HSY3705
ASSIGNMENT 3 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 29 SEPTEMBER 2025
, Reform or Repression? The Effectiveness of Apartheid Reform Strategies in the
1970s–1980s
Introduction
During the 1970s and 1980s, the apartheid regime faced mounting crises: economic
decline, international isolation, and internal resistance. In response, successive
governments attempted a series of reforms aimed at easing tensions and preserving
white minority rule. These reforms ranged from changes in labour and pass laws to
constitutional restructuring, most notably the creation of the tricameral parliament in
1983. Yet the question remains: did such reforms undermine apartheid by opening
space for resistance and negotiation, or did they strengthen it by buying the regime
more time?
This essay argues that while apartheid reforms were intended to stabilise and legitimise
the system, they largely failed in their objectives. Instead, reforms exposed the
contradictions of apartheid, mobilised greater resistance, and contributed to the
regime’s delegitimisation. The essay begins by examining the motivations behind
reform, then evaluates key strategies of the 1970s and 1980s, considers their
immediate impact, and assesses whether they ultimately weakened or reinforced the
system.
Motives Behind Apartheid Reform
The late 1960s had been a period of relative stability for apartheid. The economy was
growing, black political opposition was suppressed after the Rivonia Trial, and
international pressure was muted. However, this changed dramatically in the 1970s.
The 1973 Durban strikes demonstrated the growing power of black workers, while the
1976 Soweto Uprising highlighted the explosive discontent of youth and students.¹ At
ASSIGNMENT 3 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 29 SEPTEMBER 2025
, Reform or Repression? The Effectiveness of Apartheid Reform Strategies in the
1970s–1980s
Introduction
During the 1970s and 1980s, the apartheid regime faced mounting crises: economic
decline, international isolation, and internal resistance. In response, successive
governments attempted a series of reforms aimed at easing tensions and preserving
white minority rule. These reforms ranged from changes in labour and pass laws to
constitutional restructuring, most notably the creation of the tricameral parliament in
1983. Yet the question remains: did such reforms undermine apartheid by opening
space for resistance and negotiation, or did they strengthen it by buying the regime
more time?
This essay argues that while apartheid reforms were intended to stabilise and legitimise
the system, they largely failed in their objectives. Instead, reforms exposed the
contradictions of apartheid, mobilised greater resistance, and contributed to the
regime’s delegitimisation. The essay begins by examining the motivations behind
reform, then evaluates key strategies of the 1970s and 1980s, considers their
immediate impact, and assesses whether they ultimately weakened or reinforced the
system.
Motives Behind Apartheid Reform
The late 1960s had been a period of relative stability for apartheid. The economy was
growing, black political opposition was suppressed after the Rivonia Trial, and
international pressure was muted. However, this changed dramatically in the 1970s.
The 1973 Durban strikes demonstrated the growing power of black workers, while the
1976 Soweto Uprising highlighted the explosive discontent of youth and students.¹ At
