OBJECTOR £ » *V v v ^ f t l f i o l 11 i f ( D i iM- i cnt i oi iN O b j f t t n t S u p p o r l ( . r o u p v " I - - x l ' n l 1 ' ' s 4

Hathorn Released

Pete H athorn , a conscientious objector w ho stood trial a year ago, was recently released from prison. OBJECTOR spoke to Pete about some o f his prison experi­ences.

| O : What were your m ain reasons for objecting to m ilitary service?

|P : F irstly , the SADF is fighting a civil, n o t an external war. Secondly, the people it is fighting against had a long history o f non-violent resistance before they resorted to armed strug­gle, and th ird ly , th a t the SADF’s role is no t defensive, as can be seen by the illegal occupation o f Namibia and incursions in to neighbouring states.

| 0 : Could you tell us a bit about your court martial?

|P : The prosecutor was quite sym pathetic and fairly easy on me, bu t the head of the court gave my law yer no chance at all, and only w anted to know w hat the m aximum sentence was tha t he could impose.

):W ere you sent to D etention Barracks after the court martial?Yes, I spent tw o m onths in DB while m y case w ent before the Review Board. The o ther inm ates largely left me alone. They d idn’t know I was a ‘political’. DB is beyond the reach o f the law. I was pu t into solitary for tw o weeks, for speaking on the phone!

DB is very isolated from the main­stream — people are m uch m ore cut o ff from life there than in prison. The Military Police hassled me tow ards the end o f my tim e there, when they heard 1 was a ‘political’, bu t before th a t they left me alone:

Pete Hathorn finished ‘pushing tim e’ : “ the costs have changed, but the facts remain the same.”

O: Where were you moved to then?P: 1 was moved to Pretoria Central, where

I was lucky to have contact w ith Billy Paddock, ano ther CO. I felt much more in touch there, w ith m ore people to speak to and some contact w ith the outside world.

It made a big difference being w ith Billy, rather than having to conform to the racist, sexist stereotype. Most re­lationships in prison are purely funct­ional.

I w anted to study while 1 was in prison, bu t it took over tw o m onths before I was allowed. Studying gives you som ething to look forward to each day and you have something constructive to do.

0 :Y o u spent your remaining time in Polsmoor.

P: Yes, th a t was a big change. Pollsmoor is regarded as a ‘soft’ prison and has a m ore relaxed atm osphere. A lot o f the tim e I worked outside, so I saw trees and the sky. In Central all you see is red brick.

Working is very frustrating. The m otivation behind prisoners doing work is th a t they pay their debt back to society. But i t ’s d ifferent w ith COs, because th ey ’re working for the apart­heid state, which is w hat th ey ’re objecting against.

0 :H o w do you feel about your prison experience now?

P: Looking back at the tim e, it was al­right. But looking forward to it is heavy. The phrase ‘pushing tim e’ is quite apt, because i t ’s like a weight on your shoulders.

0 :T o w hat extent did the support you received from people outside prison lighten the load?

P: While in D etention Barracks - with unlim ited letters allowed - people’s support made an incredible difference. In prison, ju s t knowing that people are thinking of you helps: each letter one receives is im portant. On coming ou t o f prison, the personal support received from family, friends, and COSG helps a lot. .

O: Would you do the same thing again?P: Well, the legislation has changed. It

now stipulates a maximum six-year prison sentence. Blit the basic prin­ciples stay the same. If you partici­pate in the m ilitary you must accept tha t you are fighting for apartheid. The costs have chang d, but the facts remain the same.

editorial I Budget for Peace ?\ ( AT WHAT COST?

On Mai cl) IX. 1984 Prime M inister! Botha announced that South A fricaf was now .it peace with Mozambique . .

On March 2;s finance Minister O w enl Norwood announced that the defencel budget had risen by 21,4 percent .

The two happenings are not unrelated.

It is South A frica ''s massive war m achine! which has enabled it to win “ peace"! through the barrel o f the gun. A fter! years o f destabilisation o f its eastern! neighbour. South Africa lias been able! to force M ozambique president S am ora| Machel to the negotiating table. E conom -| ic disruption, m ilitary attacks and the! backing up o f the terrorist M ozam bique! N ational Resistance Movement have all! contributed to South Africa's d iplom atic!

success" - success, that is, in the ey es | o f the conservative western powers.

N ot that South Africa itself has been I free from pressure. The cost o f fighting wars on three fronts - in Namibia (a t I nearly R2 million a day), in Angola and I in Mozambique — has put a massive drain | on South A frica's econom ic resources, especially in a period o f severe drought.

Internationally , South Africa has been I a ttacked for its system atic policy of I destabilisation. So it was in South Afri-1 ca’s interests, too , to go to the negotia t- | ing table.

