Secession and/or annexation are in the international air. What about here?
Crimea’s mainly-Russian citizens have just voted to leave Ukraine and re-join Mother Russia. They say it’s about language and culture: Crimea has always been part of Russia and was “given” to Ukraine as recently as 1954. At that point, Ukraine itself was part of the Soviet Union, so it didn’t really matter. Leave aside President Putin’s thuggish geopolitics and the diplomatic objections of the West; the majority of Crimeans may well be where they belong.
Then there’s the case of the Catalans in Spain. Centred on the beautiful city of Barcelona, the region of Catalonia looks set for a full showdown with Spain’s Madrid-based government. Separatist sentiment has grown for a number of years, despite a high degree of regional autonomy in Spain. Catalonia’s president, Artur Mas, is pushing for a referendum on the question, which he has promised for later this year. He’s just been knocked back hard. Spain’s Constitutional Court says it will strike down any such vote as illegal.
At the heart of Catalan calls for independence is a familiar refrain: this part of the country is wealthy, successful and hard-working. Its citizens, with their distinctive language and culture, ask why they should contribute to less successful parts of the country. They want to go it alone, like counterparts in wealthy northern Italy, where there have been mutterings about separating from the poor south for quite a few years. Is this really all about culture and identity or is it about old-fashioned cash?
One referendum on independence that will take place this year happens in Scotland. Scotland and England have shared the same monarch since 1603, and been one country since 1707, but now a significant number of Scots want their independence back. Latest polls suggest it will be close. Politicians on both sides are campaigning hard, while economists, bankers and technocrats puzzle over issues like how to share – or not – North Sea oil revenues, European Union membership for a newly independent Scotland and whether or not such a state should or could use the Pound as its currency.
Are the Scots truly a people distinct from their fellows in England, Wales and Northern Ireland? My mother was Scottish, my father English, so I’ll sit firmly on the fence on that question, happily clutching my South African passport. But proponents of a Yes vote suggest that Scotland would be much better-off as an independent nation. Cash once again plays a role.
But if secession or independence is as much about economics as it is about distinct national characteristics, has the time perhaps come to examine the question as it pertains to the Western Cape? Would an independent Western Cape be better off without the rest of South Africa? Would the rest of South Africa be improved by losing one of its largest provinces, although not, by any stretch, its most economically important one?
Cash once again is at the forefront of this question. Currently, the province is governed by the DA, and governed rather better than those provinces ruled by the ANC, to say nothing of the country as a whole. There is little appetite for corruption in this province’s administration, nor are its politicians permitted to live high on the hog at taxpayer expense. Motor vehicles are modest, in stark contrast to those driven by members of the national government.
There is also a distaste within the DA for large, badly-run state enterprises, which guzzle public money, like SAA. It’s fair to assume that an independent Western Cape would not have its own airline. This would be a country whose economics were firmly rooted in capitalism, and not the often loopy socialism of the ANC. Presumably, it would therefore be more attractive to foreign investors.
But there would also be some harsh realities for this secessionist venture. One elderly nuclear power station at Koeberg would not be enough to sustain its economy. There would have to be significant investment in wind and solar power. Quite a few of the financial services companies currently headquartered in Cape Town would shift to Johannesburg, South Africa’s real economic powerhouse. Wonderful wine farms, windy beaches and scraggy Karoo sheep farms might not be enough to produce sufficient wealth, either.
Any kind of referendum preceding independence would be certainly be characterised by opponents on racial lines: arch-conservatives seeking a “whites-only” state at the expense of the poor, black population. Given that Cape Town’s urban layout still reflects apartheid as accurately as anywhere in the nation, that might be a hard argument to counter. Protests against secession would be long, noisy, and probably very violent. Could it even trigger civil war?
Perhaps you think all of these obstacles surmountable? Well, consider for a moment the sporting side of independence. It’s almost inconceivable to think of Spain’s La Liga without El Clasíco – Real Madrid vs. Barcelona – but that would be a consequence of a Catalan exit. A hundred times worse, surely, would be a domestic rugby competition consisting exclusively of matches between Western Province and Boland, with an occasional excursion to George or Beaufort West.
No, despite the fact that secession might be in the air elsewhere, it really does look as though we South Africans are stuck with each other.