A Party in Three Pieces
The Conservative Split over Rhodesian Oil Sanctions, 1965
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12585486 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mark Stuart (0000-0003-4962-6496, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2002 |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 51-88 |
| Publication date | 2002-03-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Contemporary British History (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1361-9462 • E-ISSN: 1743-7997 |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/713999439 |
| OpenAlex | W1985450031 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
The article details and analyses the motivations behind the Conservative three-way split over Rhodesian oil sanctions on 21 December 1965 in the wake of Ian Smith's Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI). Supporters of Harold Wilson's sanctions policy included both progressive Conservatives committed to maintaining the bipartisan decolonisation policy begun under Harold Macmillan's second administration (1959-63) and more traditional Conservatives who were anxious to maintain British sovereignty over the issue. The opposing wing of the Conservative Party largely comprised those who believed that sanctions could not be made to work, but also included a cohesive group - the Friends of Rhodesia - who were convinced that Harold Macmillan had betrayed the Central African Federation by breaking a series of assurances. The bulk of the Conservative Party, under the new leadership of Edward Heath and Chief Whip William Whitelaw, abstained, resulting in an embarrassing three-way split. Despite annual Conservative opposition to the renewal of the oil sanctions order in Parliament throughout the rest of the 1960s and during his own period in government (1970-74), and support for Ian Smith organised by the Monday Club at successive Conservative Party conferences, Heath maintained the bipartisan policy with Harold Wilson over Rhodesia. Although Rhodesian rebels on the Tory right were not necessarily those rebelling in the House of Commons on issues like Europe, immigration and capital punishment (though a small number were), throughout his years as Leader of the Opposition and in government, Heath struggled to establish his authority as leader of the Conservative Party. The article therefore challenges the argument put forward especially by Norton that poor leadership was largely responsible for the frequent Conservative backbench rebellions during Heath's government. In reality, the right caused trouble for Heath from the minute he became leader in 1965
Opposition (politics · Parliament · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sanctions · Sociology · Historical and Contemporary Political Dynamics · Law · Middle East and Rwanda Conflicts
| Citations per year | 0.33 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2014 - 2026 (13) |
| Highly cited | No |