This statement by Helen is ahistorical + sadly reflects a simple one dimensional thinking for an issue that requires critical and complexity thinking. Let me explain:
During the cold war, the global game plan was controlled from Washington London and Paris.
During the cold war, the global game plan was controlled from Washington London and Paris.
https://twitter.com/SundayTimesZA/status/1275354462639587328
The evil apartheid state was tolerated as a necessary geopolitical cog in this game. It thrived despite universal sanctions. But after the fall of the Soviet Union the game masters led by London decided the pretence must end. They again decided the game
plan for SA under the new global neo-liberal paradigm that was being pushed under globalization. P W Botha failed to read the script and succumbed to illness and was forced off the scene. When de Klerk took over, he understood and accepted the inevitable.
He was thus just a pawn in the bigger game to protect the interests of the western neo-liberal powers led by London in the case of SA. Apartheid had to end and negotiations had to begin, he was told by Thatcher. de Klerk had no option but he was smart enough
to understand that he must protect the interests of the Afrikaner and achieve a stable transition for business. He did not alone decide the game. He was forced to understand how to play the game. For this he was rewarded with a Nobel prize in 1993. 🤔
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
