JUSTICE, JUDGEMENT, AND DEPENDABILITY; the writings of Martin Luther King Jr., Michael Pollan, and John Steinbeck, and their relationship to Rhodesia.

Social justice is fundamental to any society striving for equality, inclusivity, and fairness. This topic has been extensively discussed and analyzed by influential figures throughout history. In this analysis paper, we will examine the works of Martin Luther King Jr., Michael Pollan, and John Steinbeck to explore how they address social justice issues and shed light on the struggles faced by marginalized communities. Drawing parallels to the historical context of Rhodesia, we will delve into the perspectives presented in these texts and analyze how they contribute to our understanding of social justice, and the fight for it, earned with time, blood, and steel; along with each texts’ relationship with said Rhodesia.

MLK's "Letter from Birmingham Jail" was written in April 1963 while he was incarcerated for participating in nonviolent protests against racial segregation in Birmingham, Alabama. The letter is a response to a statement by eight white clergymen who criticized King's methods as disruptive and untimely. MLK wrote the letter to justify the civil rights movement's nonviolent direct action and to address the social and racial issues prevalent during that period. During the 1960s, racial segregation and systemic racism were pervasive in the United States, particularly in the Southern states. African Americans faced discrimination in various aspects of their lives, including education, employment, housing, and voting rights. MLK's letter addressed these issues by arguing for the urgency of fighting against racial injustice. In the letter, MLK emphasizes the interconnectedness of all communities and the need for collective action to achieve social justice. He critiques the moderate approach advocated by the white clergymen, highlighting that waiting for gradual change perpetuates the injustices faced by African Americans. MLK argues that direct action is necessary to bring attention to the plight of marginalized communities and force society to confront its discriminatory practices. MLK's letter also draws upon the principles of nonviolent resistance and civil disobedience, inspired by figures like Mahatma Gandhi. He stresses the moral obligation to disobey unjust laws and argues that justice delayed is justice denied. MLK asserts that it is not only the responsibility of African Americans but also of all individuals who believe in justice to actively work toward eradicating racial inequality. In the context of Rhodesia during the 1960s and 1970s, MLK's letter can be connected to the struggle for social justice in several ways. Rhodesia, which is now known as Zimbabwe, was a country facing racial tensions and an oppressive regime under white minority rule. Just as MLK fought against racial discrimination in the United States, there were individuals and movements in Rhodesia fighting for racial equality and the end of colonial rule. MLK's emphasis on nonviolent direct action and the power of unity in challenging oppressive systems resonated with the struggles in Rhodesia. The principles of civil rights and social justice espoused in the letter provided inspiration and guidance to those advocating for equal rights and justice in Rhodesia. MLK's letter highlighted the interconnectedness of social justice movements globally. The struggles for racial equality and self-determination in Rhodesia were part of a broader global movement for decolonization and social justice. MLK's words served as a reminder that the fight for justice transcends national boundaries and requires international solidarity. MLK's "Letter from Birmingham Jail" addressed social and racial issues prevalent during the 1960s in the United States. It advocated for the urgency of fighting against racial injustice, emphasized the principles of nonviolent resistance, and called for collective action. The letter's message of social justice and the interconnectedness of communities resonated with those fighting for equality in Rhodesia, providing inspiration and serving as a reminder of the importance of solidarity in the struggle for justice.

Michael Pollan's book, "What's Eating America?", provides a comprehensive analysis of the food system and its interconnectedness with social inequities, social justice issues, consumerism, industrialization, and environmental impact. In this brief analysis, we will explore each of these key themes and their implications for social justice advocacy. Pollan delves deep into the complex web of the food system, examining how it perpetuates social inequities. He explores how access to healthy, affordable food is often limited to low-income communities, leading to disproportionate health issues and nutritional disparities. Pollan highlights the impact of factors such as food deserts, lack of education about healthy eating, and reliance on processed foods, all of which contribute to the unequal distribution of food resources. Pollan establishes a strong connection between food and social justice, recognizing that the food choices we make have wider implications beyond personal health. He explores issues such as agricultural labor practices, migrant workers' rights, and the exploitation of farm workers. Pollan also highlights the impact of food policies and the need for equitable food access for marginalized communities, emphasizing the importance of addressing systemic injustices within the food system. The book critically examines the role of consumerism and industrialization in shaping the modern food system. Pollan highlights the rise of large-scale industrial agriculture, factory farming, and the use of synthetic chemicals in food production. He discusses the detrimental effects of these practices on the environment, including soil degradation, water pollution, and loss of biodiversity. By exploring the ecological consequences of industrialized food production, Pollan encourages readers to question the sustainability of our current food system. Pollan's analysis provides valuable insights for social justice advocates. He underscores the need for systemic change in the food system, advocating for policies that prioritize food justice, equitable access to nutritious food, and sustainable farming practices. By highlighting the interconnectedness of social, environmental, and health issues, Pollan encourages individuals and communities to engage in advocacy efforts aimed at transforming the food system into one that promotes social justice and environmental sustainability. Michael Pollan serves as a thought-provoking analysis of the food system and its social implications. Through his examination of social inequities, linkages to social justice issues, exploration of consumerism and industrialization, and the resulting environmental impact, Pollan encourages readers to recognize the importance of advocating for a more just and sustainable food system.

