Dailymaverick logo

Maverick News

This article is more than a year old

ANALYSIS

Slowly but surely, separatism is becoming an electoral issue — possibly as early as 2029

While much of the focus of our elections is on the future of South Africa, there is a growing list of groups pushing for secession. Instead of campaigning for a better common future, they are against the ties that bind us, claiming their futures would be better outside South Africa. While these groups will not win a significant share of the vote in the 29 May polls, the experience of other nations shows their ideas could soon have a more profound impact.
Slowly but surely, separatism is becoming an electoral issue — possibly as early as 2029 Illustrative image | Sources: Afrikaner leaders issue joint declaration.(Photo: Document) | Waldo Swiegers / Bloomberg via Getty Images | Philani Mavundla, Abantu Batho Congress leader and former deputy mayor of eThekwini. (Photo: Gallo Images / Darren Stewart)

In the past few months, at least three South African political groups have declared that they would prefer to be in a territory with some kind of border between them and South Africa.

The leader of the Abantu Batho Congress (ABC), Philani Mavundla, wants the “Zulu Kingdom” to be independent of South Africa and has campaigned under the slogan, “Vote for Abantu Batho Congress to bring back the land of the Zulus!”  

The Referendum Party, a group describing itself as a “single-issue” party dedicated to forcing a referendum on the independence of the Western Cape, has campaigned  under the slogan: “If you want Cape Independence and a First-World future, you are going to have to vote for it in 2024!”

And, in a “Joint Afrikaner Declaration”, a group of organisations released a document in which they stated, “The Constitution recognises the pursuit of territory.” 

If you consider our difficult history, it is no surprise that groups like this have emerged. South Africa has only been a single state since the imposition of it on all the people living here by the British Empire in 1910. That unit was defined by the end of the colonial era and then apartheid.

Our country does not have a long history as a single distinct polity. Some people are bound to have cultural memories of what they regard as a happier time when they were able to enjoy “self-determination”. 

Of course, it is unlikely that any of these groups will win significant shares of the vote in the near future. But, that does not mean their — fundamentally dangerous — ideas won’t have an influence over the long term.

Their real power might well lie in their relationships with other political groups.

For example, Mavundla is not just the leader of the ABC. He is also an adviser to King Misuzulu kaZwelithini. He is the mayor of the Umvoti Local Municipality, having previously been the deputy mayor of eThekwini. He has only been able to win these council positions through his relationships with the ANC and the IFP.

He is not speaking in a political vacuum — the IFP also campaigns on largely ethnic lines; it appeals primarily to people who speak Zulu in KwaZulu-Natal.

It is entirely possible that Mavundla can pull parts of the IFP in the direction in which he is heading. By campaigning for an independent Zulu kingdom, he may force the IFP to take a position on the matter.  

Read more in Daily Maverick: Elections 2024

Current unhappiness

Turning to the Referendum Party (RP), its website is proof that it is well-resourced and that the people behind it have an understanding of the current unhappiness among diverse groups. When its site proclaims, “If you want Cape Independence and a First-World future, you are going to have to vote for it in 2024!”, it knows exactly who it is appealing to.

It claims to be working with other parties and to have a relationship with the Freedom Front Plus.

But, more importantly, it also appears to be trying to influence the DA. It claims, “Our goal is to convince 100,000 DA voters to vote RP in 2024. Vote RP to keep a DA Government and secure a Referendum!”

It is not speaking in a vacuum. 

The DA has been campaigning for more powers for provinces, particularly the Western Cape. The party regularly demands more powers over policing, claiming that it will be able to reduce crime while the national government cannot. 

This could well see the demands being made by the Referendum Party pulling the DA in its direction.

At the same time, the signatories of the Joint Afrikaner Declaration have said they included the phrase “The Constitution recognises the pursuit of territory” to ensure the people who run the Orania settlement join them.

