2.1 Refer to Source 2A: 2.1.1 Identify the TWO countries in the source that were blamed for South Africa's intervention in Angola - NSC History - Question 2 - 2018 - Paper 1

Vorster likely defended South Africa's involvement in Angola to safeguard national interests and maintain geopolitical stability in the region. His rationale could have included preventing the MPLA from gaining control, which was seen as a threat to the security of South Africa. Additionally, Vorster may have sought to preserve access to resources and to counteract the influence of communism from the Soviet Union and Cuba.

According to the source, South Africa's main reasons for intervening in Angola included the desire to prevent the MPLA government from taking control, to safeguard water resources, and to stop the MPLA from gaining influence over southern Africa. The intervention was also framed as a necessity to counteract the spread of communism in the region.

The two African leaders named in the source who welcomed South Africa's support of the FNLA (National Front for the Liberation of Angola) and UNITA (National Union for the Total Independence of Angola) are Kenneth Kaunda, the President of Zambia, and Mobutu Sese Seko, the President of Zaire.

South Africa's involvement in Angola can also be understood through the context of the Cold War, where regional conflicts were often influenced by global superpower rivalries. It viewed its intervention as essential for maintaining its own security and countering perceived threats from communist forces backed by Russia and Cuba. Additionally, controlling Angola was seen as vital for economic interests, particularly in maintaining stability in the southern African region.

The two organisations that prevented the SADF (South African Defence Force) from capturing Cuito Cuanavale were the MPLA (People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola) and SWAPO (South West Africa People’s Organization). Their coordinated efforts effectively resisted South African military advances.

Communism, in the context of the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale, refers to a political and economic ideology aimed at creating a classless society where the means of production are collectively owned. During this battle, it represented a significant challenge to capitalist interests in southern Africa, notably those of South Africa and its allies, as the MPLA sought to establish a communist government.

Nelson Mandela's statement likely implies that the victory at Cuito Cuanavale symbolized a broader triumph against colonialism and oppression across the African continent. It underscored the solidarity of African nations in their fight for independence and self-determination, showcasing that the defeat of South African forces was not just a local success, but a collective achievement in the struggle against imperialism and apartheid.

Source 2C presents a narrative that paints the South African forces as 'winners' of the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale, emphasizing their military successes and capabilities. In contrast, Source 2D offers a more nuanced perspective, highlighting the significant resistance and eventual withdrawal of South African troops, framing the battle as a loss for them. This contradiction illustrates differing interpretations of the battle's outcomes and the impact on subsequent liberation movements in the region.

Foreign powers played a crucial role in the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale, with Cuba and the Soviet Union providing military support to the MPLA, which ultimately bolstered their capacity to resist South African forces. South Africa, backed by Western interests, sought to establish a foothold in Angola to prevent the spread of communism. The involvement of these external entities polarized the conflict, turning it into a significant battleground for Cold War ideologies, ultimately shaping the political landscape of Southern Africa.