Advertisement

The Role of the Public

  • Deon Geldenhuys

Abstract

The role of the people in the formation of foreign policy is in academic literature, as in political debate, a contentious subject. There are, on the one hand, scholars who see the public making little or no positive contribution, if not actually being a hindrance, to foreign policy making. On the other hand, there is the notion that in a democracy also a government’s foreign policy should be subject to popular control.1 The dialectic essentially deals with the political role of the people as “an unorganised whole”, that is, with public opinion as it is commonly understood. This is only one possible level of analysis. The other is to consider the public’s role as articulated by organised groups, which in effect serve as intermediaries between government and people.2

Keywords

Foreign Policy Foreign Affair Opinion Survey Foreign Ministry South African Government 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes to the Text

  1. 1.
    See Frankel, J, op. cit., pp.70 & 71.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ibid., p.70.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Holsti, KJ, International Politics: A Framework for Analysis, Third Edition, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1977, pp.393 & 394.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    The concept was introduced by Gabriel A. Almond in The American People and Foreign Policy, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York, 1950, 269pp.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    See Wallace, W, The Foreign Policy Process in Britain, Royal Institute of International Affairs, London, 1975, p.88.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barber, J, British Foreign Policy, op. cit., p.92.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    See Vital, D, op. cit., p.82.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barber, J, British Foreign Policy, op. cit., p.70.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holsti, KJ (1977), op. cit., pp.393 & 394.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Abravenal, MD and B Hughes, “Public attitudes and foreign policy behaviour in Western democracies”, in Chittick, WO (Ed), The Analysis of Foreign Policy Outputs, Charles E Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus, 1975, p.54.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Barber, J, British Foreign Policy, op. cit., p.92.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frankel, J, op. cit., p.70.Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    Barber, J, British Foreign Policy, op. cit., p.95.Google Scholar
  14. 21.
    The lengthy declaration is reproduced in Shaw, JA, “The evolving framework”, op. cit., pp.15–17. The four parties inter alia resolved to restrict the public sector’s direct role in the economy “mainly to the provision of collective and strategic goods and services and to the co-ordination of regional development”; to provide “as much scope as possible to private business enterprises to decide what, how, where and for whom to produce”, and to give private business enterprises the assurance “that they will not be nationalised and that their ability to make profits and to repatriate dividends will not be arbitrarily restricted”.Google Scholar
  15. 24.
    See Geldenhuys, DJ and TD Venter, op. cit., pp.55 & 56.Google Scholar
  16. 26.
    Etheredge, DA, op. cit., pp.12 & 13; The ASSOCOM Executive Council Response to the Concept of a Southern African Constellation of States … As Outlined by the Prime Minister, the Hon. PW Botha, Issued by the Association of Chambers of Commerce of South Africa, Johannesburg, 21 May 1980, 3pp.; and The Constellation of States, Sanctions, and Southern Africa, Address to the Witbank Chamber of Commerce and Industries by Mr Raymond Parsons, Chief Executive of the Association of Chambers of Commerce (ASSOCOM), on Wednesday, March 18, 1981, Roneoed, ASSOCOM, 9pp.Google Scholar
  17. 33.
    Republic of South Africa, South Africa 1982, Official Yearbook of the Republic of South Africa, Chris van Rensburg Publications, Johannesburg, 1982, p.514.Google Scholar
  18. 34.
