique, and on Namibia. It featured the academic boycott of South African and reported on the launch of the UK-South Africa Trade Association. It carried an article on the strengthening of economic ties between France and South Africa.

AA News March 1966

In the run-up to the whites-only election in South Africa, AA News revealed South Africa’s support for the illegal Smith regime in Rhodesia. It exposed the torture of South African detainees and reported on the setting up of schools by the Mozambique liberation movement FRELIMO in the liberated northern areas of Mozambique. In a centrespread and editorial, AA News highlighted how the apartheid government had abused its League of Nations mandate over South West Africa (Namibia).

AA News April 1966

The April issue called on the re-elected Labour Government to ask the UN Security Council to impose mandatory sanctions against Rhodesia to stop South Africa and Portugal supporting the Smith regime. It carried summaries of the papers submitted to the international conference on South West Africa (Namibia) organised by the AAM. Reports of campaign actions organised by anti-apartheid groups around Britain included a piece on  Leeds University AAM’s anti-apartheid week.  

AA News May 1966

The AAM responded to the British Government’s announcement that it had reopened talks with the illegal Smith regime in Rhodesia by launching a petition calling for majority rule. The May issue carried the petition. It summarised Bram Fischer’s speech from the dock and looked at where new Labour MPs elected in March 1966 stood on Southern Africa. It featured a statement by prominent academics and writers countering the argument that recent coups in West Africa meant that the British should support ‘stable’ minority governments in South Africa and Rhodesia.

AA News June 1966

In the summer of 1966 the AAM stepped up its campaign against a sell-out on Rhodesia. AA News reported on the AAM’s lobby of parliament and poster parade in Trafalgar Square. It highlighted plans for a march through central London demanding ‘Freedom for Rhodesia’ on 26 June. It also highlighted the worldwide protests against the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on Bram Fischer in South Africa.

AA News July 1966

Under the headline ‘A great day in the Square’ AA News reported on the AAM’s march and rally demanding majority rule in Rhodesia. It reported on independence talks on Basutoland (Lesotho) and criticised Senator Robert Kennedy for his opposition to sanctions after his visit to South Africa.

AA News September 1966

The September issue welcomed Liberal MP David Steel as President of the Anti-Apartheid Movement. Recently released political prisoner Dennis Brutus gave an inside account of the brutal treatment of prisoners on Robben Island. An article by Fabian Society representative Margaret Roberts exposed the failures of the Labour Government’s policies on Southern Africa. The issue also carried a piece by former SWANU (South West Africa National Union) President Jariretundu Kozonguizi on the International Court of Justice’s failure to rule that South Africa had violated its mandate in South West Africa (Namibia).

AA News October 1966

The October issue accused Britain’s Labour Government of siding with apartheid and called for new protests against its policies on Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) and South West Africa (Namibia). It exposed starvation conditions among black South Africans in rural areas. The issue profiled Johannes Vorster, who took over as South Africa’s new Prime Minister after the assassination of Hendrik Verwoerd in September 1966.

AA News November 1966

In an editorial, AA News warned that the Wilson Government was about to do a deal with Ian Smith in Rhodesia and launched a new campaign against any settlement that fell short of majority rule. A report on the AAM’s annual general meeting recorded the failures of the past year and the AAM’s difficult financial situation. Alan Brooks wrote about conditions for white political prisoners in Pretoria Central Prison. In an article headed ‘The fight continues’ Judy Todd warned that Rhodesians had decided that the only way they could achieve a democratic majority government was by force of arms.

AA News December 1966–January 1967

This issue carried a detailed analysis of the British Government’s proposals for a settlement with the Smith regime. An editorial argued that sanctions against Rhodesia could only be effective if the international community acted to stop South African sanctions breaking. On the eve of Swaziland’s independence, Caroline de Crespigny highlighted its economic dependence on South Africa. AA News reported on growing West German and US investment in the apartheid economy.

AA News February 1967

AA News called on the Labour Party and trade union movement to join with members of other political parties to pressure the Labour Government to commit to overthrowing the illegal white minority regime in Rhodesia (Zimbabwe). It reported on the growing disinvestment campaign in the USA and analysed the vulnerability of the South African economy to economic sanctions. It revealed the apartheid government’s plan to stockpile oil as an insurance against an international oil boycott. It exposed a government plan to change the racial balance of South Africa’s population by restricting the birth rate among South Africa’s majority African population.

AA News March 1967

This issue’s editorial argued that change in any one part of Southern Africa could not be isolated from change in the region as a whole, and advertised an AAM conference on the theme ‘The Crisis in Southern Africa’. It reported on South Africa’s attempts to counter the sporting boycott campaign by making irrelevant relaxations in sports segregation. It carried an article by a recently deported South African priest examining the role of the church under apartheid.

AA News April 1967

In a report on the AAM’s ‘The Crisis in Southern Africa’ conference, this issue highlighted the sense of betrayal felt by anti-apartheid campaigners at the Labour Government’s policies on Southern Africa. It profiled four centuries of exploitation by Portugal’s colonial regime in Angola and exposed the farce of ‘partial self-government’ given by the South African Government to Ovamboland in the north of Namibia. It also reported on a set-back for South Africa’s attempts to counter the international sporting boycott, when Tunisia and Morocco withdrew from the International Cross-Country Championships in protest against South African participation.

AA News May 1967

The May issue exposed links between far-right organisations in South Africa and the British consul-general in Johannesburg. It carried an exclusive interview with banned South African Helen Joseph and extracts from Alex La Guma’s new novel The Stone Country . It also reported on the police harassment of Winnie Mandela.

AA News June 1967

AA News headlined a call by Labour and Liberal MPs for the Labour Government to cancel a visit by British warships to Cape Town. A roundup of anti-apartheid action in Britain included a ‘Southern Africa Week’ of talks and seminars at the LSE and a conference organised by Birmingham AAM. The centrespread featured articles on the history of Mozambique’s liberation movement FRELIMO and on how British subsidiaries in Rhodesia were evading sanctions. The issue exposed French arms sales to South Africa in defiance of the UN’s call for an arms embargo.

AA News July–August 1967

AAM members disillusionment with the 1964–70 Labour Government came to a head at a National Committee meeting which asked Cabinet Ministers Barbara Castle and David Ennals to choose between their government posts and AAM membership. AA News followed this up with a debate on future strategy. Ronald Segal argued that the AAM should abandon lobbying and build a ‘democracy of the streets’. Frank Hooley responded that it should continue to use ‘every normal device of political persuasion’. This issue also reported on the Terrorism Act trial of 37 SWAPO members and on evidence from former political prisoners to the UN Human Rights Commission.

AA News September 1967

In the September issue, CLR James carried forward the debate on AAM policy by arguing that local AA groups should ask workers to take action against the involvement of local enterprises in South Africa. The newspaper highlighted Britain’s growing trade with apartheid South Africa. An eyewitness account of the forced removal of elderly people and former political prisoners to a remote rural area showed the lengths to which the apartheid regime was prepared to go in establishing total race segregation. The issue also carried the first reports of fighting between a combined ANC-ZAPU guerrilla group and the South African security forces in the Wankie region of Rhodesia.

