adminThe Rhodesia Herald 30, April 1938
THE question of Nyasaland’s joining in the proposed amalgamation of the two Rhodesias was discussed by the committee of the Inter-State Association for the amalgamation of the two Rhodesias last night.
An authoritative opinion from an official in Nyasaland was expressed in a letter which the secretary, Mr R.W. Hammond, read to the meeting.
The letter said that meetings were being held in Nyasaland to consider the question of closer union, and a memorandum was being drawn up.
“It is a little difficult to get a fully expressed and definite opinion,” stated the letter.
“Two or three years ago the public unanimously declared for amalgamation. Now there seems to be a little hedging with some.
“Although some form of closer union is advocated, the extent of it is not defined. Some are distinctly against amalgamation if that means the loss of Nyasaland’s identity, and the word ‘Federation’ is now used. This I do not understand as applied to Nyasaland, in that when there is a federation of States usually there is some form of self-government.
“The Nyasaland Government is the Colonial Office. Thus it is difficult to imagine the federation of self-governing Rhodesia and the Colonial Office. It seems to me that we would then be where we were at the start.
“There may be means, however, of a certain amount of local control being granted to Nyasaland which would enable some form of federation taking place. This of course, is a point which will be cleared up later.”
“My own view is that amalgamation would be best. I do not consider the native question as a great obstacle. In fact, I do not think there is much difference between the native policy of Rhodesia and that of Nyasaland though at first there appears to be a conflict.
“This I think, is due to nomenclature, not fact. The word ‘reserve’ has rather a sinister meaning in the minds of some at home, and Rhodesia has native reserves. In Nyasaland we have ‘native trust land,’ which has a better and more gentle sound, but in practical politics I do not think that there is much, if any, difference.
LESSONS FOR TODAY
Though amalgamation was originally not welcome, it is a well-known historical fact that there was a Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland also known as the Central African Republic from 1953 to 1963.
Nyasaland is modern-day Malawi, while Northern Rhodesia is Zambia and Southern Rhodesia is Zimbabwe.
This colonially-driven federation gave unity of these states, which resulted in large volumes of migrant labour between the united states. While many Zimbabweans worked and settled in Zambia, the same applied with Malawian and Zambian migrants coming to work in a variety of areas, especially mining and farming sectors in Zimbabwe.
Unknown to the colonial settlers, the federation later proved very useful for Zimbabweans when they fought the liberation struggle. Since Zambia and Malawi gained independence in the early 1960s, they were later used as havens for the revolutionaries.
These early stages of unity among states led to the formation of the Frontline States, whose membership expanded in 1980 with the setting up of the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference (SADCC), now Southern African Development Community (SADC), whose major role is regional peace and integration.
The regional integration and peace has opened several avenues for the countries in the Southern African region on the economic front especially. The road, railway and airspaces were opened to enable the movement of goods in the region and beyond our borders.
SADC is now a regional bloc to reckon with, within the African Union.
For historical information contact:
Zimpapers Knowledge Centre at Herald House on:
+263 8677 004323;
+263 0242 795771
E-mail: [email protected]
Online Reporter