In John Steinbeck's "Travels with Charley" excerpt, several significant themes can be observed, including Steinbeck's journey of self-discovery, his observations of socioeconomic disparities, his exploration of discrimination and injustice, and a comparison to the struggles in Rhodesia. The excerpt from "Travels with Charley" displays Steinbeck embarking on a journey of self-discovery. By undertaking this cross-country road trip with his dog, Charley, Steinbeck seeks to reconnect with the American people and explore the essence of his own identity. Through his encounters with various individuals and communities, he reflects on his own beliefs, values, and purpose in life. Steinbeck keenly observes socioeconomic disparities during his travels. He encounters people from different levels of society, ranging from wealthy individuals to struggling working-class families. By depicting the disparities in wealth and opportunities, Steinbeck highlights the social and economic challenges faced by different segments of American society. His observations shed light on the stark contrasts between the haves and the have-nots. Within "Travels with Charley," Steinbeck also explores themes of discrimination and injustice. As he interacts with people across the country, he becomes aware of the prejudice and inequality that exist in American society. Whether it is encountering racial discrimination or witnessing the mistreatment of marginalized groups, Steinbeck's narrative underscores the need for social change and the eradication of systemic injustices. The excerpt from "Travels with Charley" draws a comparison between the struggles observed in America and those experienced in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). By juxtaposing these two contexts, Steinbeck aims to highlight the universal nature of societal issues. While the specific details of the Rhodesian struggles are not provided, this comparison suggests that discrimination and injustice are not limited to a particular place or time. It underscores the importance of recognizing and addressing such challenges on a global scale. Steinbeck's "Travels with Charley" excerpt offers a multifaceted analysis of American society, encompassing themes of self-discovery, socioeconomic disparities, discrimination, and the interconnectedness of global struggles. It prompts readers to reflect on their values and perceptions while encouraging them to seek a more just and inclusive world.

The relationship between the United States, Rhodesia, the Bush War, social justice, and the demand for minerals is a complex one that spans several decades. Rhodesia, now known as Zimbabwe, was a former British colony that declared independence in 1965. The country was ruled by a white minority government led by Ian Smith, which was not recognized by the international community. The United States initially opposed Rhodesia's unilateral declaration of independence and supported international efforts to impose economic sanctions on the country. However, the US also had strategic interests in the region, particularly in the Cold War and the fight against communism. As a result, the US began to provide covert military and economic assistance to Rhodesia, despite the international sanctions. [1]This support was primarily driven by the US desire to secure access to the country's vast mineral resources, including chromium, platinum, and gold, which were critical to the US economy and military efforts. [2]Meanwhile, Rhodesia was engaged in a protracted bush war with various black nationalist groups, including the Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army (ZANLA) and the Zimbabwe People's Revolutionary Army (ZIPRA). The war lasted for more than a decade and was characterized by brutal violence and human rights abuses on both sides. The US support for Rhodesia was controversial and drew criticism from many quarters, including civil rights activists and African leaders who saw it as support for a racist and oppressive regime. Nevertheless, the US continued to aid Rhodesia until the country achieved majority rule in 1980, at which point the US recognized the new government and lifted sanctions. Overall, the relationship between the US, Rhodesia, the Bush War, and the demand for minerals was a complex and often contentious one, shaped by geopolitical considerations, economic interests, and human rights concerns.

           Ian, my attaché to the RDF, stalked off to the HQ and picked up the strings of command, while I started the task of filling sandbags; then an African constable arrived, he was a young fit man in a camouflage shirt, green shorts, and black canvas riding stockings.

“Are you Delta?”, he asked.

I nodded, and he said, “I’ll give you a hand.”

           The constable grabbed the handle of my trunk, which held everything for a 6-week rotation into the bush, and helped remove it from the top of the Land Rover, and together we carried the box across the flattened grass of the camp, entering a corner tent. My new home was made of heavy canvas, many of the tents were from WW2, which were filled with soldiers’ personal effects: books, comics, alarm clocks, knick-knacks, etc. Beyond the tent was the defensive infrastructure, or lack thereof, there were no flares, mines, razor wire, or any other essentials of modern entrenchment; it goes to show how much the RDF did, with so little.

           Rations in the RDF were done in a way more reminiscent of pre-Industrial army deployment, while two-thirds of my trunk had stored food, most were bought in the local town with cash; the premade rations were not bad, but the supermarkets of Salisbury were not lacking for dry goods. Spam and meat pastes, dry soup packs, coffee grounds, condensed milk, sugar, tea, oak cereals, curry powder, and rice; fresh foods would be bought more locally to the operation area, to supplement dry rations. While in camp, the black Rhodesians would make a customary Grits-like meal called “Sadsa”, which was eaten in combination with tomato relish and is made by bringing water to a boil- while rapidly stirring, add cornmeal/flour; this process will bring the substance into a porridge-like paste, which is known to be done, when the mixing spoon can stand upright. The black Africans would eat said Sadsa by hand, as is their way, while those who were not one for such an appetite, would be reserved to curried sauce with beef-on rice, or some other form of delight.

