OVERSHADOWED by the dramatic transformation of Eastern Europe in recent months are slower, more subtle changes in South Africa. Some of President F.W. de Klerk's new policies, which have given Blacks greater rights, have been criticized by the right wing in his apartheid regime.

These reform efforts are to be applauded, but the world should not be fooled. De Klerk's policies do not make him a true political reformer. He has not indicated that he will give Blacks equal political rights, since such a move would lead to the end of white apartheid rule.

De Klerk's "new thinking" is simply an effort to buy time. Until he can conceive a realistic solution for his troubled regime, de Klerk's "plan" is simply to alienate extremists on both sides to make himself look like a moderate. In a nation that desperately needs true political reforms, this gradualist game is not enough.

DE Klerk has offered some concessions to South African Blacks. Last month he released several jailed African National Congress (ANC) leaders. And this month he desegregated public beaches and recreational facilities and provided some public lands for integrated housing.

But de Klerk still controls all means of negotiation. No serious political concessions have been made, and the president will offer few unless there is some way to protect his white constituency.

One way has been to support Uncle Toms. De Klerk has publicly praised Black leaders who prefer gradual desegregation policies. After meeting with several Black evangelical leaders, for example, de Klerk was quoted as saying, "They told me that radicalism is representative of a small minority of the total black population and that the vast majority of all black South Africans are striving for moderate solutions."

Evangelicals, in fact, comprise merely one-fourth of the 28 million Blacks in South Africa. Representing a religious--but not necessarily a political--constituency, the evangelicals told de Klerk what he wanted to hear, and what he wanted to repeat to whites in his country.

Traditionally, the ANC has served as the primary anti-apartheid organization in South Africa. De Klerk, however, is trying to undermine the ANC's influence by dividing and conquering South African Blacks. His request that different Black groups become involved in the shaping of a new constitution is not an attempt at inclusion, but rather an effort to highlight the differences between these groups on desegregation and make the ANC look uncooperative.

IN addition to the anti-apartheid leaders, a powerful right-wing faction is putting political pressure on the president. Seeing themselves as the rightful owners of South Africa, white traditionalists point to Black violence and argue that the majority cannot be trusted with equal political rights.

These supporters of apartheid have leaned away from even superficial reforms, complaining that any compromise with the Blacks is a sellout. When De Klerk opened public beaches to all South Africans, for instance, right leaders called the move "intolerable."

The political might of the right wing cannot be underestimated. Former presidents of South Africa have been completely unable to control this constituency, and they have always feared the political repercussions of concessions. But de Klerk realizes he must alienate the right, and he is downplaying the consequences of doing so.

THE president's movement away from the hard-liners may be eased by recent reports that a police hit squad was responsible for the deaths of antiapartheid activists over the past decade. In one such case, assassins were told by police to kill a lawyer with ANC ties. His widow, also an activist, was stabbed to death a few years later.

If the investigation proves that rightwing elements in the police department--and in the government--instigated such a policy, de Klerk's efforts to undermine the right's political legitimacy will be aided substantially.

That de Klerk is attacking right-wing intolerance is heartening. But de Klerk, like Gorbachev in Europe, has also unleashed strong political forces that threaten to carry him away. Unlike the Soviet premier, however, de Klerk is offering only superficial changes, not legitimate reforms. Unless he is willing to offer Blacks an equal political role, he may discover that his policies of "balance" have expiration dates.