But w hat does all this hold ou t for the possibilities o f positive change within South Africa? Part o f the answer comes I in the new defence budget. The am ount! allocated now stands at R3755 million. But when the finance allocated for SA D f building projects and for arma-l m ents purchases from A rm scor are l added, then the figure approaches] R 5000 million. 1

This am ount will increasingly be chan-l nelled internally, in an a ttem pt to crush! all signs o f resistance by those opposed! to apartheid. It will be used, too, to ! prop up the violence o f apartheid, m ost! obviously evident in the destruction o fl houses and the forced relocation o f | millions.

We. in the Conscientious O bjection! Support m ovem ent condem n South! Africa's gun-boat diplomacy. We con-1 demn the massive increase in defence! spending. And we affirm that true peace! in Southern A frica can only be achieved! once the struggle for freedom, democracy! and justice in South Africa, has been[

T he governm ent’s peace overtures have created hope am onst m any South Afri­cans. The defence budget suggests a d ifferent picture.

Mr Horwood announced last m onth that the Defence Budget was up by 21,4 per­cent, bringing it to R 3754 667 000.

This am ount o f R3.7 billion understates the to ta l defence expenditure. The cost o f arms purchases from Armscor and the cost o f the construction o f bases and camps have no t been included. The latter is budgeted under the D epartm ent o f Public Works. These could account for a fu rther R2 billion.

South Africa is a country w ith a severe housing backlog, m alnutrition and pover­ty . Y et, the governm ent’s budget again shows it is no t prepared to make peace w ith its own people:

73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

E xpenditure on black education 1984: R709 277 000E xpenditure on health 1984:R 430 347 000Expenditure on defence 1984:R 3754 667 000.

COSG debates BoardIn the first o f a series o f open meetings on issues facing COs, Cape Tow n COSG discussed how we should respond to the Board o f Religious O bjection.

Invited to speak on the panel were Rev R obin Petersen, a Congregational minister, Prof Andries du T oit, from the D epartm ent of Political Studies in Stel­lenbosch, and Peter Moll, w ho spent 1981 in D etention Barracks fo r Con­scientious O bjection.

P rof du T oit argued tha t there was a contradiction in asking fo r political grounds for conscientious objection to be recognised, if this assumes the pres­ence o f a dem ocratic society. He dis­tinguished between religious objectors, whose bottom line was to “ Obey God rather than m an” , and “ dem ocratic objectors” , whose objection assumed a com m itm ent to a dem ocratic society and were therefore prepared to serve an alternative to the m ilitary service dem anded. He later agreed th a t a third categorisation was possible: those who rejected conscription because they op­posed an unjust state; but he did not indicate why such objectors should no t be recognised.

Peter Moll spoke about conscientious objection in an in ternational perspec­tive, and illustrated his talk by referring to the m any objectors who had spent long periods in prison. Britain in World War II allowed socialists as well as o ther objectors to perform non-m ilitary service, and he regarded their system as the best yet devised. Only the sincerity o f the objector was taken in to account. He also said tha t the current West German system, which only allows non-m ilitary service for pacifist objectors, had a lot m ore leeway than the new South African system.

R obin Petersen, speaking from a theologi­cal and moral perspective, exposed a num ber o f contradictions in the new legislation on conscientious objection. He pointed ou t tha t while the NG Church believes th a t the Just War Theory is the only ethical basis for participation in o r objection to a war, it concludes th a t the B oard for Religious O bjection should only allow pacifist objection. He called fo r the churches to reject the Board and no t allow their ministers to participate in adjudicating im m oral legis­lation.

Community opposes SADFcampControversy surrounds the organisation o f a camp for over 100 school children at the Belmore Prim ary School, Hanover Park.

When children arrived hom e w ith in­dem nity form s granting paren ts’ consent for the camp, m any signed w ithout being aware th a t the SADF was running the camp. O ne parent, Mr Abraham Jones, said: “ I was n o t very keen be­cause I felt I did no t know enough about the camp. I am no t prepared to let m y son Marius go, now tha t I know th a t the SADF is involved.”

N either the children nor their parents were to ld by the camp organisers o f the SA D F’s involvement. When the parents became aware of the SA DF’s role, a delegation o f 10 parents m et w ith the school principal. He denied tha t the school o r the D epartm ent o f Internal A ffairs was involved, claiming th a t the camp was organised on the personal initiative o f one of the teachers at the school.

A pam phlet was then distributed to all parents, which argued th a t the camps were an a ttem pt “ to sell the arm y” to the children, and to prepare them for fu ture army duty .

Board hears 4 objectorsThe Board o f Religious O bjection has interviewed applicants for the first time. They were newly-qualified teachers who applied for non-com batant service after beginning m ilitary training at Oudshoorn.