           The rest of my issue was made of replacement needs, clothes, and hygiene; along with my wants: paperback books, a dessert spoon, a can opener, and toilet paper. Our camp life was nothing if not, not formal, there was a gas-powered stove and freezer, and a gas heater warmed tents at night. There was no entertainment area on base, no bars, or TVs, one was to look forward to games of volleyball, and handheld radios; when off duty, beer, and steak at the “Crocodile Motel” was a treasure.[3]

           [4][5][6][7]The Hon. Ian Smith took control in 1964 of Rhodesia, and in 1965, the country would declare unilateral independence from the British, even though the country itself had been self-governing since the early 1920s, a second of such independence movements from the British empire, by Anglos, the first being the Americans in 1776; England would nearly immediately state the country was illegal, and would enact a state restraint of trade, and acceptance on their former colony. From 1965-67, the United Nations would pass consecutive barriers against Rhodesia, and no amicable agreement could be made between Ian Smith’s government and Great Britain, as full black independence was the main ‘sticking’ point for the latter. Ian Smith was born and would be educated in Rhodesia, joining the air corps during the 2d Word War, he would be one of the most decorated aviators of the British side, surviving the war, with facial injuries which would be remedied by a surgeon post-war; by 1974, he was the leader of a tired Rhodesia, fraught with economic sanctions, and Terrorists. Ian Smith’s crux with black, and colored (Indian subcontinent, Asian and other non-Anglo or black) release, was the fundamental rent that literacy was a key to liberation; Smith conflates what literacy statues, as many of the black and coloreds would have a ‘scant’ education, if any at all; during the 2d World War, Smith states, one could not make a black Rhodesian want to be educated- along European means, but from the 40s to 60s, an education was suddenly desired by ‘all’. Smith states that while cultivating tribal minds is easier said than done, it is the practicality of bringing the tribals out from their homes, and into the classroom; but the Rhodesians had the best infrastructure for learning, amongst all of its northern and even South African neighbors; yet the literacy rate for blacks and coloreds, rather difficult to know for sure, was not known by Ian Smith, but the former would state, “very few young Africans do not see the inside of a classroom”. Liberty, voting rights, and the like, were to Ian Smith and the minority government, as a step which is gained, only after sufficient schooling had been undertaken and conducted by the state and the black citizen; Smith argues that Western, or European style of government is contrary to that of the black Africans- tribal: elected Chief and council, who say to Ian Smith, that they are not interested in European style of governance. This is not to say blacks were barred from joining the Rhodesian Front-dominated government, but Smith would stress that, although seats are purposefully set aside for blacks, the other non-reserved seats are also open for appointment; the situation proposed by Smith displays a position of black Africa inattention to Democratic leadership. Indeed, one may take from Smith’s words, a sense of fault laid at the blacks, for not wanting to be in government, but it would not take one to do mental gymnastics to understand, also, why Smith would not want the black majority in his Anglo minority chamber; as of 1974, there were 16 allotted seats for the blacks, and then an ‘unlimited’ statute for the remaining 50/66 settings for blacks, with the edict that said black or colored is to meet the requirements for proficiency, but there was also a tenant in the Rhodesian dogma, which forbade full black or majority governmental control; the Europeans knew, even if 20 percent of the black population met the social-political standards, they would be immediately outnumbered in their congress and policy. In theory, in the next election of 1975, if the blacks wanting a seat were to be elected, there would be polarity between the Europeans, and the black representatives; the 1969 constitution was proposed to be reformed in 1971, and the most important points of the meeting being: how those earn a spot in Parliament, and the removal of a monetary backing to justify one’s position, preferring to go along an educational standard; if a tribal were to have no less than 2 years in high school, and makes at this time, no less than $1,800 a year, they are eligible to join the Congress, 4 years or more, and the financial barrier is dropped to $1,200 a year- in the 1971 proposal. Of the nearly thirty percent of blacks who would be able to vote, only 5% it was thought, took part in said voting; many of the tribals reporting to Smith stated they do not care and wanted to just be left alone, Smith would agree with this sentiment.

           [8]One can only imagine what Ian Smith thought to himself in 1976, as he stood on a cliff that overlooked the great Victoria Falls, watching the water rage; much like the war for his country’s survival raged on around him. He had been called to the conference, at the behest of the South African government, the US under [9][10]Henry Kissinger, and representatives from the rival south-central African factions, to hash out a peace settlement between the European minority, and the black majority. Kissinger especially, was set on majority rule in Rhodesia and was public friends with future PM- Robert Mugabe; he had even pushed Carter to end the chromium and other mineral imports from Rhodesia. Smith had spent the entirety of his reign attempting to maintain the status quo, gain legitimacy from his former British masters- again, masters which had recently flipped to a more liberal governmental doctrine and ensure the survival of Cecil Rhodes’ namesake. The Bush War had been raging since the mid-60s, the Rhodesians were surrounded, and victory seemed far away; the enemy of the state was seemingly in every patch of grass or trees, and the chemical weapons produced by American companies like the [11]Du Pont’s, and Johnson did not kill enough, fast enough. Black enfranchisement, without the need for literacy or education to hold public office, was out of the question for Smith; he had seen the degradation of other former European colonies and wanted to cut off any chaos in the past, if possible. Racism and rationality, when placed in a post-colonial African lens, and seemingly lost on one when the situation at hand displays a more drastic outlook; meaning this, it is understandable why the minority government would not immediately turn into a universal one, other than the mentioned fear of violence, as the intricates of European style government, and tribal are vastly different. The intricacies of the former, it was believed, would be lost on the majority of uneducated Rhodesian blacks, escalating the country’s descent into what is present today.

