In 1985 the Congress, in an unusual development, legislated over a presidential veto and installed harsh mandatory sanctions against South Africa, hoping to change Regan's weak policies.
In 1989 FW de Klerk came into power and released Nelson Mandela, leader of the ANC. De Klerk also lifted the ban on the ANC and other anti-apartheid groups, opening the door to negotiations on political reforms between the South African government and the ANC. Therefore, the process of dismantling apartheid began which lead to an historic agreement in 1993, which restored democracy and made possible black majority rule. Trade restrictions were lifted and South Africa rejoined the community of nations.
Were the sanctions responsible for setting South Africa on a path of reform and majority rule? While the sanctions were being applied, opinions differed, but now that apartheid has been officially lifted, most believed that the sanctions eventually paid off. According To Davis, apartheid has been ended through the concerted co-operation and economic sanctions of many states in combination with human rights activities of international institutions and nongovernmental organisations throughout the world.
The arguments against economic sanctions are many, due to their unsuccessful history. Elliot and Forland says this in World Politics:.
q A typical response in the sanctioned society is a heightened sense of nationalism, a lager mentality that simulates resistance.
q Sanctions sometimes hurt the powerless people they seek to help the average citizen.
q Governments often act covertly to support the sanctioned state even as they publicly profess their support of sanctions.
q The credibility of the state(s) imposing sanctions is often low, given their costs and the fact that it always involves something lost on both sides.
q Widespread co-operation from the international community seldom materialises and unilateral or one-way sanctions seldom succeed in a globalized market with many competitive suppliers of embargoed goods.
