Southern Rhodesia joins the Union of South Africa

It depends how hard-line this expanded Union of South Africa would be. Anyway, the catalyst which saw South Africa expelled from the Commonwealth was the 1960 referendum, where SA voted to become a republic, where a narrow majority voted for it (I think it was something like 52% in favour, 48% against). The new Republic of South Africa applied to remain a member of the Commonwealth (following the Indian precedent) but because of its racial policies, was denied. In this ATL Union, with Rhodesia, the Nats would probably not be in power, meaning no referendum. Even if they were, the whites in Rhodesia, who are overwhelmingly pro-British, will be enough to sway the vote in favour of the anti-Republicans.

Isn't there some way you can be banned from the Commonwealth? I think Zimbabwe was, some years ago, at least temporarily. Even if it doesn't get that drastic, they'll still have a hard time in the CoN. The British government will still be Labour, and they'll rather appease the former colonies than support South Africa.
 
Isn't there some way you can be banned from the Commonwealth? I think Zimbabwe was, some years ago, at least temporarily. Even if it doesn't get that drastic, they'll still have a hard time in the CoN. The British government will still be Labour, and they'll rather appease the former colonies than support South Africa.

A member country can be suspended from the commonwealth, and has been done several times...
  • Fiji (2000-2001)
  • Pakistan (1999-2004, 2007-)
  • Nigeria (1995-1999)
  • Zimbabwe (2002-2003)
And several withdrawals
  • Pakistan (1972-1989)
  • Zimbabwe (2003-)
  • South Africa (1961-1994)
  • Maldives (1965-1982)
  • Fiji (1987-1997)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Commonwealth#Suspensions
 
That's it then. Now that I think of it, I'd probably heard of Pakistan as well (Though why they, of everyone, get banned begs the question). But I didn't know there were so many.

Well, thanks for the info.
 
That's it then. Now that I think of it, I'd probably heard of Pakistan as well (Though why they, of everyone, get banned begs the question). But I didn't know there were so many.

Well, thanks for the info.

First time, they left of their own accord over Bangladesh joining the Commonwealth.

Second time, it was with the imposition of emergency rule by everyone's favourite moustached (sic.) Pakistani ex-General...-but still President. :p
 
I was thinking of the recent ban... Yeah, that makes sense. Isn't it kinda hypocritical though, considering most Commonwealth countries in Africa have been dictatorships? And why isn't anyone banning, for example, Kenya for the troubles there?
 
I was thinking of the recent ban... Yeah, that makes sense. Isn't it kinda hypocritical though, considering most Commonwealth countries in Africa have been dictatorships? And why isn't anyone banning, for example, Kenya for the troubles there?

Of course its hypocritical, but that's world politics for you. I mean, China was given this year's Olympics, and they are not remotely a democracy by the West's standards.

With regards to the new Union of South Africa's continuing membership of the Commonwealth, perhaps if there is some sort of qualified franchise for blacks, this may result in them staying in the organisation for longer?
 
Of course its hypocritical, but that's world politics for you. I mean, China was given this year's Olympics, and they are not remotely a democracy by the West's standards.

With regards to the new Union of South Africa's continuing membership of the Commonwealth, perhaps if there is some sort of qualified franchise for blacks, this may result in them staying in the organisation for longer?

I suppose anything's possible... yet the West seems to consider racial discrimination of any kind worse than totalitarianism (as long as it's Black<White).
 
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.
 
Excellent analysis Viriato.

One thing I don't think you mentioned though, and that was AIDs. AIDs would have a drastic impact on the growth of the black population.

I doubt that the government would try all that hard to stop the epidemic, and I think one would see a decline in the population of black people relative to the population in OTL. I'm not sure though, as I can't seem to find out how many people have died from AIDS in Southern Africa since the 1980s.

I'll keeping looking and when I find something, I'll post it.
 
Excellent analysis Viriato.

One thing I don't think you mentioned though, and that was AIDs. AIDs would have a drastic impact on the growth of the black population.

