Botswana’s Independence: A Geopolitical History

In a similar way to the rest of African states, Botswana started its path towards independence in the 1960s, the years of the “wind of change” of which Harold Macmillan spoke in February 1960 (MacMillan, Hurd, 1966). After eighty years as the Protectorate of Bechuanaland under British colonial rule, from 1885, Botswana finally gained independence in 1966. There were two main elements that led to Botswana gaining independence: the first relates to the state’s contribution to the First and Second World Wars, and the second is undoubtedly tied to the marriage between Seretse Khama (designed kgosi (chief) of the Bangwato) and Ruth Williams, a British nurse of humble origins. This article analyzes the intricacies and geopolitical factors surrounding Botswana’s independence, situating them within the broader international context of the 1960s.

War and Marriage: Triggers of Botswana’s Independence 

The participation of African colonies in the two wars is indeed widely considered to have been fundamentally important in terms of strengthening the countries internally, as highlighted by historian Micheal Pesek (2017). Indeed, he emphasizes that the economic and logistical participation of the African colonies in the conflicts contributed to raising a decolonial consciousness among the people and government bodies. While Pesek’s theory is pertinent to a broad discourse around African colonies and the First World War, Botswana’s participation in the Second World War presents a distinctive case. A number of Tswana men were recruited by the dikgosi (local chiefs) and sent to the British Army in an independent corps, known as African Auxiliary Pioneer Corps (AAPC). Notably, these units were kept specifically distinguished from the main South African Defence Force, due to Bechuanaland’s political hostility to the Union of South Africa, a political-administrative union of the four British colonies in South Africa. Bechuanaland did, however, provide logistical support, through food production for the British units, together with the institution of a war levy paid to the British Crown, amounting to £89,000 at the end of the war (Tlou, Campbell, 1984). 

A second crucial moment in Botswana’s path towards independence was the wedding between Seretse Khama and Ruth Williams, a British woman whom he met while completing his studies in London. The wedding, being interracial, attracted much public attention, and soon became a scandal. It was openly fought over by different sides for years. On the one side, its legitimacy was refused within Bechuanaland, where it was customary for a designated chief to marry a royal Motswana. On the other, South Africa’s government, which had instituted the racist apartheid regime in 1948, strongly opposed the marriage, as did the British administration (Hyam, 1986). Within the Bangwato group and their kgotla (the group’s assembly), the legitimacy of Seretse Khama as chief was never questioned. Nevertheless, the initial rejection of a white woman as the kgosi’s wife (mohumagadi) was strong. According to custom, it was required that the mohumagadi was chosen from a royal family, and she had to be a Motswana (Tlou, Campbell, 1984). The case immediately became political, and the position assumed by Tshekedi Khama, Seretse’s uncle and regent, was of fundamental importance: his opposition to the marriage led to a deterioration of the domestic climate. Tshekedi Khama had a strong political influence, and elevated the marriage case to the international stage. In November 1948, two months after the marriage had taken place, he questioned the legitimacy of various decisions reached by the kgotla assemblies. After taking this stance, he went into voluntary exile in the territory neighboring Bakwena, as a result of the impossibility of exercising formal opposition, due to Setswana tradition (Hyam, 1986). Meanwhile, in parallel to this opposition, there was a growing movement of people in favor of the marriage, and the establishment of Ruth Williams as mohumagadi, prompted the British government to undertake a judicial inquiry. This would later become known as the Harragin Inquiry, named after Sir Walter Harragin, Chief Justice of the High Commission Territories, who presided over the investigations. The resulting report, dated December 1st 1949, was not published in its entirety, but it declared Seretse “not fit in present circumstances” for sovereignty, for three main reasons: he was considered to be a “prohibited immigrant” in Mafeking; he did not enjoy the essential political favor of South Africa and Rhodesia; and it was believed that his presence would undoubtedly lead to internal unrest within Botswana (Hyam, 1986).

Figure 1: Simon, C. (2019). Ncee Tcee, Dove & Porcupine.

While European public opinion was only initially opposed to the recognition of the union between the two, the opposition of the South African administration grew increasingly fierce. In light of this, the British government summoned Seretse Khama and Ruth Williams to London.  Khama traveled alone, and was invited to remain in Britain in exchange for the provision of a regular subsidy, during a period of direct administration of the Bangwato. Concurrently, Khama's position gradually worsened as the British Conservative Party strengthened its power and Gordon Walker arose to the post of Secretary of State. Walker invited Khama to a voluntary renunciation of bogosi (power over the region) and, following his refusal, banned Seretse from Bechuanaland. For a period of five years, Seretse Khama was prohibited from entering his country, while the protectorate was to be governed by a Native Authority.

