Research Paper on South Africa

The purpose of this research paper is to provide information on the country of South Africa. For a teenager living in the United States of America, little about South Africa is common knowledge. As a matter of fact, before I started this research paper, the only thing I knew about South Africa was the fact that it is located in Africa. This term paper should sum up everything significant about South Africa from before the first British settlers to the end of apartheid, a system of legalized racial separation.

South Africa is located on the very south tip of the African continent. It is the southern-most country in Africa, thus the name South Africa. The coordinates of South Africa are 29 degrees south, 24 degrees east. (The World Factbook, pg 2)

South Africa is believed to be one of the first areas occupied by human life. For about 100,000 years the area has been believed to have been occupied by numerous groups of hunters and gatherers. These groups of hunters and gatherers, known as bush-men, had no established government. They simply had to adapt to there harsh environment, and look out for there offspring. Eventually the bush-men began pastoral farming, and along came the domestication of sheep and cattle. About a thousand years ago the first political systems arose. Chief dominated polytheistic communities would be the way to live. A chief’s power depended upon his ability to dominate his people. Females were depended upon for production and youth were workers and soldiers. Domesticated cattle were used to trade and buy goods, and were also used to obtain a wife. The trading of cattle or goods for marriage was called a lobola. Another important trading commodity came with the use of metallurgy.(Davenport, page 3) Metal tools were a useful and valuable thing. This sort of civilization, known as the Khoikhoi clans, continued until the colonization of South Africa in the 1600’s.

__________________________________________________________

We Write Custom Research Papers on South Africa topics!

__________________________________________________________

Until the 1600’s, most encounters Europeans had with South African natives, were very violent. But, no organized effort to seize the territory had been made. Eventually the Portuguese, French, Dutch, and English, all saw The Cape of Good Hope, as excellent grounds for a port. Its true value, of course, was as a half way point between Europe and the eastern empires. Traveling ships would then be able to provide care for sick sailors and load up on supplies. The European attraction to the Cap of Good Hope meant bad news for its Khoikhoi inhabitants. It was, of course, a well known belief that those with darker skin were lower forms of life. And that meant slavery for many inhabitants. European settlers also brought in slaves from other regions of Africa, and even Asia. Unlike slaves in the American colonies, these slaves would never be offered freedom for service in the military, or for converting to Christianity. Slave woman were not even permitted to be married. They were, of course, allowed sexual visitations from their white owners though. When the British took possession of the Cape during the French revolutionary war in 1807, a somewhat successful attempt to free the slaves was made. The British government was in a state of change. The belief that colored people should be slaves grew less and less popular. The Khoikhoi were given the “charter of liberties” in 1828.(Davenport, Page 6) This meant that slaves would be freed after a four year apprenticeship. This was not popular with local business owners, because they would have to pay for labor. So although most slaves were technically freed, racial oppression and segregation continued. South Africa would be subject to British rule with little opposition until the Boer Wars (1899-1903), a conflict between the descendants of Dutch settlers (Boers) and the British. In the first third of the war the Boer forces managed to fight off the main British force. In 1900 the city of Pretoria fell to the British. After the fall, the Boers resorted to Guerrilla tactics and dragged the war on for another 2 years. The war came to an end when the British offered peace agreements in 1902 ( the treaty of Vereeniging). During the war forces from both sides raided African villages for food and supplies. When Africans resisted, Martial Law was declared and many were slaughtered. After the war ended the British desired to keep peace with the Boers. So, in time, The Union of South Africa was formed, a completely white-run system government. In which Boers who served the King of England would be leaders along with British nobles. The African people were, of course, regarded as inferior. Apartheid kept everyone from interracial relations of any kind. And Black people had no voting rights, or any say in how their country would be run. This angered Native South Africans, and eventually led to the start of an organization known as the African National Congress. The ANC would spark several riots and protests in the next 70 years. It wasn’t until 1989 that Nelson Mendella, a former ANC leader, was released from prison after a 27 year sentence. His only crime was speaking out publicly against a hateful law that was crippling the nation. Soon after Nelson Mendella was released, all South African political parties agreed to draw up a constitution, which led to a Government of National Unity. The first democratic election for South Africa was held in 1994, in which Nelson Mendella was elected president. (World News Digest, page 3)