While three o f the applicants were classi­fied as non-com batants, the case o f the fou rth , a Presbyterian, was postponed indefinitely because the Presbyterian m inister refused to participate in the Board. A ccording to the Defence A m end­m ent A ct o f 1983, th e objector will have to continue com batant training until the Board has classified him as a non- com batant. If he had applied before the beginning o f his m ilitary service, he w ould n o t have had to report fo r service un til his case had been heard.

OBJECTOR apologises for the lateness of this issue, due to technical problems.

A m eeting organised by the UDF Area C om m ittee, and attended by over 100 pupils and parents, resolved to oppose the camp. Typical o f the objections raised by the parents was th a t o f one m other who said she believed tha t the SADF was holding camps for young black children “ to catch them early. They give them a good tim e so th a t they associate good things w ith the army . .

The day after the meeting the SADF am m ounced tha t the camp had been cancelled “owing to a re-organisation o f our (Civic A ction) departm ent.” (!?1

Such camps are organised in such a way as to direct the least possible atten tion to SADF involvement. However, it is clear th a t the camps enjoy the support o f the D epartm ent o f In ternal Affairs, which controls coloured education. Mr N Eales, press liaison officer for the D epartm ent, said tha t “ the D epart­m ent approved o f the camps, but did no t organise them . The iniative is taken from within the schools and individuals in the schools contac t the SADF to arrange them .”

E C C moves forwardThe End Conscription Com m ittee (ECC) in the Western Cape is to campaign fo r an end to the war in Namibia. The EEC sees the ongoing war as an im portant reason for com pulsory conscription into the SADF.

South A frica’s presence in Namibia is seen —b o th in ternationally and internally — as th a t of a foreign and illegal occupy­ing force, following the In ternational Court o f Justice’s 1970 decision and subsequent U nited N ation’s resolutions.

The cost of the war, bo th hum an and financial, is beginning to tell on South Africa. The SADF itself recognises th a t it is involved in a “ no-win” war requiring political — not m ilitary solu­tions. Y et South Africa continues to stall on agreeing to the only viable solution presented to date - UN Resolu­tion 435.

Young South Africans are being called up n o t only to defend apartheid, the ECC asserts, bu t also to m aintain the occupation o f a foreign country , and to engage in acts o f destabilisation and aggression against neighbouring states.

The ECC in the Western Cape is compris­ed o f organisations ranging from the Black Sash, NUSAS and COSG, to TEAM and church bodies. The ECC will focu,s on the war situation in Namibia

in May and hopes to raise for public discussion the issues surrounding the Namibian situation.

Member organisations o f the ECC in the Western Cape have already begun to adm inister surveys raising questions relat­ed to conscription and militarisation. A survey at the University o f Cape Town provided both useful inform ation and stim ulated discussion on campus (see report on page 8). TEAM, an ecumenical group, is coordinating a survey in Western Cape churches. Black Sash has prepared a survey for the broader com m unity.

In o th er regions the end conscription campaign is finding its feet w ith com m it­tees active in D urban and Johannesburg.

* In D urban, the ECC consists o f about 10 organisations, ranging from church and ecumenical bodies to NUSAS, Black Sash and detainees and CO support groups. The com m ittee is in the process o f preparing a survey, and is making educative material about m ilitarisation available to the public.

* In Johannesburg, the ECC has about 12 organisations, representing the same range of constituencies as in D urban and Cape Town. A survey is in preparation for distribution in different areas.

ISRAEL: War25-ycaj niti Kobi Peter was sentenced to one m onth in a military prison for refusing orders to join his unit in L eban­on. He was the 100th Israeli soldier to be jailed for this reason in the past year or so - and he will certainly no t be the last. More than 2 000 men legally obliged to serve in the army reserve have pledged themselves to refuse duty in Lebanon by signing the petition o f a radical new protest group called Yesh Gvul, a Hebrew phrase which means “There is a lim it” . Some of these objectors have already been to prison twice for their beliefs;

Yesh Gvul is no t the only protest move­m ent to have emerged from the armed forces in the b itter afterm ath of the first war Israel has undertaken w ithout a clearly favourable national consensus. Soldiers Against the Medal urges those who served in Lebanon to reject the red, white and blue striped campaign ribbon issued by the governm ent for what it still insists on describing as “ O peration Peace for Galilee” . Well over 1 000 have already done so, among them Sgt Carlos WEiner, whose com m an­ding officer prom ptly reduced him in rank and sentenced him to a week in the lock-up. Paths to Peace, established by troops from crack units o f religious Jews who were in Lebanon, claims several thousand adherents among the normally nationalistic O rthodox com­m unity. M others Against Silence hold dem oncrations on the sisth of every m onth to com m em orate the start o f a war which still takes their sons to a dangerous front line. Some 15 000 women signed their demand to “ stop the madness” and bring the boys safely back home.