    Ibid., p.495, and an official brochure, The FCI. Google Scholar
  19. 38.
    See Towards a Constellation, op. cit., pp.28 & 29, and Etheredge, DA, op. cit., pp.12 & 13.Google Scholar
  20. 43.
    See Giliomee, H, op. cit., pp.131–5.Google Scholar
  21. 44.
    Stultz, NM, Who Goes to Parliament? Institute for Social and Economic Research, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, 1975, p.13.Google Scholar
  22. 47.
    Stultz, NM, op. cit., p.13.Google Scholar
  23. 57.
    Munger, ES, Foreign Policy, op. cit., pp.34–6 & 51–3.Google Scholar
  24. 58.
    For example, Van Aswegen, HJ, Geskiedenis van Afrika: Van die Vroegste Oorspronge tot Onafhanklikheid, Academica, Pretoria, 1980, 557pp.Google Scholar
  25. A very recent publication by a Pretoria University historian who has written several books on aspects of contemporary African history is Van Rensburg, APJ, Moderne Afrika, De Jager-HAUM, Pretoria, 1983, 317pp.Google Scholar
  26. 59.
    For example, Prinsloo, DS, United States Foreign Policy and the Republic of South Africa, Foreign Affairs Association, Pretoria, 1978, 141pp.;Google Scholar
  27. Spring, GM, Confrontation: The Approaching Crisis between the United States and South Africa, Valiant Publishers, Sandton, 1977, 181pp., and Steward, AW, op. cit., 308pp.Google Scholar
  28. 61.
    Olivier, GC, op. cit., 236pp. The author is Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Politics, Pretoria University. In August 1983 his university seconded him for two years to the foreign ministry.Google Scholar
  29. 62.
    Spence, JE, Republic under Pressure, op. cit., 132pp.Google Scholar
  30. 63.
    See Willers, D & S Begg (Eds), South Africa and Sanctions: Genesis and Prospects, South African Institute of Race Relations/South African Institute of International Affairs, Johannesburg, 1979, 95pp.Google Scholar
  31. 64.
    Munger, ES, Foreign Policy, op. cit., p.52.Google Scholar
  32. 67.
    Quoted by Wilkins, I & H Strydom, op. cit., p.345.Google Scholar
  33. 68.
    Quoted ibid., p.410. Pelzer’s official history of the Broederbond has been cited in Chapter 1.Google Scholar
  34. 69.
    Serfontein, JHP, op. cit., p.98.Google Scholar
  35. 70.
    See ibid., pp.99–125, andGoogle Scholar
  36. Wilkins I & H Strydom, op. cit., pp.5–7 & 190.Google Scholar
  37. 71.
    Serfontein, JHP, op. cit., 278pp., andGoogle Scholar
  38. Wilkins I & H Strydom, op. cit., 597pp. According to a former spy of the Bureau for State Security,Google Scholar
  39. the Broederbond was so anxious to stop the latter book being published that the authors were offered a bribe of over R30 000 (Winter, G, op. cit., p.87).Google Scholar
  40. The Broederbond’s published official history (Pelzer, AN, op. cit., 193pp.), though useful, is not surprisingly far less revealing than the other two books on the organisation’s influence in the corridors of power.Google Scholar
  41. 72.
    Munger, ES, Foreign Policy, op. cit., pp.56 & 82.Google Scholar
  42. 74.
    Serfontein, JHP, op. cit., p.145.Google Scholar
  43. 75.
    Wilkins, I & H Strydom, op. cit., p.30.Google Scholar
  44. 76.
    A breakdown of the Broederbond’s membership figures for 1977 showed that the teaching profession represented the largest group (including university and school teachers) − 20,36%; followed by farmers − 18,81%; clergymen − 7,12%, and the public service − 4,35%. In 1968 16 managers of newspaper groups and 22 editors were Broederbonders; by 1977 these figures may well have increased. (Quoted ibid., p.366.) Membership in 1968 stood at 8 154.Google Scholar
  45. (Quoted by Serfontein, JHP, op. cit., p.105.)Google Scholar
  46. 77.
    Quoted by Serfontein, JHP, op. cit., p.110.Google Scholar
  47. 78.
    Quoted by Wilkins, I & H Strydom, op. cit., p.356.Google Scholar
  48. 80.
    Serfontein, JHP, op. cit., pp.101, 102, 105, 123 & 153, andGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilkins, I & H Strydom, op. cit., pp.239–52.Google Scholar
  50. 81.
    Quoted by Wilkins, I & H Strydom, op. cit., p.28.Google Scholar
  51. See also Serfontein, JHP, op. cit., pp.123, 146 & 156.Google Scholar
  52. 82.
    Quoted by Wilkins, I & H Strydom, op. cit., p.29.Google Scholar
  53. 83.
    Ibid., p.356.Google Scholar
  54. 84.
    Ibid., p.27.Google Scholar