This means the organisers of this declaration are giving important influence to a group that gives every impression of wanting to exclude black people and prioritise white Afrikaans people.

Again, it is an example of a larger political group being pulled in the direction of separatism by a smaller group.

Unfortunately, there are many examples of the separatist ideas of small groups influencing the politics of bigger groups.

One of the most recent examples is that of the UK Independence Party, which agitated to leave the European Union (EU). It had only two MPs in the British House of Commons, both of whom belonged to other parties before they defected. (However, it was the biggest party representing British voters in the European Parliament.)

Despite that, this party’s ideas gripped British politics. It pushed some in the Conservative Party to campaign to leave the EU. It seized the political zeitgeist. Because of weak leadership in the two major parties, eventually a small majority prevailed in the vote to leave the EU.

This had huge repercussions and the majority of people in the UK now regret the decision

It is very likely that the political dynamics in South Africa will create a space for separatist groups to exploit.

There is a real risk that by the time of our next elections in 2029, these groups will hold sway over some of the parties desperate for power.

This could radically alter our politics — instead of discussing how to improve the lives of everyone, there will be populist motivations to secede from South Africa.

This will be destructive and open up yet another fault line in our already difficult political reality. DM

Comments (10)

gilstra May 2, 2024, 11:28 AM

It serves no purpose to conflate the break of the UK from the EU with certain provinces' wish to break with SA as a whole. The Eu is much looser federation (union) of independent states that retain responsibility for much of their domestic and foreign policies; the idea was only to standardise a lot of things to smooth trade and the free movement of people and good across an area with some 600 million inhabitants. Brussels or Strasbourg does not control the police forces or defence forces of any single one of the member states; it tries to harmonise foreign policy for the benefit of the bloc. SA, on the other hand, after 30 years of uninterrupted corrupt rule by the cANCer, is a different story. If, say, the Western Cape is allowed control of its own police, health, education and other very local issues, there would be no reason to choose independence. However, while the WC runs a fairly clean and effective administration, its citizens and its government are still affected by that circus in Pretoria. There is no 'nationalism' or separatism in the majority of these desires to go independent, it seems to be the only viable option.

Skinyela May 2, 2024, 11:50 AM

"Vote RP to keep a DA Government" Makes a lot of sense. Very smart these RP guys!

Peter Holmes May 2, 2024, 12:05 PM

South Africa (1910) is an artificial construct. But then, so were the four southern African colonies (two of which were short-lived republics). Probably the only country with as many ethnic groups, languages and religions was the old USSR, held togther by Moscow, and dominated by Russia. Countries with as few as two ethnic groups (Czechoslovakia) have split, or experienced ethnic cleansing (Rwanda) or serios difficulties (Cyprus). It is a short-sighted person who would bet on the Republic of South Africa existing in its present form in a generation's time.

hyacnthokafor2023@gmail.com May 2, 2024, 02:28 PM

You people are not thinking well. You don't dismantle South Africa because ANC or the economy is not doing well. Grow up for Heaven's sake. Any attempt to bring back Apartheid through the back door will be catastrophic. The greed and insensitivity of that system was mindboggling...creating tiny tribal homelands on bare inhabitable places for blacks while reserving lush, mineral-rich places for a small percentage of the population. Be assured of bigger trouble if history repeats itself. At the moment, blacks are not happy economically because of the legacy of Apartheid and the uncivilized way ANC governed the country since 1994. But then, in every organization, there are always bad eggs. Unfortunately, the bad eggs ruled in South Africa. But to go back to reformed separate development will be counterproductive really....Think properly please.

Michael Cinna May 2, 2024, 02:33 PM

Secessionism is a pipe-dream. We should rather strive for federalism and the devolution of centralised power in Pretoria. Allow provinces broader control and authority over provincial-specific policy issues.