South Africa currently has a population of 43,647,658 people.(World Factbook, page 6) In 1996, the population was about 40.5 billion. That is a pretty steady increase for the country. Unfortunately, many South African people have a lower life expectancy due to AIDS and HIV. The population of South Africa consists of 75.2 percent black people, 13.6 percent white people, 8.6 percent colored people, and 2.6 percent Indian people. The capital of South Africa is Pretoria, named after Andries Pretorius, a hero of the Boer Republic. Although it is not the capital, Cape Town is the center of legislation. The most populated city, which many confuse to be the capital, is Johannesburg. South African is known as affectionately known as the Rainbow Nation, because of its many different cultures, languages, religions, and ethnic groups. Although South Africa is a mesh-pot of cultures, there is still hatred left over from the days of apartheid. Many white people living in South Africa still regard black people as lesser beings. This is a world wide problem that still exists in out very own United States. People living in South Africa tend to dress in accordance with their own cultures. White people will dress much like Americans, T-shirt and Jeans. Very few, but some black people also dress this way.

Most black people of South Africa will dress wearing a Caftan, a blanket like robe that covers most of the body. The official languages of South Africa are English and Afrikaans. Africkaans is a variation of the Dutch language. However, the official languages are for white people. The black people speak Bantu, of which there many variations including, Xhosa, Sesotho, and Zulu. Asian citizens are likely to speak a language of India. About two thirds of the South African people are protestant Christians. Very few descendants of the bush-men (Khoikhoi) still practice their polytheistic beliefs of old. Those who still live in a Zulu tribe, still have to pay a lebola to the father of the girl he wants to marry. The chief of a Zulu tribe can have up to eleven wives. Most people in South Africa receive at least an 8th grade education. Both males and females can read at age 15. Unlike American schools, South African children are forced to wear uniforms.

The Government of South Africa is that of a republic. Although until 1994, it was one ruled by the white minority. Black citizens were not permitted to vote. When the white minority was overthrown, a true democratic election was held, in which Nelson Mendella became the president. In the election of 1999 Thabo Mbeki became the president/ chief of state.(Davenport, page 8) Under him is President Jacob Zuma. In 1989, President P. W. Botha was succeeded by F. W. de Klerk. When Botha stepped down, it sparked huge changes in the South African government. President de Klerk agreed to release Nelson Mendella, who had been imprisoned for speaking out against apartheid. The legislative branch consists of a bicameral Parliament with a National Assembly, and the National Council of Provinces. Each of the Nine Provincial legislatures has special powers to protect local customs and traditions. The judicial branch consists of 4 courts; the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court of Appeals, the High Court, and the Magistrate Court. (World Factbook, page 7)

If an uneducated person were to attack South Africa, thinking that they had no defense, that person would be in for a surprise. The South African National Defense Force has at least 11.5 million troops available. With almost 500 thousand new recruits each year. With 1.79 billion dollars being spent per year, they are pretty well beefed up on their defenses. Now as far as attacking other countries, South Africa is only interested in defending its land, and keeping the peace. They have no nuclear capabilities, or weapons of mass distruction of at all.

Since 1990, the South African economy has been significantly transformed, particularly following the transition to democracy in 1994. Economic growth has been recovered, capital inflows resumed and business and consumer confidence increased.

Exports and imports have both grown substantially. South Africa's trade relations have also diversified, including rapid growth in exports to sub-Saharan Africa and significant expansion into Asian and American markets. The South African stock exchange ranks among the top ten in the world. South Africa, like most developing nations, is susceptible to trends in the economies of its major trading partners.

The East Asian crisis of 1998 led to deep declines in economic activity in several emerging economies, continuing into 1999. Financial market volatility led to a slowdown in South Africa's growth, but its impact was muted by prudent fiscal and monetary policy responses and sound financial institutions. A strong economic recovery is now underway and economic growth of more than 3 percent a year is projected.

South Africa and the United States of America have always been on good terms. We have set an obvious example for them in our democratic government, which is very closely emulated by them today. We fully support them in seeking a democracy which is color blind. During World War 2 they were a valuable ally, not so much because of man power, but because of the location. The Cape of Good Hope has always been a valuable port. The South African army was not that massive, but they did wield the ability to fly. Since Nelson Mendella became President in 1994, South Africa has become a more and more pleasant place to visit. The interesting South African culture combined with the beautiful landscape, have made it a somewhat desirable tourist attraction. However, some bitterness still remains from the times when apartheid was applied. Some of the white people still think that black people exist to serve them. And many of the black citizens still hold a grudge for the way them and their ancestors were treated.

