Governance & Political Systems
Colonial era (1884–1960s)
Southern Africa, South Africa
Bantustans and their long shadow — apartheid's territorial logic and its successors
<p>The Bantustans — Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda, Ciskei, and six other 'self-governing' territories — were the apartheid regime's attempt to resolve a structural contradiction. South Africa needed cheap Black labor for its mines and farms. It did not want to grant Black workers political rights in 'white' South Africa. The Bantustans offered an answer: Black South Africans would be citizens of *somewhere else* — small, fragmented, non-viable 'homelands' — and would enter white South Africa only as temporary migrant labor.</p>
<p>The territorial logic was Hendrik Verwoerd's. The implementation was Cornelius Mulder's and PW Botha's. By 1981 four Bantustans had been declared formally 'independent' — recognized only by South Africa itself and Israel. Their parliaments were puppet bodies. Their economies were transfer-dependent on Pretoria. Their borders gerrymandered to exclude useful land, mineral deposits, and urban centers.</p>
<p>The 1994 democratic transition formally abolished the Bantustans and reincorporated their territories into the new nine provinces. But the spatial geography did not vanish. The former homelands remained — and largely remain — the poorest, most underdeveloped, most infrastructure-starved regions of South Africa. The Eastern Cape's former Transkei and Ciskei have unemployment rates that approach 50% three decades after democracy. The North West province's former Bophuthatswana exhibits similar patterns.</p>
<p>Two questions follow. First: why has post-apartheid policy been unable to undo the spatial legacy? The honest answer is that the geographic concentration of underdevelopment is the harder face of the Black-white wealth gap. Addressing it requires sustained public investment of a scale that has never been politically sustainable, partly because the South African tax base is too small and partly because the urban middle class — Black and white — has not prioritized rural homeland investment over urban service delivery.</p>
<p>Second: what does the Bantustan model tell us about contemporary 'special economic zones' and 'autonomous regions' in other African states? The Ethiopian regional ethno-federalism of 1995, the Nigerian state-creation pattern of the 1990s, the Sudanese regional administrations, the Kenyan devolved counties — all of these involve drawing lines on a map and declaring that the people on different sides of the lines have different political rights. The Bantustans are the cautionary case. Drawing lines on a map is the easy part. Making each side of each line economically and politically viable is the hard part, and decades-long failures of viability are common.</p>
<p>Apartheid was a uniquely vicious system. Its territorial logic, however, was a generic colonial tool. The post-colonial states that inherited similar logics — and reproduce them in new forms — have not escaped the underlying problem.</p>
0
likes
Sign in to like