           It is understandable why the civil rights era administration would not want a public, or at least friendly relationship with the Rhodesians, as the optics of such would be rather damning to a politician, in the popular opinion-dominated US political cycle; a nation going through, with hindsight to the last 100 years, a complete redefinition of national identity and ethnic-racial identity, through the civil war, reconstruction, and the 20th century World Wars; such sensitive feelings towards race, the arbitrary American definition of the matter, and maintaining the peace back home, dealt the Rhodesians an unfavorable hand- in part when dealing with the Americans. [12]Yet, that is not to say that Americans had never been involved in the continent, fighting withstanding. North American colonists and pirates, along with US tobacco could be found in South Africa in the 18th century, and admiration for the US back home to annex African land outright in the south. The 1842 Transvaal Constitution of the Boer Republic was inspired by doctrine from the US South, and by the 1850s, there was an invested stake between the Democratic-dominated US South and Boer agriculture, specifically in millet and sesame. By the mid-1860s, before Cecil Rhodes’ “Greater Zimbabwe” would be called Rhodesia, US mining barons would be imported to extract the immense wealth of the African land; being always surrounded by a posse of American investors, Rhodes’ new colony became one of the largest pan European trading partners with the United States. Further, the mystique of the wild west and the Indian Fighters was not lost on Rhodes, who knew the tribal Africans would not submit to the might of the British so willingly (see the Anglo-Zulu War); importing as well the Indian fighter Fredrick Burnham, who was acclaimed by the founder of the US Boy Scouts, as being a model to follow, his tactics would later inspire the Selous Scouts.

           [13]Rhodesian value as a colony cannot be understated, while it was under the oversight of the Crown, and in 1962 alone- Rhodesian farmers paid nearly one billion Pounds in colonial tax, which in hand paid for the UK healthcare national system in full. When Ian Smith signed the Rhodesian Universal Declaration of Independence- UDI, in 1964, the following sanctions were a boon, rather than a bane to much of the Rhodesian economy; and allowed for their African tobacco to spread to other markets, rather than being seized by the British government- noting that some of the largest Rhodesian tobacco warehouses were managed by American tobacco experts. Whereupon such expansion, in 1966, conflicting sentiments were heard amongst US tobacco barons; while some were in favor of Rhodesian imports, others wanted their play ended, excluding a competitor to the market. There would be an increase from the mid-60s to 1973 of tobacco prices, and a drop in output from the US, which would inject life into the Smith regime; yet in the halcyon days of Rhodesia, the country would experience a drought, a regulation on crops, and black unemployment all adding to the unneeded stress the war already brought on. Despite good harvests, when Americans would visit- the largest consumers of tobacco along with the Chinese, were amazed that Rhodesia was a producer, and would often bring their cigarettes- rather than buying the very ones they had, but rebranded. Certainly, by 1977, ultra-right political groups were complaining to Ian Smith, that the protected market- brought on by recovered tobacco prices, had insulated US farmers, and allowed them to get ahead of them; even though said farmers were still able to circumvent sanctions and sell. Rhodesia’s market share of cured tobacco had fallen from nearly 30%- from 1965 – 1973, post ’73 the share would drop to only 10, with the US taking up the space left by the African farmers. Rhodesians would also, despite gains, sell at a 20% export cost, and buy with a 20% import surcharge- destruction incarnate, of the economy. The British government would do its part in assisting in being a thorn in the Rhodesian side, by proposing to the US subsidy to supply Virginia grade plants, which the US accepted to take over the gap which was left by the Rhodesian farmers.

           The UDI would also affect the mineral extraction of the country, procurement by the US, and holdings already had in the country. US companies already owned 50% of Zambian copper mines, and the Congo crisis exemplified the need to not allow minerals to be left idle, while the nation therein descends into chaos; and a belief that there was an at-home ‘black conspiracy’, which wanted to leave the pan Europeans to die in Africa, within Johnson’s cabinet. It was agreed that Communism must be stopped, but how to go about that was not exactly agreed upon, and in the face of Johnson’s leaning towards the popular-black vote, was the feeling Africa would be taken over by totalitarian-Communist blacks. Naturally, not only was tobacco an issue of US economics, but the colossal amount of minerals therein the medium-sized African nation, which includes but was not limited to phosphates, nickel, coal, gold, iron, gems, cesium, pollucite, lithium, wolfram, tungsten, platinum, copper; these things are valuable on their own but are also integral for strategic weapons, it was argued by a US senator in the mid-70s against the economic embargo against Rhodesia, in the face of ‘needing’ these materials. [14]OPEC would also extend an invitation to the Rhodesians, as some members were from continental Africa, which at that time had economically wounded the US during Carter’s administration, further intensifying the push to lift the sanctions against Smith, within the highest echelon of the US government. Regardless of the sanctions against the country, oil continuously flowed into Rhodesia, whether through shell companies via the RSA, or US mining companies would attempt to hedge their bets with black Rhodesians, as expected they would inherit the country’s government in some capacity; giving scholarships to prestigious universities in Pittsburg, while some denied the offer, blacks such as Bishop Abel Muzorewa- a future leader of Zimbabwe, Christian reverend, and a man who murdered his political enemies on live TV after taking power, would accept hundreds upon thousands of dollars in ‘assistance’ from US mining companies.

