Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
The Clubhouse Bar
Clarkson: "Ruck off you nancy Aussies!"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Prestwick" data-source="post: 186657"><p>The main trouble started with Harold Wilson's Labour government in the 1960s and the disscussion with implementing majority rule as a condition of granting Rhodesia independence. Ian Smith rejected this out of hand and wanted to remain under the then system of dominion-like self-rule with a white-minority twist. At that time, the divide between the HM government and Rhodesia could not have been starker as you had radical labour members like Barbara Castle and Tony Benn in cabinet pushing for this and Harold Wilson (a working class Yorkshireman) did not at all like being talked down to by Ian Smith. Smith and co on the other hand objected to the rhetoric coming out of London which they felt did not reflect reality on the ground in Africa at the time and almost sounded a bit too far left for their liking (which was one of the reasons why US policy baffled Rhodesia throughout UDI). In effect, they saw most of the British as high minded idealists and intellectuals more intent on lecturing and hectoring than actually helping. </p><p></p><p>In any case, when Ian Smith imposed UDI, this privately enraged Wilson and most of the ruling labour party at the time and at that point there was going to be no turning back and the embargo was imposed. Not only that, but he also pressed his allies both in Europe and the rest of the Commonwealth/World to do the same. This policy was continued on by both Heath, Callaghan and Thatcher throughout the 1970s until 1979 and Lancaster House. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ironically, the UK did seriously consider action in Rhodesia. However, its not in the way that you think. My Dad was in 3 Battalion, the Parachute Regiment at the time and when the crisis blew up and UDI was imposed, they were already assembled being briefed to drop on vital infrastructure and command & control points across Rhodesia like hydro dams, radio stations, regional government buildings, etc. The political view in Britain was that majority rule <em>was</em> going to be imposed either by force or by starving Rhodesia out. I don't know if the files of the cabinet conversations have been released yet but I don't think anyone in Southern Africa quite knows how close Britain was to invading Rhodesia to impose majority rule.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And here is the main result of Britain's policy. Although Ian Smith was a hardliner and was backed by hardliners (his defense minister, for example, liked to shoot people from a helicopter for fun according to journalist Max Hastings who reported from Rhodesia undercover in the 1970s) the opportunity for a compromise deal to phase in majority rule could still have been reached. Instead, the embargo and UDI only forced the hardliners on the white and black sides to the fore, pushing aside any moderate voices. It was because there was no credible, moderate alternative that enabled guys like Robert Mugabe to strike when they did to take power. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Quite a few British did as well. At the time, there was less and less action for British soldiers while abroad there was Vietnam and various bush wars in Africa so many Paras and Royal Marines quit the services to enlist with the US Army, the Australian Army, the Rhodesians or hired themselves out as mercenaries simply to get action.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Prestwick, post: 186657"] The main trouble started with Harold Wilson's Labour government in the 1960s and the disscussion with implementing majority rule as a condition of granting Rhodesia independence. Ian Smith rejected this out of hand and wanted to remain under the then system of dominion-like self-rule with a white-minority twist. At that time, the divide between the HM government and Rhodesia could not have been starker as you had radical labour members like Barbara Castle and Tony Benn in cabinet pushing for this and Harold Wilson (a working class Yorkshireman) did not at all like being talked down to by Ian Smith. Smith and co on the other hand objected to the rhetoric coming out of London which they felt did not reflect reality on the ground in Africa at the time and almost sounded a bit too far left for their liking (which was one of the reasons why US policy baffled Rhodesia throughout UDI). In effect, they saw most of the British as high minded idealists and intellectuals more intent on lecturing and hectoring than actually helping. In any case, when Ian Smith imposed UDI, this privately enraged Wilson and most of the ruling labour party at the time and at that point there was going to be no turning back and the embargo was imposed. Not only that, but he also pressed his allies both in Europe and the rest of the Commonwealth/World to do the same. This policy was continued on by both Heath, Callaghan and Thatcher throughout the 1970s until 1979 and Lancaster House. Ironically, the UK did seriously consider action in Rhodesia. However, its not in the way that you think. My Dad was in 3 Battalion, the Parachute Regiment at the time and when the crisis blew up and UDI was imposed, they were already assembled being briefed to drop on vital infrastructure and command & control points across Rhodesia like hydro dams, radio stations, regional government buildings, etc. The political view in Britain was that majority rule [i]was[/i] going to be imposed either by force or by starving Rhodesia out. I don't know if the files of the cabinet conversations have been released yet but I don't think anyone in Southern Africa quite knows how close Britain was to invading Rhodesia to impose majority rule. And here is the main result of Britain's policy. Although Ian Smith was a hardliner and was backed by hardliners (his defense minister, for example, liked to shoot people from a helicopter for fun according to journalist Max Hastings who reported from Rhodesia undercover in the 1970s) the opportunity for a compromise deal to phase in majority rule could still have been reached. Instead, the embargo and UDI only forced the hardliners on the white and black sides to the fore, pushing aside any moderate voices. It was because there was no credible, moderate alternative that enabled guys like Robert Mugabe to strike when they did to take power. Quite a few British did as well. At the time, there was less and less action for British soldiers while abroad there was Vietnam and various bush wars in Africa so many Paras and Royal Marines quit the services to enlist with the US Army, the Australian Army, the Rhodesians or hired themselves out as mercenaries simply to get action. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
The Clubhouse Bar
Clarkson: "Ruck off you nancy Aussies!"
Top