I doubt that the government would try all that hard to stop the epidemic, and I think one would see a decline in the population of black people relative to the population in OTL. I'm not sure though, as I can't seem to find out how many people have died from AIDS in Southern Africa since the 1980s.

I'll keeping looking and when I find something, I'll post it.

I did some research and the first case reported among the black population was in 1987, apparently a mine worker from Malawi. By 1988 the government was screening foreign workers and deporting those whom were infected. As for the number of deaths, for most of this decade around 300,000-400,000 people a year have died from AIDS in South Africa alone.

In Swaziland and Botswana the infection rate appears to be higher. In Zimbabwe the deaths are around 100,000-130,000 people per year. Zambia also has a fairly high rate. Namibia and Lesotho also have very high rates of infection.

If a white ruled government managed to last in this region, it would inevitably be criticized harshly for failing to do anything or not enough.
 
Good post there Viriato, but I can see a few aspects you many not have considered:

1 - Do the economic benefits in South Africa make it to the blacks? They did at some level starting in the mid 1960s and badly eroded black support for the ANC during the 1970s. The Bantu Education Act and the Soweto Riots put an end to that slump. But here, one could conceivably have the wealth of South Africa and its vast resources eventually start reaching the blacks in the form of greater jobs and wages, and this would be encouraged by the whites I'd figure - it grows the markets for South African goods.

2 - Does a black leader that the whites respect come up? Mandela was hard to accept until the 1990s, because he spent most of his life as a left-winger. Somebody like Steve Biko could change that, however, assuming he could get noticed. That could start allowing the votes to blacks with sufficient education and wealth, like what happened in Rhodesia. The Federation in 1953 had just 70 Africans eligible to vote. In 1963 they had several black junior ministers, Kenneth Kaunda being one of them. The wealth of South Africa could - probably would - make for many blacks start trying to gain the respect of the Europeans. Part of the reason South Africa didn't disintegrate in 1994-95 was that respect was earned.

The first moderate African leaders were people like Seretse Khama, who were and truly on the scene by 1960. Khama would become Botswana's president in 1966 in OTL, and led the country well. Combine him with the likes of Albert Luthuli, Dr. Joshua Nkomo (who turned to armed struggle in Rhodesia long after Mugabe did) and Steve Biko and his BCM later on, and its entirely possible that the racism is dying by 1980 - the black leaders advocate non-violence and proving yourself as Biko and Nkomo did, combined with these black leaders making the racial dogma of people like Verwoerd and Vorster look completely stupid. Even Ian Smith had always said that Rhodesia had places for both the blacks and whites.

3 - You assume the post-war growth in whites is 200,000 between 1948 and 1960. That is being seriously pessimistic IMO, because the number that landed in Rhodesia alone between 1945 and 1970 alone is almost 250,000. Couple that with economic growth and an immigration-friendly United Party, you could probably make than 200,000 more like half a million. That means a lot to 1960 South Africa, it's a growth of 10-20% of the white population.

4 - Could South Africa have been an appealing prospect from other European countries? The Germans would in particular be at home in some places in South Africa, especially places like Luderitz and Windhoek.
 

HJ Tulp

Donor
4 - Could South Africa have been an appealing prospect from other European countries? The Germans would in particular be at home in some places in South Africa, especially places like Luderitz and Windhoek.

Alot of Dutchmen left for Australia, New Zealand and the USA after World War 2. Maybe alot of them could go to South Africa if the government there tried a bit?
 
Good post there Viriato, but I can see a few aspects you many not have considered:

1 - Do the economic benefits in South Africa make it to the blacks? They did at some level starting in the mid 1960s and badly eroded black support for the ANC during the 1970s. The Bantu Education Act and the Soweto Riots put an end to that slump. But here, one could conceivably have the wealth of South Africa and its vast resources eventually start reaching the blacks in the form of greater jobs and wages, and this would be encouraged by the whites I'd figure - it grows the markets for South African goods.

