South Africa has by no means completed all of the necessary steps to bring it into the 21st century as a fully developed and prosperous stable democracy, but it has made significant progress. The military has maintained its stance as pro-democratic and successfully kept the peace throughout the transition to democracy. Recent education reforms are helping increase the standards of learning in South Africa, and the economy is slowly reviving (Matloff 1). Despite this, there are still other problems such as health care, the tax system, immigration control and additional improvements of the aforementioned that need to be dealt with, before the country can reach a stable equilibrium conducive to democracy. Countries such as Nigeria, Uganda, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe are also making the necessary reforms from which to establish a stable basis for democracy to grow. South Africa’s history of a strong and stable government, despite its lack of a multi-racial democracy has provided a stronger foothold for the new government making its’ job slightly easier than those of the other current democratizing countries in Africa.
“There is a growing threat of crime and general lawlessness which, unless the South African government can control, will derail overseas investment which is vital to the future of a stable economy and social reform” (Kurland). In order for the process of democratization to be successful throughout the various African countries, they must simultaneously deal with political and social reforms to improve the country’s economy, education, and military. Establishing a stable basis for the new government to develop from is vital if democracy is going to take root and last. “Insofar as democratization involves the institutionalization of procedures for popular government, precious little time was available for such procedures to take root, implying that the consolidation of democratic institutions in Africa will be problematic in years to come” (Bratton 71).
Bratton, Michael. “Deciphering Africa’s Divergent Transitions.” Political
Science Quarterly Volume 112 Number 1 1997: 67-93.
Bvuma, Thomas S. “Having it Both Ways: Dual Policy Analysis and Evaluation of
Zimbabwe Government. Information Policy 1980 – 1998.” Department of Media
and Communication 12 October 1998. Online. Available: www.media.uio.no. Carnoy, Joel Samoff. Education and Social Transition in the Third World. New Jersey:
Princeton University Press, 1990.
Esterhuyse, Willie. “Scenarios for South Africa—Instability and Violence or Negotiated
Transition.” Long Range Planning June 1992: 21-26.
Fitzgerald, Mary A. “A Treacherous Climb Up Democracy’s Slope; Musevni Takes On
the Difficult Task of Converting to a Multiparty State.” International Herald
Tribune 9 October 1992.
Griffiths, Robert J. “South African Civil-Military Relations in Transition: Issues and
Influences.” Armed Forces and Society Spring 1995: 395-407.
Jenkins and John Knight. “Equity, growth or both? Juggling lessons from Zimbabwe for
post-apartheid South Africa.” ID21 22 July 1998. 3. Online. Available: www.id21.org.
Kurland, Michael. South African citizen currently residing in South Africa. Personal
Interview. 27 November 1999.
“Living Standards In South Africa.” The Economist 29 February 1992: 21.
Matloff, Judith. “South African Schools Struggle to Make Grade.” The Christian Science
Monitor 9 January 1996: 10.
Musoke, David. “Uganda: Lawyers Criticize Army for Civilian Detentions.” Inter
Press Service 7 May 1991.
Phinny, Robert H. “The start of a parade of African democracies?” The Houston
Chronicle 26 December 1994: A19.
“Social Conditions.” The PRS Group 1 September 1992.
Stamets, Reena S. “In Nigeria, like rest of Africa, Military wields uniform power.”
St. Petersburg Times 5 December 1993: 18A.
“Zambia.” The Economist Intelligence Unit No 1 (1992): 4-11.
“Zimbabwe.” Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Online. Internet. 3 December 1999. Available:
www.um.dk.