The FW de Klerk Foundation decided to dedicate its annual conference this year to the
consideration of the future of multiculturalism in South Africa.

We did so because of the strains that have been developing in relations between our
communities and because of the central importance of reaching agreement on how
communities in our complex multicultural society should relate to one another in the
future. These are questions that will play a key role in determining the long-term success of
our society and the security and happiness of all our peoples.

This is also a challenge that increasingly confronts countries throughout the world. The main
threat to peace during the 21st century no longer comes from the possibility of conflict
between countries but rather from the inability of states to manage relationships between
ethnic, cultural and religious communities within their own borders.

The age of the single culture, single language state is over. Two thirds of the world’s 200
countries have minorities comprising more than 10% of their populations. Cultural and
ethnic minorities now comprise more than one billion people throughout the world - one in
seven of the human population.

Our own country, South Africa, is one of the most culturally and ethnically diverse societies
in the world.
Like so many other African countries, South Africa was a creation of European
imperialists. At the beginning of the last century the British drew arbitrary lines on the map
of southern Africa which created South Africa as we know it today. In so doing they
incorporated within the same state a wide array of different peoples with different cultures,
values and levels of development.

In 1910 when the Union of South Africa was established, the British gave white South
Africans a monopoly of political power. During the subsequent decades whites used their
monopoly of power to promote and protect their own interests. Their relationship with the
other peoples of South Africa was characterised at best by condescending paternalism - and
at worst by naked exploitation and dispossession.

26 years ago today I initiated the process that would end the white monopoly of power and
that would open the way to our present non-racial constitutional democracy.

During the constitutional negotiations the participating parties gave extensive attention to
the manner in which the rights of all our communities would be protected and how they
would work together in a new spirit of unity in diversity. Our new constitution recognised
our 11 official languages and proclaimed that they should enjoy parity of esteem.
• It required us to strive for unity within our diversity.
• It prohibited discrimination, inter alia, on the basis of race, language and culture.
• It enjoined the state to take special action to develop our indigenous languages.
• It stated that government at national and provincial levels must use at least two official
languages.

The Constitution importantly recognised the right to receive education in the language of
one’s choice in public educational institutions, where such education is reasonably
practicable and provided that it does not lead to discrimination.
It also created space for language, cultural and religious diversity.
• Everyone would have the right to use the language and participate in the cultural life of
their choice.
• People belonging to cultural, religious and ethnic communities would be able to enjoy
their culture, practise their religion and use their language.
• They would be able to form cultural, religious and linguistic associations and other
organs of civil society.

Our new Constitution was in line with international thinking on multiculturalism at the time.
A United Nations Development Programme report, published in 2004, pointed to what it
called the newly emerging ‘identity politics’.

“In vastly different contexts and in different ways - from indigenous people in Latin
America to religious minorities in South Asia to ethnic minorities in the Balkans and
Africa to immigrants in Western Europe - people are mobilising anew around old
grievances along ethnic, religious, racial and cultural lines, demanding that their
identities be acknowledged, appreciated and accommodated by wider society.”

The Report affirmed that cultural liberty was a vital part of human development. If handled
well, it could lead to greater cultural diversity and enrich people’s lives. However, if it was
mismanaged it could “quickly become one of the greatest sources of instability within states
and between them.” The answer was to “respect diversity and build unity through common
bonds of humanity”.

The UNDP Report recommended that states should promote cultural liberty as a human
right and as an important aspect of human development. Neither did the UNDP believe that
cultural rights could be secured “simply by guaranteeing individuals’ civil and political
rights”.

On the contrary, the promotion of cultural rights required explicit state action:
“…states need to recognise cultural differences in their constitutions, their laws and
their institutions. They also need to formulate policies to ensure that the interests of
particular groups - whether minorities or historically marginalised majorities - are
not ignored or overridden by the majority or by dominant groups.”
It is only within such a framework of tolerant multiculturalism that all of us who live in
multicultural societies can achieve our full potential as human beings in the many different
areas in which we operate.

For example, I am an individual. I belong to the De Klerk family. I belong to the Reformed
Church. I am a member of a number of private organisations - including a number of golf
clubs. I am an Afrikaner. I derive my language, my history, and my traditions and much of my
identity from all these associations. I am also very proud to be an active citizen of the new
vibrant and multicultural South Africa. Like my ancestors since 1688, I am an African - and I
like to think that I am a citizen of the world.

