Bantustans in South Africa.
At the end of the Second World War, the world became increasingly conscious of the need for the expansion of the freedoms and rights of the minority and the pacified. Already the affected people were putting up their case through civil rights movements in America and armed national struggles in Africa. The Bantustans in South Africa were created as a response to the need to promote an egalitarian society. This discourse focuses on the history of Bantustans, their structure and influence and, to what extent, if any, they succeeded to promote political, social and economic equity in South Africa.
As MacDermot 1 notes in his paper titled, Self Determination and the Independent Bantustans, the history of the creation of Bantustans stretches back to the seventeenth and eighteenth century when slave trade and slave labor were a flourishing commerce across the continents. It is through this trade that Africa was opened up to the people from other continents, particularly Europe, who found it a land full of unexploited human and physical resources.1
Upon their settlement in Africa they embarked on a campaign to tap on the productivity of the lands across Africa. And as settlers, they eventually seized the best agricultural land and this meant that they had to drive Africans from their native lands and congest them in reserves. This development coincided with the abolition of slavery in the beginning of the nineteenth century, which in essence was a mutation of the same vice into a politically correct form. 1
With the flouring of agriculture in the white settlements and as other industries such as mining developed, the native reserves came in handy as a source of cheap labor. As a result the Africans in the native reserves were left with no option but to look for employment in white settlements and growing industries, since they were deprived of their productive land, hence the means of a livelihood. The white settlers subsequently came up with legal obligations such as the hut tax, which imputed Africans in the reserves to seek employment in mines and white settlements in order to pay the tax. In the long run, this ensured that the cheap labor offered by the Africans came in constant supply. 1
Eventually, as MacDermot observes, the population explosion within the reserves, coupled with congestion and abject poverty, there arose an acute need for the African working populace to migrate to urban centers in pursuit of greener pastures. But in the urban centers they lived more or less a humiliating life like the one they had faced in the reserves. In sum, apart from helping the white settlers to exploit the agricultural opportunities in Africa, the native reserves played a crucial economic function of providing plentiful supply of cheap labor. This system was further entrenched by systemically denial of the African majority their political and social rights, and in South Africa the black labor force was considered migratory citizens from the reserves. 1
The Second World War influenced major geopolitical changes the world over, altering the social and political status of the minorities, wherever they were struggling for equality. Africa benefited from these changes that came after the Second World War, which swayed the tide of world opinion to push for the granting of independence to the colonized countries and to bring to an end the discrimination on the grounds of race. 1
At this time the leaders of white South Africa adopted the policy of apartheid, otherwise referred to as separate development. This was a ploy to satiate the conscience of the white people in South Africa and also the conscience of those they intended to trade with or with whom they sought their investments. The plan didnt work out and failing to impress their target trade partners, the Pretoria government modified the theory of separate development by coming up with Bantustans, which purported independence for the Africans in their territories. 1
Eventually, the Bantustans became the glaring feature of the grand apartheid policy of the 60s and 70s. Legally, the Bantustans were created by the Promotion of Bantus Self-Government Act of 1959, which in practice, abolished the indirect representation of black South Africans in government and also divided Africans in the country along ten ethnic groups that were assigned the Bantustans. The legal background that helped to determine the territorial boundaries was lifted from the Land Act of 1913, which was subsequently amended in 1936. This law led to the demarcation of 13 of South African land to the black citizens who constituted approximately 75 of the whole population. 2
The Pretoria government did not stop after enshrining the Bantustans in the law. In 1970, they passed the Bantu Homeland Citizenship Act, which declared that all Africans were citizens of their respective homeland as opposed to the larger South Africa itself. When four Bantustans were declared independent between 1976 and 1981, eight million Africans lost their South African citizenship. The independent homelands were Transkei, Venda, Ciskei and Bophuthatswana. 2
The Composition and Structure of Bantustans
As aforementioned, the black citizens of South Africa were pushed into living within the ten homelands as stipulated by the Bantus Self-Government Act of 1959. Egoro (1991) argues that the Bantustans were divided into two broad categories the independent Bantustans and the Self Governing Territories. 3
