INTRODUCTION
The union of South Africa came into being
after series of deliberations, agreements, hostilities and military confrontations.
There have been array of historical review and critical analysis on the course
of the Union of South Africa. What is the Union of South Africa? To many who
probably have not heard about the South African Union of 1910- a union without
unity, borne out of an economic necessitation and imperial quest- it is
advisible, if not most reasonable, to follow this manuscript as it takes its
readers back to period preceding 1910 (the year of the Union of South Africa).
As a matter of fact, the years before the unification of the four South African
'colonies' were characterized by fierce struggle and insidious economic
permutation from the Imperial British power and the Boers. Subsequently, a war
broke out in 1880; and another in 1899.
However, the course of this
manuscript will attempt to bring to light the reason (s) for the Union
of South Africa. Of course, this attempt shall be made after a succinct explanation
has been provided to the odorous and beautiful trajectories which circumvented
the whole history.
BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE
DEVELOPMENTS BEFORE THE UNION
The Boers had long established their
hold on 'South Africa' before the British secured a pact to control ' South African'
region after the Napoleonic Wars. The British, earlier in 1795, seized the control of the Cape colony
just after the French conquered the Dutch. Soon Britain dominated the economic
arena in the country, taking over Cape Colony and sacking the Boers to take
effective control of Natal in 1843. The Boers, having found the policies and
doctrine of Britain as regard the blacks in Cape and Natal umbrageous, were
ready to hold their ground against any further British assault. It is pertinent
to know at this juncture that the Boers having vacated Cape and Natal went
north to establish two different states: Transvaal and Orange Free State. These
two Boers states were touted as independent states by the Boers. Hence, the
British and Boers each control two states in 'South Africa'.
Surprisingly, the British , fed up of
the Boers' recalcitrance , again moved to take over the Boers independent
states of Transvaal and Orange Free State, an action which the Boers were
determined to repel. The discovery of diamond and gold in 1867 and 1886
respectively further spurred the British to establish both political and
economic control over the Boers. In 1877, the British successfully annexed the Transvaal colony. Shortly after, a prolonged agitation by Transvaal Boers
followed, supported by Boers in Orange Free State and even the Cape colony,
they vociferously demanded for outright independence.
Subsequently, a
military clash broke out in 1880; this war is known as the First Anglo-Boer
War. The first Anglo-Boer war was a Boer success. Within a year and few months,
the Boers had successfully conquered the British force. A disappointed Britain
which could not accept defeat by 'agriculturalist' soon readied for another
war. In a war known as the Second Anglo-Boer war, the Boer witnessed a total
debacle; in a few months, the last standing Boer settlement -Pretoria- had been
occupied. Britain, however in her magnanimity, suggested that the four South
African 'states' be federated. This was probably due to the numerical disadvantage
of Britain and her challenges at effectively subduing the Boer. Thus, an
European alliance was logically necessary.
DURBAN CONVENTION AND THE BIRTH OF THE UNION
At a Durban Convention, held in 1909, an
agreement was reached for a union among the states. The states abandoned their
claim to independence and hence adopted the title of protectorate (British
protectorates of course). Also, national assembly was created and the erstwhile
state assemblies reverted to councils; bicameral legislature was adopted. It is
noteworthy that there was no agreed capital for the union as all the component
states shared the benefits of capital: Pretoria had the appellate; Cape had the
parliament; Transvaal had the administrative; Natal was given financial compensation.
It was a parliamentary state: the queen of England was the ceremonial head
while Louis Botha, a Boer general, served as the first head of government.
Without much ado, a union which formed the bedrock of today South Africa, and
ushered in the apartheid regime in full scale came into existence in 1910.
ON THE POSITION OF THE
WHITES AND THE NATIVES
Critically, I must say at this point that
both the British and the Boers had an audacious and sanctimonious battles on
what was not theirs. The truth be told, the Boers had long claimed that they
were 'God sent' and thus should control in their words, '' the unfortunate and
doomed blacks''. The British on the other hand could not overlook the gains that abounded in South Africa. Thus, the British monitored the mass movement of Britons from 'home country' to South Africa. Since South Africa found itself in
a pitiable socio-political and economic phenomenon that made the tenants the
landlords, would it not suffice to therefore say that the tenants, having
dehumanized and exploited the natives had a beautiful experience they
definitely could not be afforded in any part of Europe? Absence of
dehumanization, dejection, and exploitation, I stand challenged, with different
research that I carried out, though simple, I posit that whites
population in South Africa could never be successful in their home countries as
they were in South Africa. Overall, the standard of living of whites in South
Africa was better than whites in most part of Europe in the post Union of South
African era. Obviously, your presence in
South Africa as a white would ordinarily fetch you a reasonable standard of
living. In addition, you have the land and can easily prey on the outrageously
cheap labour of the natives. Little wonder, Europeans in stunning figure moved
to South Africa in the 19th century. Indeed, South Africa was the ''white paradise''.
CONCLUSION
Finally, the political and economic
necessitation spurred the need for a united South Africa in 1910. The discovery
of diamond and gold made the enslavement of black and European unity in South
Africa humongously lucrative and worth it for the British. Even after the
decolonization of 1960, Britain looked subtly indifferent at slavery in South
Africa. Shortly, South Africa looked like the wheel of white
superiority in the last decades of the 20th century; as an economic haven, it
house great European investments- slavery and exploitation was the grease of
this engine. Lastly, the chapter of slavery and massive exploitation have not
left South Africa and, by extension, Africa yet; only the scale and character
have changed.
In May 1910, the infamous Union of South
Africa was made; an atomistic union of disjointed components- a union without
unity which pronounced further assault on divine characters on the ground of
pigmentation and sheer primitive savagery.
written by Mafe
0 Comments