Some of the most interesting things about South Africa involve the significant changes in government that occurred within the last decade. For the most part, segregation between black people and white people in the United States is over. But in South Africa legalized segregation only ended a little more than a decade ago.

South Africa is slowly becoming more and more like the United States. One thing the United States should be concerned with is the transshipment of the illegal drugs heroin and marijuana in South Africa. South Africa is the Worlds largest market for illicit methaqualone (pg. 12, World Fact Book). Also, South Africa still has minor disputes with bordering countries such as Swaziland and Zimbabwe. Swaziland desires to regain territory that was once part of Swaziland a long time ago. And the trade between South Africa and Zimbabwe is so closely intertwined that what happens to one country directly effects the other. The South African Military Exists only to keep the peace, and to defend the homeland, not to brutalize neighboring countries. As long as the future leaders of South Africa emulate the political disposition and attitude set forth by Nelson Mendella, the nation should prosper.

“We thank all our distinguished international guests for having come to take possession with the people of our country of what is, after all, a common victory for justice, for peace, for human dignity. We trust that you will continue to stand by us as we tackle the challenges of building peace, prosperity, nonsexist, non-racialism, and democracy. We deeply appreciate the role that the masses of our people and their political mass-democratic, religious, women, youth, business, traditional-and other leaders have played to bring about this conclusion.”
~ Nelson Mendella. (Union building speech, paragraph 6)

South Africa is thought by many uneducated Americans to be unimportant or even non-existent. The truth is that South Africa has gone through many of the same things that our great nation has; colonization by European countries, war, slavery, and rule by an unfair government.

Through all of that, the spirit of the South African people has risen above and given them a chance to be free. Truly, in this puzzle of Earth, South Africa has proven itself to be a significant piece, and a beautiful nation.

___________________________________________________________
Warning!!! All free online research papers, research paper samples and example research papers on South Africa topics are plagiarized and cannot be fully used in your high school, college or university education.


If you need a custom research paper, research proposal, essay, dissertation, thesis paper or term paper on your topic, EffectivePapers.com will write your research papers from scratch. Starting at $12/page you can order custom written papers online. We work with experienced PhD. and Master's freelance writers to help you with writing any academic papers in any subject! High quality and 100% non-plagiarized papers guaranteed!

___________________________________________________________

"Rise of the Rest III" (2010)

Earlier this month, we held at the Carnegie Council the third iteration of our ongoing series on the "rise of the rest" or the emergence of non-Western powers in international affairs. Our March 9, 2010 panel titled "Rise of the Rest III" was a follow up to a similarly themed event we held at Carnegie Council in 2008 and one that I participated in at the Nixon Center in Washington DC in 2007. Here is a summary from the original 2007 panel called "The World Without the West." Here is my summary and my speech from 2007.

Nicholas Gvosdev kicked off the panel this month by reviewing some of the points made at the last two panels.



A point I made in 2007 was that the BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) countries are not similar, nor are they a coherent alliance. But why the BRICs has been working as a group is that these countries are coordinating their actions and using theirs relationships as force multipliers, Gvosdev said. It allows the members to credibly speak for half the planet. Gvosdev pointed to embryonic groupings that can go around the United States if U.S. leadership is unsatisfactory.



The southern democracies, like Brazil and India, act as "independents" in international affairs. They will work with the United States when they see it in their interest and will work with other southern democracies, for example through the IBSA (India, Brazil, South Africa) Dialogue Forum when they don't. IBSA is coordinating on trade issues but is also making forays into military joint activities as well, Gvosdev said.



Craig Charney started by making the point that there is an international consensus among peoples that they want some sort of elected and accountable political leadership. "Democracy" broadly means "free expression" worldwide, and people want to choose their own leaders, according to Charney's extensive polling. It is "minimalist" support for democracy and not very deep. It is not a demand for "free and fair elections," but the desire to choose own's leader is a "very powerful trend at present," Charney said.



Charney also identified "connectedness," along with collective responsibility and national power, as another powerful trend and reality in international affairs today. "We are seeing the emergence of imagined communities," which is reinforcing national sentiment through electronic media, Charney said. He noted that 70 percent of humanity now lives in a family with a telephone, creating billions of communications possibilities and accelerating collective consciousness, collective action, and social movements.

As for China, Charney made a fascinating point that seems to resonate with my own research in Asia: Worldwide people admire China for its economic growth, but the admiration for the United States goes much deeper to include America's legal system, its movies, its popular culture, its educational system, its openness, etc. Recently, I have tried to make a somewhat playful point to some of my friends that until China creates modern equivalents to rock 'n' roll and Hollywood, I will be unconcerned about Chinese influence. Give me a Chinese Michael Jackson and "Avatar," I will be worried about a decline in U.S. influence.



Parag Khanna identified a widespread crisis of global governance--in power, norms, and institutions. The emerging powers or "the rest" do not yet have the appropriate voice in global goverance commensurate with their political and economic weight. In power relations, for example, there is no credible proposal on the table to expand the UN Security Council or reform the board of the IMF. For norms, the rules, for example over democracy or intellectual property or humanitarian intervention, are in question. As for institutions, the proposals have been unimaginative. "Meta global governance" has been uninspired, Khanna said.



"What is global governance?" Khanna asked. It is the sum of: multilateral bodies (like the UN), regional mechanisms (like the African Union), inter-regional functional activities (like bilateral climate change cooperation), and the huge array of public-private partnerships (like the activities of the Gates Foundation), Khanna answered. Global governance therefore has no center, Khanna said. So to capture the totality of globalization, "you have to think of global governance as radically decentralized," he said.



Stephen Young asserted that the epistemology of modern civilization is fundamentally nihilistic, and therefore there are no norms or values, only power. But power fragments unless you have a dominant power. So the world is guided by Hobbesian dynamics--"kill or be killed, eat or be eaten," Young said. You therefore need to find norms and values common to many traditions. He rejected the idea that America actually ever had hegemony in the international system but underscored the importance of the "rise of the rest" in a world that is fundamentally about power.

Nevertheless, the central and continuing importance of "the West" in international affairs actually makes "the rise of the rest" the "second rise of the West," Young said. He also asked whether what we might see if a "convergence of societies," as I have argued elsewhere, for example in relation to Google's exit from China. Young concluded that greed has been a perennial problem in the global economy and we have not much evolved since the Dutch tulip bubble of the 1600s. Young's group, the Caux Round Table, sees the need to promote corporate responsibility, use core (universal) values in corporate governance, and to find the right pricing in the economy even if it takes state intervention.



I asked the panel what I asked Harry Harding in 2008: In this new world of emerging powers is cooperation possible? (Harding's response is above.) This time, each panelist had slightly differing views. Young said cooperation is possible but it will be case specific and we therefore need to engage by acknowledging the identities of potential partners. Gvosdev said cooperation will require a real give-and-take, especially between the United States and China. We have to honestly ask ourselves, what kind of world do we want, said Gvosdev. The United States asks for more burden sharing from China but when China becomes more assertive Americans get suspicious. Like Young and many in the Obama administration, Charney said cooperation will depend on establishing a dialogue on shared interests. Khanna finished by saying we will see a world that is "to each his own. You will see more and more of what Charles Kupchan of Georgetown calls the autonomy rule—engaging with other countries in such a way that one can't push too far beyond the extent to which one is really respecting their own autonomy and self-directed evolution. I think we'll see more of that."

To view the transcript and the video in its entirety of the event, click here. A special thanks to our corporate sponsors Booz, HP, and Merck for making this event possible. We look forward to the next iteration of this ongoing series. Like any successful Hollywood movie, another sequel is expected--"Rise of the Rest IV," perhaps next time in 3D.

Ian Bremmer's Top Ten Political Risks for 2009

Eurasia Group's Ian Bremmer just released the firm's top ten political risks for 2009. We will feature a panel discussing the ethical implications of these risks with Ian Bremmer, Michele Wucker, and Art Kleiner next week, on Jan. 13, at the Carnegie Council. Sign up for the event at gpievents@cceia.org.