And then there is Peace Now, biggest and best-organised of the peace groups, founded by 350 front-line soldiers — offiqers, NCOs and privates — in the wake of President Sadat’s historic visit to Israel five years ago. I t was able to bring some 400 000 Israelis into the streets to p rotest against the Beirut refugee camp massacres - perhaps a quarter o f the country’s adult popula­tion. Long before Lebanon, Peace Now support was growing among the ranks of soldiers w ho found the job of polic­ing Israel’s occupied territories, the West Bank the Gaza S trip , demeaning and immoral.

It was a Peace Now dem onstration outside Meanchem Begin’s office in Jerusalem earlier this year which pro­vided the protest movem ent w ith its first, highly sym bolic, m artyr. An Israeli army grenade hurled in to the crowd demanding the resignation o f Arik

Sharon, then Defence M inister and architect o f the Lebanon invasion, killed Emile Grunzweig, a 33-year-old reserve paratroop officer who had fought in the Six Day and Yom Kippur wars. Equally sym bolic, the first suspect detained by the police (he was later released) was also an Israeli com bat soldier, associated w ith one of the extrem e right-wing groups which Grunzweig, like a growing num ber of political m oderate Israelis, had come to regard w ith alarm. “Emile had an obsession about dem ocracy in our coun try ,” a friend recalled.

Meir Scheffer described how his experien­ces in Lebanon changed his m ind about service in the Israeli arm y.

A reserve staff-sergeant in the paratroops, Scheffer was called up for the planned assault on PLO strongholds in West Beirut. “ Everyone understood w hat th a t w ould involve, heavy casualties for us and a lo t o f civilians killed. We could see them in the houses we were to attack, and although nobody said m uch at the tim e, th a t was when the doubts really began. We were an unusually well educated unit and we brought our personal princi­ples in to the arm y w ith us. By then , the lies o u r ow n governm ent was telling and the losses we had already suffered were always on our m ind .”

“ I w asn’t politically active before this war, and although I had doubts about the real reasons for our invastion,I thought, well, maybe it’ll tu rn ou t O K .”

Scheffer’s unit was w ithdraw n when the PLO agreed to leave Beirut, but back hom e, talking w ith his wife, he began to consider refusing to serve again in w hat he was now convinced was an unjust and w asteful war. Even so, when th is th ird recall came, in March this year, he alm ost went. “ The atm os­phere in our un it was very bad, nobody believed any longer in w hat Israel was doing in Lebanon. I raised the possibility o f refusing service and we had some very serious discussions. I asked my closest friends, look, if I refuse, am I betraying you? N ot one said yes. My com m anding officer tried to stop me, talking about bringing shame on the unit and my fam ily. I took a deep breath and said ‘D on’t bother, I’m no t going.’ ”

Meir Scheffsr’s story is echoed, w ith m inor variations, by m ost Yesh Gvul “ resusniks” . Paratroopers, tank crewmen, com bat in fan try , even a m ilitary police­man: trained soldiers w ith clean records, they can hardly be w ritten o ff as paci­fists and draft dodgers.

On The

David R othfield, an im m igrant from Australia tw o decades ago, opposed the invasion o f Lebanon from the start and, called for service there, asked his com m ander to assign him somewhere else. T urned dow n, he stayed w ith his in fan try un it “ because I d idn’t feel I could cut m yself o ff from society” . Next tim e he was recalled, he p u t his conscience first, warning his com m and­ing officer tha t he would no t cross the LEbanese border. Sure enough, when the trucks got there, R otherfield fo t off, and was perm itted to re tu rn to bsse camp. The th ird tim e he was called for Lebanon, last May, he stayed a t home and was given 35 days in prison. One m onth after he got ou t, his call-up papers arrived again - this tim e for service w ithin Israel.

None o f the reservists w ho chose jail over LEbanon reports m istreatm ent or even harrassm ent from guards and o ther solders in for “ ord inary" offences. “They used to chang ‘Begin, Begin’ at first” , a Yesh Gvul activist recalls, “ bu t after we explained to them w hy we were there, it was the b irth o f under­standing and respect.” Som ew hat to their surprise, few form er prisoners encountered m uch public hostility when they got ou t. Meir Sheffer had warned his wife th a t it m ight be hard at first,

Home Front?

but he found strangers shaking his hand at work, praising his stand against the war.