The independent Bantustans were Transkei, Ciskei, Bophuthatswana and Venda. Egoro points out that the Transkei Bantustan is located between the coast and Lesotho and was considered a disparate political entity, ever since it was made part of the British CAPE colony. It was officially regarded as the homeland of the Xhosa people and it was the first Bantustan to be granted independence in October 1976. For many years, Transkei was ruled by the dictatorial brothers of Mantanzima, until they were eventually replaced in 1986 by General Bantu Holomisa. 3
The Bophuthatswana homeland was bordering Botswana in the northwest of South Africa. It was the second Bantustan to be granted independence in December 1977 and it was considered by the Pretoria government as the official homeland of the Tswana people. It was almost the same in size compared to Transkei homeland but its land had spread over many pieces that were geographically separated. There was an attempted coup in the homeland in 1988, which was quelled by the direct intervention of South African troops. 3
Egoro, B., The Bantustans Today. South Africans Bantustans From Dumping Ground to Battlefronts, (The Nordic African Institute, 1991) 9
The other independent Bantustan as studied by Egoro 3 was Venda, which was a tiny homeland inhabited by close to a half a million people and was made independent in 1979. It was officially regarded as the homeland of the Venda people. The Venda homeland bordered Rhodesia until when she later attained her independence and became Zimbabwe and then the Pretoria government redrew the frontier to create a corridor of South African land between the two. 3
Ciskei, the fourth independent Bantustan was of equal size to Venda with a populations of approximately 800 000 inhabitants. According to Egoro3 the Venda homeland was created for the strategic reason of vitiating the size and power of Transkei and it lacked any ethnic historical identity. It was the official homeland of the Xhosa alongside Transkei and was made independent in 1981.
The Self Governing Territories
Apart from the independent homelands, Egoro 3 reveals that there were other territories that were regarded as the Self-Governing Territories (SGT). One of such territories was the Gazankulu homeland. It was composed of a number of small lands that were closer to the border of Mozambique, with a population of approximately 700 000 inhabitants. It was referred as the official home of the Tsonga and Shagaan and like the KaNgwane Bantustan it hosted many refugees from Mozambique.
Egoro also looks at the KaNgwane homeland was composed of some small parcels of land that were situated to the north of Swaziland with a population about a half a million inhabitants. The homeland was officially classified as the home of the Swazi and its government under the leadership of Chief Enos Mabuza was well known for defying the Pretoria government. The KaNgwane Bantustan had established cordial relations with the ANC its leadership staunchly resisted the attempt by the Pretoria government to resettle there the people that were evicted from the white farmland. They also stubbornly resisted the efforts by Pretoria to make their territory independent. 3
On the other hand, the KwaNdebele Bantustan was the smallest of all with a tiny population of about three hundred thousand people. The homeland was officially considered the home of the Ndebele people. It was located in Transvaal and its main labor market was in Pretoria. Egoro 3 notes that for a number of years they put up a fierce resistance to the plans by the government in Pretoria to make the region independent. As a result there were frequent cases of violence perpetrated by the Mbokotho vigilante who were claimed to have very close links with the ruling clique.
The other self-governing territory was the KwaZulu homeland. Egoro points out that this was one of the most renowned Bantustan within and outside South Africa. It was considered the official home of the Zulu and composed of about thirty separate pieces of land, which together measured to the size of Lesotho and was the home of approximately 4.5 million people. The Bantustan was led by Chief Gatsha Buthelezi who was a staunch contender in the post apartheid national leadership of South Africa. 3
The Lebowa Bantustan, was the official home of the North Sotho. Its population was approximately two million inhabitants, who lived on a dozen bits of land in the north of South Africa. And finally, Egoro looked at the Qwaqwa Bantustan, considered the home of South Sotho boasted of a population of about 200 000 inhabitants. It was the smallest of all Bantustans that were located on the northeastern tip of Lesotho. 3
Egoro notes that this distinctions created between the two kinds of Bantustans do not discount the fact that whether independent or self-governed, all Bantustans were all an integral part of South Africa. The Pretoria government sought to eliminate them from being part of the larger country but this didnt succeed as they ended up becoming significant branches of the central government. 3
Influence
Arguably, the influence that came with the creation of the Bantustans mostly benefited the very architects of that system the apartheid rulers. This influence was felt in the two forms political and military. Coakley 4 notes that the government structure of the Bantustans were forced upon the territories by the central government and that the Africans in these homelands had no real political power to bring about changes in key issues concerning the larger South African society. Worse still, amongst the independent Bantustans none of them enjoyed international recognition.
