It was written by Dr. Graca Machel. Liberals may have heard of her.
... Damn, damn. The speech used to be available on Oxfam's site: "Small Arms and Southern Africa". It no longer is. I can't find it anywhere else. If anyone does, please let me know.
Here's another, by the appropriately named Enough Sishi.
http://www.peacemagazine.org/9803/sishi.htm - excerpts:
Violence is so deeply entrenched that it is viewed as "part of life." The social acceptance of violence as part and parcel of human relations creates a "culture of violence." Michael Klare argues that global interdependence, mass media, and influence of international organizations are shifting power away from nation states toward powerful international forces, thereby creating anxiety and insecurity among ethnic groups. Modernization, the creation of a global village, was supposed to erode these identities, but instead has created anxiety among individuals, who turn to ethnic identities for support. Modernization has also created new ethnic elites who can provide leadership to their groups. Rootless individuals whose groups occupy unequal social classes are vulnerable to ascriptive mobilization and antagonisms that can burst into conflict.
South Africa; Identity, Violence And Small Arms
Together, small arms and identity played a big role in the violence of South Africa. One of the most important institutions in forming a link between identity and violence is the army -- in this case, both the SADF and the Mkhonto Wesizwe fostered insensitivity, aggressiveness and violence. Armed struggle by M.K. and the counter-insurgency measures by the SADF were identity-based violence. The ideologies that drove the different sides of soldier-identities in South Africa legitimized violence as means of obtaining and maintaining power. The slogan of the anti-apartheid movement, Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), "one settler, one bullet," is examples of violent indoctrination forming the soldier-identities of the resistance-apartheid era.
Like the rest of the region, Russia, China and Cuba backed the liberation movements with military equipment -- especially small arms, which were smuggled into South Africa by ANC operatives. Arms caches were created inside the country. General Bantu Holomisa opened up what was then a small bantustan, Transkei, to liberation movements as a base for launching operations. Large amounts of weaponry entered Transkei. To counter these developments and further the strategy of "divide and rule" the National Party trained and equipped the paramilitary force of the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), a South African political organization headed by Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi, whose strength came from manipulating the anxieties of the Zulu ethnic group.
... Manipulation of ethnic identities became the electioneering strategy for the IFP. Finally the IFP was taken aboard the election process through a last minute promise to consider their worry about the Zulu Kingdom after the election. The success of the 1994 election has dramatically reduced violence.
However, after the election, disarmament strategies were not successful at all. In October 1994 a disarmament operation called "Rollerball" was started. It was a disaster. Four months later, the weapons seized by this operation consisted of only 70 AK47s, 93 hand grenades, 53 pistols, 316 limpet mines. This figure is nothing compared with quantities that had been supplied to IFP by the National Party and by the superpowers to the ANC.
The second major source is the internal armament industry. During the violent '80s and sensitive transitional stage the white population armed themselves alarmingly with legal firearms. By the early 1990s they were well armed but this acquisition of legal firearms continues and theft is still a major problem; there are still 2700 reports of stolen firearms every month.
...
Remember how Bush wouldn't go along with controls on the international proliferation of small arms ... because he wants to be able to help out all those oppressed peoples? Hmm. Anybody care to guess which side Bush might have supported in all that? I didn't see any reference there to
the US arming the
liberation movements.
http://www.oneworld.org/ips2/jan99/03_00_001.htmlLast year the South African Police Service destroyed or melted down 70 tonnes of small arms and ammunition, including 4,504 pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns and home-made firearms.
Additionally, South Africa and Mozambique have jointly destroyed more than 100 tonnes of small arms and ammunition on site in Mozambique.
South Africa says it already has entered into agreements with several other Southern African states, with a view to curbing the trafficking of illegal small arms and ammunition.
Any experts out there care to estimate how many handguns, or machine guns, or combination thereof, there might be in a tonne? (A tonne is 2,200 pounds.)
