1992 South African Referendum

BEFORE THE REFERENDUM

from 1928–1994]]

Prior to the referendum, the governing National Party had lost three By-elections since announcing negotiations to end apartheid two years earlier, and its position was challenged by the Conservative Party which opposed the negotiations and boycotted the Convention For A Democratic South Africa (CODESA). When the National Party was defeated in the Potchefstroom by-election on 19 February , after calling it a test vote, its credibility was placed in doubt.

In the meantime, negotiations between the government and the African National Congress were making slow progress. Violence was increasing in the South African Township s, different white Right Wing groups were becoming more prominent, and there was growing dissatisfaction within the white community. The government was thus under domestic and international pressure to make progress in the negotiations.

While the Conservative Party claimed that the government did not have the mandate to negotiate with the ANC after it's defeat in held.

THE CAMPAIGN

When de Klerk annouced the referendum, many were critical of the referendum, due to the fact that only whites had the right to vote in the referendum.

The National Party and Democratic Party campaigned for a "Yes" vote, while the conservative right wing led by the Conservative Party campaigned for a "No" vote.

Much of de Klerk's efforts in 1992 were directed toward appeasing and weakening his Right-wing opponents, the conservative defenders of apartheid who had broken away from the National Party during the 1980s .

The National Party "Yes" vote campaign was of a kind that had never before been seen in South Africa. The National Party held large political gatherings through the country and published advertisments in many national newpapers and bought commercial time in television.

The National Party produced massive election "Yes" posters with the message "Yes! Ja! SA" and a poster showing a picture of a AWB member with a gun and with the text "You can stop this man! Vote YES".

The Democratic Party had a more traditional posters with the message "Ja vir vrede (Yes for peace)".

De Klerk attempted to show white South Africans that the Government was not giving up power to the ANC, but negotiating on the basis of "power sharing". The National Party and De Klerk warned the white voters that a "No" vote would mean continuation of international sanctions, the danger of civil war and worsening chaos in South Africa.

The "No" campaign, led by Dr Andries Treurnicht , played on racial prejudices and warned of "black majority rule" and "ANC communist rule". The Conservative Party also advocated white self-determination and argued that white South Africans had the right to rule themselves. During the campaign the "No" side also started to advocate a independent homeland for the white minority (see Volkstaat ).

The "No" side tried to convince the white electrorate, that a "Yes" vote would mean the end of the white minority in South Africa .

RESULT

The question asked was ''"Do you support continuation of the reform process which the State President began on February 2, 1990, and which is aimed at a new constitution through negotiation?"''

The results, in a turnout of 85.1%, were:

Yes: 68.73% (1,924,186)

No: 31.27% (875,619)

In Cape Town and Durban over 85% voted "yes" and in Pretoria over 57% voted "yes". Only Pietersburg in the Northern Transvaal , a rural right wing stronghold, voted "no" with 57%. Election analysts reported that support among the Afrikaners was actually slightly higher than among English speakers, although this seems somewhat unlikely, given that the electoral regions returning a higher yes vote had higher proportions of English-speaking voters. Also, English-speaking South Africans had most to gain from the future changes i.e. the removal of sanctions, given that they controlled most of South Africa's industry, whereas the Afrikaners, who controlled most of the government positions (which they all but lost as a result of the changes) had most to lose.

Next day, President de Klerk said ''"Today we have closed the book on apartheid"'' as he celebrated his 56th birthday. Nelson Mandela said that he was ''"very happy indeed"''.

There are many reasons why a yes vote was passed.
1) Many white South Africans had become fed up of being regarded as a pariah nation.
2) White South Africans had simply become resigned to the inevitability of black rule.
3) The white electorate knew that voting no would further isolate South Africa internationally and bring about further sanctions.
4) South Africans wanted increased access to international trade that they were denied by the sanctions.
5) The white South African electorate naively believed that multi-racial democracy would bring about an end to the violence.
6) Many whites had simply become morally opposed in principle to apartheid.
7) The fact that capitulation to South Africa's blacks was the only option on offer (the idea of a separate white state was discussed by some politicians, but was not offered in the referendum).
8) The government had waged a series of unpopular wars across southern Africa that resulted in a number of lives being lost that was unacceptable to the electorate.
9) An expression of general discontent with De Klerk's predecessors.
10) Many political leaders reluctantly backed the apartheid government because it was fighting against communists in Africa. With the demise of the Cold War and the Soviet Union shortly before the referendum, the apartheid system suddenly lost a significant amount of world support, with the white electorate recognising its position as being untenable.

AFTERMATH

The right wing criticised the referendum and accused the government of Ballot Rigging . The right wing lost where they had been the strongest, in the Afrikaner heartland and in the big cities.

The alliance between the Conservative Party and the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging may have harmed the CP and in some cases even scared away voters to the "Yes" side.

De Klerk and his Government could now claim that the whites were in favour of democracy and that they had a clear mandate to negotiate with the African National Congress . The ANC had disliked the referendum, mainly because whites where the only one allowed to vote. But the ANC realised that a "No" vote would not only risk the negotiations but also increase the political chaos in the country. The ANC therefor advocated a "Yes" vote.

The result of the referendum has been seen as the "acceptance" of a majority rule in South Africa, by the white minority. It was said that the white South Africans voted for their "fears, hopes and their wallets".

The next day, the Cape Times news bill was dominated by the large text "YES, IT'S YES!".

SEE ALSO

South Africa

1960 South Africa Referendum

Apartheid

Information About

1992 South African Referendum