AA News October 1967

AA News headlined ‘The battle in Zimbabwe’, with a report on fighting between a joint ANC-ZAPU guerrilla group and Rhodesian security forces. It carried an analysis by Brian Bunting of South Africa’s aggression against African countries and an appeal by Labour MP David Winnick to delegates at the forthcoming Labour Party conference to oppose any settlement with the white minority Rhodesian regime that fell short of majority rule.

AA News November 1967

Under the headline ‘OAU backs freedom fighters’, AA News highlighted the setting up of a commission of military experts by the Organisation of African Unity. It reported on a new spirit of militancy at the AAM’s annual general meeting, with calls for sit-ins and the establishment of a ‘Fighting Fund’ for the guerrilla fighters in Zimbabwe. Resolutions included a call for ‘greater democratisation’ of the AAM’s structures and a review of racial discrimination in Britain. The issue reported on the setting up of a SWAPO campaign committee calling for the release of all Namibian political prisoners, focusing on the 37 SWAPO members on trial under the Terrorism Act.

AA News December 1967–January 1968

This issue raised the alarm on rumours that the Labour Government was about to abandon its limited arms embargo against South Africa. It reported on a speech by ANC Acting President Oliver Tambo in Central Hall Westminster and on the refusal by several student unions to host an all-white rugby team from the Orange Free State. In an interview, former political prisoner Wilfred Brutus told how he escaped re-arrest by rowing out into the Indian Ocean, where he was picked up by a passing ship.

AA News February 1968

This issue headlined the trial of the 35 remaining accused SWAPO members facing a death sentence under South Africa’s Terrorism Act. Its editorial contrasted the courage of guerrilla fighters who had infiltrated Rhodesia's Wankie valley with British businessmen profiting from apartheid. The newspaper reported on protests outside the headquarters of British companies investing in South Africa and on Sir Alex Douglas-Home’s pledge that a future Tory Government would resume arms sales. In a special feature on African trade unions, it exposed the decision by the Trade Union Council of South Africa (TUCSA) to exclude its few remaining African affiliates from membership.

AA News March 1968

The March issue’s editorial condemned the proposed government restrictions on the right of Kenyan Asians to settle in the UK as a step towards ‘importing apartheid’ into Britain. It condemned the decision of the International Olympic Committee to readmit South Africa to the Mexico Olympics. The issue highlighted the plight of over 100 prisoners condemned to death by the illegal Smith regime in Rhodesia. A lively letters column argued the case for and against the launch of armed struggle in Southern Africa.

AA News April 1968

In an open letter to the AAM’s former President, Labour MP David Ennals, now a Minister in the Labour Government, AA News condemned the new Commonwealth Immigration Act. It carried an exclusive feature by FRELIMO President Eduardo Mondlane, who visited London in March, and the first article in a series contrasting the provisions of the Declaration of Human Rights with the situation in Southern Africa. Former South African political prisoner Ann Nicholson described conditions at Barberton women’s prison.

AA News May 1968

The May issue reported on the white Rhodesian reaction to the ongoing ANC/ZAPU guerrilla presence in Zimbabwe. It carried a special feature on racism in the US and the killings of black Americans in the aftermath of the assassination of Martin Luther King. It quoted British playwrights who had added their names to the pledge to impose a cultural boycott on apartheid South Africa and reported on South Africa’s exclusion from the Mexico Olympics.

AA News June 1968

The June issue advertised a march and rally in central London to mark 26 June, South Africa Freedom Day, under the slogan ‘Oppose Apartheid – Support African Freedom Fighters’. It exposed leading British businessmen with interests in white minority-ruled Rhodesia. News items included a report of plans to extend the playwrights boycott of South Africa to film, and for Marlon Brando to take part in the IDAF ‘Come Back Africa’ concert at the Royal Albert Hall.

AA News September 1968

Under the headline ‘Bold moves by ANC resistance’, AA News reported on the distribution of ANC leaflets in Durban and Johannesburg. It reported on evidence given by ANC President Oliver Tambo and Canon John Collins of the International Defence and Aid to hearings held by the UN Special Committee on Apartheid in London. It carried a letter from a US gaol by Black Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver and a report of a speech by novelist Nadine Gordimer in South Africa attacking apartheid censorship.

AA News October 1968

The October issue reported on rumours of new talks between the British Government and the Smith regime in Rhodesia and on FRELIMO’s second congress, held inside Mozambique. It revealed that South Africa was responsible for more than half the world’s executions and exposed the murder of a detainee by South African police.

AA News November 1968

The AAM’s annual general meeting was the scene of a vigorous debate in which young members called for ‘direct action on the streets’, reported this issue of AA News. It carried a feature article on the apartheid government’s attempts to attract British tourists and immigrants to South Africa and analysed the latest British government proposals for a settlement with the illegal white regime in Rhodesia. An article by a Labour MP argued that parliamentary lobbying was still an important form of action for the Anti-Apartheid Movement.

AA News December 1968–January 1969

The December–January issue reported on ZAPU’s rejection of the British Government’s proposals for a settlement on Rhodesia. Norman Levy, recently released from prison in South Africa, told of the harsh conditions endured by David Kitson and other white political prisoners in Pretoria Central Prison. An article by Ruth First argued that South Africa would act against any move to achieve majority rule in Zimbabwe. The issue also exposed Australia’s racist treatment of its ‘Aboriginal’ people.

AA News February 1969

A centrespread in the February issue featured a march on Rhodesia House organised by the Zimbabwe Solidarity Action Committee, and a sit-in by anti-apartheid writers. AA News highlighted a conference in Khartoum held to mobilise material aid for the Southern African liberation movements. Students at the London School of Economics called for the withdrawal of LSE investments in companies with South African interests. A South African correspondent exposed the use of police dogs to remove ‘Coloured’ residents from beaches designated as ‘whites only’ in Cape Town.

AA News March 1969

AA News revealed the growing trade links between Britain and South Africa with details of visits by South African government representatives to most major British cities. This issue reported on a memorial meeting for assassinated FRELIMO leader Eduardo Mondlane. Former political prisoner Jean Middleton described her life as a banned person in South Africa. An advertisement promoted a meeting organised by the AAM for British trade unionists, the first in a long series of AAM annual trade union conferences.

AA News April 1969

The April issue featured a report on the relaxation of the US arms ban against South Africa. It reported on student action against apartheid and on a show organised by the AAM at London’s Roundhouse on the anniversary of the Sharpeville massacre. A feature article revealed the role that the Cabora Bassa dam project was intended to play in consolidating white minority rule throughout Southern Africa. The newspaper’s centrespread exposed the horrific living conditions of people dumped in South Africa’s ‘resettlement camps’. 

AA News May 1969

Under the headline ‘New bill means slave labour’, AA News exposed the implications of proposed new legislation in South Africa. Former South African political detainee Desmond Francis told of how he had been tortured by the apartheid security police. The centrespread reported on the advances made by MPLA guerrilla fighters in Angola.

