World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article
 

Greater South Africa

During the late 19th century and early 20th century, a number of South African and British political leaders advocated for a Greater South Africa. This irredentism can be regarded as an early form of Pan-Africanism, albeit strictly limited to White Africans of European ancestry.[1]

Contents

  • Theoretical planning 1
  • Actualization 2
  • See also 3
  • References 4

Theoretical planning

Map shows the location of River Zambesi, the hypothetical border river of an enlarged South African state.

Statesman Jan Smuts repeatedly had called for South African expansion since 1895, envisioning a future South African border along the river Zambesi or even the equator.[2] German South-West Africa, Southern Rhodesia, and at least the southern parts of Portuguese Mozambique (especially the port of Lourenço Marques in the Delagoa Bay) along with the High Commission Territories (Basutoland, Bechuanaland and Swaziland, the last one having been a Transvaal protectorate from 1890–99) were to be included in this state, with Pretoria now being its geographical capital.[2] Although the initial objective of Smuts' expansion plan was the Zambesi, he took great geopolitical interest in the East Africa Protectorate and Tanganyika: he was impressed with the British colonists of the White Highlands and believed that the area could be transformed into a "great European state or system of states" in the near future, eventually leading to a "chain of white states which will in the end become one from the Union to Kenya".[3] Smuts believed this expansion would finally lead South Africa to become "one of the greatest future Dominions of the Empire", the equal of Australia and Canada.[3]

Smuts' expansionist aims received little domestic white support.[4] Afrikaner nationalists feared that the incorporation of British territories near South Africa would result in a state with a much larger black majority than in the then-current Union of South Africa.[4]

Actualization

The formation of the Union in 1909 was seen as the first step in bringing forth the unification of the British-held territories in Southern Africa.[5] The British were initially supportive of territorial enlargement of the South African State. The retainment of imperial responsibility in the Rhodesias, Nyasaland and the High Commission Territories was not intended to be the ultimate territorial arrangement either by the British or the South Africans: the South Africa Act 1909 made provisions for admitting Rhodesia as a fifth province of the Union in the future, and laid out the terms for the potential future transfer of the High Commission Territories.[5] Prime Minister Louis Botha agreed with Smuts that the South African annexation of the High Commission Territories was only a matter of time.[6]

The British approved Smuts' war aims during the South-West Africa Campaign, and supported the mandation of German South-West Africa to South Africa, although Smuts looked to formally incorporating the territory.[6][7] He suggested the naming of this new territory as Bothaland after the Prime Minister.[8] Even future fulfillment of the territorial objects in Portuguese Mozambique – by the means of a purchase approved unanimously by the South African cabinet[6] – were looked favorably, despite Portugal being a member of the Entente.[7]

However, the Southern Rhodesian government referendum of 1922 saw the colony of Southern Rhodesia reject joining the Union. This decision made the South African acquisition of the British South African Company rights in Bechuanaland unnecessary, and thus its transfer to the Union was halted.[7] Rhodesia, functioning as a British counterweight to Afrikaner dominance, had laid claims to at least a part of Bechuanaland, and thus it was increasingly in British interests to transfer the latter from the South African sphere of influence.[9] The British were also disappointed with the South African parliament passing the Natives Land Act, which created the land tenure system which eventually became one of the foundations of Apartheid.[10]

Without Rhodesia, Smuts' projections for further South African expansion northward became impossible to actualize and his aspirations towards Mozambique difficult to accomplish.[11] The South African general election of 1924 brought the end of Smuts' premiership and the election of J. B. M. Hertzog as the new Prime Minister.[12] The British were suspicious of the anti-imperial and pro-Afrikaner Hertzog compared to the anglophile Smuts, and became less willing to meet South African territorial demands.[12]

In the Afrikaner dominated Apartheid South Africa, especially under the premiership of Hendrik Verwoerd, the concept of an incorporation of Southern African territories into a white dominated South Africa revived, aiming now at Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland which became independent from the United Kingdom in this time.[13]

See also

References

  1. ^ Schwarz 2012, p. 301
  2. ^ a b Hyam & Henshaw 2003, p. 103
  3. ^ a b Hyam & Henshaw 2003, pp. 103–105
  4. ^ a b Nolutshungu 1975, p. 33
  5. ^ a b Hyam & Henshaw 2003, p. 102
  6. ^ a b c Schwarz 2012, p. 302
  7. ^ a b c Hyam & Henshaw 2003, p. 110
  8. ^ Hayes 1998, p. 46
  9. ^ Hyam & Henshaw 2003, pp. 110–111
  10. ^ Hyam 2010, p. 349
  11. ^ Hyam & Henshaw 2003, p. 111
  12. ^ a b Hyam & Henshaw 2003, p. 112
  13. ^ Robert Jaster, South African Defense Strategy and the Growing Influence of the Military. In William J. Foltz, Henry S. Bienen (eds.), Arms and the African: Military Influences on Africa’s International Relations (New Haven 1985) p. 124
Bibliography
  • Hyam, Ronald; Henshaw, Peter (2003). The Lion and the Springbok: Britain and South Africa Since the Boer War.  
  • Schwarz, Bill (2012). The White Man's World.  
  • Hyam, Ronald (2010). Understanding the British Empire.  
  • Nolutshungu, Sam C. (1975). South Africa in Africa: A Study in Ideology and Foreign Policy.  
  • Hayes, Patricia (1998). Namibia Under South African Rule: Mobility & Containment, 1915–46. James Currey Publishers.  
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and USA.gov, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for USA.gov and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
 
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
 
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.
 


Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.