  55. 85.
    Ibid., p.31.Google Scholar
  56. 86.
    Quoted ibid., p.441.Google Scholar
  57. 87.
    Quoted by Serfontein, JHP, op. cit., p.156.Google Scholar
  58. 88.
    Quoted ibid., p.155.Google Scholar
  59. 89.
    Ibid., p.156.Google Scholar
  60. 90.
    See Wilkins, I & H Strydom, op. cit., pp.157ff.Google Scholar
  61. 91.
    Ibid., p.1.Google Scholar
  62. 93.
    See Wilkins, I & H Strydom, op. cit., p.440.Google Scholar
  63. 94.
    Quoted by Serfontein, JHP, op. cit., p.101.Google Scholar
  64. 96.
    Wilkins, I & H Strydom, op. cit. (title of the book).Google Scholar
  65. 97.
    For details about the origins of the South Africa Foundation, see Gerber, LB, op. cit., pp.1–22. Gerber in May 1960 joined the Foundation as Assistant Director and subsequently became Director.Google Scholar
  66. 99.
    Beck, WF de la Harpe, Presidential Address to the South Africa Foundation, 11 March 1981, reprinted in South Africa International, Vol. II, No. 4, April 1981, pp.177ff. One of the Foundation’s main activities was sponsoring visits to South Africa by eminent foreigners. The extent to which the programme has reached into the corridors of power is seen in the fact that every Foundationsponsored guest from Westminster between 1968 and 1970 became a member of the Heath Cabinet, except for one, who became Speaker of the House of Commons (Gerber, LB, op. cit., p.150).Google Scholar
  67. 100.
    It is only necessary to read the regular SA Foundation News, the quarterly South Africa International, and such occasional publications as Breytenbach, WJ (Ed), The Constellation of States: A Consideration, SA Foundation, Johannesburg, 1980, 81pp.Google Scholar
  68. 101.
    Munger, ES, Foreign Policy, op. cit., p.78.Google Scholar
  69. 102.
    Gerber, LB, op. cit., pp.13, 152 & 164.Google Scholar
  70. 104.
    Munger, ES, Foreign Policy, op. cit., p.57.Google Scholar
  71. 105.
    See Mulder, PWA, op. cit., p.417.Google Scholar
  72. 108.
    Munger, ES, Foreign Policy, op. cit., pp.76–8.Google Scholar
  73. 114.
    Gordon, L (Ed), Survey of Race Relations in South Africa1981, SAIRR, Johannesburg, 1982, p.25.Google Scholar
  74. 124.
    Williams, F, The Right to Know: The Rise of the World Press, Longman, London, 1969, p.148, quoted by Steyn Commission, Vol. 3. op. cit., p.970.Google Scholar
  75. 125.
    Sussens, A, “The English language press”, in South Africa Today, Financial Mail publication, 1966, p.77,Google Scholar
  76. quoted by Herbst, DAS, op. cit., p.222.Google Scholar
  77. 127.
    Potter, E, The Press as Opposition: The Political Role of South African Newspapers, Chatto & Windus, London, 1975, p.31.Google Scholar
  78. 128.
    On the history of Die Burger, see Scannell, JP (Ed), Keeromstraat 30, Nasionale Boekhandel, Cape Town, 1965, 267pp. 129. Steyn Commission, Vol. 3. op. cit., p.974 & 975.Google Scholar
  79. 130.
    Ibid., pp.977–80.Google Scholar
  80. 132.
    Broughton, M, Press and Politics of South Africa, Purnell & Sons, Cape Town, 1961, p.7.Google Scholar
  81. 133.
    Potter, E, op. cit., p.170.Google Scholar
  82. 134.
    Loc. cit., and Broughton, M, op. cit., p.7.Google Scholar
  83. 137.
    See Republic of South Africa, Verslag van die Kommissie van Ondersoek na Beriggewing oor Sekerheidsaangeleenthede Rakende die Suid-Afrikaanse Weermag en die Suid-Afrikaanse Polisiemag, RP 52/1980, Government Printer, Pretoria, 1980, pp.102, 154–6. This Commission, like the Commission of Inquiry into the Mass Media, was chaired by Mr Justice MT Steyn.Google Scholar
  84. 138.
    The Steyn Commission, Vol. 3, op. cit., p.943, took the rather questionable view that “the overall effect of the restrictive legislation has been widely exaggerated and even sloganised”, claiming that “certain members of the media and certain of their minions”, had overzealously created “a false image of ‘press oppression and censorship’”. For a different view, see Duff, T, “A legislated erosion of freedom”, Ecquid Novi, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1980, pp.128–35.Google Scholar
  85. 142.
    Mulder, CE, “Interessant of belangrik?”, Ecquid Novi, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1981, pp.69–90.Google Scholar
  86. 143.