In short, the Rhodesian Army was the military force of now the nation of Zimbabwe, from 1965 to 1980, when the country gained its tentative independence. It was initially composed of the Rhodesian Light Infantry and the Rhodesian African Rifles- black troops under white European officers, and eventually grew to include several other units, such as the infamous Selous Scouts- the Rhodesia “SS”. During its existence, the Rhodesian Army was primarily focused on combating nationalist guerrilla groups, such as the Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army (ZANLA) and the Zimbabwe People's Revolutionary Army (ZIPRA). These groups were fighting for the liberation of Zimbabwe from minority rule by the white Rhodesian government. The Rhodesian Army was known for its unconventional warfare tactics, which included long-range patrols, helicopter-borne operations, and deep penetration operations behind enemy lines. It was also known for its use of counter-insurgency methods, such as "hearts and minds" campaigns and resettlement programs; such programs wired in and had the tribal Africans living in effective concentration camps. The army was unsuccessful in its efforts to prevent Zimbabwean independence, and in 1980, the country became a democratic republic under the leadership of Robert Mugabe; many former Rhodesian soldiers emigrated to other countries, particularly South Africa, where they continued to play a role in the region's conflicts.

[15]The Rhodesian army was at its time and self-proclaimed, the finest anti-guerrilla force on the planet, despite the country being made to secretly import or manufacture its arms and infrastructure at home; their aircraft were outdated, and some were so weighed down with paint, they could not effectively take off. Because of the equipment shortage, and other logistical shortcomings, most of the rugged country was patrolled on foot. Considering these circumstances, including the troop disparity, four thousand Rhodesian regular troops vs over thirty thousand Communists, within and without, the Rhodesians managed to survive for over a decade; this may be in part more so the incompetence of the disorganized Communist soldiers, rather than the supreme ability of the Rhodesians. As the war progressed into the mid then late seventies, the need for more ground troops was foreseen, and the government would institute black conscription into the army; the black Africans that would join the army willingly did so for social-economic advancement. The blacks taken into the army through conscription were tribals, and were therefore not, more than likely, given the same if any education as their European counterparts; being unsophisticated due to station, the training for the black recruits was long, up to 2 years, before said trooper was deemed regularly trained. This is on top of a boot camp, which itself is 6 months long, the training of the troops focused on conventional, and insurgency warfare; the utilization of limited resources to counter acts the play of outside forces being of the utmost importance.

The defense force was broken up into Fire Forces, these being stationed throughout the countryside, in 4 units of 2 European-American and 2 black Africa, with the men being stationed for weeks at a time; waiting for ground patrols to call support, with 2d Force- Company A, having a kill-to-death ratio of 1 Rhodesian to 100 Communists in 3 months of 1978 alone; the officers were always European-American, “typical fighting men” and loyal to his troops, who were in turn loyal to him. Most of the Rhodesian army were trained paratroopers, unique in any modern military, with dependency on aircraft not being understated, the African terrain demanded this form of hazardous locomotion. When the “bird” is in route to the targeted zone, the soldiers on board are given a simple fragment order, how long to arrive and how many Communists they are expected to encounter; all the Rhodesian aircraft fly low, to hide their signature, and are then talked onto the target by a ground observer. The speed of the soldiers was key, as soon as the aircraft is spotted, the enemy would disappear into the bush, and blend into the locals; if contact is made, and the enemy cannot be destroyed through rifle or machine gun fire, the air force would then come in and destroy the tough spot, with the soldiers moving in afterward. Up ahead, the commander of the Fire Force would be in a helicopter, directing the action on the ground, as his troops would move from a crawl to the brink movement through the bush, each step deliberate and eyes fixed; in the Bush War, he who sees his enemy first, shoots first and thus lives. [16]

In the confusion of bush combat, Communists would be able to escape into the foliage, possibly to safety, or possibly to the arms of another Rhodesian patrol; many others though were simple civilians, caught in the middle of a war they did not want, in a country not truly their own, and many were indiscriminately murdered by the Rhodesian army, both by Anglos and blacks. Once the Force is assured the area is clear from Communists, they take a respite and then investigate the post-battle scene, many of the gorillas killed by the Rhodesians would field weaponry that would not only be degraded Soviet but not even functional; much of the Communist field leadership would keep detailed notes and journals of their operations and hard copies of orders, this unthinkable in any professional army, giving the Rhodesians accurate and up to date information on their enemy.

