Apartheid

=== Western influence ===
{{see also|International sanctions during apartheid}}
[[File:Boycott Apartheid Bus, London, UK. 1989.jpg|thumb|London bus in 1989 carrying the "Boycott Apartheid" message.]]
While international opposition to apartheid grew, the [[Nordic countries]]{{snds}}and [[Sweden]] in particular{{snds}}provided both moral and financial support for the [[African National Congress|ANC]].<ref>International Labour Office (1991). ''Apartheid: Special Report of the Directed General on the Application of the Decoration Concerning the Policy of South Africa.'' [[International Labour Organization]]. p. 46.</ref> On 21 February 1986{{spaced ndash}}a week before he was assassinated{{spaced ndash}}[[Sweden|Sweden's]] Prime Minister [[Olof Palme]] made the [[keynote]] address to the ''Swedish People's Parliament Against Apartheid'' held in [[Stockholm]].<ref>Bangura, Abdul Karim (2004). ''Sweden vs apartheid: putting morality ahead of profit.'' Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. p. 104.</ref> In addressing the hundreds of anti-apartheid sympathisers as well as leaders and officials from the ANC and the [[Anti-Apartheid Movement]] such as [[Oliver Tambo]], Palme declared: "Apartheid cannot be reformed; it has to be eliminated."<ref>Grieg, Charlotte (2008). ''Cold Blooded Killings: Hits, Assassinations, and Near Misses That Shook the World.'' Booksales Inc Remainders. p. 43.</ref>

Other Western countries adopted a more ambivalent position. In [[Switzerland]], the [[Swiss-South African Association]] lobbied on behalf of the South African government. The [[Presidency of Richard Nixon|Nixon administration]] implemented a policy known as the [[Tar Baby Option]], pursuant to which the US maintained close relations with the Apartheid South African government.<ref name="Dowdall 2009">{{cite book|last=Dowdall|first=Aaron T.|title=The Birth and Death of a Tar Baby: Henry Kissinger and Southern Africa|date=December 2009|url=https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10355/10125/research.pdf?sequence=3|access-date=13 August 2012|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160126045231/https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10355/10125/research.pdf?sequence=3|archive-date=26 January 2016 }}</ref> The [[Presidency of Ronald Reagan|Reagan administration]] evaded international sanctions and provided diplomatic support in international forums for the South African government. The United States also increased trade with the Apartheid regime, while describing the ANC as "a terrorist organisation."<ref>Joseba Zulaika and William Douglass, "Terror and Taboo" (Routledge, 1996), p. 12</ref> Like the Reagan administration, the government of [[Margaret Thatcher]] termed this policy "[[constructive engagement]]" with the apartheid government, vetoing the imposition of UN economic sanctions. U.S. government justification for supporting the Apartheid regime were publicly given as a belief in "[[free trade]]" and the perception of the [[anti-communism|anti-communist]] South African government as a bastion against [[Marxist]] forces in Southern Africa, for example, by the military intervention of South Africa in the [[Angolan Civil War]] in support of right-wing insurgents fighting to topple the government. The U.K. government also declared the ANC a terrorist organisation,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/history/or/pr/lond88.html |title=Oliver Tambo interviewed by The Times|date=13 June 1988 |publisher=ANC |access-date=25 September 2012 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080523184111/http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/history/or/pr/lond88.html |archive-date = 23 May 2008}}</ref> and in 1987 Thatcher's spokesman, [[Bernard Ingham]], famously said that anyone who believed that the ANC would ever form the government of South Africa was "living in [[cloud cuckoo land]]".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/Mandela/0,,2-7-1507_1389526,00.html |title=Mandela's triumphant walk |date=18 July 2003 |work=News24 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060924042332/http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/Mandela/0%2C%2C2-7-1507_1389526%2C00.html |archive-date=24 September 2006 }}</ref> The [[American Legislative Exchange Council]] (ALEC), a conservative lobbying organisation, actively campaigned against divesting from South Africa throughout the 1980s.<ref>[http://www.democracynow.org/2013/12/11/alecs_institutional_corruption_from_backing_apartheid ALEC's "Institutional Corruption", From Backing Apartheid to Assault on Clean Energy, Public Sector] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170915052126/http://www.democracynow.org/2013/12/11/alecs_institutional_corruption_from_backing_apartheid |date=15 September 2017 }}. ''[[Democracy Now!]]'' 11 December 2013.</ref>

By the late-1980s, with no sign of a political resolution in South Africa, Western patience began to run out. By 1989, a bipartisan [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]]/[[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]] initiative in the US favoured [[Disinvestment from South Africa|economic sanctions]] (realised as the ''[[Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act]]'' of 1986), the release of Nelson Mandela and a negotiated settlement involving the ANC. Thatcher too began to take a similar line, but insisted on the suspension of the ANC's armed struggle.<ref>{{cite web|title=Another Kind of War|author=Mark Phillips and [[Colin Coleman]]|publisher=Transformation|year=1989|url=http://digital.lib.msu.edu/projects/africanjournals/pdfs/transformation/tran009/tran009002.pdf|access-date=25 March 2016|archive-date=18 October 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121018171230/http://digital.lib.msu.edu/projects/africanjournals/pdfs/transformation/tran009/tran009002.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

The UK's significant economic involvement in South Africa may have provided some [[Leverage (negotiation)|leverage]] with the South African government, with both the UK and the US applying pressure and pushing for negotiations. However, neither the UK nor the US was willing to apply economic pressure upon their multinational interests in South Africa, such as the mining company [[Anglo American plc|Anglo American]]. Although a high-profile compensation claim against these companies was thrown out of court in 2004,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Action/press468.htm |title=Compensation case against South African miners thrown out |publisher=Minesandcommunities.org |access-date=3 January 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080119221322/http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Action/press468.htm |archive-date=19 January 2008 }}</ref> the [[US Supreme Court]] in May 2008 upheld an appeal court ruling allowing another lawsuit that seeks damages of more than US$400&nbsp;billion from major international companies which are accused of aiding South Africa's apartheid system.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7396040.stm |title=US court allows apartheid claims |work=BBC News |date=12 May 2008 |access-date=3 January 2011 |archive-date=26 July 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080726231602/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7396040.stm |url-status=live }}</ref>