Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:09:41.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Southern African Pressure Politics in the U.S.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2017

Robert J. Janosik  and
Barbara E. Lawrence
Get access

Extract

Southern Africa earns little press coverage in the United States. Issues which relate to this part of the world are, newsmen feel, of minimal interest to the American news consumer. But the lack of coverage reflects another phenomenon: the nature of the activities of Southern African agents and allies in the U.S. These pressure groups, unlike those of the splashier (domestic) labor, medical and legal lobbies, do not concern themselves with grassroots activity or extensive media attention. Like the Nixon Administration at least until the Watergate debacle the Southern Africa-oriented pressure groups foster and consciously maintain a low profile.

Type
Research Article
Information
African Issues , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , Fall 1974 , pp. 76 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © African Studies Association 1974 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 1972 Information Digest, South Africa Foundation (Johannesburg, South Africa: By the Foundation), p. 1.

2 John H. Chettle, “The Evolution of United States Policy Towards South Africa,” Modern Age (Summer 1972), pp. 259-70. (Hereinafter cited as “Evolution.“)

3 United States Sugar Act, 48 Stat. 670 (1934), 7 U.S. Code i608 (1958).

4 Berman, Daniel M. and Heineman, Robert A., “Lobbying by Foreign Governments on the Sugar Act Amendments of 1962,” 28 (Spring 1963), p. 419 Google Scholar.

5 Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report. “Nazi Tactics Led to Foreign Agents Registration Act,” 8 May 1970, p. 1262. (Hereinafter cited as “Tactics.“)

6 Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, “How Foreign Agents Fared in House Version of 1971 Sugar Act,” 18 June 1971, p. 1300.

7 Foreign Agents Registration Act, as amended, 56 Stat. 249 (1942), as amended, 80 Stat. 244 (1966)..

8 “Tactics,” p. 1247.

9 Ibid., p. 1248.

10 “Ford Expected to Declare New Sugar-Buying Quotas,” New York Times, 16 November 1974, p. 40.

11 Mr. Kenneth Towsey, private interview with Robert Janosik held in Washington, D.C., August 1972.

12 Robert O. Keohane, “The Big Influence of Small Allies,” Foreign Policy (Spring 1971), p. 168.

13 Statement of the SASA before the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives (92nd Congress), in Hearings on the Extension of the Sugar Act, 1971, p. 1076.

14 As quoted in ibid., p. 1077.

15 Ibid., p. 1082-83.

16 “Evolution,” p. 259.

17 Kenneth Owen, correspondent for the Argus Press International, private interview with the authors in Washington, D.C., August 1972.