2 - Does a black leader that the whites respect come up? Mandela was hard to accept until the 1990s, because he spent most of his life as a left-winger. Somebody like Steve Biko could change that, however, assuming he could get noticed. That could start allowing the votes to blacks with sufficient education and wealth, like what happened in Rhodesia. The Federation in 1953 had just 70 Africans eligible to vote. In 1963 they had several black junior ministers, Kenneth Kaunda being one of them. The wealth of South Africa could - probably would - make for many blacks start trying to gain the respect of the Europeans. Part of the reason South Africa didn't disintegrate in 1994-95 was that respect was earned.

The first moderate African leaders were people like Seretse Khama, who were and truly on the scene by 1960. Khama would become Botswana's president in 1966 in OTL, and led the country well. Combine him with the likes of Albert Luthuli, Dr. Joshua Nkomo (who turned to armed struggle in Rhodesia long after Mugabe did) and Steve Biko and his BCM later on, and its entirely possible that the racism is dying by 1980 - the black leaders advocate non-violence and proving yourself as Biko and Nkomo did, combined with these black leaders making the racial dogma of people like Verwoerd and Vorster look completely stupid. Even Ian Smith had always said that Rhodesia had places for both the blacks and whites.

3 - You assume the post-war growth in whites is 200,000 between 1948 and 1960. That is being seriously pessimistic IMO, because the number that landed in Rhodesia alone between 1945 and 1970 alone is almost 250,000. Couple that with economic growth and an immigration-friendly United Party, you could probably make than 200,000 more like half a million. That means a lot to 1960 South Africa, it's a growth of 10-20% of the white population.

4 - Could South Africa have been an appealing prospect from other European countries? The Germans would in particular be at home in some places in South Africa, especially places like Luderitz and Windhoek.

I’ll try to answer all of your questions.

1. The economic benefits would trickle down to the African majority as they did in the Rhodesias in the 1950s and South Africa in the 1960s. However, the white minority would undoubtedly have the most to gain from any economic boom. The hardships for the black majority would come after the 1973 energy crisis. This crisis would put strain on the economy and I imagine that the fall of world copper prices in the mid-1970s would cause unrest among the mine labourers in Northern Rhodesia. One has to remember that in the Copperbelt the Africans enjoyed a relatively well off existence (by African standards).

2. I believe that the majority of whites will be suspicious of any African nationalist movement as long as the Soviet Union is around. That is because the nationalist movements inevitably looked to the Soviet bloc for assistance and aid. In my opinion it’s no coincidence that white South Africa embraced multiracial equality only once the Soviet Union was gone.

3. In OTL South Africa had 167,795 white immigrants between 1946-1956, however there were also many emigrants especially to the Rhodesias making the net gain after emigration only 73,795. In OTL South Africa itself had a gain of around 250,000 white immigrants from 1960-1969 with the government actively recruiting them. Northern and Southern Rhodesia’s white immigration peaked in 1956 with 26,201 arrivals, around 40% were from Britain and 38% were from South Africa. I believe a net of 200,000 to 250,000 is not being pessimistic at all.

4. There was immigration from non-English speaking countries to South Africa and even Rhodesia. However, during this period it was much easier for someone from say Germany to emigrate to a country in the Americas where there were German-speaking communities to live among. Also, much of the unskilled jobs that European immigrants performed in the United States, Canada & Argentina was done by the native majority. So any immigrant that comes to Africa is generally going to have to work in the service sector or farming (a capital intensive sector). There were around 40,000 Germans that settled in South Africa from 1946-1980. A few did go to Southwest Africa, mostly to Windhoek. Luderitz is no economic powerhouse so it has room for few immigrants.

The largest non-English speaking European group to settle in South Africa were the Portuguese. Beginning in the 1950s large numbers of Portuguese immigrants from the island of Madeira began arriving in South Africa. They were largely small business owners who would set up small stores or businesses, much like Asian immigrants in North America do. In 1975 they were joined by thousands of their compatriots from Angola and especially Mozambique who expanded into commercial farming and other industries. The Greeks and Greek-Cypriot immigrants that settled in Rhodesia and South Africa were similar in that they were also small business owners, often running commercial enterprises in primarily black areas.

