IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cjssxx/v45y2019i1p89-110.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The ‘Partnership’ Hoax: How the British Government Deprived Central Africans of their Rights

Author

Listed:
  • Robert I. Rotberg

Abstract

British governments connived with Rhodesian settlers to transform their ‘protected’ Central African wards into junior ‘partners’ of whites in an attempt to solve a series of Africa-wide problems that threatened sustainable colonial rule. Multiracial ‘partnership’ was a ruse to divert African self-rule initiatives and to concoct a compromise that would preserve white dominance. The genesis of the federation movement in central Africa is well-known, but not the precise invention of ‘partnership’. Without ‘partnership’ there would have been no Federation and, conceivably, different triumphs of African nationalism. This article examines the intellectual odyssey that resulted in the articulation of the idea of multiracial ‘partnership’; the role of the Colonial Office, governors, particular churchmen and the Capricorn Africa Society in promoting ‘partnership’; how cynicism and sleight of hand came to dominate the official imperial debate over African rights; the profound rejection of these initiatives by Africans; the immediate and lasting consequences in Central Africa of ‘partnership’; and what the failed foisting of ‘partnership’ upon wards of the Crown tells us about the underlying ethics of colonialism.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert I. Rotberg, 2019. "The ‘Partnership’ Hoax: How the British Government Deprived Central Africans of their Rights," Journal of Southern African Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 89-110, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:cjssxx:v:45:y:2019:i:1:p:89-110
    DOI: 10.1080/03057070.2019.1558654
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03057070.2019.1558654
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03057070.2019.1558654?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cjssxx:v:45:y:2019:i:1:p:89-110. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cjss .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.