Once the Force’s mission is over, the aircraft return and pick up the men, in “sticks” of 16 pax total, as well as any Communist bodies reclaimed from the bush; usually taking the dead to a local town to display, and send a message, in a rather Graccian show of “Woe to who shall ever do the same”. This is done because much of the combat is deep in the bush, while many of the civilians in the tribal lands do not know of the fighting beyond, even while the invading Communists destroyed many Rhodesian tribal communities, with over two thousand killed by 1978. The soldiers’ work is never done, even normal villages would have more within there within, and tribal leaders would often be taken for “questioning” by a Fire Force or God forbid [17]Selous Scout camp- where one would assuredly never be seen by their family again. The Rhodesian nerve in the bush may be understood, having to move through rough ground, with snagging plants, and dangerous animals and insects, on top of the insurgence; the army would repeatedly patrol in long extended lines when able, walking upright, as the Communists would be laying in front of them- the man who shoots first, survives. The cost of the war, just like on the Communist forces, was taxing on the Rhodesians, with a combined thirteen thousand being killed, both civilian and military; as Rhodesians would degrade and become Zimbabwe, the Europeans would flee, but the black Africans would remain, and die further by the thousands at the hand of the transitionary government.

[18]It is more so inevitable, rather than avoidable, that the besieged Rhodesian government would take on foreign volunteers- mercenaries, into their army, the Romans from the apex of Trajan to the end of the Byzantines, and Alexander himself used mercenaries; this is not to discount said use of supplementary troops by modern nations such as the British and French empires. The US, rather hypocritical during the Johnson, and Carter administrations would express hostility to US involvement in any capacity during the Bush War, but said nation itself had a prior history within the 20th century; with FDR sending US navy pilots, under the employ of the RoC to fight the Japanese invaders, among other instances, but the conflicts in Africa were beholding a level of American and pan European involvement never before seen. The involvement of US and European peoples fighting in Africa as volunteers had gone back farther than just the 1960s-80, hundreds of ex-pat US Irish would go to South Africa and fight with the Boers against the occupying British army; mercenary involvement, dress rehearsed in the early 1960s in the Congo, as the Belgians withdrew their Empire; US help was needed to stem the violence as the country transitioned into a “Communist” one. [19]Bilateral to the Rhodesian Bush War, was the Angolan crisis in 1975, with the necessity of US volunteers being implied by the reported “scores” of US citizens joining the European security force within the African country.

[20]The Pan Europeans who went to Rhodesia were as varied in motivation as they were in ideology, some went to fight Communism and believed in the mission, and some were White supremacists and obsessed with the ethno-racial superiority of the Anglo identity (Rhodesia by identifying British, not Afrikaner), and some came for adventure. Not every soldier who joined was top notch, some being exposed on their first patrol of not being able to ‘hack it’, regardless of their experiences in Vietnam; in Asia, the Americans would deploy in force, and as mentioned the Rhodesians would operate in small units. Surely, the black troops, as mentioned, taken were little better than the underprepared European volunteers, and were viewed as being untrustworthy, unreliable, and possibly spies for the Communist forces invading the country; Ian Smith’s government was forced to decide between blacks or possibly dubious loyalty, and forging [21]volunteers, some of which had no qualms of murdering blacks, both civilian and combative, and by 1977, 40% of the Rhodesian army was made up of volunteers from pan European decent.

As ideology and anti-Communism stand as the bedrock of Rhodesian doctrine at this time, there was a further desire by those who had come to the country, to maintain the status they had found for themselves in Africa, with the cost of living being rather low; if a soldier had come with funds, or had [22]gained wealth through illicit means, more than likely learned in Vietnam, one could have for themselves, “…a place in the sun with a pool and servants, you’d have to fight sooner or later…if you wanted a black “Houseboy” in a white cotton uniform, or a black “Garden boy”, to cut your grass, something you’d never had the UK; there is going to be a price to pay.” The price-to-be-paid may be taken as both a physical and esoteric thing, while a soldier is expected to, through blood and steel, kill the enemy; but also, the human tole through atrocities, in the face of state protection, at the sake of ‘results. The catalog of barbarity executed by the RDF upon the Communists and locals dazes the brain, with acts such as napalm and poisoning being not uncommon, and a majority of the inhumanity being conducted by the former mentioned [23]Selous Scouts; named after a friend of Theodore Roosevelt, F.C. Selous, taking inspiration from the US Army Green berets, and would be charged with 86% of insurgent and civilian casualties over the course of the Bush War. This unit, being the most famous with Special forces enthusiasts, was a favorite unit for US volunteers, most not having familial and therefore historical relationship with the black Africans and other Europeans, were reported to have innate hostility towards blacks, and would “…commit crimes a decent, white Rhodesian would never”, scorched earth also being a favored tactic of the Scouts, from April 1974 on the war would undergo a striking escalation in discriminatory violence. US infrastructure and covert purchasing of minerals would assist, partnered with trade from the RSA and the Portuguese, in keeping the rebel regime of Ian Smith alive, and sustaining the fight as long as possible; imports of US-made planes from North American Aviation, McD&D, Boeing, and so on were bought by the Rhodesian government. Outside observers would report on such dealings, with Lockheed Trojans, C130s, and Boeing 720s among others sold to Ian Smith’s country illegally by US companies- with little to no punishment being levied on the companies. Before the embargo, the Rhodesians were able to deal with sanctions easily, and for almost 10 years, from 1966 to 1974, the short-lived country went through a golden age.