I think I just heard on a CBC documentary rerun last night that Smith & Wesson's giant spiffy new handgun weighs 5 pounds. So, 440 of them in a tonne. 74,800 of them in 170 tonnes. Hell, let's say half the weight was ammunition, not really likely I'd imagine; 37,400 of them. The ones that were somehow got hold of and destroyed, alone, in one year, alone. Anybody else thinking (you don't have to admit it): Wowsers! ?
In an address to the UN Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Tuesday that "the scourge of small arms continues to devastate civilian populations, creating humanitarian crises the world over."
"These weapons of personal destruction impair economic and social progress, and impede our best development efforts," he said.
But then, who cares about other people's human rights or economic and social wellbeing, when ya've got yr own "right" to swagger around with a concealed weapon to worry about, eh?
Under the apartheid regime, replaced by a multiracial government in 1994, South Africa was the world's 10th largest arms manufacturer.
Damn, I'm just not going to be the one who observe that firearms seem to turn up in the company of racists and fascists awfully frequently.
In its letter to Annan, South Africa points out that it "is committed to a policy of responsibility and accountability in the trade and transfer of all arms."
The government has established an arms control system which makes provision for a ministerial body to set criteria, principles and guidelines "to ensure the responsible transfer and trade in, among others, small arms and light weapons."
South Africa has also introduced legislation which requires the licensing of all civilian small arms, including a requirement for the safe storage of such weapons.
Lemme see whether I've got this straight. A democratically elected, multi-racial government is implementing firearms control policies. How can that be??
.
Now, to get back to our sheep, and the actual problems in South Africa. Anybody remember that stuff about income disparity? How in some places, the upper one-fifth, say, of the population gets just a huge amount more than its "share" of income, while the lower one-fifth doesn't get much at all? That "Gini index" stuff?
The Gini index is a measurement of the disparity of income distribution in a country; figures for individual countries can be found at the CIA's factbook site.
http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fbhome.htmlThe higher the figure, the less equally income is distributed. A few examples:
South Africa -- 59
Zimbabwe -- 57
US -- 41
Russia -- 40
China -- 40
UK -- 36
Australia -- 35
Canada -- 32
Norway -- 26
Sweden -- 25
Anybody else noticing a general pattern? Remember the Canada-US study that concluded that income inequity seems to be a useful predictor of homicide rates?
South Africa's pattern of income distribution is far more unequal even than the US's -- and of course has much less income to go around in the first place. (Average income has also been found to be a not too shabby predictor of homicide rates.) Maybe we could fairly confidently predict that S. Africa is going to have a fairly high rate of crimes of violence. I humbly submit.
I'd even be willing to wager a small amount -- maybe Spentastic can help me out -- that income disparity in the UK has been increasing in recent years, along with perhaps some changes in other social and demographic factors that might be predicted to lead to higher violent crime rates ... without even considering the impacts of illegal trafficking in arms into the country.
Ah yes, here we are:
http://www.ncpa.org/pd/unions/pd081601g.htmlIncome inequality rose and unionization fell in both the United States and the United Kingdom in recent years:
- From 1980 to 1990, the ratio of the 10 percent highest to the 10 percent lowest paid men rose from 2.7 to 3.5 in the U.S. and from 2.4 to 3.1 in the U.K.
A bit out of date, but:
http://poverty.worldbank.org/library/view/13024/Of course, my question would be why anyone would think that adding lots of firearms to volatile mixes like these would ever be a good idea ...
So knowing all this stuff, I'd have to wonder why anyone would (purport to be) surprised at the horrible levels of violence in South Africa. Or think that the private possession of firearms would be a SOLUTION to that violence
as a matter of public policy. Or, yes, as has been said, think that the situation in South Africa had anything at all to do with the situation in the US, for example.
Of course, if the US continues down its neo-liberal road, leading to even greater income disparity and even more impoverishment and despair in the lower-income segments of the population, while at the same time allowing the numbers of firearms in private hands to proliferate, I'd hope that no one would be surprised to find him/herself living in something resembling a South African township.
.
More generally on these issues, here are some other things that liberals might be interested in reading:
http://www.essex.ac.uk/armedcon/themes/smallarms/default.htm"Small Arms: Issues and Themes"
.