Ibid, 11.
Coakley, J., Coupling Ethnicity and Territory The Old South Africa, The Territorial Management of Ethnic Conflict.
Far from that, the power within the Bantustan did not rest with the people but rather the bureaucratic authority vested in chiefs. This leadership enjoyed quite minimal support from the people they ruled and as a result, in order to consolidate the Bantustan rule the central government employed patronage, developmental benefits, bribery, nepotism, emergency regulations and even force. At the grass-root level, the quickest way for the Africans to obtain houses, land, jobs, pensions and disability grants was through the possession of the membership card of the ruling party. This engendered corruption amongst the ruling elite, who defrauded the public coffers in spite of their inflated salaries and luxurious allowances. 4
The greatest of influence coming from these Bantustans was the military manpower that the Africans provided to the central government. As revealed by Cock and Nathan 5, there are two broad aims that led to the formation of the Bantustan forces. One of them was to function as of the greater South African defense system against any insurgency. Secondly and more importantly, the creation of the forces was meant to suppress any domestic unrest that could occur. The Soweto uprising of 1976 impelled the Pretoria government to adopt the policy of Total Strategy, which was aimed at containing any attack against the state, while at the same time reforming the apartheid system in the quest to satisfy certain popular demands. 5
As Cock and Nathan elaborate, this brought significant changes in the state policy, which saw to the inclusion of blacks in the armed forces. Until 1960, the National Party Policy held it that Africans would never be used in the armed forces of South Africa. But then in 1970, the Minister of Defense announced the governments change of heart by stating that blacks would be employed in the army but only to serve as common laborers.
5. Cock, J., Nathan, L., War and Society. (New Africa Books, 1989) 177.
However, by 1973, an urban based battalion otherwise referred to as the 21 Battalion, had already been established by the central government. This opened the doorway into the creation of forces for the independent Bantustans, as they took independent regional forces from 1979 for the non-independent Bantustans. 5
Eventually, as Cock and Nathan 5 point out, all the four independent Bantustans had their own forces and five regional battalions were also established in the non-independent homelands. Worth noting is that these battalions were formed on ethnic basis and were crafted to become homeland forces once the cooperative Bantustans accepted to become independent. The Pretoria government was keen on using ethnicity to bind each force to its respective Bantustan, therefore fostering the Bantustan system.
While the Pretoria government recognized the need to create Bantustan armies to satisfy the notion of independence and to build up their military manpower, it also perceived the dangers that were posed by these nominally independent armies. In order to preserve these Bantustan armies as a part of its defense system the Pretoria government controlled them in a number of ways. One of them was through the non-aggression pact that it signed with the four independent Bantustans. 5
This pact ensured that the forces in the Bantustans fell within the sphere of influence of the Pretoria government. The pact contained two key elements, which consisted of the parties pledges not to resort to the use of armed forces against the sovereignty of a territory and the political independence of the other. Secondly, it required the Bantustans not to allow their territory to be used as a base for military purposes or hostile activities against the South African government, by any state, government or organization.
