Apartheidless South Africa

South Africa seems to be quite popular lately for some reason....

So, what if apartheid is never implimented as an official policy in South Africa?
The National Party is kept away from power and South Africa steadily liberalises instead of steadily becoming more conservative (the hows aren't too important, I don't believe it's that ASB). We can assume civil rights would be in line with the US (just because) and we have a full equal rights situation by the 70s.

What effects could a progressive instead of a pariah South Africa have on the world?
Where would hte nation be today?- better off due to the lack of embargos and a normalised situation of equal rights existing for longer?
 

HueyLong

Banned
It may sound bad, but a more liberal South Africa may develop problems down the road.

No Apartheid means no ANC- which means tribal politics are likely to crop up. Part of the success of the ANc was its ability to build bridges across the various tribes and build a South African identity.

There is no need for an ANC ITTL, and so we see the rise of tribal and political divisions much greater than IOTL.
 
It somewhat depends what one means by "Aparheid". Segregation, discrimination and the denial of political rights to all, or nearly all of South Africa's pre colonial population existed from the 1800s until the 1990s.

"Apartheid" itself was the extreme formalization of this. It was the policy of the National Party (which won parliamentary majorities in 1948 and 1953 despite polliing fewer votes (on the restricted electorate) than its more moderate opponents,

The Nationalists losing in 1948 is one thing. A decision that the society will not be race based from 1900 is very different.
 
It may sound bad, but a more liberal South Africa may develop problems down the road.

No Apartheid means no ANC- which means tribal politics are likely to crop up. Part of the success of the ANc was its ability to build bridges across the various tribes and build a South African identity.

There is no need for an ANC ITTL, and so we see the rise of tribal and political divisions much greater than IOTL.

I can see your point but I disagree on two counts. Firstly even under a non-apartheid system S African politics are still likely to take on a black versus non-black character so there is still reason for the various black tribes to unite to a certain degree.

On the other hand, if blacks are given the franchise slowly (as I think would definitely be the case) they could well be integrated into existing white political parties, if those parties were willing to have modify their policies.
 
Full equality by 1970 is ASB. Even without laws, you'd still have de facto discrimination and racism... and not all of it from the white side.

However, a slower development towards equality (a bit like what Ian Smith wanted for Rhodesia, or at least said he did) is not out of the question. I'd imagine liberalisation would progress a a slow but steady pace, assuming there aren't immediate setbacks like black terrorism spilling over from neigbouring countries.
 
Hmm, without apartheid it wouldn' have as much international disapproval, so it could stay in the Commonwealth after becoming a republic (like India). That could have political and economic butterflies...
 
It may sound bad, but a more liberal South Africa may develop problems down the road.

No Apartheid means no ANC- which means tribal politics are likely to crop up. Part of the success of the ANc was its ability to build bridges across the various tribes and build a South African identity.

There is no need for an ANC ITTL, and so we see the rise of tribal and political divisions much greater than IOTL.

The ANC was the first African political party and was founded in 1912. It would still exist, and would probably be as popular as it was in OTL. I don't see how no Apartheid would make it go away. There would still be racial discrimination, and the ANC, as a national organization, would be a powerful force against this.
 
Here's a post by Viriato about what a non-NP South Africa could look like:

If Southern Rhodesia had joined the Union, most likely the High Commission Territories of Bechuanaland, Basutoland and Swaziland would have been handed over to the Union government as well. The British did not hand them over simply because after 1948 the Malan government was too reprehensible. I’m going to assume that sooner or later Northern Rhodesia would have joined the Union especially since it too had a large settler population.

In OTL, the 1960 Constitutional Referendum was passed because 850,458 (52.29%) of voters voted “Yes” for the Republic, whereas 775,878 voted “No”. The National Party was only able to get the yes vote to win because whites in Southwest Africa were enfranchised and the voting age was lowered to 18. At the time, Rhodesia had around 100,000 eligible voters, assuming voter turnout was 90%, the vote would have to be 85% of Southern Rhodesia voting “No“. Around 4,500 of the registered voters were Africans, so I’m not sure they would be able to vote and also 11% of Southern Rhodesia’s white population was Afrikaner. However, with Northern Rhodesia as part of the equation, the “No” vote would win.

My assumptions above though are based on the European population in South Africa and Southern Rhodesia being the same as in OTL (3,078,000 in South Africa, 225,000 in Southern Rhodesia, 73,000 in Southwest Africa for a total of 3,376,000). If the United Party wins in 1948, they are going to keep the doors open to European immigration, especially from Britain. In OTL the National Party was reluctant to admit immigrants until 1963 when the did an about face and began promoting white immigration. So, I’m going to assume that South Africa itself would have around 200,000 more Europeans in 1960 bringing their total to around 20% of the population. However, if we include the Rhodesias and High Commission Territories we have 3.8 million whites out of a population of 23 million (16%).

As for South Africa remaining in the Commonwealth, it seems unlikely. The move to leave was prompted by the fact that it was becoming an increasingly hostile organization to South Africa with Ceylon, Ghana, India and Malaya being the most vocal critics of apartheid. Even without apartheid it seems likely that at some point in the 1960s South Africa would have had to leave. Whether or not the Queen would remain head of states is up to debate. However, I’m sure that more likely than not South Africa would become a Republic in the late 1960s or early 1970s. I’m going to say that by 1970 white South Africans feel betrayed by Britain and it would have become a bit of an embarrassment for the Queen to be the head of state of a racist country.