None of these relationships is mutually exclusive. People can be all these things at the same
time. Their reasonable rights in all these spheres need to be protected. Neither should they
suffer discrimination because of any of these affiliations.
I believe that we South Africans are all richer because of the cultural diversity that we
enjoy. I am confident that we can show that diversity does not need to be a source of
tension and conflict - but can help to enrich our lives by providing differing perspectives of
the world in which we live.

Unfortunately, virtually every one of the provisions relating to cultural and language rights
that we negotiated into the 1996 Constitution has been ignored or diluted:
• English is increasingly the single de facto official language.
• The supposed official status of the remaining 10 languages is increasingly an illusion.
• Little or nothing has been done to develop our indigenous languages.
• Afrikaans, as a university language, is under enormous pressure - and there are
increasing pressures on especially single medium Afrikaans schools.
Perhaps the most ominous threat to diversity comes from increasing demands that
minorities should conform to the goal of pervasive and all-embracing demographic
representivity. The idea is that in a perfectly non-racial society all institutions in the public,
private and non-governmental sectors should reflect the ethnic composition of society at all
levels - down to the first decimal place.

In a multi-community society like South Africa demographic representivity would mean that
minorities would be subject to the control of the majority in every area of their lives: in their
jobs, in their schools, in their universities, in their charitable institutions and in their sports.
It would be the antithesis of multiculturalism. It would constitute African hegemony - and
negate the idea that all South Africans are equal, regardless of the community to which they
belong.

Our communities also continue to be deeply divided by our very different perceptions and
experiences of the past.
During the negotiations we reached agreement on the need for reconciliation and for
actions to promote national unity. We accepted that our approach to the past should be
based on:
• a need for understanding - but not for vengeance;
• a need for reparation - but not for retaliation; and
• a need for Ubuntu - but not for victimisation.
We also agreed to establish a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to examine our deeply
divided past and to promote reconciliation and national unity.
In the course of the TRC’s proceedings, I made a full and sincere apology for apartheid. I
apologised in my capacity as Leader of the National Party to the millions of South Africans
• who had suffered the wrenching disruption of forced removals in respect of their
homes, businesses and land;
• who over the years, had suffered the shame of being arrested for pass law offences;
• who over the decades - and indeed centuries - had suffered the indignities of
humiliation of racial discrimination;
• who for a long time were prevented from exercising their full democratic rights in the
land of their birth;
• who were unable to achieve their full potential because of job reservation; and
• who in any way suffered as a result of discriminatory legislation and policies.
I said that this renewed apology was “offered in a spirit of true repentance in full knowledge
of the tremendous harm that apartheid has done to millions of South Africans.”
Nothing has changed since I made that apology. I stand by it. I believe that all white South
Africans should continuously try to understand, acknowledge and process the pain and
humiliation that apartheid caused black, Coloured and Indian South Africans. We need to be
involved in addressing it.

At the same time, black South Africans must show much greater sensitivity for the enormous
complexity of our history. They should not judge previous generations by the moral

standards of today - either Paul Kruger or King Shaka. History is not a simple cowboy story
about bad guys vs good guys.
The main motivation of my people throughout our history was simply our desire to establish
and maintain our own right to national self-determination.

Our critics must also understand that even more important than apologies is the
determination to put right what has been wrong. It was inter alia for this reason that my
colleagues and I took the decisions and actions that were necessary to get rid of apartheid
forever. We also agreed that our new Constitution should make provision for restitution, for
a balanced system of land reform and for measures to promote equality that would not
result in unfair discrimination against anyone.

Despite the considerable risks involved we gave up our virtual monopoly of power and of
our historic quest to rule ourselves. Instead, we put our faith in the non-racial Constitution
that we negotiated with all our fellow South Africans. In March 1992 almost 70% of white
South Africans supported the course that we had adopted.
Now, 22 years after the founding of our new society we continue to be more deeply divided
by our past than ever.
Many white South Africans live contentedly in their own first world bubbles oblivious of the
plight of less advantaged communities. This manifests itself too often in what blacks
perceive as an unconscious racial superiority - and sometimes in crass, racist and hurtful
remarks and attitudes.