The Dutch from Indonesia were mentioned, and there were around 250,000 Dutch who lived in Indonesia in 1945, however only 1/3 of these were of unmixed Dutch origin. Many settled in Australia, and a few thousand might make it to South Africa, but it’s hardly enough to make an impact. In OTL around 25,000 Dutch immigrants arrived in South Africa between 1960 and 1980.

I’m going to try to make more precise demographic estimates for South Africa, Southwest Africa, the two Rhodesias and Bechuanaland. I’ve decided to exclude Basutoland and Swaziland from the equation since it seems that their native kings were very much against inclusion into the Union of South Africa and the Colonial Office respected their wishes.

I’m going to start with the 1946 census, since all those territories had a census that year. Below are the actual numbers:

Native Africans 11,747,866 (75.7%)
Whites 2,517,178 (16.2%)
Coloureds 963,384 (6.2%)
Asians 287,178 (1.9%)
Total: 15,515,606

Moving forward to 1960 are approximate estimates since South Africa took a census in 1960 and the British territories in 1961.

Native Africans 17,145,000 (75.7%)
Whites 3,459,000 (15.3%)
Coloureds 1,550,000 (6.8%)
Asians 493,000 (2.2%)
Total: 22,647,000

My estimate includes for 1960 includes higher unrestricted immigration from Britain as well as from other countries. Also, immigration to Rhodesia does not slow down in the 1958-1960 period as it did when rumblings for independence began. I’m also going to assume that family reunification immigration is allowed for Asians (South African banned it in 1953).

Native Africans 17,145,000 (74.7%)
Whites 3,736,000 (16.3%)
Coloureds 1,560,000 (6.8%)
Asians 523,000 (2.3%)
Total: 22,964,000

For the 1960-1970 period I’m going to assume that there are more immigrants flowing to the Rhodesias. The copper prices are still stable and the copper belt will especially attract many settlers. The discovery of diamonds in Bechuanaland will also attract some immigrants there. Here is my 1970 estimate.

Native Africans 25,693,000 (76.8%)
Whites 4,988,000 (14.9%)
Coloureds 2,107,000 (6.3%)
Asians 680,000 (2.0%)
Total 33,468,000

Below is my 1980 census estimate.

Native Africans 34,714,000 (77.8%)
Whites 6,332,000 (14.2%)
Coloureds 2,704,000 (6.1%)
Asians 881,000 (2.0%)
Total: 44,631,000

For 1990 I have increased the immigration throughout the 1980s. I’m assuming that even with some sanctions this country can be in much better shape than South Africa was in OTL. The frontline states are much further away from the core of the country. Also, Rhodesia was able to attract a net of white immigrants from 1967-1975 despite much tougher economic sanctions.

Native Africans 46,840,000 (79.5%)
Whites 7,601,000 (12.9%)
Coloureds 3,486,000 (5.9%)
Asians 1,016,000 (1.7%)
Total 58,943,000

As I stated in my earlier post I have a South Africa that digs in its heels and ends up facing sanctions. With the assumption that the sanctions are much like those that say Myanmar faces, the country can take it. There is some civil strife and international outrage at the lack of human rights. However, the economy chugs along and has been since 2004 enjoying an economic boom due to demand for gold, copper, coal, etc from China.
The country attracts immigrants especially from Eastern Europe, mostly from Ukraine, Belarus, the former Yugoslavia and Romania. There are still a sizable number of British immigrants arriving (around 10,000-15,000 per year). Also, there are fewer blacks as the huge numbers of Nigerians, Somalis, Ethiopians and other Africans that have made it to South Africa are not allowed in. Also, there are probably going to be thousands of South African refugees in Tanzania and the Congo. Below is my 2007 estimate:

Native Africans 61,136,000 (79.5%)
Whites 10,207,000 (13.3%)
Coloureds 4,311,000 (5.6%)
Asians 1,248,000 (1.6%)
Total: 76,902,000
 
Alot of Dutchmen left for Australia, New Zealand and the USA after World War 2. Maybe alot of them could go to South Africa if the government there tried a bit?

That is another possibility, yes. The Afrikaners would love that, too.
 
Top