Between 1950 and 1953, tensions grew, thanks to broadening support for Seretse, which manifested itself in the foundation of the Seretse Khama Fighting Committee, an organisation which formally accused the British government of operating under the influence of racial and arbitrary biases. The Conservative Party, after its victory in the 1951 elections, confirmed its rejection of the permanent recognition of Seretse Khama as chief, later formalizing this position in March 1952, favoring instead a possible return of Tshekedi Khama from his exile. Interestingly, this happened despite an independent British investigation having shown that the kgotla was not well-disposed toward the latter, but was openly supportive of Seretse's return (Tlou, Campbell, 1984). In a climate of increasing British sympathy to the South African regime, the Bangwato began to express their opposition to the British administration, in the form of a series of protests in Serowe in June 1952. Meanwhile, British public opinion increasingly sided with Seretse Khama by challenging the British government’s conduct, as reported by excerpts from several newspaper articles between 1952 and 1953, from publications such as The Guardian and The Birmingham Post, which emphasized the grave injustice committed against Khama.

The whole affair, as is evident from such newspaper articles, resulted in increasing attention towards, and support for, Seretse Khama. This also came about due to an increasing public perception of the United Kingdom's subjugation to the South African regime, as well as due to the press’ romanticization of the affair. Indeed, this process of romanticization in popular culture is still ongoing today, as demonstrated by the realization of works such as the movie A United Kingdom, directed by Amma Asante in 2016. Seretse's engagement with the public was continuous, and the growing public support was remarkable. As a result of this mounting public pressure, Tshekedi Khama's position eventually shifted, and he gave his politically significant recognition to Ruth Williams as a mohumagadi after he was readmitted to the country in 1952. This moment was crucial when considered in a context characterized by continuing internal unrest within the Bangwato. In these circumstances, renouncing succession in the bogosi and accepting that his sons would also remain outside of it, Seretse was readmitted to Bechuanaland in September 1956, where he returned as a private citizen (Tlou, Campbell, 1984).

Figure 2: Tuicxago, X. (2019). Healing Dance.

The Rise of Nationalism

In the international climate of the 1950s, the Legislative Councils (LEGCOs) were formed within the British colonies in Africa. Through these, African political elites participated in the governance of their countries in a format that included equal numbers of Africans and Europeans. The achievement of LEGCO in 1960 in Bechuanaland was seen as an important step towards independence, and served as a laboratory for the development of nationalist strategies, as well as a means through which to criticize the British administration, and particularly its chairman, the Resident Commissioner. Overall, the process of decolonization that Pierluigi Valsecchi and Giampaolo Calchi Novati describe as “an event of general significance” characterizes the general climate in which these events occurred. Indeed, in the wake of the independence of some North African states, and especially following the end of the colonial era in the Gold Coast (now Ghana) in 1957, a wave of independence began to ripple throughout the continent (Calchi Novati, Valsecchi, 2020).

In Bechuanaland, this phase saw the emergence of several political parties, the first of which was the Bechuanaland (later Botswana) People's Party (BPP), formed in 1960 by Motsete, who immediately advocated for independence and the abolition of LEGCO. The political strategy of the BPP did not gain much traction in rural areas, however, largely due to their intention to abolish bogosi. The BPP's political path, radical in its positions and very close to the African National Congress and the Pan Africanist Congress, was soon hampered by a series of internal disturbances and, above all, by the emergence of the Bechuanaland Democratic Party (BDP). Formed in 1962 by Seretse Khama and other prominent figures in the country (including Quett Masire, who would later become its president), its rise was seemingly inevitable. Supported by the British government for being less radical, and approved of by the country's main ethnic group, the Bangwato, for its connection to the figure of Khama, the party immediately presented itself as being closer to the people, partly because of its greater connection to the more distinctly Setswana tradition of the bogosi. The initial preparations for independence were discussed at the Lobatse Conference in July 1963, from which arose a National Assembly, whose members would be elected to deal with the discussion of domestic issues, which the British administration would no longer control. The management of these was transferred to a cabinet consisting of a Prime Minister and five ministries, headed by the Resident Commissioner (known as the “Queen Commissioner” from 1964).