Here is how Ian summarizes the top risks for the year:

First, we’ll see more state intervention in the global economy. Second, that intervention will be both reactive and uncoordinated by a series of local, regional, and national political actors who have decidedly non-global (and in many cases non-market) views of the cost/benefit equations that attend their policy decisions. In short, politics will drive the global economy more directly, and more inefficiently, in the coming year than at any point since World War II.

Below, we present a truncated excerpt of the ten risks:

1. Congress - Political risks have historically been most important for economic outcomes in emerging markets, but that’s not so this year. The current financial crisis has created an unprecedented space for government interference in economic affairs within developed states, as well. Nowhere is that more true than in Washington.

2. South Asia Security - The security environment in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan will deteriorate significantly over the coming year, and the United States and Europe will find themselves more directly involved in conflicts in all three states, with little benefit to show for it, by the end of 2009.

3. Iran/Israel - The likelihood of the United States launching strikes against Iran has diminished considerably over the past two years, due both to internal policy wrangling between Vice President Dick Cheney and others within the Bush administration and the election of Barack Obama as president. But 2009 is the critical year for conflict (both direct and through proxies) between Iran and Israel.

4. Russia - We enter 2009 with Russia in play in a way we haven’t seen in decades. The relevant comparison isn’t 1998, when the Russians engaged in default and devaluation but remained within the bounds of their existing political and economic system (as Lenin said, two steps forward, one step back). The history to consider is 1989—as key aspects of the Russian system could change for the worse.

5. Iraq - Frankly, Iraq at number five is a good news story. With about 140,000 American troops remaining on the ground and no serious evolution of the Iraqi political model, it’s a testament to the relative improvements of security that Iraq has managed to claw its way away from a risk that keeps the world on edge.

6. Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez has made a habit of miscalculation over the years, but this may be the big one. His plans for a referendum in the coming month to reform the Venezuelan constitution and abolish term limits (which would allow Chavez to run again for the presidency in 2012) show little likelihood of success. Then the Venezuelan president will have a real political fight on his hands.

7. Mexico - While Colombia’s President Alvaro Uribe has effectively won his country’s war against the drug cartels, the same can’t be said of Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon. The security situation there has worsened and is almost certain to deteriorate further over the course of 2009. Well armed and well financed narco-criminals have effectively declared war on the state of Mexico—increasingly singling out elected government officials, bureaucrats, and the armed forces and police for their attacks. As the government continues to rely on the military to go after the drug lords, the bloodshed will continue.

8. Ukraine - As I mentioned, Ukraine isn’t likely to spur the kind of direct military conflict we saw last August in Georgia. But it merits a slot in our top risks because of the government’s inability to deal effectively with the severe challenges posed by the current financial crisis and economic downturn—and one certainly not helped by its volatile relationship with Moscow.

9. Turkey - Speaking of internal distractions, Turkey is essentially defining the problem. The country has all sorts of factors in its favor—a diversified economy, strong demographics, an extremely favorable trade route geography, and solid ties with both western countries and its Middle Eastern neighbors. Yet the fight pitting secularists in the judiciary, military, and industry against Islamists in government is becoming a serious obstacle to economic advancement. And the AK party leadership, feeling that it increasingly carries the weight of popular support on its side, is unwilling to compromise—instead, casting out potential dissent from within the party (and losing critical bureaucratic competence as a result). To make matters worse, the AK party has long lost its reformist spirit and has embraced a more nationalist attitude, making it more difficult to find a solution to the thorny Kurdish question.

10. South Africa - Rounding out the top risks for 2009 is South Africa. Upcoming elections will dominate the news, but it’s more political context than electoral results that will cause concern. It’s pretty clear that the African National Congress (ANC) will keep its majority in parliament, though the emergence of a new splinter party will reduce its numbers. In principal, that’s not a bad development; popular concerns over the ANC’s abuse of power should be reduced accordingly. But the transition is going to be hard on the ANC leadership—with South Africa’s legislators having to accept the need to cooperate with political opponents, rather than using political influence to force would-be dissidents into line. The initial reaction is likely to be a lack of patience and tolerance, undermining public confidence in South Africa’s political institutions...and providing little comfort to investors.

Notice China instability, the Persian Gulf, and climate change are not on the list. Ian sees these as either red herrings or, in climate change's case, longer term developments.