In OTL the 1960s were a boom period for South Africa and as I mentioned previously the National Party began a policy of attracting white immigrants. A net of 350,000 immigrants entered the country that decade. With the Rhodesias I’m going to assume it would be higher and would push the white population to 5.1 million in 1970 out of a total of 32 million (16%).

However, the 1960s would also be the beginnings of turbulence for the Union of South Africa. Assuming that Northern Rhodesia is part of the Union, Tanzania would become in the 1960s a base for the ANC to organize guerrilla raids into the territory much as they did into Mozambique after 1964. If Zambia is a black-ruled state than it will be the major foreign supporter for the ANC. However, assuming Northern Rhodesia is part of South Africa, it will support an independent Katanga. Perhaps South Africa props up Katanga and Malawi as friendly puppet regimes and launches raids into Tanzania in an effort to destabilise the Julius Nyere’s government. I’m going to assume in this TL that Katanga survives as a quasi-puppet of South Africa.

Attacking Tanzania and possibly supporting a rebellion to overthrow the government there can have important effects on the region. Firstly, it helps portray South Africa as an aggressor earlier on and could possibly lead to an earlier arms embargo. Secondly, it has a major impact on the Portuguese ruled territories of Angola and Mozambique. In OTL the guerrilla bases from which FRELIMO operated were in Tanzania and Zambia. The operations from Tanzania began in 1964 and in 1969-1970 moved in large numbers to Zambia. With Zambia as part of South Africa there would be no base where FRELIMO could operate from. Also, with South Africa attacking ANC rebel bases in Tanzania it would not be out of the realm of possibility having a joint South African-Portuguese attack to clear southern and eastern Tanzania of rebel activity. For the Angolan insurgency of the FNLA was based in the Congo and was eradicated by the mid-1960s. The MPLA began operating around that time out of Zambia and UNITA shortly after.

The strategic importance of the ports of Lobito in Angola and Beira in Mozambique to the Union in this TL would have made active South African armed involvement in Angola and Mozambique a necessity. Essentially the Portuguese would probably have been assisted much more by South Africa, with actual military assistance and the wars themselves would have been much more limited in scope and possibly reduced to insignificance (as was the case in OTL in Angola by 1972 but not in Mozambique). This would have greatly lessened the burden on the Portuguese, especially in Mozambique allowing the bulk of forces to concentrate on Portuguese Guinea. This could have possibly butterflied the 1974 revolution away or to a later date. Angola and could have remained Portuguese indefinitely perhaps been turned into multi-racial puppet states within South Africa’s sphere of influence.

By 1980, there are 6.5 million whites in the country 60% of whom are English speaking. Although their numbers increased the non-white population has increased at a more rapid rate and they whites are now 15% of the total population. As in OTL the 1980s will become the decade where world attention will focus on the racial discrimination in this country. Though not as harsh as apartheid, I cannot see how South Africa would escape international criticism, especially in the western democracies. Some changes would have been required.

Perhaps, the country can become a federation with each province controlling voting rights. Cape Province can allow colored to vote as they had before apartheid. Natal will probably allow Indians to vote. Perhaps, the voting rights according to income earned as was practiced in Southern Rhodesia before 1961 can be introduced on a federal level. A senate that allows tribal leaders too would be a possibility. It seems that some sort of tokenism would be offered to the non-white majority, though I suspect it would be seen just as that by the ANC as well as the outside world.

However, economically speaking South Africa would be in a much better position than it was in OTL. The lack of the war in Angola with Cuban and Soviet backing allows South Africa to avoid that money draining war. A much larger population does give the country a larger internal market for South African manufactured goods. Also, added mineral and agricultural resources would be a great help to the economy. The run up in commodity prices especially gold before 1982 would help the economy at least until 1983. If the threat from Tanzania can be neutralized in the early 1960s, I see it as perfectly manageable in the long term (the Portuguese were much weaker and managed to neutralise front by 1970). As I mentioned earlier, Katanga and Malawi would be client states serving as buffers and therefore be devoid of trouble. Angola and Mozambique are still Portuguese and Angolan oil makes any oil embargo ineffective.

The late 1980s and early 1990s can be a period where negative attention from the western world starts to make South Africa buckle. Perhaps an English speaking majority would be more willing to negotiate with African nationalists. However, part of me thinks that they would be just as stubborn as the Rhodesians were until 1979. Although I believe that multi-racial elections would occur sometime in the late 1980s or early 1990s I think it is more interesting to imagine a more stubborn South Africa.

So instead we have a nation of 7.3 million whites in 1990 lording over 51 million nonwhites that refuses to surrender. By the 1990s most countries have imposed economic sanctions on South Africa and the country now has to deal with terrorism. Portugal has some sort of change in government in the 1990s and decides to leave Africa. Angola and Mozambique have become multiracial countries whom are dependent on South Africa much like Malawi and Katanga. Much like Rhodesia though the country keeps chugging along and is able to trade through the outside world through friendly neighbouring countries.

In the 1990s large numbers of Eastern European immigrants are admitted and former engineers and unemployed skilled labourers help the country’s defence industry as well as it’s nuclear capabilities. With few friends in the world, South Africa becomes friendly with Russia and is able to purchase weaponry from that country. By the 2000s, China in its quest for raw materials, cozies up to South Africa and although not an official ally the Chinese are willing to trade with South Africa for economic advantages (much like the Japanese did with South Africa in the 1980s). The record prices of gold, copper and other minerals and crops may even provide an economic boom that will allow the now 8 million whites rule indefinitely.
 
Top