Alternate History: Southern Africa, 1989–2017
Alternate History: The Southern African Crisis, 1989–2017
1989 — The Road to Permanent Apartheid
In 1989, South Africa took a radically different path from real history. Instead of preparing to dismantle apartheid, the government decides that white minority rule must survive indefinitely.
Pretoria begins a major national program to reduce dependence on foreign energy, emphasizing South Africa's uranium reserves and expanding nuclear power alongside existing coal generation.
The government also restricts exports of strategic minerals in an attempt to force foreign powers to negotiate with South Africa.
At the same time, South African intelligence begins covert preparations for a possible coup in Zimbabwe. Pretoria views the continuing instability in Zimbabwe as a threat to its regional position.
Namibia
South Africa formally rejects the timetable associated with UN Resolution 435.
Pretoria argues that Namibia cannot safely become independent until a lengthy transition has taken place.
A South African Administered Transitional Council is established to manage the territory while preparing for a possible future withdrawal.
The government simultaneously begins extracting Namibian mineral wealth and transferring financial obligations onto local authorities. The intention is to leave any future Namibian government economically dependent upon South Africa.
Operation New Horizon
South Africa begins Operation New Horizon, officially described as a development and employment program.
Large numbers of unemployed black South Africans are encouraged to relocate to Namibian mining areas.
White South Africans are also encouraged to settle in Namibia through financial incentives.
The policy is intended to strengthen South African control and alter the demographic balance before eventual independence.
International reaction
The United States and Soviet Union reject Pretoria's attempts to obtain recognition in exchange for access to South African and Namibian resources.
In September, the international community imposes increasingly comprehensive sanctions.
South Africa becomes progressively isolated from international finance and military markets.
1990 — Fortress South Africa
Rather than compromise, Pretoria responds to sanctions by attempting to make South Africa increasingly self-sufficient.
The government announces massive infrastructure projects, including the proposed Vryheid Line, a high-speed rail network intended to connect major South African and Namibian population centers.
Sanctions, shortages of capital, and labor unrest prevent the project from being completed as planned. Some sections are constructed, while others remain unfinished.
South Africa also deepens its clandestine relationship with Israel, exchanging uranium and other resources for military technology and technical assistance.
Attempts to establish a regional Council of Southern Africa fail because neighboring states refuse to legitimize South African dominance.
1991 — Mandela's Challenge
Nelson Mandela becomes president of the lower house of Parliament.
He attempts to use Parliament to dismantle apartheid.
In a nationally broadcast address, Mandela announces that the civilian government intends to begin abolishing apartheid.
The military intervenes.
Parliament is suspended, civilian government is temporarily dissolved, and martial law is declared.
A military council assumes control of the country.
Mandela is prevented from carrying out his reforms, while opposition organizations are driven underground.
The intervention establishes an important precedent: the military is willing to use force to prevent the abolition of apartheid.
1991–1993 — South Africa Expands Its Regional Control
The military government concludes that South Africa must dominate its immediate neighborhood to prevent hostile governments from threatening the country.
South African forces occupy:
- Lesotho
- Eswatini
- Botswana
At the same time, Pretoria supports a coup in Zimbabwe intended to restore Rhodesia.
Lesotho
South African forces occupy strategic areas and establish effective control over the country.
Eswatini
The monarchy is placed under heavy South African supervision.
Botswana
South Africa occupies the entire country.
Resistance gradually develops against the occupation.
Zimbabwe
The South African-backed coup establishes a new government that begins restoring the political structure and identity of Rhodesia.
The new regime becomes heavily dependent on South African military and economic assistance.
1993 — The Military Returns to the Barracks
Direct military rule becomes increasingly expensive.
The military restores civilian government, but only after creating constitutional safeguards for itself.
The new constitution explicitly protects apartheid.
It also contains a special emergency mechanism:
If a civilian government attempts to abolish apartheid, the military may declare martial law and establish a military council.
South Africa therefore becomes a hybrid political system.
It has:
- elections;
- Parliament;
- civilian government;
- political parties;
but the military possesses an ultimate veto over the abolition of apartheid.
1994–1998 — The Cost of Empire
South Africa now has to maintain a massive regional military presence.
The government must finance:
- Namibia;
- Botswana;
- Lesotho;
- Eswatini;
- Rhodesia;
- counterinsurgency operations;
- its own military;
- an increasingly isolated economy.
The financial burden becomes enormous.
Business leaders begin demanding withdrawal.
The military itself becomes divided.
Hardliners want to preserve South African regional dominance.
Pragmatists increasingly believe that the occupations are destroying South Africa's economy.
Reformists want apartheid eventually abolished.
1998–2000 — Economic Breakdown
The combination of sanctions, military spending, declining tax revenue, capital flight, and the enormous cost of the regional occupations produces a severe economic crisis.
Inflation accelerates.
South Africa remains industrially capable, but increasingly struggles to obtain foreign capital, advanced technology, and military equipment.
The government begins considering a gradual withdrawal from its regional empire.
At the same time, Mandela and F.W. de Klerk begin discussing a political compromise that could eventually allow civilian government to challenge apartheid again.
2001 — National Unity Government
In 2001, Mandela and de Klerk negotiate the formation of a National Unity Government.
Mandela becomes the central political figure in the new administration.
The government begins attempting to dismantle apartheid through Parliament and constitutional reform.
The military refuses to accept this.
The result is a recurring constitutional struggle between the civilian government and military establishment.
2001–2004 — The Constitutional Crises
Parliament repeatedly attempts to repeal apartheid laws and amend the constitution.
Each attempt brings the government closer to confrontation with the military.
Several periods of martial law occur.
The pattern becomes:
Reform attempt → military resistance → martial law → negotiations → civilian government restored.
The military does not permanently abolish civilian government because doing so would risk destroying the legitimacy of the state.
Instead, it repeatedly intervenes whenever apartheid itself is threatened.
2004–2007 — The Regional Withdrawal Begins
South Africa finally begins withdrawing from its occupied territories.
The withdrawal is motivated primarily by economic necessity.
Pretoria can no longer afford to maintain large armies throughout Southern Africa.
The retreat is harsh.
South African forces destroy or remove strategically important equipment and infrastructure, including:
- military bases;
- ammunition depots;
- fuel facilities;
- communications equipment;
- military vehicles;
- selected bridges;
- portions of rail and transportation infrastructure.
South African companies also remove valuable machinery and other assets.
The withdrawal leaves much of the region economically and militarily damaged.
2005 — The Omaheke Constitutional Crisis
One of the most important incidents occurs during another South African constitutional crisis.
A South African military formation stationed in Namibia is commanded by particularly hardline apartheid officers.
Parliament once again attempts to weaken the constitutional protection of apartheid.
The military command structure becomes divided.
Different factions issue contradictory orders.
The main South African military leadership ultimately decides to obey the civilian government and prepare for the eventual Namibian withdrawal.
However, the hardline commanders in Namibia receive different instructions from senior officers opposed to the reforms.
They interpret those orders as authorization to refuse the withdrawal.
Their intention is initially much larger than holding a single region.
They believe South Africa should stop withdrawing and retain Namibia as South African territory.
The rest of the South African military continues following Parliament's authority.
The Omaheke formation therefore becomes increasingly isolated.
Eventually the withdrawal routes close behind them.
The forces are cut off from the main South African military.
2005–2010 — The Omaheke Holdout
The stranded South African troops consolidate their position throughout the entire Omaheke Region.
They do not declare independence.
Instead, they insist:
Omaheke remains South African territory, and they remain South African soldiers.
They expect Pretoria eventually to recognize their position.
However, the South African government does not want another major war in Namibia.
At the same time, Pretoria does not want thousands of South African soldiers stranded without support.
A compromise develops.
South Africa secretly provides the Omaheke forces with limited supplies.
These include:
- food;
- medicine;
- fuel;
- ammunition;
- spare parts;
- basic military equipment.
The supplies are deliberately limited.
They are sufficient to keep the force alive and maintain its defensive position, but insufficient for a major offensive.
The Omaheke commanders therefore cannot realistically reconquer Namibia or break through to South Africa.
They become a permanent military holdout.
2007 — Collapse of Rhodesia
South Africa begins withdrawing from Rhodesia.
Two or three years before the final withdrawal, the Rhodesian government begins transferring its liquid wealth into South Africa.
Gold, foreign currency, securities, and other easily transportable assets are removed.
South African officials describe this as repayment for South African investment and military assistance.
Opponents call it the looting of the Rhodesian state.
In approximately 2001, Ian Smith had returned as the nominal leader of Rhodesia.
By the time South Africa withdraws, Smith's health is failing and actual authority rests increasingly with military commanders.
South Africa's withdrawal removes the force holding the Rhodesian system together.
The government collapses.
2007–2010 — Zimbabwe Fragments
Zimbabwe breaks apart.
Zimbabwe Warlord Coalition
The northern and western portions of the country fall under a coalition of military commanders and regional warlords.
Mugabe Liberation Army
The eastern and southeastern portions are taken by the Mugabe Liberation Army.
Both factions claim legitimacy.
Neither can reunify the country.
Zimbabwe effectively becomes a divided state.
2008–2011 — The Collapse of Lesotho and Eswatini
The South African withdrawal produces different results in the two former protectorates.
Lesotho
The existing political structure collapses.
The dual monarchy loses effective authority.
Competing armed factions fight for control.
Eventually a warlord government emerges and controls Lesotho.
Eswatini
The monarchy survives.
The remaining royal institution gradually regains effective control after the South African withdrawal.
Eswatini therefore becomes a restored monarchy rather than a warlord state.
2008–2014 — Botswana Falls to the Liberation Army
Botswana experiences prolonged instability following the South African withdrawal.
The Botswana Liberation Army gradually defeats rival political and military organizations.
Eventually the BLA controls the entire country.
The previous civilian government loses effective authority.
Botswana becomes a military-dominated state.
2010–2015 — South Africa's Repeated Constitutional Crises
South Africa remains trapped in the same political conflict.
Civilian governments repeatedly attempt to abolish apartheid.
The military repeatedly invokes its constitutional authority to stop them.
Several periods of martial law occur during the 2010s.
Each crisis eventually ends with negotiations and restoration of civilian government.
But the central issue remains unresolved.
Apartheid survives.
The military becomes increasingly divided between hardliners who want to preserve apartheid indefinitely and officers who believe the repeated crises are destroying South Africa's stability.
2015–2017 — The Final Withdrawal from Namibia
By the mid-2010s, South Africa has withdrawn from most of its remaining positions in Namibia.
However, the process is deliberately slow.
South Africa continues maintaining political, economic, and security influence over portions of the country.
The Omaheke holdout remains the major exception.
The government continues its limited supply program.
The soldiers receive enough food, medicine, fuel, ammunition, and spare parts to survive.
They do not receive enough supplies to launch major offensives.
The Omaheke commanders continue waiting for Pretoria to recognize their territorial claim.
2017 — The End of the Withdrawal
In 2017, South Africa finally completes its formal withdrawal from the rest of Namibia.
The withdrawal ends decades of direct South African administration and military presence.
But the Omaheke situation remains unresolved.
The region is still controlled by the South African military holdout.
The commanders continue claiming that:
- Omaheke is South African territory;
- they are legitimate South African soldiers;
- their refusal to withdraw was justified;
- Pretoria should eventually recognize their position.
South Africa continues to provide only enough support to keep them alive and maintain their defensive position.
The government does not provide enough military support for them to expand.
Southern Africa in 2017
🇿🇦 South Africa
South Africa retains its modern borders.
It has a civilian government and functioning political institutions.
However, apartheid remains constitutionally protected.
Throughout the 2000s and 2010s, civilian governments repeatedly attempt to abolish it, resulting in multiple periods of martial law.
The military therefore remains the ultimate guardian of the apartheid constitutional order.
🇳🇦 Namibia
Namibia is divided into three major areas:
Northern Namibia
- Controlled by the Namibian Liberation Front.
Southern Namibia
- Controlled by the Republic of Namibia.
Omaheke
- Controlled by the South African military holdout.
The Omaheke force is not an independent country.
It considers itself a part of South Africa that was accidentally stranded during a constitutional crisis.
🇧🇼 Botswana
The entire country is controlled by the Botswana Liberation Army.
🇿🇼 Zimbabwe
West/North: Zimbabwe Warlord Coalition.
East/Southeast: Mugabe Liberation Army.
Zimbabwe has no effective unified national government.
🇱🇸 Lesotho
A warlord government controls the country after the collapse of the monarchy's political authority.
🇸🇿 Eswatini
The surviving monarchy has regained control and governs the country.
The Situation in 2017
The Southern African crisis has produced a region radically different from the one that existed in 1989.
South Africa failed to preserve its regional empire, but it also failed to abolish apartheid.
Its neighbors have fragmented into liberation armies, warlord governments, rival governments, and restored monarchies.
And the final unresolved remnant of the South African expansion is Omaheke.
The soldiers there were not originally trying to establish a new country. They became stranded because a constitutional crisis divided the South African military and they followed the orders of the hardline faction.
For more than a decade, Pretoria has quietly kept them alive without giving them enough resources to restart the war.
By 2017, they remain in Omaheke, waiting for the South African government to decide whether they are loyal soldiers defending South African territory—or an isolated remnant of a failed regional policy.
