The list at OCS sparked the SASC report, whichfound all but one of the institutionsobjectionable.

It was by no means a complete or final list,Steiner says, but simply those institutions whichresponded to the OCS. Some other organizationsresponded to Heimert, while still more toMassachusetts Hall, Steiner explains, although hewill not specifically name other respondents.

"If we did it all over again, the [OCS] listwould not have been public," Steiner says, addingthat he would rather have described the types ofinternships available in general rather thanspecifically.

"I wanted to be as open as possible," saysMargot N. Gill, OCS associate director and acommittee member, explaining her reason forproviding the information. Now she says sheregrets the decision.

Today, there is little doubt Gill and Steinerwould have preferred the general approach becauseit was the list which sparked the critical reportabout the program by SASC. After their two weekinvestigation, SASC recommended that "theinternship program be suspended immediatelypending an investigation by the University andthrough consultation with representatives of BlackSouth Africans."

"The actual internships currently listed as`available' contradict the stated goals of theprogram," concludes the 48-page SASC report. Theactivists charge that these organizations do notserve the Black majority because they are eitherpredominately white private schools or wouldinvolve Harvard students in bolstering SouthAfrica's illegal occupation of Namibia.

Steiner says that the "misconceptions" aboutthe OCS list are due to organizational failures inhis committee although he points out that SASCnever discussed the issue with him before thegroup published its report. He blames the mix-upon the confusing effort of gathering institutionalinternship offerings while generating studentinterest.

"Ideally we would have a list of five or sixsuitable institutions all ready before solicitingthe student interns," Steiner says. "Perhaps weshould have started a little earlier," he adds.

But SASC members are still asking why there wasa need to set up the the undertaking so quicklythis year when organizational difficulties plaguedthe undertaking. The partisan student activistsanswer their own question: it was an urgent efforton the part of the University to quickly justifyits investments in South Africa and to preempt astrong spring divestment protest season.

Idealism

Ironically, it is the students who take thisless idealistic approach. To Heimert this view iscynical, and Steiner simply asks, "Why waitanother year to set up a good program?"

But is the program good? While SASC and Steinerbattle over the way the committee has gone aboutcreating the program South Africans debate thevery essence of the program itself: the roleeducation should play in battling apartheid.

"Liberation before education," some SouthAfricans cry while others stand by the slogan,"Education for liberation." These two battle criesillustrate the split between the moderate andradical approach to fighting apartheid. The firstviews the internships as bolstering efforts tobreak the apartheid educational system while thesecond sees Harvard involvement with such programsas helping to foster a Black elite.

Harvard, for the most part, contacted thoseSouth Africans who favor the moderate approach,many of whom are educators. SASC wants Harvard tospeak 'o the nation's Black politicalleaders--many of whom favor the radical point ofview that for apartheid to end, the Pretoriagovernment must be totally isolated.

The battle between Steiner and SASC has to beunderstood with a view to South Africa's domesticdebate over the role politics plays in education.Indeed both SASC and Harvard agree they will dowhat Black South Africans want, but the problem iswhich South Africans they choose to talk to.