Daniel Tim erm an was posted to Lebanon after the main fighting ended, bu t was deeply shocked by w hat he saw and was expected to do.The refugee camp massacres in Beirut clinched his decision. “ In 20 years tim e I d o n ’t w ant to tell by kid, ‘yes, I w ent bu t I w asn’t there . . . I was based somewhere else . . . I d idn’t know .’ I prefer to tell my children. ‘I knew and I refused .’ ” Tim erm an was sentenced .to 28 days in jail last O ctober: in May this year, he again refused reserve duty in Lebanon and received 35 days’ deten­tion.

The closer one got to the Israeli front line, the m ore anger and cynicism was voiced am ong the troops about their governm ent’s real objective in Lebanon.

T oday, m any of these tough bu t troubled soldiers are active in various branches of the peace m ovem ent. Thousands more came hom e profoundly disenchanted w ith the Country's leaders. F o r every Yesh Gvul “ refusnik” , -scores, perhaps hundreds, o f reservists avoid serving in Lebanon again by producing acceptable excuses:

“ Frankly , I was still confused and rather apprehensive when I reported to the arm y jail. Y ou don’t refuse arm y service easily in th is country . B ut when I go t ou t 35 days later, I knew th a t I had done the right thing and I was com pletely at peace w ith m yself.”

“ I expect the w orst because the arm y is clearly going to be Lebanon for a long tim e, and may decide to make an example o f people who refuse to dis­courage others who m ay be contem plat­ing it ,’’says Meir Scheffer.

No o ther peace group in Israel goes as far as Yesh Gvul in urging soldiers to refuse Lebanon duty .

The dissatisfaction which started in Lebanon is spreading to o ther occupied areas.

A great many soldiers, above all those from kibbutz or similar backgrounds, already find service in th e West Bank and Gaza alm ost unbearable. “ We are gradually losing our hum anity because the local population are becoming mere objects in ou r eyes . . . to be degraded and hum iliated,” one decorated offier complains.

With M enachem Begin finally gone (hastened ou t, surely, by the cruelly effective candlelit “ scoreboard” o f Israeli deaths in Lebanon which peace groups maintained outside his hom e), Arik Sharon dem oted and the occupation force in less vulnerable defensive lines, will bhe L ebanon pro test m ovem ent run o u t o f steam ? Reservists will still be killed and w ounded there from tim e to time, fueling the deep public distaste for the b itte r fruist o f O peration Peace for Galilee. Yesh Gvul adherents will con­tinue to go to jail, unless and un til the arm y w orks ou t some kind of form ula fo r accom m odating such determ ined dissent.

Israeli-SA connectionIsrael has come to occupy a special place in South Africa’s international m ilitary connections. I t is very w orrying to see th a t apart from norm al trade relations, Israel has been setting up close m ilitary ties w ith some o f the hom elands in South Africa. These relations are probably harm ful both to Sou th Africa and Israel as they involve supporting regimes w hich have little credibility and are best know n fo r the repressive measures they have taken against those w ho oppose them . Some o f the highlights in South A frica’s Israeli connections are:

* Increased m ilitary cooperation be­came evident in 1979 w hen a series o f top level m ilitary visits betw een Israel and South A frica occurred.

* In 1979 the BBC reported th a t 50 S o u th African Navy personal were being trained near Haifa to operate Reshet missile-carrying boats.

* Many Israeli designed w eapons are produced under licence by Armscor. Of special im portance here is the R4 assault rifle w hich is a copy

i o f the Galil assault n fle , the Gabriel

surface to surface missile and the Reshev class boats, now being built under licence in Durban.

* The disgraced General Charles Sebe visited Israel earlier this year, spoke at a sem inar on security and was photographed w ith the now deceased Major George Haddad, the leader o f a right-wing Christian Phalangist group supported by Israel prior to the invasion of Lebanon and allegedly involved in the Shatilla refugee camp massacre.

* Following the deten tion of General Charles Sebe, it was announced that the Ciskei had secured a contract w ith Israel to supply and train a Ciskeian airforce. The Ciskei agreed to buy “ about six” aircraft from Israel and Israeli Air Force instruc­tors were to come to the homeland to run “ phase one” o f a pilet train­ing scheme.

The Israeli-South A frican connection has taken on the shape o f an inform al alliance. I t is necessary to question the m ilitary, econom ic and political policies persued by both governm ents which this alliance supports. .

Church view on Namibia

ANG LK'ANS CONDEMN SA OCCUPA­TION O f NAMIBIA

A major new report by an international delegation of Anglican Bishops has confirmed the findings of South African Anglican and Catholic bishops that South Africa is not wanted in Namibia and that South African forces are the greatest cause o f fear in Namibia.

The delegation was sent to the territory by the Archbishop of Cantebury, Dr Robert Runcie, at the request o f the Bishops of Namibia, James Kauluma. The delegation spent two weeks in Namibia, including six days in Ovam- boland where much of the fighting takes place.