5. Ibid, 177.
The Pretoria government also exercised control over the Bantustan forces through the placement of South Africa Defense Forces (SADF) officers to the positions of authority within the homeland forces. Generally, the SADF officers filled the senior positions in the homeland forces. For instance, in 1985, there were 44 SADF officers in Ciskei when the Pretoria government recalled them after the chief of the homelands force was suspended. 5
Importance of the Coups in the Bantustans
The attempted coups that occurred in Bophuthatswana in 1988 and the 1991 coup in Ciskei were significant in highlighting the many weaknesses that were found in the administration of the Bantustans. They also helped to demonstrate the position of the military in power relations. The major cause for the coups was the entrenchment of corruption in the Bantustans. In Transkei for instance, Cock and Nathan 5, observe that corruption was brought to the open through the findings of a commission of inquiry by the Department of Work and Energy. 5
The findings of this commission stated that the Mantinzama brothers had defrauded the government of Transkei oodles of money to the tune of 42 million Rands. A further inquiry by Department of Commerce, Industries and Tourism, which was commissioned by Holosima upon seizing power in Transkei, revealed some more corruptions dealings conducted by George Mantizama. Besides, the forces in Bophuthatswana participated in the coup to demonstrate their dissatisfaction about widespread corruption. Such example was the suspicious dealings between Mangope, the chief of the homeland and Kalmanovitch, a Russian born Israeli who had befriended Mangope and was thereby appointed the trade representative of the Bantustan to Israel. 5
Cock and Nathan 5 further note that Kalmanovitch had as a result amassed a fortune in the homeland by securing some quite lucrative contracts. One of the contract involved building a shopping centre in Garankuwa and the second one, which was acquired without tenders being called for, involved the building of Independence Stadium. 5
The Pretoria government was responding to international pressure when it decided to come up with the Bantustans or the homeland. Under the pretext of granting self-rule to the Africans, it in essence succeeded to entrench their rule by grouping them within those ethnic boundaries. As Africans lacked the resources to develop themselves socially and economically they slaved in the farms and industries owned by whites.
This Bantustan system heavily relied upon racism and subjugation to flourish. Its beneficiaries were the whites and the ruling elite in the Bantustans whereas on the other end the Africans in the homeland tottered under the weight of poverty and oppression. The whites benefited because they owned the means of production and had cheap labor at their disposal. On the other hand, the Africans ruling elite benefited through the huge perks that they earn for their efforts to engender apartheid.
In another perspective, the quest for an egalitarian South Africa was propelled by the oppressive Bantustan regime. Even though the system succeeded in creating social-economic classes amongst the Africans in the country, it gave them the gravitas they so much needed to push for change in the social, political and economic facets of their country.
As MacDermot 1 notes in his paper titled, Self Determination and the Independent Bantustans, the history of the creation of Bantustans stretches back to the seventeenth and eighteenth century when slave trade and slave labor were a flourishing commerce across the continents. It is through this trade that Africa was opened up to the people from other continents, particularly Europe, who found it a land full of unexploited human and physical resources.1
Upon their settlement in Africa they embarked on a campaign to tap on the productivity of the lands across Africa. And as settlers, they eventually seized the best agricultural land and this meant that they had to drive Africans from their native lands and congest them in reserves. This development coincided with the abolition of slavery in the beginning of the nineteenth century, which in essence was a mutation of the same vice into a politically correct form. 1
With the flouring of agriculture in the white settlements and as other industries such as mining developed, the native reserves came in handy as a source of cheap labor. As a result the Africans in the native reserves were left with no option but to look for employment in white settlements and growing industries, since they were deprived of their productive land, hence the means of a livelihood. The white settlers subsequently came up with legal obligations such as the hut tax, which imputed Africans in the reserves to seek employment in mines and white settlements in order to pay the tax. In the long run, this ensured that the cheap labor offered by the Africans came in constant supply. 1
Eventually, as MacDermot observes, the population explosion within the reserves, coupled with congestion and abject poverty, there arose an acute need for the African working populace to migrate to urban centers in pursuit of greener pastures. But in the urban centers they lived more or less a humiliating life like the one they had faced in the reserves. In sum, apart from helping the white settlers to exploit the agricultural opportunities in Africa, the native reserves played a crucial economic function of providing plentiful supply of cheap labor. This system was further entrenched by systemically denial of the African majority their political and social rights, and in South Africa the black labor force was considered migratory citizens from the reserves. 1