On the other hand, the attitude of many blacks towards white South Africans is becoming
harsher and more uncompromising. Many feel that little has changed since 1994. Many
believe that whites “stole” all the land that they now possess and that their relative
prosperity is based not on hard work and enterprise, but on the historic exploitation of black
South Africans.

Whites are increasingly blamed for the problems of inequality, unemployment and poverty
that continue to afflict many South Africans. The Government openly attacks their history
and their heroes - such as Jan van Riebeeck and Paul Kruger - who, ironically, led one of the
greatest anti-Imperialist struggles in African history.
South Africans are once again perceiving people from other communities
• in terms of negative racial stereotypes and not as individual human beings;
• in terms of past animosities rather than in terms of the need for present and future
cooperation to achieve national goals.
More seriously, prominent political parties are competing against one another in their
attempts to mobilise their constituencies on the basis of hostile racial agendas.

We simply cannot afford this kind of racial polarisation. We must remember the UNDP's
warning that if relationships between communities in multicultural states are mismanaged
they can “quickly become one of the greatest sources of instability within states and between
them.”

We need to return to the spirit of reconciliation, compromise and goodwill that
characterised the first years of the New South Africa. We need to hear Nelson Mandela’s call
for reconciliation and nation building again.
We need to rediscover the vision of multiculturalism in the Constitution - in which:
• all our indigenous languages will be fully developed and enjoy real official status;
• all our languages will be treated equitably and with parity of esteem;
• the human dignity and moral equality of all our peoples will be respected - regardless of
their race or language;
• all people will be treated on the basis of non-racialism and non-sexism;
• no one will be subjected to unfair discrimination on the basis of their race, gender or
language;
• everyone will enjoy the right to education in the official language or languages of their
choice in public educational institutions; and in which
• everyone will have the right to use the language and practise the culture of their choice.
Leaders of goodwill from all our communities must now urgently come together to call for
calm:
• They should unambiguously condemn racism from whatever quarter it might come;
• They should call to account those who seek to incite violence - whoever they are;
• They should encourage South Africans to abandon negative stereotypes of people from
other communities;
• They should urge all South Africans to treat one another with respect, courtesy and
toleration;
• They should promote open dialogue between our communities to gain understanding of
the sources of their anger; their fears and their sense of hurt;
• They should learn more about one another’s cultures, languages and histories; and
• They should encourage us all to unite around the values in the Constitution and to work
for a society in which those values will be translated into reality.

We must all understand that all of us are mutually dependent: none of us will prosper and
feel secure if all of us do not prosper and enjoy security. We really do have a symbiotic
relationship and cannot survive without one another. As Pik Botha used to say, it makes no
difference whether a zebra is shot in a black stripe or a white stripe: the whole animal dies.
Because of the importance of healthy multiculturalism to the future of South Africa, the FW
de Klerk Foundation has decided to establish a Centre for Unity in Diversity that will operate
alongside the Centre for Constitutional Rights, which we established in 2006.
• The new Centre will uphold the Constitution’s vision of unity in diversity; the language
and cultural rights that it ensures; and everyone’s right to equality - regardless of their
race, gender or language.
• It will monitor any developments that might harm national unity; and that might
constitute unfair racial, gender or language discrimination.
• It will actively participate in the national debate on issues related to the rights of South
Africa’s language, ethnic, cultural and religious communities; and
• It will - where possible - assist people to claim their language, cultural, religious and
gender rights.
• It will support and promote nation building and social cohesion.
Like the Centre for Constitutional Rights, the new Centre will be assisted and guided by a
Panel of Experts. We hope that the new Centre will be up and running within the next six
months.

In conclusion I call on all fair minded and moderate South Africans:
• Let us say no to all forms of hate speech and destructive dialogue.
• Let us distance ourselves from all extremists.
• Let us take hands and build bridges towards a healthy multicultural nation.
• Let us build a successful, peaceful and prosperous South Africa.
• Let us revive the spirit and intent of 1994.
Let us work together to make the vision in our Constitution of human dignity, the
achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms a tangible
reality for all South Africans.