BEHIND THE CURTAIN OF CENSORSHIP IN RHODESIA »
By John Walters
- London
Reports appearing in the April 24 Observer indicate that the apparent calm that prevailed inside Rhodesia at the time of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence LUDI] by the Smith regime was in fact only the result of an efficient censorship. The report by the Commonwealth correspondent opens with "Reports of proceedings in the Rhodesian courts made it clear that there has been considerably more active African opposition to the Rhodesian rebel regime than has been allowed to show through censorship regulations."
Several incidents and court proceedings are reported, and significantly these are only now being dealt with, despite the fact that most of them relate to last November. Attacks. on crops, cattle and farm buildings seem to have been numerous.
Bearing in mind that Rhodesia is a largely agricultural economy, these attacks. should not be seen as of little importance. One individual case was. reported: "A.former hospital orderly, Amos Tshuma, was jailed for eight years at Bulawayo for burning down a European womens club." He was quoted as: Saying: "This was the only thing I could do to show my disgust for Smith's U.D.I." That this should have happened is an indication of the feelings that must be running through the African people of Rhodesia, but it is also a sad comment on the disunity in the nationalist movement, because it would seem to have been an uncoordinated action.
However, more important as an indication of the opposition of the Rhodesian Africans is a report of an army mutiny at the time of UDI. This was reported as follows: "It is clearly established that there was a mutiny among soldiers of the Rhodesian African Rifles. immediately. after U.D.I. The mutineers were recently court— martialed at. Llewellin Barracks, Bulawayo. The number of men a involved is hard. to establish, the figure varying between 110- 120."
That such a mutiny took place is an indication of the isolated position of the Smith regime, and indeed of the majority of the white population. Army and police are notoriously the last section in the colonial world to defect from imperialism, being selected and trained for loyalty to the white regime. Given this fact, the mutiny indicates the tremendous pressure that must be generating under the surface. calm in Rhodesia. . .
The mutiny also throws a clear light on Prime Minister
Wilson's: declaration that Britain would only use force in Rhodesia in an event of a breakdown of "law and order." The law being of course that of the "rebel" regime, the order that of a police regime. The mutiny shows why this particular phrase was used at that time. Clearly, what Wilson feared was that the Rhodesian African masses would rise up and throw out Smith, and have a UDI of their own. Certainly not the best thing for British investments! Therefore he was preparing opinion in Britain, and elsewhere, for British troops moving in to help the white Rhodesians to suppress the Africans.
This would explain the odd disposition of the British troops sent to Zambia. They were not sent to Kariba to guard the dam, but held. in the interior presumably near airfields ready to rush to Rhodesia if the need arose. This also explains why these troops took no heavy equipment with them, such as they would need if they were ~~ to fight the Rhodesian army. However they were equipped to deal with unarmed, or lightly armed Africans.
This report -~ of mutiny, crop burning, etc. -- shows two things. Firstly the demand by some left-wing elements in Britain that Wilson should take "strong action"; i.e., send in British troops, is a complete misunderstanding of the role of British imperialism, and its hired "labour leader." British imperialism is not going to use its troops as a colonial liberation force. Ascension Island, Aden, Malaysia; support for U.S. imperialism in Vietnam, should give these people the truth of Wilson's role. Secondly, all the reported events expose those "liberals" who agree that British intervention will: not set up a socialist regime, but merely a "softer" type of capitalism and so should be supported, because the Africans are not able to throw out Smith themselves. These latter-day Uncle Toms now have their answer. Support by elements of the British left for British troops intervening shows a lack of confidence in the African masses, and a covert racialism.
OGINGA