AA News June 1969

AA News deplored Robert Sobukwe's 12-hour house arrest after his release from Robben Island. Its editorial urged the British Government to support the freedom fighters in Zimbabwe instead of negotiating with the illegal Smith regime. It reported on the AAM’s first conference for trade unionists, which urged unions to end the investment of their funds in companies with interests in South Africa. A feature article argued that the time had come for a reassessment of AAM tactics and that it might be necessary to set up a new organisation to undertake direct action against British organisations that collaborated with apartheid.

AA News July–August 1969

The AAM marked its 10th anniversary with a conference that discussed guerrilla warfare in Southern Africa and the implications of the armed struggle for the international solidarity movement. AA News reported on widespread disillusion with the British Labour Government.  A feature article by Basil Davidson reported on the advance of the PAIGC liberation movement in Portugal’s colony Guinea-Bissau. In an article on sports apartheid, the President of SANROC, Dennis Brutus, highlighted the forthcoming Springbok cricket tour of Britain.

AA News September 1969

The September issue reported on the sentencing to life imprisonment of five SWAPO members in the conclusion of a long-running trial under South Africa’s Terrorism Act. It carried an eyewitness account of the forced removal of black South Africans from their farms in Natal to a tented settlement, where they were dumped on the veldt with no sanitation. Its letter column continued the debate on future tactics of the AAM. In a foretaste of the campaign to stop the 1970 Springbok cricket tour, AA News reported on how one activist disrupted a fixture of the all-white South African Wilfred Isaacs cricket team.

AA News October 1969

The October issue headlined the advances made by FRELIMO guerrilla units in northern Mozambique and plans to stop Western companies involvement in building the Cabora Bassa dam. It reported on a TUC motion urging unions to discourage their members from emigrating to South Africa and carried a first-hand account by former political prisoner David Ernst on the difference in conditions for black and white prisoners. The back page printed the Springbok rugby tour fixture list, with a report of the launch of the Stop the Seventy Tour Committee.

AA News November 1969

Winnie Mandela and Shanti Naidoo were among the detainees expected to be charged under the Terrorism Act, reported this issue. A report on the Conservative Party conference highlighted a motion calling for an end to all ‘coloured’ immigration and for the ‘repatriation’ of many recent British immigrants. A resolution passed at the AAM’s annual general meeting warned the MCC that the tour by the all-white Springbok cricket team planned for the summer of 1970 would inevitably be disrupted.

AA News December 1969–January 1970

‘Stop Apartheid Sport’ demanded this issue of AA News. A centrespread reported ‘One match cancelled, three disrupted, 17 to go’. The newspaper gave a round-up of student action against apartheid and reported on a march to Senate House to protest against the University of London’s links with University College, Rhodesia. A review of a new AAM pamphlet ‘South Africa’s Defence Strategy’ argued that South Africa’s defence programme posed a threat not just to the Southern African liberation movements but to the whole of Africa.

• Teaching Resources
• Upcoming Events
• On-demand Events

Introduction: Early Apartheid: 1948-1970

• Social Studies
• Democracy & Civic Engagement
• facebook sharing
• email sharing

Table of contents:

Triumph of the National Party

• Science, God and Race

Many Nations

The passbook system, the defiance campaign, the freedom charter, women protest, the sharpeville massacre, the rivonia trial, shut down at home, organizing overseas.

The roots of apartheid can be found in the history of colonialism in South Africa and the complicated relationship among the Europeans that took up residence, but the elaborate system of racial laws was not formalized into a political vision until the late 1940s. That system, called apartheid (“apartness”), remained in place until the early 1990s and set the country apart, eventually making South Africa a pariah state shunned by much of the world.

Having aggressively promoted an ideology of Afrikaner nationalism for a decade, the National Party won South Africa’s 1948 election by promising to clamp down on non-white groups. Once in office, the National Party promptly began to institute racial laws and regulations it called  apartheid  (a word that means “apartness” in Afrikaans). Led by Daniel Malan, a former pastor in the Dutch Reformed Church turned politician, the National Party described apartheid in a pamphlet produced for the election as “a concept historically derived from the experience of the established White population of the country, and in harmony with such Christian principles as justice and equity. It is a policy which sets itself the task of preserving and safeguarding the racial identity of the White population of the country; of likewise preserving and safeguarding the identity of the indigenous peoples as separate racial groups.” 1

• 1 D. W. Kruger, ed., South African Parties and Policies 1910–1960 (London: Bowes and Bowes, 1960), available at Politicsweb, accessed July 29, 2015.

Apartheid Era Sign

The Reservation of Separate Amenities Act (passed in 1953) led to signs such as the one shown above. The Act prohibited people of different races from using the same public amenities.

By 1948, segregation of the races had long been the norm. But as journalist Allister Sparks noted, apartheid, drawing on racist anthropology and racist theology, “substituted enforcement for convention. What happened automatically before was now codified in law and intensified when possible. . . . [Racism] became a matter of doctrine, of ideology, of theologized faith infused with a special fanaticism, a religious zeal.” 1

Religion was an important aspect of Afrikaner identity. Most Afrikaners were members of the Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa, a strict and conservative Calvinist church that promoted the belief that the Afrikaners were a new “chosen people” to whom God had given South Africa. Journalist Terry Bell explained the role of religion in the outlook of those who supported the National Party: “Afrikaners [saw themselves] as players in the unfolding of the Book of Revelations, upholding the light of Christian civilization against an advancing wall of darkness. . . . It was God’s will that the ‘Afrikaner nation’ . . . linked by language and a narrow Calvinism, had been placed on the southern tip of the African continent.” 2  As a result, they saw themselves as a select group whose right to the land was greater than any other group’s.

The new National Party administration offered a stark view of ethnic categories. As laid out in the Population Registration Act of 1950, these categories were as follows: “white” (“a person who in appearance obviously is, or who is generally accepted as a white person, but does not include a person who, although in appearance obviously a white person, is generally accepted as a coloured person”), “native” (“a person who in fact is or is generally accepted as a member of any aboriginal race or tribe of Africa”), and “coloured” (“a person who is not a white person or a native”). 3  “Indian” was soon added as a fourth group. The groups were not only portrayed as distinct and fundamentally different; drawing on principles of Social Darwinism, they were ranked hierarchically in terms of supposed intellectual capacity and other attributes. The white population stood at the pinnacle of the South African racial hierarchy, with the National Party ideology claiming that they should dominate the other groups because of their natural superiority. Their control of the state guaranteed whites superior access to education, healthcare, employment, and housing. “Natives,” or black South Africans, stood at the very bottom of this steep hierarchy—a necessity in the eyes of Afrikaners, who believed not only that their livelihoods depended on depriving black South Africans of land, voting rights, the right to marry freely, and, above all, the right to participate freely in the labor market but also that Africans were not as deserving as whites of these privileges. Indian and “coloured” groups were “ranked” above black South Africans, allowing them some employment and mobility privileges denied to black South Africans yet still making them subservient to the white South African population.

Science, God, and Race

The triumph of the National Party pushed to the forefront of South African racism the ideas fostered by church leaders and scholars in Afrikaner institutions. During the 1930s, scientific books and articles, some written by scholars at Stellenbosch University and the University of Pretoria, lent credence to the idea that white populations were of superior intelligence to nonwhite groups. The Dutch Reformed Church, whose congregations had been segregated since 1857, also preached that, following the Tower of Babel, God had ordained that different cultures be distinct and sovereign. The church’s ideas combined with the pseudoscience of race to give rise to a secular theology of Christian nationalism. If groups were to develop as God intended, they needed to live separately.

Because they conceived of blacks and whites as fundamentally different, Afrikaners concluded that contact between the groups fostered conflict. Each group would prosper most if left to develop on its own; to impose segregation was to protect and promote black culture, they argued. The 1947 National Party campaign pamphlet explained:

The party holds that a positive application of apartheid between the white and non-white racial groups and the application of the policy of separation also in the case of the non-White racial groups is the only sound basis on which the identity and the survival of each race can be assured and by means of which each race can be stimulated to develop in accordance with its own character, potentialities and calling. Hence inter marriage between the two groups will be prohibited. Within their own areas the non-white communities will be afforded full opportunity to develop, implying the establishment of their own institutions and social services, which will enable progressive non-Whites to take an active part in the development of their own peoples. The policy of our country should envisage total apartheid as the ultimate goal of a natural process of separate development. 4

The reading  Apartheid Policies  offers a more extended explanation of the ideas behind apartheid, as publicly articulated by the party.

A contradiction arose, however, because if black South African labor had been subtracted from the white South African economy, the latter would have immediately collapsed. While the theory of apartheid argued that the races should be kept separate, the economy of the South African state depended heavily on black South African labor. Therefore, the apartheid state had to permit black South African laborers to come and go between white and black territories.

After the National Party took power, it implemented a series of laws designed both to separate each of the country’s racial groups and to divide and weaken the black South African population and allow for the easy exploitation of its labor. The Population Registration Act created a national system of racial classification that gave every citizen a single identification number and racial label that determined exactly what privileges this person would be able to enjoy. Where one could live, whether one had to carry a passbook to travel, and what sort of education one could receive depended on one’s racial classification. While white South Africans enjoyed every conceivable right, black South Africans could not vote for South African officials, and coloured South Africans could only vote for white representatives—they could not run for office themselves. The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1949 banned interracial marriage, while the Immorality Act of 1950 “prohibited sex between whites and non-whites.”

The Group Areas Act of 1950 was the Malan government’s first attempt to increase the separation between white and black urban residential areas. The law was both a continuation of earlier laws of segregation and a realization of an apartheid ideal that cultures should be allowed to develop separately. The law declared many historically black urban areas officially white. The Native Resettlement Act of 1954 authorized the government to force out longtime residents and knock down buildings to make room for white-owned homes and businesses. Whole neighborhoods were destroyed under the authority of this act. For example, on February 9, 1955, Prime Minister Malan sent in 2,000 police officers to remove the 60,000 residents of Sophiatown, a vibrant African neighborhood in central Johannesburg. Black South African residents were forcibly resettled in the Meadowlands neighborhood of Soweto, where they were expected to move into houses without electricity, water, or toilets. In Durban, Indian neighborhoods faced a similar fate. City centers became enclaves for the white South African population, while black, coloured, and Indian South Africans were relegated to townships at the periphery of the urban areas, which were often far removed from centers of employment and resources such as hospitals and recreation spaces. Generally, the townships were intended to contain the black South African population by restricting movement through urban planning while ensuring that black South Africans had permission to leave these areas in order to work.

• 1 Allister Sparks, The Mind of South Africa: The Story of the Rise and Fall of Apartheid (Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball Publishers, 2006), 190.
• 2 Terry Bell, Unfinished Business: South Africa, Apartheid and Truth (London: Verso, 2003), 23.
• 3 Population Registration Act (1950) , Wikisource entry, accessed July 27, 2015.
• 4 D. W. Kruger, ed., South African Parties and Policies 1910–1960 (London: Bowes and Bowes, 1960), available at Politicsweb, accessed July 29, 2015.

Bantustans in South Africa

With the passing of the Bantu Authorities Act in 1951, the apartheid set in motion the creation of ten bantustans in South Africa, illustrated in this map.

Apartheid laws treated black South Africans not as citizens of South Africa but rather as members of assigned ethnic communities. The Bantu Authorities Act (1951) and the Bantu Self-Government Act (1959) created ten “homelands” for black South Africans, known as Bantustans, and established new authorities in the Bantustans. While the apartheid state portrayed the Bantustans as a system that offered black South Africans independence, giving the appearance of self-government, the leaders of the homelands were appointed by the apartheid state. Furthermore, black South Africans were assigned these ethnic identities and corresponding “homelands” even if they did not see this as a central aspect of their identity. Black South Africans were essentially stripped of their South African citizenship.

By making black South Africans citizens of Bantustans, the government deflected any possible criticisms of refusing them the right to vote in South Africa. But this arrangement also very deliberately created a system of migrant labor. Since the homeland areas, which were mostly rural and underdeveloped, offered inhabitants few employment opportunities, most had to search for work in cities and live temporarily in townships. Given the desperate situation in the homelands, the apartheid state was ensured of a regular source of cheap labor for white-owned businesses and homes.

Although they were said by apartheid authorities to bear a historical association with the different kingdoms, Bantustans were scattered around the fringes of the country without any consideration for the well-being of their residents. KwaZulu in Natal, for example, was divided into many pieces, separated by large areas designated as white. The apartheid government reserved urban areas, the most desirable farmland, and regions rich in natural resources for white South Africans, while it allocated the least arable land for the Bantustans. Although black South Africans constituted nearly 70% of the population, only 13% of South Africa’s territory was allocated to the Bantustans. The reading  A Wife’s Lament  offers a look at how the creation of the homelands affected black South African families.

Girl Walking to School, Mthatha

A child walks to school through the barren village of Qunu, South Africa, located just outside of the town of Mthatha.

Dividing the black South African population into Bantustans was in part intended to break the solidarity that had formed between groups of black South Africans in the face of white oppression. By cultivating a false sense of “tribal” belonging, the government sought to reduce the black South African population to many small, ineffective groups, channeling discontent from resistance to apartheid into internal bickering.

A decade after the rise of the National Party, many black South Africans found themselves effectively stateless. They could only enter white areas to work, and they needed documents authorizing them to do so.

By the middle of the twentieth century, vast numbers of black South Africans commuted daily from Bantustans and townships to the white areas where they worked. Various forms of internal passports had existed in South Africa since the early twentieth century, but the apartheid government expanded and formalized the pass system. Designed to satisfy both the need for black labor and the need to protect white advantages, “pass” laws required every black male over the age of 16 to carry a passbook, which contained a photograph, fingerprints, a racial classification, place of work, and the bearer’s police record.

