Country of My Skull: Guilt, Sorrow, and the Limits of Forgiveness in the New South Africa

Having addressed hearings for victims and police-related amnesty-seekers, Krog moves onto amnesty hearings for politicians, which prove to be an attractive spectacle drawing many more foreign journalists. Krog believes that South Africa’s TRC’s unique position of having politicians testify is a result of them having to submit individually rather than as a group. Krog observes that this is “a shift from individual tales to the collective, from victims to the masterminds, from the powerless to those in power” (134).

Krog then outlines the basic positions of each of the major political parties—IFP, AWB, National Party, ANC, Democratic Party, and Freedom Front—each of whom have strong, disparate positions on their roles in apartheid. The IFP and AWB in particular object to the TRC, the IFP because of conflict with the ANC and the AWB because of far-right politics.

Krog primarily focuses on the submissions from the National Party, who were most recently in power before Mandela’s election, and the ANC, who fought against apartheid and took over from the National Party. The NP’s primary stance involves admitting to being wrong in perpetuating apartheid, but denying knowledge of or involvement in “the authorization of assassination, murder, torture, rape, assault” (136). By contrast, the ANC’s “whole submission centers on the notion of a just war. Because the war was just, the battles were just” (137).

Krog provides some additional historical context and allusive comments on South Africa’s political history by observing the removal of official Cabinet paintings that hung in the Parliament. She uses the visuals of three of the largest paintings to describe “three distinct eras of our past” (139)—namely, around 1910, when South Africa was more unified but less integrated in race and gender, around the 1950s, when the apartheid government began, and in 1984, shortly before apartheid began to unravel.

Chapter 10 focuses on the definition of reconciliation and what reconciliation means in practical terms when applied to South Africa post-apartheid. Krog provides quotes from victims, professors, politicians, and commissioners addressing the concept of reconciliation as well as dictionary definitions. She focuses particularly on how amnesty-seeking Afrikaners use reconciliation—by threatening to withhold it—and on definitions provided by Archbishop Tutu and Thabo Mbeki, Deputy President of South Africa. Krog observes:

Where for Tutu, reconciliation is the beginning of a transformative process (one must be able to transcend one’s selfish inclinations before one can transform oneself and one’s society), for Mbeki, reconciliation is a step that can follow only after total transformation has taken place (144).

As part of her discussion, Krog includes thoughts and analysis from Professor Mahmood Mamdani, who leads a panel discussion Krog attends at the University of Cape Town. Mamdani seems to suggest that both Tutu and Mbeki could be correct. Krog concludes the chapter with a piece of victim testimony detailing abuses by the Vlakplaas hit squad.

As the amnesty deadline gets closer, political parties begin submitting their applications. The ANC demonstrates little understanding of the actual process, despite having been integral to the creation of the TRC. When an ANC member goes rogue and submits his own application—potentially damning to the party—the ANC pressures him, giving the impression that “unity is more important than truth” (151). In response, the TRC takes its own stand against the ANC, insisting that the ANC’s actions are in direct conflict with the purpose of the TRC.

After controversy around the dates for amnesty submissions, Mandela extends them. The Amnesty Committee receives thousands of applications, many coming in around the last minutes of the deadlines, including several from a group of young black men who apply based on having not done enough to oppose apartheid.

During this period, the TRC sinks further into controversy about racism and preferential treatment, which the media exacerbates by publishing deliberately inflammatory stories telling only half-truths. When the first amnesty rulings are going out, “All seven are black ANC members. Of the five who were refused, four are white” (154). Boraine, conscious of the TRC’s appearance, phones the judges and acquires names of four additional successful applicants—all white.

Krog concludes this chapter by talking about various ghosts that haunt the South African Parliament.

The political parties give their testimonies for their amnesty applications. Krog gives particular focus to the two major parties, the ANC and the NP. Krog and her fellow journalists are surprised when the ANC admits wrongdoing and apologizes for it, noting, “They are clearly no longer used to being called to account in public by those with no political power” (162). Krog observes that the ANC may just be going through the process to clear its name without actually meaning its apology, as it doesn’t provide any details or acknowledge bad policies, only individual actions. Similarly, the NP’s testimony serves mostly as damage control by F.W. de Klerk, trying to save his party from total ruin. The TRC makes no progress with him.

As a result of the political testimonies, the TRC comes under fire even more from the political parties themselves, the media, and the general public. Krog and many of her colleagues wrestle with contradictory feelings of wanting to give up on the TRC and wanting to see their job through to the end. With everyone seemingly unhappy about the Commission now, particularly Afrikaners, Krog provides observations from a psychiatrist who points out that acceptance and healing will take time, possibly several generations’ worth. He notes, “Afrikaners in particular are feeling terribly exposed […] The community feels exposed because they have been caught out, shown up as evil, and this is very hard to deal with” (170).