    The series was subsequently published as a booklet: Parker, A, Secret U.S. War Against South Africa, SA Today, Johannesburg, 1977, 76pp.Google Scholar
  87. 146.
    See Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Press, op. cit., Annexure XX. Useful background information on the Commission’s origins, terms of reference, proceedings and eventual findings is contained in Potter, E, op. cit., pp.102–8.Google Scholar
  88. 151.
    Mulder, CE, “World focus on South Africa”, South Africa International, Vol. 12, No. 2, October 1981, pp.384–93.Google Scholar
  89. For an earlier content analysis of Austrian press reporting by the same author, see “Some stereotyped images of South Africa”, Politik on, Vol. 1, No. 1, June 1974, pp.15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 153.
    Potter, E. op. cit., p.130.Google Scholar
  91. 155.
    See Vosloo, T, Schalk Pienaar: 10 Jaar Politieke Kommentaar, Tafelberg, Cape Town, 1975, pp.22, 41 & 42. (Pienaar was at the time —1968–9 — editor of Die Beeld, Nasionale Pers’s Sunday paper.)Google Scholar
  92. 156.
    Cillié, PJ, Tydgenote, Tafelberg, Cape Town, 1980, pp.16–23.Google Scholar
  93. 158.
    “Dawie” (columnist), Die Burger, 22/9/1973, quoted in Steyn Commission, Vol. 3, op. cit., pp.1037 & 1038. See also Herbst, DAS, op. cit., pp.351 & 360.Google Scholar
  94. 160.
    See Potter, E, op. cit., p.170.Google Scholar
  95. 193.
    See Seiler, J, “The world perspectives of South African media”, Communications in Africa, Vol. 1, No. 5, March 1974, pp.26–8, for a content analysis of To the Point’s news coverage.Google Scholar
  96. 196.
    Ibid., p.1073. In April 1980 the prime minister told Parliament that the television service, falling under state control, “will in future be instructed not to feature reports of the onslaughts on South Africa by revolutionary elements as main news items” (Quoted ibid., p.1050). On the content of SABC radio news broadcasts, see Seiler, J, op. cit., pp.28–32.Google Scholar
  97. 198.
    Adam, H, South Africa: Sociological Perspectives, Oxford University Press, London, 1971, pp.90ff.Google Scholar
  98. 199.
    Hudson, W, GF Jacobs & S Biesheuvel, Anatomy of South Africa: A Scientific Study of Present Day Attitudes, Purnell, Cape Town, 1966, p.27.Google Scholar
  99. 200.
    Lever, H, “Public opinion and voting”, in De Crespigny, ARC & R Schrire, (Eds), The Government and Politics of South Africa, Juta, Cape Town, 1978, p.144.Google Scholar
  100. 201.
    Quoted by Lever, H, op. cit., pp.144 & 145.Google Scholar
  101. 202.
    Quoted by Schlemmer, L, “External pressures and local attitudes and interests”, in Clifford-Vaughan, F McA (Ed), International Pressures and Political Change in South Africa, Oxford University Press, Cape Town, 1978, p.79.Google Scholar
  102. 203.
    Adam, H, op. cit., pp.90ff.Google Scholar
  103. 204.
    Schlemmer, L, op. cit., p.79.Google Scholar
  104. 205.
    In an opinion poll conducted for Rapport in 1974 respondents were asked, “What three issues should the government give its attention to after the coming general election?” “Terrorism” was mentioned by 25%, a further 14,9% mentioned “security” or “defence”. (Quoted by Lever, H, op. cit., p.144.)Google Scholar
  105. 206.
    Hanf, T, H Weiland & G Vierdag, South Africa: The Prospects of Peaceful Change — An Empirical Enquiry into the Possibility of Democratic Conflict Regulation, David Philip Publishers, Cape Town, 1981, pp.206ff.Google Scholar
  106. 209.
    Hudson, W, et al., op. cit., p.37.Google Scholar
  107. 210.
    Conducted by Market Research Africa and published in The Argus, 12/5/1976, cited in Hallett, R, op. cit., p.384.Google Scholar
  108. 211.
    Quoted by Schlemmer, L, op. cit., p.79.Google Scholar
  109. 212.
    Quoted by Frankel, J, op. cit., p.73.Google Scholar
  110. 213.
    Schlemmer, L, op. cit., p.79.Google Scholar
  111. 232.
    Edelstein, ML, What Do Coloureds Think?, Labour and Community Consultants, Johannesburg, 1974, p.60.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. J. Geldenhuys and the South African Institute of International Affairs 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deon Geldenhuys

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations