Quote:
One of the keys to understanding why many terrorists were turned so easily is found in their cultural make up.
The answer may also be found within your notes, where in effect your source suggested that the African will follow those who show themselves to be strong (for this read "more ruthless, more violent, more powerful" etc), and will as a general rule vote for them. Setting the tribal niceties aside, mentally the captured terrorists often fell from their perceived positions of power i.e. God with an AK47 who commanded all he wanted - beer and women etc, to a frightened, defeated nobody on his way to see a Judge and a rope. In the African mindset, having been captured, bettered and effectively defeated by "his own people" would, I have little doubt, have been a particularly sobering psychological experience. (I am not sure if this means Rhodesians, of whatever colour, or black Rhodesians).
The Selous Scout upper command were also very careful not to promote any suggestion that they were fighting for "Rhodesia" or "Smith" or any other institute that the terrorists would have a disliking for, or been taught to hate. The Scouts slogan "Pamwe Chete" effectively means "Together Only" and conveys the idea of brothers fighting for each other, not for a system.
For a captured terrorist to be offered the chance to join a unit with an extremely fearsome (i.e. strong) reputation, carefully cultivated via propaganda, enabled the African to avoid the Judge, and regain his position of power once again. (For sometime the Rhodesian COIN included criminal prosecutions, with the death penalty and I suspect this time-consuming practice lessened as the war expanded).
I know of instances where terrorists captured in the morning were handed their AK47`s back to them in the afternoon (after a carefully orchestrated chat and assessment), and off they went happily hunting down their old friends as a member of the "strong." It probably seems bizarre to a westernised mindset, and I’m afraid it does not portray the African in a particularly favourable light, but the turning methods frequently worked. I know of only one incident where an "ex" terrorist turned on his new associates, and this was his intention all along.
It should be added that the intelligence community frequently used the terrorist propaganda against them. The terrorist High Command would spend as much time, if not more, pushing propaganda into the heads of their men as they did on military training. (Hence the frequent comments that ZANLA were poorly trained compared to ZAPU).
Consequently your average terrorist was expecting all sorts of nasty things to occur if they were captured. The Scouts, as part of the turning technique, made certain that the captive was treated respectfully, and provided with any medical assistance he required (delivered by pretty African nurses).
Basically he was treated the absolute opposite as to how he had been told he would be, without the fact that he was still deep in trouble going away. The effect of this was to add to their confusion, and in the end self preservation will swing the person for you.
The Scouts were effectively the armed wing of a larger intelligence organisation. As the interviewee suggests the entire exercise was intelligence driven, and as an Intelligence Officer his liaison with SB (Rhodesian Police Special Branch) would have been frequent. It perhaps could be argued that he was more SB than Scout. It is certain that in some quarters the line between SB and Scouts would have blurred.
Usually SB men were involved in the investigation of incidents, i.e. weapons collection (for forensic examination where the weapon would be traced to various previous activities etc); and all the other intelligence gathering methods.
On the issue of dirty tricks, discovered ammunition dumps were frequently sabotaged so that the AK47 rounds would explode in the barrels. Grenades were certainly tampered with in terms of fuse timing, and RPG7 rockets were rigged to detonate on triggering, as this weapon was usually the first fired in ambush situations. The detonation obviously killed the launcher and his nearby associates, and gave away the ambush position.
I also know of Scouts who attacked Rhodesian targets in order to "prove" their credentials to the real terrorists.
The radios, manufactured by the Rhodesian Company Supersonic (one of our answers to sanctions) could be rigged in a number of ways. The first was to have it blow up after a number of activations (15?), and these would be passed on through various contacts within the tribal areas to the guerrillas who would be interested in listening to propaganda broadcasts from Mozambique etc. Another use was to have the radio emit a beacon that a “Fire Force” helicopter could home in on. There was suggestion that this beacon transmitted when the radio was actually turned off, as once the Lynx or Trojan spotter (the first stage of a “Fire Force” operation) was airborne the terrorists would switch the radio off to listen to the air activity, thus effectively giving their position away.
There is a lot of stuff on the web about the heroics of the Selous Scouts. They are (were) a particularly tough bunch, but it remains true that while it was their job to find the terrorists, it was the RLI who killed them.
The poisoning allegations; it appears however that someone, or rather some group within SB may have in fact gone down this road as a progression from sending out dodgy radios etc. For obvious reasons it is not really likely that anyone will confess to involvement in operations of this kind particularly in today’s world.
I am certain however that there was South African (intelligence) involvement in the process, and this has been aired during the Truth and Reconciliation hearings after the change down there.
To be blunt, the general consensus from those I have discussed the matter with over the years was, "a dead terrorist is a dead terrorist." They do not regard the supply of poisoned camouflage uniforms to terrorists, as anything remotely approaching the deliberate and indiscriminate use of chemical/or other weapons on a civilian population. It should also be added that we frequently used Frantan (Napalm) and white phosphorus grenades/bombs on terrorist targets, and when a four man “stick” are challenging anything up to thirty opponents, a phosphorous grenade was frequently a life saver.
Could the turning techniques used in Rhodesia be used in our war today with Moslem extremists? Perhaps there are similarities in the extremists poor self esteem, driven by anger to fight against a powerful opponent that always "wins" (beginning with the Crusades.) I believe the sense of power it gives these deluded individuals, to be part of a system fighting "unbelievers" with guarantees of heaven etc as a reward, makes them an interesting opponent. Does their penchant for feeling "strong" come from plotting against and killing the innocent?