Sunset for Mugabe in Zimbabwe?

I recently interviewed Peter Jacobs of the University of the Western Cape in Cape Town, South Africa about the political crisis in Zimbabwe.

---

In your estimation, is the land reform issue at the root of the political crisis in Zimbabwe?

Indeed, land reform or the absence of a genuine pro-poor land redistribution policy is a major source of the socio-economic and political crisis in Zimbabwe. But it is inaccurate to trace everything to this single driving factor.

The most productive resources remain concentrated in the hands of a few (including the black elite). But the land issue alone cannot explain the depth, breath and long duration of this crisis. Other post-independence economic and social policy blunders plus the dictatorial degeneration of the ZANPU-PF regime must also be factored into this story.

How has the land reform issue been dealt with in South Africa?

In South Africa, land reform is law-abiding and modeled on the willing seller willing buyer template promoted by the World Bank. In other words, it is through the law and the market, the pillars of land reform entrenched in the post-apartheid Constitution, that 30% of white-owned land is to be transferred to blacks.

Fast-tracking land restitution with a tougher expropriation law is becoming increasingly popular among ANC politicians- especially those most likely to seize hold of parliamentary power after the 2009 national elections.

What risks exist for the regional economy as a result of the ongoing crisis in Zimbabwe?

This really depends on who one talks to and at what time. Among most investors, the mood is very gloomy, but they are eager to pour capital into Zimbabwe if there is greater stability.

South Africa’s poor record in attracting long-term fixed capital investment is often blamed on the crisis in Zimbabwe. But it is not easy to support this claim with hard evidence given the many other things happening in South Africa and other neighboring countries. Other resource based economies in the region (such as Angola and Botswana, for instance) have been attracting investors.

For the rural and urban poor, on the other hand, this is a different matter. The region appears to be unable to handle the sharp rise in out-migration from Zimbabwe. This factor, no doubt, has contributed to the mindless violent attacks on nationals from neighboring countries which have erupted mainly in South African slums.

Do you expect violence in Zimbabwe to worsen prior to the June 27 runoff?

The entire state machine is now deployed to terrorize Zimbabweans. And the post-election humanitarian crimes and brutality of the regime go far beyond imprisoning the 2 vociferous leaders of the MDC, Arthur Mutambara and Morgan Tsvangirai.

The worst scenario as the country heads towards the run-off poll on June 27 is a massive intensification of this campaign of violence. In the best scenario, the run-off will take place in a volatile climate of fear, intimidation and the threat of destabilization.

Are the people of South Africa satisfied with the response of their government to what is happening across the border?

South African reactions to the crisis in Zimbabwe can best be described as mixed. Elements within the governing ANC have been speaking out against ZANU-PF, asking it to accept its defeat in the March elections.

This runs counter to the official ‘quiet diplomacy’ approach of President Mbeki and leading state officials. In their view, Zimbabwe is an independent and sovereign state which needs to resolve its internal difficulties without external interference.

Civil society groups, including COSATU which is the trade union federation allied to the ANC, have been demonstrating against the human rights record of the Zimbabwean government. Aside from this ‘indirect lobbying’, poorer South Africans have not expressed or articulated any organized public dissatisfaction towards the way government has handled the Zimbabwean situation so far.

Minority opposition parties in South Africa, like the Democratic Alliance and Independent Democrats, however, want the Mbeki cabinet to shift from its ‘quiet diplomacy’ stance to active support for ‘regime change’.

What should an MDC or a unity government do to address the dire economic conditions inside Zimbabwe?

Let us assume that there is no rigging of the June 27 run-off and the MDC scores a landslide victory. What the MDC needs to tackle in this context, for a start, is to stop the economic meltdown of Zimbabwe, create a free space for civil society to engage in politics and implement a pro-poor redistributive project.

Large-scale capital investment is required to rebuild its physical and social (healthcare, education, etc) infrastructure. Private foreign capital inflows may not be enough to quickly address these needs, yet privatization is core to its economic platform.

To boost food security, it needs an integrated program to redistribute land and agricultural resources to poorer farmers. However, until now, the MDC appears to have woefully neglected drafting a clear proposal on how to resolve Zimbabwe’s complex land question.

photo by babasteve