The Second World War influenced major geopolitical changes the world over, altering the social and political status of the minorities, wherever they were struggling for equality. Africa benefited from these changes that came after the Second World War, which swayed the tide of world opinion to push for the granting of independence to the colonized countries and to bring to an end the discrimination on the grounds of race. 1
At this time the leaders of white South Africa adopted the policy of apartheid, otherwise referred to as separate development. This was a ploy to satiate the conscience of the white people in South Africa and also the conscience of those they intended to trade with or with whom they sought their investments. The plan didnt work out and failing to impress their target trade partners, the Pretoria government modified the theory of separate development by coming up with Bantustans, which purported independence for the Africans in their territories. 1
Eventually, the Bantustans became the glaring feature of the grand apartheid policy of the 60s and 70s. Legally, the Bantustans were created by the Promotion of Bantus Self-Government Act of 1959, which in practice, abolished the indirect representation of black South Africans in government and also divided Africans in the country along ten ethnic groups that were assigned the Bantustans. The legal background that helped to determine the territorial boundaries was lifted from the Land Act of 1913, which was subsequently amended in 1936. This law led to the demarcation of 13 of South African land to the black citizens who constituted approximately 75 of the whole population. 2
The Pretoria government did not stop after enshrining the Bantustans in the law. In 1970, they passed the Bantu Homeland Citizenship Act, which declared that all Africans were citizens of their respective homeland as opposed to the larger South Africa itself. When four Bantustans were declared independent between 1976 and 1981, eight million Africans lost their South African citizenship. The independent homelands were Transkei, Venda, Ciskei and Bophuthatswana. 2
The Composition and Structure of Bantustans
As aforementioned, the black citizens of South Africa were pushed into living within the ten homelands as stipulated by the Bantus Self-Government Act of 1959. Egoro (1991) argues that the Bantustans were divided into two broad categories the independent Bantustans and the Self Governing Territories. 3
The independent Bantustans were Transkei, Ciskei, Bophuthatswana and Venda. Egoro points out that the Transkei Bantustan is located between the coast and Lesotho and was considered a disparate political entity, ever since it was made part of the British CAPE colony. It was officially regarded as the homeland of the Xhosa people and it was the first Bantustan to be granted independence in October 1976. For many years, Transkei was ruled by the dictatorial brothers of Mantanzima, until they were eventually replaced in 1986 by General Bantu Holomisa. 3
The Bophuthatswana homeland was bordering Botswana in the northwest of South Africa. It was the second Bantustan to be granted independence in December 1977 and it was considered by the Pretoria government as the official homeland of the Tswana people. It was almost the same in size compared to Transkei homeland but its land had spread over many pieces that were geographically separated. There was an attempted coup in the homeland in 1988, which was quelled by the direct intervention of South African troops. 3
Egoro, B., The Bantustans Today. South Africans Bantustans From Dumping Ground to Battlefronts, (The Nordic African Institute, 1991) 9
The other independent Bantustan as studied by Egoro 3 was Venda, which was a tiny homeland inhabited by close to a half a million people and was made independent in 1979. It was officially regarded as the homeland of the Venda people. The Venda homeland bordered Rhodesia until when she later attained her independence and became Zimbabwe and then the Pretoria government redrew the frontier to create a corridor of South African land between the two. 3
Ciskei, the fourth independent Bantustan was of equal size to Venda with a populations of approximately 800 000 inhabitants. According to Egoro3 the Venda homeland was created for the strategic reason of vitiating the size and power of Transkei and it lacked any ethnic historical identity. It was the official homeland of the Xhosa alongside Transkei and was made independent in 1981.
The Self Governing Territories
Apart from the independent homelands, Egoro 3 reveals that there were other territories that were regarded as the Self-Governing Territories (SGT). One of such territories was the Gazankulu homeland. It was composed of a number of small lands that were closer to the border of Mozambique, with a population of approximately 700 000 inhabitants. It was referred as the official home of the Tsonga and Shagaan and like the KaNgwane Bantustan it hosted many refugees from Mozambique.