Additionally, the passbook had to have a current signature from an employer and proof that the bearer had paid income taxes. The passbook bureaucracy was so convoluted that few people were able keep their records current, providing authorities with an excuse for detaining black South African men at will. Anyone living in a black township on the outskirts of a white city who did not possess appropriate papers was effectively treated as an illegal alien and subject to arrest. Those found in violation were sometimes imprisoned, often forced to pay fines, and sometimes sent back to their homelands. Eventually, black South African women were also required to carry passes, an act that had a tragic impact on the lives of tens of thousands of families who were not allowed to live together. Only a few of these women with formal salaried employment were able to secure the necessary passes and keep them current, thereby satisfying the authorities’ requirements to be legally living in the same house as their husbands. Most black South African women were forced to remain in the homelands, raising their children and eking out a living off the land while their husbands worked in the cities or on white-owned farms.

Most black South Africans were obliged to leave “white areas” by sunset. At the country’s many checkpoints and roadblocks, black South Africans were at the mercy of the police and could summarily be stopped, arrested, and deported to homelands. Thousands of black South Africans were forced to break the law on a daily basis as they searched for work or attempted to keep their families together.

Police carried out daily raids on black residences, bursting in at midnight, forcing residents to show their passes, and arresting those out who did not have them. Police brutality was rife; hundreds of thousands of black South Africans were arrested, thousands disappeared from their homes without a trace, and hundreds lost their lives to the guns and batons of law enforcement officials. The government recruited black South Africans to join the police force and serve as informants, torturers, and, in some cases, executioners, and for a variety of reasons (bribes, economic pressures, and scare tactics), some black South Africans helped the government enforce apartheid. The reading  Experiencing Apartheid  gives an account of how the draconian enforcement of apartheid laws could affect black South Africans.

As apartheid laws were implemented, South Africa’s black leaders looked for a way to protest the changes imposed by the minority white government. Denied the right to vote, they had to find other means of expressing opposition outside the formal political system. From 1950 to 1952, the African National Congress (ANC) organized mass actions, which included boycotts, civil disobedience, demonstrations, and strikes.

A group of resisters proudly pose after their release from prison in Durban during the Defiance Campaign Against Unjust Laws, 1952.

Launched in April 1952, on the 300th anniversary of the arrival of the first Dutch colonists, this Defiance Campaign became the largest campaign of civil disobedience in South Africa’s history up to that point. It was also the first multiracial mass-resistance campaign, and its unified leadership included representatives from the African National Congress, the South African Indian Congress, and the Coloured People’s Congress. Together with other groups, these organizations formed the Congress Alliance, which forged a multiracial front against the implementation of apartheid. 1 Following heavily attended demonstrations in a number of towns, defiance of the newly erected racial laws commenced on June 26, 1953. Ten thousand volunteers, organized by the leader of the ANC Youth League, 34-year-old Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, were instructed to enter forbidden areas without passes, use entrances designated “Europeans only,” and occupy “white only” counters and waiting rooms. 2  These violations were designed to flood the prison system, rendering law enforcement impossible.

• 1 For Nelson Mandela’s description of the first months of the campaign and the unity between the different groups, see “ We Defy—10,000 Volunteers Protest Against Unjust Laws ,” August 30, 1952, African National Congress website, accessed July 27, 2015.
• 2 Reader’s Digest Illustrated History of South Africa: The Real Story , 3rd ed. (Cape Town: The Reader’s Digest Association Limited, 1994), 385.

Nelson Mandela, 1937

A young Nelson Mandela poses for a photograph in Umtata shortly before moving to Fort Beaufort to attend Healdtown Comprehensive School.

A decade later, Mandela reflected on the goals and strategies behind the Defiance Campaign:

Even after 1949, the ANC remained determined to avoid violence. At this time, however, there was a change from the strictly constitutional means of protest which had been employed in the past. The change was embodied in a decision which was taken to protest against apartheid legislation by peaceful, but unlawful, demonstrations against certain laws. Pursuant to this policy the ANC launched the Defiance Campaign, in which I was placed in charge of volunteers. This campaign was based on the principles of passive resistance. More than 8,500 people defied apartheid laws and went to jail. Yet there was not a single instance of violence in the course of this campaign on the part of any defier. I and nineteen colleagues were convicted for the role which we played in organising the campaign, but our sentences were suspended mainly because the judge found that discipline and non-violence had been stressed throughout. 1

The government lashed out, arresting over 8,000 South Africans and handing out stiff penalties and long prison sentences to those who had broken apartheid laws. It adopted the Public Safety Act (1953), which allowed the president to suspend all existing laws, stripping away basic civil liberties. “The government saw the campaign,” Mandela later recalled, “as a threat to its security and its policy of apartheid. They regarded civil disobedience not as a form of protest but as a crime, and were perturbed by the growing partnership between Africans and Indians. Apartheid was designed to divide racial groups, and we showed that different groups could work together. The prospect of a united front between Africans and Indians, between moderates and radicals, greatly worried them.” 2

While the Defiance Campaign lost momentum after a few months, and it did not achieve many concessions from the government, it was a turning point for South Africa. For the liberation movement, it was the first mass campaign, swelling the membership ranks of the ANC from just 7,000 to 100,000 and helping to transform the group from an elite organization into a mass movement. 3

In early 1955, the ANC organized a listening campaign, in which they sent out 50,000 volunteers to talk with people across the country about their political hopes for South Africa. In June 1955, the ANC, along with several other anti-apartheid political organizations—the South African Indian Congress, the Coloured People’s Congress, the South African Congress of Trade Unions, and the Congress of Democrats—developed a set of political demands that drew on the results of these interviews. The “Freedom Charter,” as it became known, called for a nonracial South Africa, in which people of all races would have equal rights and would share in the country’s wealth.

The Freedom Charter became the political agenda for the ANC, shaping its actions over the next several decades. The charter called for rights for all South Africans, not just black South Africans, and this concept of nonracialism became an important principle behind the ANC’s approach to political change. The Freedom Charter served as the guiding document for the ANC in its struggle against apartheid and beyond, as its nonracialism ultimately became a basis for ANC policies after the fall of apartheid. The reading The  Freedom Charter  includes the text of this foundational document.

Although their role has often been overlooked in historical accounts of resistance to apartheid, black South African women played an important part in opposing the system of racial segregation. (White and “coloured” women were part of the resistance, but the vast majority were black South Africans.) In the early 1900s, black South African women successfully resisted proposed legislation that would require them to carry passbooks. After a setback in 1918, women organized again to end the practice altogether under the leadership of Charlotte Maxeke, a gifted singer, social worker, and activist—a hero of the early days of protest. She was called “the mother of African freedom in this country” by A. B. Xuma, who served as the president of the ANC in the 1940s. 4

• 1 Nelson Mandela, “ An Ideal for Which I Am Prepared to Die ,” The Guardian , April 22, 2007, accessed July 27, 2015.
• 2 Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom: The Autobiography of Nelson Mandela (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1994), 116.
• 3 For a full and vivid description of the campaign, see Monty Naicker, “The Defiance Campaign Recalled,” June 30, 1972, African National Congress website, accessed July 27, 2015.
• 4 Andile Mnyandu, “ Charlotte Maxeke ,” eThekwini Municipality website, accessed July 27, 2015.

Woman Showing Her Passbook

An unidentified black South African woman defiantly shows her passbook.

The multiracial Federation of South African Women was formed in the 1950s, representing hundreds of thousands of women. Together with the ANC Women’s League, the federation organized many local demonstrations against the pass laws, culminating in the March on Pretoria. On August 9, 1956, about 20,000 women peacefully gathered in front of the city’s Union Buildings. They stood in silence for 30 minutes and then, breaking the quiet, chanted a call to the prime minister: “Wathint’ abafazi, wathint’ imbokodo!” (Now that you have touched the women, you have struck a rock!) Alerted to the protest ahead of time, the prime minister, J. G. Strijdom, had slipped out of town. Before they concluded their protest, activists left on the prime minister’s door a petition bearing the signatures of 100,000 women. Their chant became the slogan for future women’s protests. The reading  Women Rise Up against Apartheid and Change the Movement  features a firsthand account of the 1956 women’s march.

By the late 1950s, a growing number of activists questioned the tactics of the African National Congress. The young founders of the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), formed in 1959, believed that only an all-black African organization, in league with anti-colonial Africans throughout the continent, could adopt the forceful posture necessary to overcome apartheid. The time had come, these firebrands believed, to reclaim the land stolen by whites. In his inaugural speech, Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe, head of the PAC, outlined their approach:

[W]e reject both apartheid and so-called multi-racialism as solutions of our socio-economic problems. . . . To us the term “multi-racialism” implies that there are such basic insuperable differences between the various national groups here that the best course is to keep them permanently distinctive in a kind of democratic apartheid. That to us is racialism multiplied, which probably is what the term connotes. We aim, politically, at government of the Africans by the Africans, for the Africans, everybody who owes his only loyalty to Afrika and who is prepared to accept the democratic rule of an African majority being regarded as an African. 1

Questioning the effectiveness of nonviolence against apartheid, the PAC set up a military wing, Poqo, that was feared by the white establishment.

The PAC announced to authorities that it would lead a peaceful demonstration against pass laws in the township of Sharpeville on March 21, 1960. Some 5,000 protesters gathered in the town center and then marched toward the police station to turn themselves in for defying pass laws. 2  Around midday, the police panicked and opened fire on the demonstrators, killing 69 people and wounding another 180. Most were shot in the back as they fled.

Black South African leaders called for a day of mourning and a “stay-at-home” strike on March 28, 1960. Hundreds of thousands of black South Africans did not show up for work that day, making it the first successful national strike in the nation’s history. Marches took place in Johannesburg, Durban, and Cape Town; the largest included a group of 30,000 who marched from Langa to Cape Town, led by 23-year-old Philip Kgosana. Fearing that black protests might spread, the government acted decisively in the aftermath of the Sharpeville massacre. It declared a state of emergency and arrested more than 11,000 people, including the leaders of both the ANC and the PAC. On April 8, the government banned both organizations. This put an abrupt end to the protests and ushered in a period of harsh repression that lasted for more than a decade.

During the 1960s, the government intensified its policies against the anti-apartheid movement by severely restricting the ability of the movement’s leaders to speak in public and to mobilize the population. The government went on to scrap what few rights non-white workers had, including the rights to organize, bargain, and strike, and it also intensified efforts to shut down surviving black urban neighborhoods and move the black population to the townships and homelands.

Although officially banned, the ANC continued to function clandestinely. The young leadership of the ANC, having seen their hopes for change dashed so violently, began to discuss a new approach to resistance. Despite opposition from the old guard, in 1961 the young upstarts prevailed: while there would never be official ANC approval, the creation of an armed wing was tacitly accepted. Named Umkhonto we Sizwe (“Spear of the Nation,” known as MK), the clandestine group had Nelson Mandela as its commander.

Such a group needed new skills and new partners. Mandela and the other militant ANC members formed an alliance with the South African Communist Party, a multiracial political organization with ties to the Soviet Union that had been banned in 1950 but remained active underground, working primarily to support the interests of workers. They based MK operations at a farm in Rivonia, not far from Johannesburg. Setting up a network of operatives committed to terror permitted MK, over a year and a half, to carry out approximately 200 attacks on government facilities. By January 1962, Mandela had traveled to Algeria, where he learned the basics of guerrilla warfare from members of that nation’s National Liberation Front. A fortnight after his return to South Africa, he was arrested on the charges of inciting workers to strike and leaving the country without a passport. A year later, Mandela’s MK comrades were arrested at their Rivonia training camp.

In 1963, three years after the terror of the Sharpeville massacre carried out by government forces, the Rivonia Trial began with the government seeking to accuse its opponents of fomenting violence. Ten defendants, including six black Africans, three white Jews, and the son of an Indian immigrant, were charged with sabotage and attempting to violently overthrow the government of South Africa.

During the trial, the defendants decided not to deny the charge of sabotage. They wanted the world to know what they had done and why. Their lawyers expressed misgivings about their decision, because it meant that they could be put to death for treason. But the revolutionaries felt that they had to take the risk, using the trial to make their positions known to every person in South Africa.

When he took the stand at the Pretoria Supreme Court, Mandela described his personal journey within the resistance movement, explaining the reasoning behind the adoption of a militant approach. (The reading  Mandela on Trial  includes the text of this testimony.) The prosecutor attempted to prove that the group, which he labeled communist, was plotting to overthrow the government of South Africa. He played on Afrikaner fears of Soviet revolutionary plots. The government had long presented itself as a true ally of the West, securing generous financial and military support—a position unusual among African states, many of which adopted socialism as a reaction against the colonial powers they had thrown off.

When the trial ended in June 1964, two men had been acquitted. Six of the remaining eight, including Mandela, were found guilty on all counts and sentenced to life in prison.

In the aftermath of the Sharpeville massacre and the government crackdown that followed, the ANC leadership charged Oliver Tambo, the organization's deputy president, with the task of beginning to organize overseas. With protest nearly impossible within the country and so many top ANC leaders in prison, Tambo looked for new ways to fight against the apartheid regime. Making use of a home base in London, he lobbied international leaders to speak out against the brutality in his homeland. Almost immediately, Tambo and British anti-apartheid movement activists organized to have South Africa removed from the British Commonwealth, an intergovernmental organization made up of countries that were formerly part of the British Empire—a move that succeeded in 1961. At the same time, activists began to lobby against South Africa in the United Nations, winning a 1962 vote at the UN General Assembly for a trade ban on South Africa. A partial arms ban followed a year later. Further international pressure against South Africa’s discriminatory policies came from the International Olympic Committee, which first suspended South Africa from participating in the 1964 Tokyo Olympics and then formally banned the country from the Olympics in 1970. The ANC, with Tambo’s leadership, eventually set up 27 overseas missions.

