Business | paulhunterjones

In 1934 the South African (SA) government purchased Union Airways. The acquisition of the airline included its routes and a small fleet of airplanes. From this humble beginning South African Airways (SAA) was born. Today SA’s flagship airline, SAA, is an international carrier that generates millions of dollars annually in revenue. The airline operates out of OR Tambo International Airport where it also maintains its principal corporate offices. The airlines has always been owned and managed by the South African government which is the company’s sole shareholder.

It is universally agreed that SA has a dubious and troublesome history of racial relations. In 1948 Dr. D.F. Malan and his Nationalist Party assumed power of the government. The party set about the enacted a series of laws that segregated the races along color lines. In this legally recognized forced segregated society whites legally retained and were granted vastly superior stations in life in comparison to their black countrymen. This hybrid social, political and economic system of racial segregation and discrimination became known as apartheid. For years blacks lived and died under this oppressive system with little hope of every escaping the jaws of racial injustice. Blacks sweated and labored to drive an economy that benefited only whites. Black South Africans were forced to live in abject poverty with all of its trappings.

The international community would eventually turn its collective attention and weight towards SA’s apartheid form of government and the impact it had upon its black citizens. In the mid-80s various international organizations imposed a wide range of sanctions against the SA government and its businesses. As a result of the sanctions doing business with SA became if not impossible prohibitively expensive. It was believed that by the imposition sanctions the world community could force SA to abandon apartheid.

I do not believe that the debate will never end over the effectiveness of the sanctions in bringing about the dismantling of apartheid. Following a 20 year campaign against apartheid Nelson Mandela, a political prisoner under white rule, become the nation’s first black president upon the end of apartheid. He has stated that the sanctions helped bring down the political system of apartheid. On the other hand the white President who presided over the dismantling of apartheid, F.W. de Klerk has consistently stated that the sanctions did not force his government to negotiate the end of apartheid. Maybe both esteemed gentlemen are correct.

Professor Philip I. Levy who has held many high level U.S. governmental positions concerning economics while teaching at Yale University wrote a Central Discussion Paper (796) in February 1999 entitled Sanctions on South Africa; What Did They Do? In this work Professor Levy cites the relevant facts, arguments and offers a political and economic reason why the sanctions definitely changed South African policy towards apartheid. Professor Levy states early in his work that:

“Alongside this alternative case the paper will try to illuminate the kind ofarguments that one must make if one is to argue that sanctions were effective. The fundamental problem in assessing the role of sanctions is that the end of apartheid was over determined. Given the sequence of events, it is impossible to prove that sanctions were ineffective; they were among the many potential “causes” linked to the single “effect.”3 In lieu of such a proof, the rest of the paper will describe the sequence of events

In South Africa, consider what it would mean for sanctions to be effective, and argue that at best sanctions failed to interfere with the other forces that were bringing down the apartheid regime”

I believe that the arms embargo against SA had profound impact upon the white government’s decision that the time to end apartheid had arrived. F.W. de Klerk and his ministers understood the futility a fighting a guerrilla war from without and within the country. Rhodesia fielded a better trained army that employed better tactics than the black liberation Marxists fighters could muster. Yet in the end the arms embargo prevented the Rhodesian government from prevailing in a long draw out bush war. The white government in SA understood the military obstacles that its Rhodesian brethren faced. And, just like Rhodesia, it could not count on Western powers to aid a military struggle that would help it to stay in power.

It cannot be reasonable argued that the sanctions did not have an impact on the operations of SAA; they definitely did. The U.S. Senate on October 3, 1986 overrode then President Reagan’s veto of legislation that would have imposed serve sanctions against SA. Not only did the law ban new investment in SA it prohibited the import of a long list of items and canceled landing rights for SAA on American soil. The Senate’s action mirrored legislation that had been recently enacted by the European Community and other nations. Because business between New York City and Johannesburg was so vital the SA government sued in Federal Court to have the cancellation of its landing rights blocked. After hearing and reading the arguments an Appeals Court denied SA’s request for an injunction and allowed the cancellation to stand.

We must not forget South Africa’s geographical location. It sits at the southern most tip of Africa. I would say that it is somewhat geographically isolated. During the Apartheid era SA was far from its usual and few trading partners. Because of the sanctions SAA, regardless of transporting people or goods, was not able to over fly or land in many African countries. Globalization was slowly becoming a reality that SA could not take part in the growth.

Pages: 1 2 3

This past Wednesday Steve Jobs , CEO and co-founder of Apple Inc. (Apple), lost his battle with cancer. This summer Mr. Jobs stepped down from his post in Apple. At a news conference he explained his reason for leaving Apple. Mr. Jobs simply stated that he could not longer perform his duties as expected and, thus, it was time to step aside and allow someone else to lead the company. It was clear that Mr. Jobs had lost a considerable amount of weight and his movements appeared strained. Most people rightly concluded that Apple CEO was gravely ill and was resigning his post to be with his family. Mr. Jobs’ always placed great importance on maintaining his family’s privacy. The manner in which he resigned did not surprise anyone who had followed his career.

There are not enough words to adequately describe Steve Jobs. He was a visionary and a creative genius. Mr. Jobs understood too well what the market needed and how to fulfill that need. Apple’s products were innovative and trend setting. During his stewardship Apple’s already good products continued to be improved, besides being technologically superior to the competition. Everyone agrees that Mr. Jobs was a marketing expert that put the show into business. In late August of this year Apple moved past Microsoft Inc. as the world’s most valuable technology company. Steve Jobs did not shy away from a good idea because its implementation required that risks be taken. I believe that he managed Apple as he did his personal life; he was not afraid to do what he believed should be done.

What most impresses me about Mr. Jobs is his strong belief in living life to the fullest. For a man who was bestowed with so much talent, Steve Jobs was amazingly humble and down to earth. He was a simple man in the romantic sense of the word. Mr. Jobs’ fine qualities as a human being were displayed during his 2005 Stanford commencement address. He started his speech by telling the audience that he never graduated from college and was honored to have been selected as the commencement speaker.

Mr. Jobs divided his address into three parts. He talked about his experience as a student at Reed College. On the subject of education Mr. Jobs told the graduating class that what they had learned during their time in school would be applicable at some future time. Next he talked about the need for patience, faith and perseverance in pursuing your dreams. “Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick. Don’t lose faith. I’m convinced that the only thing that kept me going was that I loved what I did. You’ve got to find what you love.” Everyone understood that he was saying that you will be more successful and happy doing something you love to do.

Steve Jobs concluded his address by talking about the certainty of death and living life to its fullest. The crowd was stunned and quiet when he discussed his brush with death. He spoke about being diagnosed with having pancreatic cancer. The doctors had told him that he had only six months to live. He now had to get his affairs in order and say his goodbyes.The results of the biopsy indicated that Mr. Jobs’ cancer was treatable by surgery. He underwent surgery and the cancerous mass was successfully removed. Steve Jobs expressed his relief and gratitude for being given a second chance at life. What he said next will motivate future generations for eternity;

“No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don’t want to die to get there. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it. And that is as it should be, because Death is very likely the single best invention of Life. It is Life’s change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new. Right now the new is you, but someday not too long from now, you will gradually become the old and be cleared away. Sorry to be so dramatic, but it is quite true.”

“Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of others’ opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary”

Steve Jobs has passed on but his wisdom and love will always inspire us.