SOUTH AFRICA: Vorster's Double Shocker

A resignation and a stunning rejection may invite renewed warfare

Terse. Unemotional. Pragmatic. Unpredictable. Those were the hallmarks of Prime Minister John Vorster's twelve-year rule in South Africa, and never were they more evident than on his leaving last week.

In a brief, businesslike address to the country, speaking first in Afrikaans and then in English, Vorster, 62, declared that he was quitting his post as well as the leadership of the right-wing National Party, which has dominated South African politics for 30 years. He gave no reason, though his resignation had been widely rumored because of his failing health (he reportedly suffers from lung congestion and an embolism in his leg). But he made one thing plain: "I leave this office with no regrets whatsoever."

As if that announcement were not dramatic enough for one day's rumination, Vorster followed with another, this one concerning Namibia (South West Africa), the mineral-rich territory that South Africa has administered since 1920. South Africa, said Vorster, was withdrawing its earlier agreement to a United Nations-supervised plan to grant independence to Namibia. Instead, it would proceed with its own "internal settlement" and hold elections in the territory in November. Among the reasons: the U.N.'s postponement of elections from December until next April would endanger Namibia's security, and the proposed increase from 3,000 to 7,500 U.N. peacekeeping troops to supervise the transition period and cease-fire had been decided upon without Pretoria's consultation. Both conditions, in South Africa's view, would favor the South West African People's Organization (SWAPO), the militant political group that has been engaged in a civil war with South Africa for the past twelve years.

In Western capitals as well as in Africa, the Vorster double shocker exploded with all the calculated force of a hidden mine. At U.N. headquarters in New York City, there was concern that the whole future of southern Africa was now cast into an ominous state of uncertainty. Vorster's turnabout on Namibia and his departure added up to an invitation to renewed warfare between South Africa and SWAPO, a fresh opening for Soviet and Cuban influence on the guerrillas, and ultimately a drive to impose economic sanctions against South Africa.

There was dismay, too, that Vorster was bowing out at the very moment when his brand of pragmatism was most needed. The Namibia decision was seen as a kind of backlash by Cabinet elders against what they regarded as U.N. highhandedness. The reasons given for the turnaround on the U.N. plan convinced no one. Pretoria, it was now clear, was not about to let SWAPO come to power, even in free elections. That means a long-term military commitment by South Africa in Namibia—and a dilemma for the U.S. and Britain, who will face pressure to punish South Africa's recalcitrance with economic sanctions. British private investment in South Africa totals $10 billion, while trade amounts to $3 billion. The U.S. has more than $2 billion in trade and $1.5 billion in private investment.