Sanctions Double-Cross Oil to Rhodesia
By Jorge Jardim
Published by Books of Rhodesia (1978)
ISBN-0 -86920 -197 -2

IMPOSITION of sanctions has been regarded as a measure to punish or cripple a government or country that has ‘defied’ the norms of relations among countries.
The Rhodesian government was subjected to economic sanctions which included an oil embargo.
As a form of coercion, sanctions on Rhodesia proved they (sanctions) could not be imposed collectively.
The sanctions were futile as Rhodesia continued to enjoy the position it always had.
Rhodesia became an example of the ineffectiveness of sanctions as long as there were countries willing to work with the sanctioned.
Both Mozambique, which was under Portuguese rule, and apartheid South Africa played a role in ensuring that Rhodesia did not suffer.
Instead of crippling the ‘errant’ Rhodesia, the white minority rule continued thriving while the black majority suffered.
The ineffective sanctions can be blamed for the bloody liberation struggle that claimed thousands of blacks who died in Rhodesian genocidal attacks such as the Chimoio and Nyadonia massacres.
Had the sanctions been effective, Africans would not have taken up arms to free themselves.
Sanctions imposed on Rhodesia did nothing to change the mindset of the Ian Smith regime, instead it gave it the false belief that minority rule would go on for a thousand years.
The book under review this week, Sanctions Double-Cross Oil to Rhodesia by Jorge Jardin is a clear reflection of how the effectiveness of sanctions is dependent upon relations of nations and sincerity in their imposition.
Portuguese author Jardim tells the story of Rhodesia in relation to his experiences in Mozambique and Malawi.
Southern Rhodesia was subjected to sanctions after proclaiming the Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) in 1965.
The declaration was a ‘threat’ to international peace thus Britain and America led in imposing sanctions that included an oil embargo on Rhodesia.
The United Nations’ Security Council passed Resolution Number 217 which called on all member-states to break economic relations with Southern Rhodesia.
This meant for the Rhodesian economy to suffer and force the rogue nation to capitulate and return to British rule.
However, Sanctions Double-Cross Oil to Rhodesia shows that the sanctions were not wholeheartedly enforced and did not cripple Rhodesia.
Jardim shows how Britain, America and French companies, as non-state actors, played a role in keeping Rhodesia afloat.
Through British and American companies such as Total, Mobil, Shell and BP, Rhodesia obtained fuel supplies that kept the brutal regime going.
The companies flouted international law with the connivance of their governments which knew and let it be as they benefitted from the money made by these entities.
“I believed the international oil companies, British, American or French, would do nothing against the guidance from their respective governments, but that in defence of their own interests they would welcome an excuse to plead the inefficiency of sanctions,” writes Jardim.
Rhodesia was helped to keep on oppressing and exploiting blacks by companies from nations that purported to be reviled by the actions of Ian Smith.
“What can be proved through concrete data … is that some months later the British companies were leading in the supplies to Rhodesia,” Jardim writes.
Clearly the sanctions were a sham and the Rhodesians cannot boast they survived sanctions because in reality, the embargo did not exist.
They were merely sanctions on paper.
Sanctions imposed by the European Union (EU) and the US under ZDERA are a typical example of real sanctions meant to suffocate and totally destroy a nation, unjustified as they are.
The sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe cannot be compared to those on Rhodesia because the Rhodies were kith and kin to the British and the British directly benefitted from Rhodesian operations.
However, in Zimbabwe, the Land Reform Programme for example meant that the British could not continue exploiting the country.
“It was no longer a case of flouting sanctions. Everybody wanted to keep their place in the market,” writes Jardim.