IN the United States they used to talk about 'company towns". Rhodesia began company country and not a lot has changed since then.
It was colonised not by European British South Africa Company. Foreign capital, dominated by and interests, still has a 70 per cent stake in the economy.
Last week we looked at the similarity between the policies of the major parties stopping the people from deciding their own future. We said that the only debate between them was how HITe as but by the South African British political all were based on Zimbabwean does propofelt toUnilateral reflected a between expanded their manufacturing, been settlerJune arentor sancuons African rather than profits. South increased since UDI. nervousness of The press provocative large stake there.
Newall, The unacceptable face? Lonrho's Tiny Rowland the continued supply of oil to Tobacco Rhodesia is an indication of how lightly most of them took son).
They did face problems in Rhodesia. The Smith regime's tight exchange control regulations forced them to reinvest repatriate their Rhodesia African companies have had free movement Corporation. of capital and their stake in Rhodesia has correspondingly creates the the top four impression that Rhodesia is ou of bounds for the international Lonrho. business community, but many British companies still have a southern operations These include: Turner and American Industries Ltd Lonrhd defiance backing parties.
leaders (chairperson Sir Richard 'bribing wogs' DobStewart and Lloyds, GKN, GEC, Dunlop, ICI, and the British Electric Traction.
In sharp contrast to its public statements, the British govern ment has substantial interests in through Leyland and the British Steel But two British-based multinationals tower above them all and consistently figure among profitmakers in Rhodesia - Rio Tinto Zinc and tion RTZ is most notorious in Africa for at the Rossing mine in South African-occupied Namibia. In Rhodesia it has big holdings in mining and industrial enginand can even strengthen them.
explains Lonrho's increasing links with sections of Zimbabwean Patriotic Front - it sees Zimbabwe's future as neo-colonial and it wants to nave a snare in ina future.
Lonrho is perhaps the model of the modern multinational. Its network of subsidiaries in every section of production allows it to both sidestep SanCHORS and confidently establish relations with liberamovements in the expectation of future profits.
This should not lead us to cynicism over the liberation movements. However success ful it may be, the Lonrho-style multinational treating with a liberation movement is a sign of