           [24]Rhodesia, 1978, inside a Tribal compound, drums are beating, and chants are sung; “Our children are dying of hunger”, the people say, “We need food”, they continue, the conditions are getting worse. They hope their children will have a better future, although what that future looks like, with events on the Rhodesian ground being as such during the war, was rather bleak. One black Africa interviewed in 1978 was asked, with the war seemingly concluding, if would he choose to fight for his tribe and the soon-to-be Zimbabwe, his answer highlights the sentiment of many black civilians within the country; “I shall continue to fight even my comrade, I can see as I meet them, they are very serious about the problem. They will not stop till we get our Zimbabwe. We won’t drop down to get what one, because with much blood on which is already wasted, of which won’t take it back. I was born here; I intend to die here.”

As mentioned before, much of Rhodesia’s black population lived in homesteads outside, or separate from the major cities, such as the capital of Salisbury; with the war’s progression, many of the outlying tribal communities would be moved to concentration camps- barbed wire, controlled movement, and tin shacks. Such conditions express to an observer, the motivation for and desire for black rule in Africa, by the black Africans, as it is understandable a person would want to live, remain, be, and die free- damn the powers that be. The K-Spans the black Rhodesians would be made to live in, simple in construction, and their expediency, rather than amenities, exemplified the horrid situation, a burning oven in the unforgivable African summers, and a fridge during the cold winters. There was no running water, and potable water was gathered from wells, or a nearby river, and paid only 5 dollars (in modern USD) per week for sustenance. There was no medicine or doctors stationed in, or within the near vicinity of these camps- if any, hopes from the blacks forced into this station held onto the idea of a safe Rhodesia, or a free and majority-ruled Zimbabwe; yet, the transitional, white to black, government, instituted little change was seen by the black Rhodesians, and truly the country’s degradation was already assured long before. The Rhodesian government insisted the blacks wanted to live in these camps- called Keeps, while the blacks viewed this action as an invasion of their way of life, and over five hundred thousand blacks would be sequestered in these camps; all movement was controlled under martial law, and identity bracelets, if a tribal was outside of his compound and found without said bracelet, they would assuredly be arrested or killed- as on a terrorist would not wear his ID tag. With the RSDF being in control of internal protection, attention was given more so to cutting off terrorists, rather than the substance of the majority populace, which was integral to Rhodesia’s survival; many of the Keeps, some two hundred of them, would be attached to farmland, but separated from said land by gates and wire, as such it was near impossible for the blacks in these camps to feed themselves, with their Keeps being locked for days at a time. As the new year dawned upon the Rhodesians, the prospect of starvation held its hand over the tribals, and many black Rhodesians would liken living in a Keep, as being stuck in a prison- which they were; in service to the government’s message, the black civilians expressed wishing to live where they please, regardless of fighting in the countryside, most black Rhodesians subject to such conditions would indeed favor the Communists to win, and supported a transitional white-to-black government-only if the new black leaders would do something for the majority of the country. The International Red Cross, and its supply points for aid, would be essentially the only source of sustenance many of the Keeps inhabitants would be able to access; and Christian missionaries, although vulnerable to attack, would give aid to not only the Rhodesian black civilians but injured Communists too, as the virtue of Anglo-Protestant doctrine demands the faithful help the sick and poor. Brave indeed, the missionaries who helps all Africans were viewed as conspirators by the Rhodesian government, and such a dangerous task to maintain.