However, diplomacy was only one part of the strategy. In 1965, the countries of Tanzania and Zambia agreed to let the ANC’s unofficial armed wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), set up paramilitary training camps. Under the leadership of Abongz Mbede and Joe Slovo, a South African Jew whose family emigrated from Lithuania, the MK sought to bring what they called an “armed struggle” to South Africa. In the late 1960s, though, South Africa was surrounded by neighbors that were allies of the apartheid government, making it difficult for fighters to make it into the country. An official history of the ANC describes the situation:

The ANC consultative conference at Morogoro, Tanzania in 1969 looked for solutions to this problem. . . .The Morogoro Conference called for an all-round struggle. Both armed struggle and mass political struggle had to be used to defeat the enemy. But the armed struggle and the revival of mass struggle depended on building ANC underground structures within the country. A fourth aspect of the all-round struggle was the campaign for international support and assistance from the rest of the world. These four aspects were often called the four pillars of struggle. The non-racial character of the ANC was further consolidated by the opening up of the ANC membership to non-Africans. 3

• 1 “ Robert Sobukwe Inaugural Speech, April 1959 ,” African National Congress website, accessed June 2018.
• 2 David James Smith, Young Mandela: The Revolutionary Years (New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2010), 210.
• 3 “ A Brief History of the African National Congress ,” African National Congress website, accessed June 2018.

How to Cite This Reading

Facing History & Ourselves, “ Introduction: Early Apartheid: 1948-1970 ”, last updated August 3, 2018.

You might also be interested in…

The 1968 east la school walkouts, california grape workers’ strike: 1965–66, memphis 1968, 10 questions for the future: student action project, 10 questions for the present: parkland student activism, getting to know the 10 questions, 10 questions for young changemakers, the union as it was, radical reconstruction and the birth of civil rights, expanding democracy, my part of the story: exploring identity in the united states, the struggle over women’s rights, inspiration, insights, & ways to get involved.

Internal Resistance in South Africa: The Political Movements

Cite this chapter.

• Kumi Naidoo  

23 Accesses

The resistance movements in South Africa have shown an increased maturity in recent years, and this has found an echo in a corresponding maturity in the modification of the apartheid system itself. The contention here is that most of the ‘reforms’ brought about by the South African government have, in one way or another, been primarily provoked by resistance activity. The tricameral parliament and the newly proclaimed National Statutory Council (NSC) — the major components of the new dispensation at a national level — reflect the state’s increasingly ‘sophisticated’ responses in attempting to contain the emergent wave of resistance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Contestation in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Foreign Policies of Angola, Kenya and Nigeria vis-à-vis South Africa

Exporting Britishness: Decolonization in Africa, the British State and Its Clients

Resistant Rationalities? Some Reflections on Shi’i Movements in Lebanon

M. Meredith, ‘The Black Opposition’, in Jesmond Blumenfeld (ed.), South Africa in Crisis (London: Croom Helm, 1987), pp. 77–89.

Google Scholar  

M. Sutcliffe, ‘The Crisis in South Africa: Material Conditions and the Reformist Response’, in Geoforum , vol. 17, no. 2, 1986, pp. 141–59.

Article   Google Scholar  

See N. Haysom, Apartheid’s Private Army: The rise of right-wing vigilantes in South Africa (London: Catholic Institute of International Relations, 1986).

G. Leach, South Africa: No Easy Path To Peace (London: Methuen, 1986), pp. 207–9.

M. Murray, South Africa: Time of Agony, Time of Destiny. The Upsurge of Popular Protest (London: Verso, 1987), p. 423.

Download references

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Copyright information.

© 1988 David Davies Memorial Institute of International Studies

About this chapter

Naidoo, K. (1988). Internal Resistance in South Africa: The Political Movements. In: Johnson, S. (eds) South Africa: No Turning Back. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-19499-5_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-19499-5_5

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London

Print ISBN : 978-0-333-47096-1

Online ISBN : 978-1-349-19499-5

eBook Packages : Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies Collection Political Science and International Studies (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Eight narrative units arranged chronologically form the backbone of this site. Units 3 through 7 contain the greatest wealth of material, focusing on apartheid (Unit 3), the struggle against apartheid (Units 4 and 5), negotiations (Unit 6), and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Unit 7). All resources can be accessed from these units. Also, a full list of Units, Essays, and Multimedia Pages appears in Contents .

Apartheid describes a system of racist laws and policies of total segregation in South Africa that began in 1948, when the National Party came to power, and ended in 1994, when Nelson Mandela was elected President in the first democratic elections. This unit briefly summarizes the region's pre-colonial past and its connections to world history. It describes South Africa's diversity and highlights how African societies underwent important transformations before the arrival of European colonizers in 1652.

This unit explores the history of South Africa from the colonial occupation of the Cape in 1652 through the creation of the Union of South Africa in 1910 and the segregation period (1910-1948). The emphasis is on patterns of economic and political transformation and how racism and segregation increasingly restricted the lives of black South Africans. Topics include: slavery at the Cape; the mineral revolution caused by the discovery of diamonds (1867) and gold (1886); loss of African independence and the South African War (1899-1902); the creation of the Union of South Africa (1910) which enforced racial separation in economy and society and promulgated an ideology of white supremacy before the advent of apartheid.

This unit examines the rise of apartheid and its subsequent development. In 1948 the Afrikaner ethnic nationalist Reunited National Party (renamed National Party in 1951) won a national election on a racist platform of total segregation under the slogan of "apartheid" - or "apartness" in the Afrikaans language. Apartheid built upon earlier laws, but made segregation more rigid enforced it far more aggressively. With the support of big business and other white interest groups, the state signifcantly extended its power and control. Apartheid led to a systematic and profound deterioration of the position of black people in South Africa for the next four decades.

This section investigates the activities of twentieth-century political movements and individuals who fought for freedom, democracy, and equal rights in a racist South Africa. It charts the rise of the African National Congress, the South African Indian Congress, and the Communist Party of South Africa and their adoption of polite constitutional protest tactics before the 1940s. After 1948, the liberation struggle gained mass support at home and abroad; a powerful leadership propelled the movement's growth as tactics changed from polite protest to direct challenges to apartheid guided by the principle of "one person, one vote." Brutal government repression resulted in the banning of the main liberation organizations and to the arrest of Nelson Mandela and many other leaders; others fled into exile. A decade of relative quiescence followed.

After a decade of relative quiescence due to the government crackdown on liberation movements in the early 1960s, black workers and students reignited resistance against apartheid in the 1970s. The apartheid regime responded with a mix of harsh repression and modest reforms inside South Africa and violent attacks on the liberation movements and their allies outside the country. Yet a combination of growing protest, international support, and significant changes in the political context of the region changed the balance of power by 1990, when Nelson Mandela was released from prison and negotiations for a new democratic South Africa began in earnest.

The final stage of apartheid's demise happened so quickly as to have taken many people in South Africa and throughout the world by surprise. As the Cold War ended, Nelson Mandela was released from prison in February 1990 and the ban of the African National Congress (ANC) and other liberation movements was lifted, thus leading to political negotiations out of which emerged a democratic constitution and the first free election in the country's history. The final transfer of power was remarkably peaceful; it is often is described as a "miracle" because many thought that South Africa would erupt into violent civil war. But democracy did not emerge spontaneously; it had to be built laboriously, brick by brick.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was almost certainly the most extensive investigation into past human rights abuses the world has known. It was more successful than other truth commissions, for example in Chile or Guatemala, and often is seen as a model of effective conflict resolution. A product of political compromise and of South Africa's need for political stability, the TRC helped reveal the worst excesses of apartheid and its lessons to the world for conflict resolution were profound. Despite its shortcomings, the TRC process had a cathartic effect that enabled the country to transcend the violence and acrimony of the apartheid years.