Egoro also looks at the KaNgwane homeland was composed of some small parcels of land that were situated to the north of Swaziland with a population about a half a million inhabitants. The homeland was officially classified as the home of the Swazi and its government under the leadership of Chief Enos Mabuza was well known for defying the Pretoria government. The KaNgwane Bantustan had established cordial relations with the ANC its leadership staunchly resisted the attempt by the Pretoria government to resettle there the people that were evicted from the white farmland. They also stubbornly resisted the efforts by Pretoria to make their territory independent. 3
On the other hand, the KwaNdebele Bantustan was the smallest of all with a tiny population of about three hundred thousand people. The homeland was officially considered the home of the Ndebele people. It was located in Transvaal and its main labor market was in Pretoria. Egoro 3 notes that for a number of years they put up a fierce resistance to the plans by the government in Pretoria to make the region independent. As a result there were frequent cases of violence perpetrated by the Mbokotho vigilante who were claimed to have very close links with the ruling clique.
The other self-governing territory was the KwaZulu homeland. Egoro points out that this was one of the most renowned Bantustan within and outside South Africa. It was considered the official home of the Zulu and composed of about thirty separate pieces of land, which together measured to the size of Lesotho and was the home of approximately 4.5 million people. The Bantustan was led by Chief Gatsha Buthelezi who was a staunch contender in the post apartheid national leadership of South Africa. 3
The Lebowa Bantustan, was the official home of the North Sotho. Its population was approximately two million inhabitants, who lived on a dozen bits of land in the north of South Africa. And finally, Egoro looked at the Qwaqwa Bantustan, considered the home of South Sotho boasted of a population of about 200 000 inhabitants. It was the smallest of all Bantustans that were located on the northeastern tip of Lesotho. 3
Egoro notes that this distinctions created between the two kinds of Bantustans do not discount the fact that whether independent or self-governed, all Bantustans were all an integral part of South Africa. The Pretoria government sought to eliminate them from being part of the larger country but this didnt succeed as they ended up becoming significant branches of the central government. 3
Influence
Arguably, the influence that came with the creation of the Bantustans mostly benefited the very architects of that system the apartheid rulers. This influence was felt in the two forms political and military. Coakley 4 notes that the government structure of the Bantustans were forced upon the territories by the central government and that the Africans in these homelands had no real political power to bring about changes in key issues concerning the larger South African society. Worse still, amongst the independent Bantustans none of them enjoyed international recognition.
Ibid, 11.
Coakley, J., Coupling Ethnicity and Territory The Old South Africa, The Territorial Management of Ethnic Conflict.
Far from that, the power within the Bantustan did not rest with the people but rather the bureaucratic authority vested in chiefs. This leadership enjoyed quite minimal support from the people they ruled and as a result, in order to consolidate the Bantustan rule the central government employed patronage, developmental benefits, bribery, nepotism, emergency regulations and even force. At the grass-root level, the quickest way for the Africans to obtain houses, land, jobs, pensions and disability grants was through the possession of the membership card of the ruling party. This engendered corruption amongst the ruling elite, who defrauded the public coffers in spite of their inflated salaries and luxurious allowances. 4
The greatest of influence coming from these Bantustans was the military manpower that the Africans provided to the central government. As revealed by Cock and Nathan 5, there are two broad aims that led to the formation of the Bantustan forces. One of them was to function as of the greater South African defense system against any insurgency. Secondly and more importantly, the creation of the forces was meant to suppress any domestic unrest that could occur. The Soweto uprising of 1976 impelled the Pretoria government to adopt the policy of Total Strategy, which was aimed at containing any attack against the state, while at the same time reforming the apartheid system in the quest to satisfy certain popular demands. 5
As Cock and Nathan elaborate, this brought significant changes in the state policy, which saw to the inclusion of blacks in the armed forces. Until 1960, the National Party Policy held it that Africans would never be used in the armed forces of South Africa. But then in 1970, the Minister of Defense announced the governments change of heart by stating that blacks would be employed in the army but only to serve as common laborers.