The delegation’s report has received wide acceptance overseas. Among the most im portant conclusions were:

* “The curfew operations in the north, the undoubted intim idation, the des­tructions o f property, the restriction o f m ovem ent, the spread o f distrust through informers, the divisions in fam ily life, the cases o f abductions, torture and beatings, the total massive armed presence o f the SADF, cause the com m unity to live in a state o f perpetual fear and suspicion. The people fear the army and K oevoet far more than they fear Swapo. ”

* “There seems to be the closest local co-operation between K oevoet and the regular South African forces, and, in the battle area, it appeared to us that they were under direct m ilitary command. I f the South African governm ent intends to win the hearts and m inds o f the people as they claim, then K oevoet activi­ties are directly opposed to that policy. ”

* “I t appears to us that Swapo has overwhelm ing support, no t least from the main-line churches and their leaders. ”

The report o f the International Anglican Delegation cannot be ignored. The churches in Namibia are uniformly opposed to South A frica’s occupation o f Namibia. It is vital that they should receive the full support o f all Christians

^*nd non-Christians in South Africa. A

What is the Board ?Q: What is the ‘board’?A : The Board for Religious O bjection

was set up in February this year in term s of the 1983 Defence A m endm ent Act. Its jo b is to decide if an applicant is a bona fide religious objector. A religious objector could fall under three categories.

Q: What are the three categories catered for by the Board?

A: (1) N on-com batantsThose religious objectors who will no t serve as a com batant in any arm ed force.(2) Non-m ilitarists in the SADF Those religious objectors who will no t serve as a com batant, or perform any m aintenance task o f a com batant nature or w ear a m ilitary uniform .(3) N on-militarists outside the SADF Those religious objectors who will no t undergo any m ilitary training or perform any task in connection w ith any armed force.

Q: If I was accepted as a bona fide case in any of the three categories, what would the Board offer me?

A: (1) Non com batan t status, ie: you would be perm itted to do jobs like: pay clerk, storem an, etc. - in m ilita­ry uniform , in the SA D F’(2) In this category you might end up maintaining SADF recreational fields and facilities, ou t o f m ilitary uniform . Jehovahs Witnesses seem to be included under this category.(3) You would be granted com m uni­ty service allocated by the D epart­m ent o f M anpower in a governm ent, provincial or municipal departm ent, eg: ambulance driver, forester, fire­man, clerk.

Q: How long would I have to serve in all o f these categories?

A: (1) Same length o f service, ie: two years plus a maximum of tw o years camps.(2) 1 1/2 times your length of service plus you would serve camps o f 1 1/2 tim es the norm al duration.

(3) 1 1/2 times the to ta l service owed to the SADF (initial training and camps). This could be a maximum of 6 years continuous service, but n o t less than 18 m onths.

Q: Who may be classified as a religious objector?

A: The law does not define the term ‘religious objector’ bu t it would seem they intend to restrict its application to active members o f a religious denom ination. F u rther­m ore, it is likely tha t the definition would be restricted to religious pacifists. It should be noted tha t Jews, Christian, H indus, Moslems could be sccom m odated.

Q: How do I apply to the Board?A: You m ust write to the Board

WITHIN 30 DAYS o f receiving your initial call up papers. You should describe and substantiate your rea­sons for objection and prove your bona fide religious m otivation.

Q : What happens if 30 days have already expired?

A: Inform ation about the Board has been confusing and inadequate. We suggest th a t you write to the SADF im m ediately stating your position and reasons for delay.

Q: Who sits on the Board?A : The com position could be:

a) A judge or ex-judge as chairpersonb) 3 theologians of different de­

nom inationsc) 1 chaplain appointed by the

chaplain generald) 1 SADF member.

Q: What happens if my denom ination is no t represented on the Board?

A : A m em ber will be co-opted onto the Board for your hearing.

Q: A nd if my church will not be repre­sented on the Board?

A: There has been a recent case of a Presbyterian objector whose church has taken a stand against participa­tion in the Board. His case has been postponed indefinitely until the Board can accom m odate him.

Q: What does th is m ean for the objec­tor?

A: If you are already a mem ber o f the SADF you will have to continue your service. If, however, you apply before beginning service in the SADF, your call-up will have to be deferred un til provision can be made.

Q: What happens if I am rejected by the Board?

A : You will still be liable for the original call-up. If you fail to report, you will be charged and brought before either a C ourt M artial or a magis­tra te ’s court. You will be liable to a sentence in civilian jail o f 1 1/2 times the to ta l remaining service owed to the SADF.

\

How are Churches to respond to the Board ?

the churches response to the Board for Religious O bjection (BRO) we need to locate it w ithin the broader con tex t o f theological ethics. I in tend therefore to look at some of these broader issues as a necessary background to discussing the practical im plications o f this new Board for the churches.

1. A Basic A ffirm ation o f Ethics The strangest ethical anom aly o f the BRO derives from its term s o f reference. Its sole purpose is to determ ine the personal religious convictions o f any applicants. The underlying ethical pre­supposition is e ither th a t only religious people are capable o f making eth ical or m oral choices, which is plainly ludicrous from an theological perspective; o r tha t only ehtical positions adopted by relig­ious people have any validity or m erit, which is equally as ludicrous. This posi­tion makes a m ockery o f Christian teaching: even th a t passage th a t is so often quoted against conscientious objec­tors, R om ans 13, where Paul calls Christ­ians to obey the ‘heathen’ Em peror, who is ‘G od’s agent for your good’ (R om ans 13:4) and to whom we m ust be subject “ for the sake of conscience” (Rom ans 13:5) contradict this. Im plicit in th is passage is the thought tha t G od does no t rule only through Christians, bu t also rules indirectly through secular authori­ties, who can act for society’s good.

did you know ?. . . th a t the recently introduced Aline and Im m igration Laws A m endem nt Bill is widely believed to be aTreplacement fo r the draconian O rderly M ovement Bill as the cutting edge o f influx control? (Financial Mail 16.3.84)

It is interesting to no te th a t this ethical anom aly is also underm ined by the underlying Christian N ational ethic o f the South African state itself; w hich argues th a t a “ Christian” governm ent has the right to legislate “Christian” ethics for non-Christians, and th a t they have an ethical responsibility to fulfill those statutes. Hence this separation is un­tenable even w ithin the confines o f the ideology of the ruling group. There can be no ethical o r theological grounds, therefore, for this separation of religious and non-religious objectors. It is purely a tactic o f political expediency cloaked in religious, theological ideology.

A second ethical anom aly is in the separation of pacifism and selective or ‘Just War’ objectors, w hether religious or not. A part from the h istoric peace churches - the M ennonites, Quakers, etc, no church holds to universal paci­fism. All denom inations espouse some form o f the ‘Just War’ theory developed by A ugustine in the 5th century and refined by A quina, Luther and Calvin at later periods. The official docum ent o f the NGK on Conscientious O bjection: “Goofsbasware teen Diensplig” main­tains, som ewhat dubiously, bu t never­theless em phatically, tha t “n pasifistese s tandpunt (is) . . . vreemd aan die tradisse van C hristendom ” (p 11). It m aintains tah t the ‘Just War’ theory is the only theological basis for partic ipation - or objection — in war (p 15).

There is a logical fallacy in this report, however, which goes som eway to ex­plaining why Naude had to lim it valid objection to pacifism in spite o f the rep o rt’s insistence tha t pacifism is no t part o f the Christian tradition . The fallacy is as follows:

(a) no political o r ethical argum ents re: the justice or injustice o f the present regime are valid;

. . . th a t pass laws are being m ore rigidly applied, even though the “ Genocide (O rderly M ovement) Bill” has been shelved? According to M inister K oornhof o f the D epartm ent o f “C o-operation and D evelopm ent” , 140 000 black people fell foul o f apartheid pass laws in 1983. This represents a substantial increase from the 98 000 in 1982 and even m ore from the 75 000 in 1981. (F inancialM ail 16.3.84)

. . . th a t almost 90 percent of dom pas fines paid in 1983 came from the Wit- w atersrand area. R and “ illegals” paid ndarly a million rand ou t o f the to ta l R1 155 000 paid th roughout th e country.

(b) yet these argum ents are necessary, even for ‘religious’ objectors, in assessing the justice or otherwise o f the war accords, to the Just War theory;

(c) hence, no one can legitim ately object (pacifism being excluded from the outset).

To conclude this po in t, I would like to quote from a report on the new legisla­tion adopted by the 17thU CCSA Assem­bly 1983.

“The U nited Congregation Church of South Africa, however, finds certain aspects o f the Defence A m endm ent Bill to tally unacceptable:

1. In the first place, the proposed legislation discrim inates between religious objectors. This is con­trary to the declared stance of the church over m any years, namely, th a t provision fo r CO should be made on the grounds o f religious, m oral, ethical o r philosophical convictions as distinct from ex­pedient o r pragm atic considera­tions.

T he church cannot accept a law that provides solely for religious objectors while it imposes severe penalities on others. To do so would am ount to condoning privileges for the relig­ious and persecution for the non­religious — a com plete anom aly in a state which is opposed to religious discrim ination.”

P a r t-will

2be i

o f n til

his e m

tlm:xt <

;e p J 6 J

artECl

artiOR

cl e '

iO ther “ contribu tions” to state cof­fers came from the Cape Peninsula (R 184 000), B loem fontein (R61 000) and D urban (R2 765). (C ity Press 1>4 84)

. . . w hat the US S tate D epartm ent has to say on apartheid, the new constitu tion notw ithstanding? In its C ountry R eport on Human R igh ts Practices fo r 1983: Sou th A frica it states that, “ regardless of w hether or no t the new constitution represents reform o f apartheid, or only its rationalisation and m oderisatioln, the practice o f apartheid rem ains the basis for the organisation o f South African society.

Cancel the Call-upCampus survey results

The UCT SRC’s C onscription Survey has clearly shown that students don 't want to be conscripted.

The survey is one of three conducted by ECC organisations in their constituencies to gauge opinion.

Com m ents from the survey included: “The SADF are merely the military

wing of a security paranoid, politically unstable capitalistic State apparatus."’

“The SADF is primarily waging a war against the people of Namibia - people whose right to determine their lives shouW not be denied.”

“ Cadets prepares people for the m ind­less fanfare and vanity of w ar.”

“ Cadets are H itler Y outh all over again.”

O ther com m ents held quite a different view :

“G et rid o f all the commies.” “ C onscription is necessary if you

do n ’t want this country overrun by unde­sirables.

“ The SADF is making a stronger nation by turning boys into m en.”

“The SADF is knocking SWAPO and ANC for a six! And making peace with the Frelim os.”

“ If the SADF was not defending the Namibian border there would be no more Namibia and our border would autom a­tically become the Orange River, which would not be very much fun .”

In the breakdown of faculty results it is interesting that only 55 per cent of medical students are opposed to con-

OCL00LUccU_oLUo<

100

9 0

00

)x>

00

5 0

4 0

LUCJcc

36 ’/.

• • • • • • >• • • • • • >

)

! » • • • • • •• • • • • • •* • • • •• • • • • • •» • • • • • •• • • • • • •

YES NOCONSCRIPTION

100

YES NO YES SA OCCUPATION OF ADEQUATE NEWS NAMIBIA_______________CCK/ERAGE OF SADF

scription, considering that so many leave the country anyway once they have qualified.

The survey was possibly no t probing enough. Certain questions such as w heth­er the SADF is politically neutral and if we are adequately informed about its activities, received an overwhelming NO from over 95 per cent o f respondents. So, whereas there is consensus on some questions, in o ther areas there are vast differences of opinion.

The Conscription A ction Group(CAG) which was set up by interested students, will now have a clearer idea of how students feel about the military and how to take up the issue from now on.

A sideshow to the SRC survey was the last m inute addition of fraudulent survey forms. All of these 600-odd forms — strangely enough - said yes to conscrip­tion, bu t many blew it by giving “ Politi­cal Science” as their faculty. The addit­ional forms were also printed on a differ­ent grade of paper, and showed typo­graphical differences to the original.

Commenting on the forgeries, SRC president, Nic Borain, said: “ This is som ething more than the political frus­trations of conservative students. Some­body has gone to a trem endous am ount of trouble to do a professional job on high quality paper,”

Dates to diarise4 May K a s s i n g a Day

8 M a y ECC Panel D i s c u s s i o n - N a m i b i a n s p e a k e r s

R o n d e b o s c h C o n g r e g a t i o n a l C h u r c h , 8 . 0 0 p m

18 May N a m i b i a Vigil - v e n u e to be a d v e r t i s e d

20 May ' P e a c e in N a m i b i a ' m e e t i n g - A r c h b i s h o p

H u r l e y , P a s t o r K a m e e t a . St G e o r g e s C a t h ­

edral , 3 . 00pm.

...... ..O M H I .. ... ....

pub lished by c o s g . p o B o x 2 0 8 . W o o d s t o c k . Printed by: Atlle’s Printing Service*,

Collection Number: AG1977

END CONSCRIPTION CAMPAIGN (ECC)

PUBLISHER: Publisher:- Historical Papers Research Archive

Location:- Johannesburg

©2013

LEGAL NOTICES:

Copyright Notice: All materials on the Historical Papers website are protected by South African copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, or otherwise published in any format, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.

Disclaimer and Terms of Use: Provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein, you may download material (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal and/or educational non-commercial use only.

People using these records relating to the archives of Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, are reminded that such records sometimes contain material which is uncorroborated, inaccurate,

distorted or untrue. While these digital records are true facsimiles of paper documents and the information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be accurate and reliable, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand has not independently verified their content. Consequently, the University is not responsible for any errors or

omissions and excludes any and all liability for any errors in or omissions from the information on the website or any related information on third party websites accessible from this website.

This document is part of a collection held at the Historical Papers Research Archive at The University of the

Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.