           The fighting in Rhodesia, although exemplified by RDF action and crimes against black civilians, also the Europeans who called Rhodesia home; in many Zambian and other border towns along Rhodesia’s border, compounds and Anglo clubs would be targeted. Indeed, from one golfing club in the north of the country, the pay field war mortared, and scorched the earth; from the driving green, one would be able to see the Zambian border road, from which attacks would be launched against the Europeans by Robert Mugabe, and other Communist leaders In the city of Tarly, as 1978 gave way to 79, saw 9/10 of the pan European Rhodesians leave the area, in the face of violence; also the black faces replacing the ones of their former neighbors. Bigotry by white Rhodesians would manifest in the form of anger, not at the fact there were blacks in the country, but that the status they had gained for their families would be lost, or given over to said blacks; understandably, one would not willingly want to give up-essentially, their home and way of life, regardless of the situation outside of their control. On one side of Tarly- Rhodesia, there are the aforementioned black Concentration camps, on the other side, are the empty homes of the fleeing Europeans, all for sale, with no buyers; even if a black Rhodesian was able to afford one of these homes, they were barred by the law from owning one, the Land Partition act under Ian Smith would equally divide Rhodesia for blacks and white, but as expected, the European owned land was invested in, and prospered- while the black Rhodesians lived as tribals, in huts and such, with no injection of governmental subsidy to enhance their station; it was viewed by the pan Europeans, the black Africans wanted to live as tribals- but did not consider the optics of opulence in the face of abject poverty. When the new black and white government of Rhodesia was in place, said segregationist policy was indeed on the legal tender, and the new black representatives of the country vowed to abolish it, but by November 1979, no such action had been undertaken; some homes had existed on the for sale market for months, the grand 4 bedroom house, with the deepest pool in the city, would be offered to sell for only twelve thousand Pounds 1-2.4 million dollars in 2023), the owners knowing the life they had made for themselves in Rhodesia was over, and movement to South Africa, the UK and so on was deemed the proper course for preservation. A farmer and homeowner in Tarly, Monte Pesco, would characterize Anglo sentiment about the degrading country, “I never thought I would be leaving Rhodesia. Now, I was one of the guys in the stay-and-see camp for Tarly, I was going to just turn off all the lights, close the gate, and say ‘Alright Rhodesia, good luck’…I was going to turn off the lights but things are happening so fast that I realized at the moment there was no time, I don’t have much time anymore…somebody else will have to turn the lights off…there is no gamble (in staying), there is a risk, the gamble is all in the…the Gooks (black Africans), the Gooks have got it now; the whole world is supporting the terrorists…I work with a staff of about 8 blacks, and they all think they are going to own houses, I have never seen so many Africans driving, and learning to use motorcars, they think they are all going to get a motorcar; my garden boy was washing my mother-in-law’s car, and he said ‘Ms., next year that is going to be my car”, my mother in law held up a box of matches and said ‘I would soon rather see this car blown up than ever give it to you, you will never get this motor car’, so that is the attitude of the African, it has changed this past year…We (Europeans to Africans) are outnumbered something like 34 to 1, in South Africa, I think, it is about 4 to 1, so you could stand a chance…I could take out 4 Afi’s before I let them get to me, but I couldn’t 34 to 36- no way.”

           It goes without saying, the desire, want, and need for one to be, remain, and also die free, goes far beyond the bounds of words, and actions; by the summarization of the information given, the very embodiment of social-proper justice, and execution of such, is enacted through war, imprisonment, but also traveling the US with one’s dog; and the actions and inactions, and consequences of the key figures at pla

[1] Alfred E Eckes. The United States and the Global demand for Minerals. Pp 244 – 250. The University of Texas and. London press, 1979.

[2] Peter Godwin. Rhodesians Never Die (1970 – 1980). The Oxford University press, 1993.

[3] Lindsay Obrien. Bandit Mentality. Pp 10 – 32. Helion and Company Publishing, 2017.

[4] William F Buckley Jr. Firing Line: The Question of Rhodesia, with Ian Smith. March 15, 1974. This source was taken from an interview held by William Buckley and Ian Smith, in Salisbury- Capital of Rhodesia.

[5] Whiley Online Library. Zimbabwe: Ian Douglas Smith (1919 – 2007). African Research Bulletin: Political, Social and Cultural, Volume 44, Pp 17318 - 17318

[6] “Ian Douglas Smith”. African Dictionary, 2006, Pp 475-77.

[7] Ian Douglas Smith. The Great Betrayal: The Memoirs of Ian Douglas Smith. Pp 166. The John Blake publishing, 1997.

[8] Julius Nyerere. The Role and Responsibility of the United States and Rhodesia. Pp 40 – 46. The Black Scholar, Volume 2. 1980.

[9] “Why Carter snubbed Rhodesia’s Ian Smith. US News and World Reporting, Pp 42 – 44, 1978.

[10]

[11] Clifford DuPont. The Memoirs of Clifford DuPont- President of the DuPont Company. Pp 100. Books on Rhodesia publishing, 1978.

[12] Gerald Horne. From the Barrel of a Gun. Pp 50 – 56. The University of North Carolina Press, 2001.

[13] Gerald Horne. From The Barrell of a Gun. Pp 170 – 198. The University of North Carolina press, 2001.

[14] United States Congress, Congressional Budget Committee. Raw Materials Policy. Pp 13 -17.

[15] Nick Downie, Lord Richard Cecil. Frontline: Rhodesia. 30th Degree Publishing, and the Royal African Rifles of the UK. 1978.

[16] H. Ellert. The Rhodesian Front war: Counter Insurgency and Guerrilla war in Rhodesia. The Mambo Press, 1980.

[17] Peter Baxter. Selous Scouts, Rhodesian Counter Insurgency Specialists. Africa At War, Vol 4. Helion and Co Publishing, 2011.

[18] Anthony Mocker. The New Mercenaries:  The History of Hired Soldiers from the Congo to the Seychelles. Chapters 1,6-9. The New York Paragon, 1987.

[19] Clipping from a December 6-1975 report, MS 308/33/7, IDAF Papers, NAZ.

[20] Luise White. Fighting and Writing: The Rhodesian Army at War and Postwar. Pages 1 – 30. The Duke University Publishing, 2021.

[21] Rand Daily Mail, South Africa. January 3, 1977.

[22] The Southern African. May 1978, MS 717/13, National African Newspaper.

[23] Report by Bridget Parsons, ca 1977. MS 308/58/5, National African Newspaper.

[24] Thames TV. Zimbabwe: Goodbye, Rhodesia. This Week, November 11-1979.