After almost two decades of freedom, South Africa's democracy is a work-in-progress. Economic growth, a stable currency, and the respect of international financial institutions has come at the cost of jobs and wealth redistribution. While the government has built many houses, it has been unable to meet demand. Land redistribution stands at less than 5 percent, well short of the ANC's targets. The government made some serious mistakes, as in the case of HIV-AIDS policy. Also, corruption is an increasingly serious concern. On the other hand, South Africa has achieved impressive gains in a relatively short time. Basic services now reach millions of people previously denied access to them, and the government has established a progressive constitutional democracy, maintained peace, and fostered unity and reconciliation in a divided society.

• Latest Resources
• Quick Links

Apartheid South Africa 1940s to 1960s Essay for Grade 11

On this page, we guide grade 11 student on how to write “Apartheid South Africa 1940s to 1960s Essay”.

Apartheid in South Africa was a system of institutionalised racial segregation and discrimination that existed from the late 1940s until the early 1990s. This period in South African history is marked by the enforcement of legal policies and practices aimed at separating the races and maintaining white dominance in all aspects of life. The years between the 1940s and the 1960s were critical in laying the foundations and entrenching the policies that would define this era. This essay will explore the implementation of apartheid laws , resistance movements , and international reactions to apartheid from the 1940s to the 1960s.

Implementation of Apartheid Laws

The formal introduction of apartheid can be traced back to the National Party’s victory in the 1948 elections . The party, which represented the Afrikaner nationalist interest, institutionalised apartheid as a means of securing white dominance. Key legislation enacted during this period included:

• The Population Registration Act (1950): This act classified all South Africans into racial groups – ‘white’, ‘black’, ‘coloured’, and ‘Indian’. This classification was a prerequisite for the implementation of other apartheid laws.
• The Group Areas Act (1950): This law geographically segregated South Africans by race , determining where different racial groups could live, work, and own property.
• The Suppression of Communism Act (1950): Though ostensibly aimed at combating communism , this act was frequently used to silence critics of apartheid, including non-communists.

Resistance Movements

Resistance against apartheid came from various quarters, including political parties, trade unions, and individual activists. The most prominent of these movements included:

• The African National Congress (ANC): Initially adopting a policy of peaceful protest, the ANC organised strikes, boycotts, and civil disobedience campaigns. Following the Sharpeville Massacre in 1960, the ANC shifted to a strategy of armed struggle .
• The Pan Africanist Congress (PAC): A breakaway from the ANC, the PAC also played a significant role in organising protests against apartheid, notably the anti-Pass Laws protest that led to the Sharpeville Massacre.
• Sharpeville Massacre (1960): A turning point in the resistance against apartheid, where a peaceful protest against pass laws in Sharpeville turned deadly, with police opening fire on demonstrators, resulting in 69 deaths.

International Reactions to Apartheid

The international community’s response to apartheid was initially muted, but as the realities of apartheid became more widely known, international condemnation grew. Significant aspects of the international reaction included:

• United Nations Condemnation: The UN General Assembly adopted a resolution in 1962 calling for sanctions against South Africa, urging member states to cease military and economic relations with the apartheid regime.
• Isolation in Sports: South Africa was banned from the Olympic Games and other international sporting events, highlighting the growing international isolation of the apartheid government.

Student Guide

When writing an essay on Apartheid in South Africa from the 1940s to the 1960s, focusing on clarity, depth, and evidence-based arguments is crucial. Here are some useful tips to enhance your essay writing:

• Start with a Strong Thesis Statement:
• Clearly state your essay’s main argument or analysis point at the end of your introduction. This sets the direction and tone of your essay. For example, “This essay argues that the apartheid laws enacted between the 1940s and 1960s not only institutionalised racial segregation but also laid the foundation for the resistance movements that eventually led to apartheid’s downfall.”
• Organise Your Essay Logically:
• Use subheadings to divide your essay into manageable sections, such as the implementation of apartheid laws, resistance movements, and international reactions. This helps readers follow your argument more easily.
• Use Evidence to Support Your Points:
• Incorporate specific examples and quotes from primary and secondary sources to back up your statements. For instance, reference the Population Registration Act when discussing racial classification or cite international condemnation from United Nations resolutions.
• Analyse, Don’t Just Describe:
• Go beyond simply describing events by analysing their impact and significance . For example, when discussing the Sharpeville Massacre, explore its effect on both the apartheid government’s policies and the tactics of resistance movements.
• Acknowledge Different Perspectives:
• While focusing on the factual history of apartheid, also acknowledge the various perspectives on apartheid policies and resistance efforts, including those of the government, opposition movements, and international bodies.
• Conclude Effectively:
• Summarise the main points of your essay and reiterate your thesis in the context of the information discussed. Offer a concluding thought that encourages further reflection, such as the legacy of apartheid in contemporary South Africa.
• Reference Accurately:
• Ensure all sources are accurately cited in your essay to avoid plagiarism and to lend credibility to your arguments. Follow the specific referencing style required by your teacher or educational institution.
• Proofread and Revise:
• Check your essay for spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors. Also, ensure that your argument flows logically and that each section supports your thesis statement.
• Seek Feedback:
• Before final submission, consider getting feedback from teachers, peers, or tutors. Fresh eyes can offer valuable insights and identify areas for improvement.

By incorporating these tips, you can create a well-argued, informative, and engaging essay on Apartheid in South Africa that meets the expectations of a Grade 11 history assignment.

The period from the 1940s to the 1960s was pivotal in the establishment and consolidation of the apartheid system in South Africa. Through the enactment of draconian laws, the apartheid government institutionalised racial discrimination, which led to widespread resistance within the country and condemnation from the international community. This era laid the groundwork for the struggles and transformations that would eventually lead to the end of apartheid.

Looking for something specific?

Related posts.

30+ Unprepared Speech Topics for Grade 10

Choosing the right unprepared speech topics for Grade 10 students is crucial as it helps develop their analytical skills, boosts confidence, and enhances their...

Effects of Load Shedding Essay Guide

Writing an essay about the effects of load shedding can be a great way to explore its impact on society, economy, and everyday life....

Why I Admire Nelson Mandela Essay Guide and Example

WhyI Admire Nelson Mandela Essay Guide and Example: The essay titled “Why I Admire Nelson Mandela” presents a unique opportunity to delve into the...

Guide: Writing a Conclusion for an Essay on “Why the Bantu Education Act Is Interesting or Important to Know About Today”

Guide: Writing a Conclusion for an Essay on “Why the Bantu Education Act Is Interesting or Important to Know About Today: Writing a conclusion...

Previous Story

Solved - Discuss the Stage of Development of the Tropical Cyclone Freddy

Afrikaans hl fal sal grade 12 all caps papers exam papers and memos database.