Robert McBride
Right to Reply
Piers Pigou has provided us with a curious response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s (TRC) decisions in respect of myself, Aboobaker Ismail and others. His lengthy article can be summarised in a sentence. Though there is no evidence to the contrary, Pigou, TRC expert and self-appointed Grand Master of selected victims, alleges that either I or my comrades in the African National Congress have lied about one of the incidents in our submission to the amnesty committee. This is a weighty allegation.
After being given less than 24 hours to respond to this article, I debated whether or not it was worth it. I had come before the commission voluntarily, unlike many other people who chose not to subject themselves to the amnesty process. Again, unlike many others who have come forward, I had no self-interest in doing this in the case of the only action that interests Pigou (the beachfront bombing) since the law had already run its course. I submitted myself fully to the TRC process and I have no regrets for having done so. I believe that in the spirit of reconciliation and nation building that I consider myself to be a part of, it was the right thing to do.
Be that as it may, his central contention seems to be that the truth is not out especially in relation to whether members of the security forces frequented the Why Not Bar. This issue was dealt with extensively during the hearing, the record is there and the commissioners were satisfied. For anyone with an open mind, the TRC transcripts will show that I did indeed provide full disclosure and complied with the TRC process in letter and in spirit. I am not going to argue the case further in this forum. Suffice to say that perhaps it would have helped Pigou reach some kind of conclusion in his article if he had listened to one of the witnesses from the bar, a Ms Helen Kearney. She did not oppose the application. She stated in front of the amnesty committee that she personally knew at least 25 members of the security forces who were regular patrons of the bar. Perhaps she, too, in his learned opinion, had tailored her evidence for some reason or another?
More generally, with respect, I have to say that what presents itself as a clinical analysis around the disclosure issue is in fact an emotional response based on prejudice. This may seem a harsh thing to say, but I can reach no other conclusion. Pigou’s response is neither unique nor surprising it is one that is entirely familiar to me. The mere mention of my name still seems to evoke the suspension of rational thought among some people whom I assume behave intelligently in their normal lives. For such people I fear that no matter how extensively or frequently I reiterate the truth about the military actions of myself and my comrades in the 1980s there will be no breakthrough.
The issue of ”civilian casualties” that troubles Pigou so deeply is one that has always troubled me. In fact, it was this issue that persuaded me and many others like me that military action was the only option open to us. I wouldn’t expect Pigou to understand this, but I know that there are many out there who do. At that time we lived under a system whose victims were civilians. Each casualty of apartheid was a civilian. The people being forcibly removed, imprisoned, exiled, killed, maimed, degraded and tortured by this system were all civilians. I would never, and have never, underestimated the tragedy and horror of a single death that has occurred as a consequence of this system that denied us our humanity, and I have expressed over and again the sincere regret for civilian casualties in the actions that I engaged in and in all actions that my organisation engaged in. These regrets fall on deaf ears.
These casualties occurred after years of restraint and as evidence of increasing brutality and civilian deaths reached our organisation in exile. The ANC made two decisions at the Kabwe Conference, both of which were noted by the TRC. One related to the fact that further civilian casualties were no longer avoidable and the other, linked to this, was that the struggle would move into the ”white areas”. Pigou makes a comment in his article that ”the bombing on the Durban beachfront … did little to advance the ANC’s cause”. This is certainly debatable.
In conclusion, Pigou states that ”we may never know whether the bombing was simply a terrible mistake based on faulty intelligence, an uncharacteristic act of incompetence, or even a deliberate and hot-headed act of terror”. I have nothing more to say to him on this he has reached his own conclusions. I participated in the TRC process honestly, my organisation participated in the process honestly, and we did so in the interests of truth and healing. Pigou participated in the TRC process as a paid employee. We have different histories and different perspectives. Maybe one day this will change.
Robert McBride has written this article in his personal capacity