William Stucke May 2, 2024, 04:20 PM

Some good points made here. To summarise: 1. Secession is dead in the water. The calls for this, in both the WC and KZN, are primarily reactions to the gross incompetence and venality of the current ANC Government. 2. Under no circumstance do we want a return to Apartheid-era Bantustans. This will help no one. 3. The current 3-tier government model makes very little sense. Provinces with no real income sources or powers are simply an extra level, providing more jobs for deployees. 4. A Federal model, on the other hand, with sufficient and suitable powers delegated to the Provinces will allow them to play to their strengths, and to cater for the differing needs of their populations, while minimising the dead hand of Pretoria. 5. Due to the greatly differing resources of each Province – both natural and human – the central government will still have a significant role in redistribution of funds between the provinces, in the armed forces and perhaps in tertiary education.

chessfin@africa.com May 2, 2024, 04:34 PM

It seems to me that all the DA wants in the Cape is to take responsibility to provide security and the services that the ANC national government cannot or does not want to provide. Like adequate law and order, a rail service that works and serves the people amongst other services. I don't think that they are talking secession per se, but there are surely many people who might believe that secession from the failure that is the rest of South Africa may have a positive outcome for the citizens of the Western Cape. Had a federal system been implemented in 1994, I feel SA Inc. would be in a better position today that she finds herself in.

Denise Smit May 3, 2024, 07:23 AM

DA has never talked succession. The journalist is dishonest

Glyn Morgan May 2, 2024, 07:22 PM

What everybody here has not mentioned, and it is important, is that the DA policy is to establish a FEDERAL STATE. Grootes mentions that the DA wants "more powers", like some power hungry dictatorship. Not once did he mention that the DA wanted a FEDERAL STATE! All the provinces would get those "more powers" in a federation! It would cut the Central Government down accordingly, like Switzerland.

M E May 3, 2024, 01:21 PM

In a sense changing to a federal state would be succession for all provinces, as they'll all gain more power to be self sustaining and potentially SUCCESSFUL. However, we first need to remove the criminals from running this country. They only want to rule, not govern as they should. The ANC and all other parties belong to the people, but the people do not belong to them. WAKE UP SOUTH AFRICA!

dou May 3, 2024, 08:51 AM

It is all a fallacy, and frankly a futile debate. The clear reality all over the world is masive MIGRATION. So even if any particular form of secession materialize, unmanageable migration will destroy the original rationale in anyway. Plenty of profound evidance all over the globe.

Mike Newton May 3, 2024, 11:14 AM

The majority of people who voted, voted for Brexit. The only true poll is that which occurs on election day. There are several instances of states that have separated from badly governed entities and have been successful. Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea are cases in point. When the established parties forget who they are supposed to be serving the risk getting a nasty surprise.

cwf5108@gmail.com May 4, 2024, 12:23 AM

Crazy times (in the whole world as well), that we live in. Just a couple of personal opinions: 1] The RSA does not have proper Leadership politicians that have proven their worth by establishing their own businesses and have run it really efficiently; 2] Neither of the current Parties have a Leader that are either a very successful Entrepreneur nor a highly respected Economist (like Argentina's Leader that promised to make tough decisions and turn the country's economy around within 6 months based on actions he took regarding unnecessary/non-performing civil servants as well as doubling down on gang/drug cartels); 3] Millions of people (that includes most politicians of all parties) in the RSA believe that "someone else owes them something that they do not have to roll up their sleeves and perspire to earn it themselves" (typical parasites like kings/queens/royalty all over the world). The only exception to this are the people who live in Orania as well as most farmers (regardless of race) - we can all learn from what they say and live out, i.e. "the best and fastest help you can get to solve any issue/problem/opportunity, is to roll up your sleeves and do it yourself"; 4] The value "treat others as you want to be treated yourself" are few and rarely being exercised (the world over) due to the introduction of CCP-related policies as supported by the various 3-letter worldwide organizations; 5] Adam and Eve did not have to work and only 1 single condition ("Do not eat ...".)