Figure 3: Thama, N. (2019). Ncuu (Edible Tuber).

Governing Independent Botswana

The first elections were held in March 1965, on the basis of the Constitution drafted in 1963, and the BDP won with a substantial majority, gaining 28 of the 31 seats in the National Assembly, with Seretse Khama becoming Prime Minister. The new government immediately called for the country's total independence from Britain. At a bilateral conference in London in February 1966, a new constitution was discussed, and the date of independence was set for September 30, 1966 (Hillbom, Bolt, 2018). On this date, the Republic of Botswana was born, defined as sovereign in the first article of the Constitution (Government of Botswana, 1966).

The 1966 Constitution, which has remained virtually unchanged, establishes a tripartition of powers. Firstly, the State, in which executive power is handled by the president, the vice president, and the cabinet of ministries, along with the Public Service. Secondly, legislative power is in the hands of the National Assembly, with the House of Chiefs and the president himself. Lastly, judiciary power is controlled by the Chief Justice, together with judges and magistrates. The elections, to be held every five years, are multiparty and are conducted through electoral districts which elect a party that is subsequently responsible for forming the government. It is notable that the BDP was victorious in all twelve elections between 1966 and 2019. The government has been criticised for its “minimalist democracy”: despite having democratic elections, Botswana is characterized by, in the words of Ian Taylor and Kenneth Good, “an illiberal authoritarianism and presidentialism […] an elitist top-down structure of government”, and “clientelism, particularis, and executive dominance" (Taylor, Good, 2008, 751). This is just one of the many widely contested aspects of the country's democracy, particularly with regard to the aforementioned Constitution, which has been extensively criticized by scholars such as Monageng Mogalakwe and Francis Nyamnjoh, according to whom “the powers of the president of Botswana are as old as the constitution itself” referring especially to Article 41 of the Constitution, which states that the president cannot be subjected to any criminal proceedings while in office (Mogalakwe, Nyamnjoh, 2017, 3). Nevertheless, in October 2024, the Botswana Democratic Party lost its first election, conceding victory to the main opposition party, the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC), and handing over power peacefully and democratically.

Regardless of the criticisms that have been levelled against the country and its democratic development, it is important to note that the Republic of Botswana is generally celebrated for its peaceful, multicultural internal climate. These elements are central to the country’s current state and have been widely discussed by authors such as John Iliffe (2007) and, albeit critically, Keene Boikhutso and Agreement Lathi Jotia (2013).

The Republic of Botswana was born as a result of the complex dynamics analyzed in this article, in an international climate that strongly interfered with its internal order. Nevertheless, independence was achieved through strong national unity. The country's desire for openness and peace is exemplified by its flag, upon which the central black line represents the African majority of the population, while the two smaller white lines above and below it symbolize the white minority living within the state. This arrangement is certainly emblematic, and underscores the interracial dimension of Botswana's politics. The blue that encompasses the lines is a representation of the sky and rain, which is the source of all life, an element encapsulated in the country's significant saying, “Pula”.

Bibliographical References

Boikhutso, K., & Jotia, A. L. (2013). Language identity and multicultural diversity in Botswana. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 32(6), 797-815.

Calchi Novati, G., & Valsecchi, P. (2020). Africa: La Storia Ritrovata. Carocci.

Constitution of Botswana. (1966). Botswana Laws Online.

https://botswanalaws.com

Good, K., & Taylor, I. (2008). Botswana: A minimalist democracy. Democratization, 15(4), 750-765.

Hillbom, E., & Bolt, J. (2018). Botswana–A Modern Economic History: an African diamond in the rough. Springer.

Hyam, R. (1986). The Political Consequences of Seretse Khama: Britain, the Bangwato and South Africa, 1948–1952. The Historical Journal, 29(4), 921-947.

Iliffe, J. (2007). Africans. Cambridge University Press.

Macmillan, H., & Hurd, D. (1966). Winds of Change. Harper & Row.

Mogalakwe, M., & Nyamnjoh, F. (2017). Botswana at 50: democratic deficit, elite corruption and poverty in the midst of plenty. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 35(1), 1-14.

Pesek, M. (2017). Making Sense of the War (Africa). In International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/

Tlou, T., & Campbell, A. (1984).  History of Botswana. Macmillan.

Visual References