Reagan Finds Hopeful Signs in Botha Speech

SANTA BARBARA —  South African President Pieter W. Botha’s much-anticipated speech to his ruling National Party contained new elements that provide some hope for resolving the country’s racial crisis, the Reagan Administration said Thursday.

But Botha’s speech fell short of what many U.S. officials had expected. And his stern stand against immediate and dramatic reforms and resistance to pressure from outsiders did nothing to ease President Reagan’s dilemma over whether he will sign or veto economic sanctions against the South African government when such legislation is sent to his desk by Congress, probably next month.

A statement read to reporters by national security adviser Robert C. McFarlane and approved in advance by Reagan called the South African leader’s address an “important statement” and said it offered some “new ideas” that “must be clarified.”

McFarlane repeatedly emphasized that the real test of what Botha said will be its reception in South Africa, particularly among the black majority. About 74% of South Africa’s people are black, but they have no voice in the white-dominated national government and are heavily restricted by the government’s policy of racial segregation. About 14.5% of the people are white.

Reagan listened to the hourlong address at his ranch near here, then conferred by telephone with both Vice President George Bush and Secretary of State George P. Shultz before sending McFarlane to read the cautious, carefully constructed statement of reaction.

McFarlane, who met with South African Foreign Minister Roelof F. (Pik) Botha in Vienna last week, evaded the question of whether President Botha’s speech fully met U.S. expectations.

Instead, he noted that the South African government seems to be moderating its policy of maintaining all-black “homelands,” its view on citizenship and its attitude on negotiations with blacks.

“I believe the language with which the homelands policy was couched today appears to convey an openness to move away from that policy of homelands--either new ones, or an openness to the re-integration of those which already exist,” McFarlane said. “That is the appearance of it. One will have to see whether that is the reality.”

Moreover, he said, President Botha’s “statement that all South Africans should be citizens of an undivided South Africa is more precise than the previous statements of that government.

“It does appear to be a commitment to these two issues as well as a commitment to a negotiating process,” McFarlane said. “I think the latter is probably what will be measured in the days ahead and is the most important element of the speech.

“There are things in this statement that have not been publicly espoused before,” he said, “and to that extent, it represents an apparent commitment to negotiations.”

But statements by Administration officials in recent days had suggested that the United States had expected more of a response to its insistence that the South African government accelerate its move away from apartheid.

During his meeting with the foreign minister and other South African officials in Vienna, McFarlane warned that, unless South Africa speeds the dismantling of apartheid, Reagan will be unable to sustain a veto of congressionally imposed economic sanctions against the country.

Both houses of Congress have approved some form of sanctions and Senate-House conferees have agreed on a compromise. The House has voted to approve the compromise and Senate approval is expected next month.

When Reagan arrived in California last weekend to begin his vacation, White House spokesman Larry Speakes, who had earlier spoken of the need for “drastic” reforms, said South Africa was taking the opinion of the United States and other countries into account in the policy statement.

On Thursday, the Administration avoided any specifics in discussing a schedule for reforms, saying only that its position has been that South Africa must accelerate actions to end apartheid. But McFarlane said it should be “days or weeks, certainly not months, before we see some tangible evidence of the commitments implied today.”

Reagan has steadfastly declined to say whether he will veto the sanctions against South Africa, an important trading partner, and he has vowed that the United States will continue its policy of “constructive engagement” as the only workable way of exerting influence on the Pretoria government.

McFarlane said Thursday that the President will study both the Botha speech and the final form of the sanctions legislation before making his decision on a possible veto. But he said Reagan believes that some provisions already written into the sanctions legislation “are harmful to black interests in South Africa.”

Opponents of sanctions argue that they will increase unemployment and thus decrease living standards among South African blacks.

Meanwhile, Mary Frances Berry, a member of the federal Civil Rights Commission and one of the first American blacks to be arrested in the demonstrations that began at the South African Embassy in Washington last Thanksgiving, denounced the Botha speech.

“I listened to the entire speech and all Mr. Botha said he was doing was reaffirming his policy,” Berry said. “The only thing he did was to try to paint a face of progress in an attempt to discourage the Senate from voting for sanctions.”

Berry, a co-chairman of the Freedom for South Africa movement that has sponsored the demonstrations at the embassy and elsewhere, scored Botha’s reference to black violence without mention of police violence. She also criticized his failure to free imprisoned black nationalist leader Nelson Mandela.

At an earlier news conference, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, head of the national Rainbow Coalition and contender for the 1984 Democratic presidential nomination, professed to see concessions in the South African president’s position.

“It’s important to recognize that President Botha’s recommendations address some part of grand apartheid, in its grand design rather than just harassment that takes place daily under petty apartheid,” Jackson said. “It properly acknowledges that time is running out.