I think that you are all right but I chose the exact opposite with South Africa remaining under a revived Apartheid.
In 1993, Chris Hani (an anti-apartheid activist) is assassinated (that failed in real life) by a Polish immigrant. The murderer is found dead and the investigation is slow.
As a result, riots are taking place in various districts. Mandela and the ANC fail to take control of the uprising and several white people are killed in the following weaks. As a result, the white/coloured minority starts to worry and de Klerk is forced to resign from the party. He is, then, replaced by Ferdinand Hartzenberg, a conservative. Later, the ANC is banned again, Mandela is send back to jail and dies, while the parliament change the law again and call for the 1994 election to be cancelled.
Of course, the result is growing chaos but basically, South Africa is left alone. The Western world is more concern about the Russian coup and the soviets don't get involved except for a renewed support to several of South Africa's neighbours. In addition, South Africa retain control of Walvis Bay.
When tensions start to really grow and war is on sight, NATO declares that it has no reason to get involved in South African's internal affairs. In return, it gets a fair access to the South African ressource market. Surprisingly, despite this, the country is never targeted by the Warsaw Pact.
Of course, internal tensions goes from riots to unrest to local uprising to full civil war but the various ethnic groups fail to unite and the government is able to play on these tensions. At last, while everyone else is engaged in the Twilight War, Hartzenberg's government meet the revolt with full military force, eventually dropping a few nukes on the few neighbour state providing what little support they can to the insurgents.
|