"Angola, Clausewitz, and the American Way of War is an example of a book with great potential that falls short of its goal. In this slim volume, John S. McCain IV attempts to use the case of apartheid South Africa's wars in Angola and Namibia during the 1980s as a positive example of Clausewitzian strategy in which political success (defeat of a Soviet and Cuban-backed onslaught) was achieved by devising effective ways and efficiently using limited means. He contrasts South African strategic acumen in stymying the efforts of the Southwest African People's Organization and Cuban troops to take over Namibia with the lack of US strategy against Al Qaeda since 9/11 in the so-called global war on terrorism and the seemingly endless operations in Afghanistan and other locations in Southwest Asia and Africa. The author fails in his effort because he confuses the South African Defense Force's (SADF's) operational success with strategic brilliance and relies on one-sided evidence. The result is an impressive recounting of South Africa's triumphs on the battlefields in Angola and Namibia which does not provide a satisfying bridge to strategic insights.
McCain's admiration for the apartheid regime's strategy relies too much on the narrative of its supporters and does not include other literature at the political and strategic level that would have led to a more accurate and balanced evaluation.[1] Instead of ensuring the survival of the apartheid regime, for example, Prime Minister-then-President P.W Botha's "total strategy" of intervening in Angola and Namibia and suppressing domestic opposition inside South Africa backfired and led to a strengthening of international sanctions that helped bring the downfall of the regime and paved the way for President F.W. de Klerk to replace Botha and begin the transition to majority rule. In Namibia, moreover, the apartheid regime's strategy of placing black allies in power was defeated in 1989, when the Southwest African People's Organization swept to power in democratic elections. In the end, the apartheid leadership's laager (circle the wagons) syndrome led to an excessive fear of a communist onslaught from Angola and strategic overreaction.
The problem with relying on one side of the literature in a case with which the author is not expert is the potential to commit errors and fall victim to bias, a potential evident in this work. The result is that McCain misunderstands the context and motivations behind South Africa's strategy. He overstates the strategic importance of Angola and Namibia and its minerals to the Soviet bloc. The strategic minerals the Soviets and their allies coveted, such as chromium, manganese, and platinum, were not in those two countries but were in South Africa. In addition, the Soviets, South African Communist Party and the African National Congress considered Angola and Namibia to be mere stepping stones to the eventual takeover of South Africa. He claims the Southwest African People's Organization (SWAPO) was "Marxist-Leninist" from its founding in 1960. However, SWAPO never declared itself to be Marxist-Leninist or proclaimed the goal of establishing a socialist state. Upon taking power through elections in 1990, they in fact established a free market democracy.[2] McCain claims South Africa "legitimized" SWAPO in 1977, but this only happened in 1989 after South Africa agreed to relinquish control of Namibia. The only action South Africa took in 1977 was agreeing to UN Security Council resolution 435 and the eventual goal of Namibian independence and South African withdrawal. He states that Prime Minister Balthazar Johannes Vorster was involved in devising the border war strategy, when it was Defense Minister P.W. Botha (soon to be prime minister and then state president) and General Magnus Malan (not Milan as the author misspells).[3] And the author states that Operation Moduler in Angola in 1987 was the epitome of civil-military dialogue. However, the dialogue was mainly among President Botha and Generals Malan and Geldenhuys and their closest advisors. There was no discussion with the whole cabinet, Ministry of Defense officials, or parliament. South Africa was criticized as a "security state" in which civilians had lost control over the military and secret police.[4] This is all amounts to a substantial misunderstanding of the political situation and the progress of the conflict.
Full review here
link
Amicalement
Armand