5. Cock, J., Nathan, L., War and Society. (New Africa Books, 1989) 177.
However, by 1973, an urban based battalion otherwise referred to as the 21 Battalion, had already been established by the central government. This opened the doorway into the creation of forces for the independent Bantustans, as they took independent regional forces from 1979 for the non-independent Bantustans. 5
Eventually, as Cock and Nathan 5 point out, all the four independent Bantustans had their own forces and five regional battalions were also established in the non-independent homelands. Worth noting is that these battalions were formed on ethnic basis and were crafted to become homeland forces once the cooperative Bantustans accepted to become independent. The Pretoria government was keen on using ethnicity to bind each force to its respective Bantustan, therefore fostering the Bantustan system.
While the Pretoria government recognized the need to create Bantustan armies to satisfy the notion of independence and to build up their military manpower, it also perceived the dangers that were posed by these nominally independent armies. In order to preserve these Bantustan armies as a part of its defense system the Pretoria government controlled them in a number of ways. One of them was through the non-aggression pact that it signed with the four independent Bantustans. 5
This pact ensured that the forces in the Bantustans fell within the sphere of influence of the Pretoria government. The pact contained two key elements, which consisted of the parties pledges not to resort to the use of armed forces against the sovereignty of a territory and the political independence of the other. Secondly, it required the Bantustans not to allow their territory to be used as a base for military purposes or hostile activities against the South African government, by any state, government or organization.
5. Ibid, 177.
The Pretoria government also exercised control over the Bantustan forces through the placement of South Africa Defense Forces (SADF) officers to the positions of authority within the homeland forces. Generally, the SADF officers filled the senior positions in the homeland forces. For instance, in 1985, there were 44 SADF officers in Ciskei when the Pretoria government recalled them after the chief of the homelands force was suspended. 5
Importance of the Coups in the Bantustans
The attempted coups that occurred in Bophuthatswana in 1988 and the 1991 coup in Ciskei were significant in highlighting the many weaknesses that were found in the administration of the Bantustans. They also helped to demonstrate the position of the military in power relations. The major cause for the coups was the entrenchment of corruption in the Bantustans. In Transkei for instance, Cock and Nathan 5, observe that corruption was brought to the open through the findings of a commission of inquiry by the Department of Work and Energy. 5
The findings of this commission stated that the Mantinzama brothers had defrauded the government of Transkei oodles of money to the tune of 42 million Rands. A further inquiry by Department of Commerce, Industries and Tourism, which was commissioned by Holosima upon seizing power in Transkei, revealed some more corruptions dealings conducted by George Mantizama. Besides, the forces in Bophuthatswana participated in the coup to demonstrate their dissatisfaction about widespread corruption. Such example was the suspicious dealings between Mangope, the chief of the homeland and Kalmanovitch, a Russian born Israeli who had befriended Mangope and was thereby appointed the trade representative of the Bantustan to Israel. 5
Cock and Nathan 5 further note that Kalmanovitch had as a result amassed a fortune in the homeland by securing some quite lucrative contracts. One of the contract involved building a shopping centre in Garankuwa and the second one, which was acquired without tenders being called for, involved the building of Independence Stadium. 5
The Pretoria government was responding to international pressure when it decided to come up with the Bantustans or the homeland. Under the pretext of granting self-rule to the Africans, it in essence succeeded to entrench their rule by grouping them within those ethnic boundaries. As Africans lacked the resources to develop themselves socially and economically they slaved in the farms and industries owned by whites.
This Bantustan system heavily relied upon racism and subjugation to flourish. Its beneficiaries were the whites and the ruling elite in the Bantustans whereas on the other end the Africans in the homeland tottered under the weight of poverty and oppression. The whites benefited because they owned the means of production and had cheap labor at their disposal. On the other hand, the Africans ruling elite benefited through the huge perks that they earn for their efforts to engender apartheid.
In another perspective, the quest for an egalitarian South Africa was propelled by the oppressive Bantustan regime. Even though the system succeeded in creating social-economic classes amongst the Africans in the country, it gave them the gravitas they so much needed to push for change in the social, political and economic facets of their country.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment