Botswana - a role model?

Post Reply
User avatar
Torchwood
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:01 am

Botswana - a role model?

Post by Torchwood »

This World Bank Review summarises the story of how one of the poorest and most marginal of African countries at independence rose to being a a comfortable, peaceful democratic state today, with a GDP per capita ($16,100 at PPP in 2011) in the higher levels of middle income, having experienced growth averaging 9% a year. Yet it was surrounded by a zone of devastation and conflict (Angola till 2002, Zimbabwe, S. Africa).

The review cited does not explain how this happened. The roots go back as far as 1897, when three Tswana chiefs visited British colonial secretary Joseph Chamberlain to complain about the encroachments of Cecil Rhodes. The latter was increasingly viewed with suspicion in London as a loose cannon, then there was rising tension with the Boer republics (which however gave the Tswana room to play off one set of whites against another). It was agreed that with British nominal control (as Bechuanaland) and the right to build a railway by passing the Transvaal, native rule would continue. The latter institutions were inclusive (chiefs were tradition bound to listen to their subjects, and chiefs were selected on merit not heredity).

And so it remained as a poor native backwater, with few whites and no colour bar. One tribe accounts still today for 80% of the population, and education is in Tswana and English. As well as being homogenous, it was lucky with its post independence leadership, which were not the usual leftist firebrands, Seretse Khama (of chiefly descent) and Quett Masire. And, yes, it has diamonds, fortunately for the Tswana discovered after independence, as well as nickel and copper. Yet in other resource rich African countries the resources were seized by kleptocrats and the funds transferred to their foreign accounts, but in Botswana that did not happen.

Yes, it has a small population (2 million) and is far from trouble free - poor rural cattle herders contrast with wealthier townsmen (although an anti-poverty programme has been introduced), uneven skills, a high rate of HIV/AIDs (but an extensive programme to combat it), and unsurprisingly, a lot of illegal immigration . So it is hardly the ideal role model, but impressive nevertheless.
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Botswana - a role model?

Post by Endovelico »

Torchwood wrote:This World Bank Review summarises the story of how one of the poorest and most marginal of African countries at independence rose to being a a comfortable, peaceful democratic state today, with a GDP per capita ($16,100 at PPP in 2011) in the higher levels of middle income, having experienced growth averaging 9% a year. Yet it was surrounded by a zone of devastation and conflict (Angola till 2002, Zimbabwe, S. Africa).

The review cited does not explain how this happened. The roots go back as far as 1897, when three Tswana chiefs visited British colonial secretary Joseph Chamberlain to complain about the encroachments of Cecil Rhodes. The latter was increasingly viewed with suspicion in London as a loose cannon, then there was rising tension with the Boer republics (which however gave the Tswana room to play off one set of whites against another). It was agreed that with British nominal control (as Bechuanaland) and the right to build a railway by passing the Transvaal, native rule would continue. The latter institutions were inclusive (chiefs were tradition bound to listen to their subjects, and chiefs were selected on merit not heredity).

And so it remained as a poor native backwater, with few whites and no colour bar. One tribe accounts still today for 80% of the population, and education is in Tswana and English. As well as being homogenous, it was lucky with its post independence leadership, which were not the usual leftist firebrands, Seretse Khama (of chiefly descent) and Quett Masire. And, yes, it has diamonds, fortunately for the Tswana discovered after independence, as well as nickel and copper. Yet in other resource rich African countries the resources were seized by kleptocrats and the funds transferred to their foreign accounts, but in Botswana that did not happen.

Yes, it has a small population (2 million) and is far from trouble free - poor rural cattle herders contrast with wealthier townsmen (although an anti-poverty programme has been introduced), uneven skills, a high rate of HIV/AIDs (but an extensive programme to combat it), and unsurprisingly, a lot of illegal immigration . So it is hardly the ideal role model, but impressive nevertheless.
I always thought that ethnic unity was the main cause for Botswana's success, which goes to show that nation states have some advantages. Of course this sounds a bit racialist, which disturbs me, but racial tolerance mostly comes only after a strong sense of national identity has been achieved. Angola started from a different type of environment but is reaching a not too different form of success. In Angola there are a number of different tribes, with two larger ones - the Kimbundo (in the north) and the Ovimbundo (in central Angola). The Angola civil war, after independence, was very much - but not exclusively - a war between those two tribes. What enabled them to overcome most of their differences was the fact that Angola started by being ruled by radical leftists (and thus non-racial), who decided to adopt Portuguese as the sole national language. A language which was already spoken by all the better educated Angolans, of all tribes. Four hundred years of Portuguese rule had also left a visible mark on all Angolans. There were thus in place some elements of a national identity, beyond the various tribal identities. As a result Angolans don't identify mainly with their original tribe, but with the country as a whole, and can thus move forward in a manner not unlike Botswana's. I'm quite convinced that this national identity - which occurs only in a few African countries - will promote their development, while richer countries - like Nigeria - will probably never function as true political units.
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: Botswana - a role model?

Post by Ibrahim »

Sounds like a good example of post-colonial success, but I would be careful not to read the tribal angle the wrong way. What is important is that lack of inter-tribal rivalry exploited by the famous divide and conquer strategy of colonialism. If, for numerous practical factors at the time, Botswana wasn't subjected to colonially exacerbated tribal animosity then there would be no grudges to tear apart the post-colonial society (as in e.g. Rwanda).

If a) the initial boundaries of African nation states were drawn with an eye to traditional territorial divisions, and/or b) tribal identity wasn't exploited by colonial rulers, then more countries in sub-Saharan Africa could very well resemble Botswana.
User avatar
Torchwood
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:01 am

Re: Botswana - a role model?

Post by Torchwood »

Ibrahim wrote:Sounds like a good example of post-colonial success, but I would be careful not to read the tribal angle the wrong way. What is important is that lack of inter-tribal rivalry exploited by the famous divide and conquer strategy of colonialism. If, for numerous practical factors at the time, Botswana wasn't subjected to colonially exacerbated tribal animosity then there would be no grudges to tear apart the post-colonial society (as in e.g. Rwanda).

If a) the initial boundaries of African nation states were drawn with an eye to traditional territorial divisions, and/or b) tribal identity wasn't exploited by colonial rulers, then more countries in sub-Saharan Africa could very well resemble Botswana.
Trouble is, many African tribes are small and some are mixed in with other tribes. Tearing that all apart would be as painful or worse than was creating "nations" out of the Ottoman and Austro Hungarian empires, and leave lots of micro states. The unspoken rule, throughout all the wars that plagued Africa, was that colonial era boundaries would be respected, no matter how crazy - otherwise it would have been much much worse.

Still, there is a country which is tribally diverse, next to war-devastated basket cases, with a Christian south and a Muslim north - and doing very well, thank you, peaceful, democratic and growing fast. It is even rated as very low on corruption. Ghana, poorer than Botswana (GDP per capita $3500) but then much more populous (24 millions) and still recovering from disastrous tinpot dictators in the first twenty years of independence. Basically thanks to one good leader, Flight Lieutenant Jerry Rawlings.
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: Botswana - a role model?

Post by Ibrahim »

I should say tribal groups, not individual tribes (though some tribes are large enough for it to be interchangeable(. Peoples more compatible based on language, lifestyle etc. Aside from deliberate colonially-imposed rivalries, problems seem to arise when people are radically different, as in Mali with a sub-Saharan black settled population in the South of the country, and Tuareg/Bedouin Saharan nomads in the North.


I must disagree that colonial boundaries have been respected internally. Just look at the way conflicts and rebel groups drift over borders in central Africa. Having adopted the nation state system, it makes sense that we continue to use it as best we are able, both as outsiders dealing with Africa and as Africans dealing among one another, but I think its fair to say that certain boundaries could have been drawn more efficiently. Not to say that this would have prevented every problem in Africa since the colonial era.
User avatar
Endovelico
Posts: 3038
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:00 pm

Angola

Post by Endovelico »

I agree with Torchwood that trying to fit sovereign borders to ethnic borders in Africa would be a nightmare and would create a few hundred states, at least. Africa is mostly stuck with the idiotic borders we created there, with a few exceptions, such as the recent split of Sudan. As I mentioned before, in the two major former Portuguese colonies - Angola and Mozambique - the longish presence of the Portuguese helped creating a sort of common cultural matrix which is assisting those two countries in creating a real national identity above the tribal loyalties. That is particularly noticeable in Angola which is quickly becoming the black image of Brazil. While Brazil is a mixed society with a white bias, Angola is an equally mixed society with a black bias, but both have increasingly parallel behaviours. I was watching yesterday an Angolan soap opera on Angolan (cable) television, and it was like a Brazilian soap with a darker tint. Absolutely unique in Africa. I know of no other country in Africa with attitudes so compatible with ours and thus so well prepared to dealing with the rest of the world. I have a very strong feeling that Angola will be the most successful country in Africa, not only because of its wealth but because of its unity and self-assured attitude while dealing with Europeans and Americans. Angolans don't feel nor act like victims of slavery or colonialism. It will be interesting watching their progress in the coming decades.

Luanda

Image

Image

Image

Angolan Beauty...

Image

Image

Image
Post Reply