Secondary Industry and Settler Colonialism: Southern Rhodesia before and after the Unilateral Declaration of Independence

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-112
Author(s):  
Ian Phimister ◽  
Victor Gwande
1997 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 273-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terence Ranger

In mid-1964 the Smith regime in Southern Rhodesia was moving towards a final ban on the African nationalist parties, ZAPU and ZANU. At the same time it was widely believed to be preparing for a Unilateral Declaration of Independence and the nationalist parties in their turn were trying to find ways to prevent this. Both chose to launch sabotage campaigns, so as to demonstrate African opposition. In late June 1964 there was a wave of sabotage in Chipinga and Melsetter in Rhodesia's eastern districts. Roadblocks were erected, the police camp was attacked, dynamite was laid at bridges. Notes were left at the scene of some of these actions purporting to come from “the Crocodile Gang.” On the early evening of 4 July 1964, a 45-year-old foreman at the Silver Streams Wattle Factory in Melsetter, Pieter Johannes Andries Oberholzer, was driving home with his wife and daughter along the Umtali/Melsetter road. He came to a low roadblock made of stones; he tried to ram it; the car turned over; Oberholzer was stabbed to death; his assailants dispersed when another vehicle approached. Police found two notes at the site of the attack. One read “Confrontation Smith. Crocodile Gang will soon kill all whites. Beware!” The other read: “Crocodile Group in Action. We shall kill all whites if they don't want to give back our country. Confrontation!”How are we to read the significance of July 4? The events have been described in five main sources and they look very different from these varying perspectives. “What is Truth?” asks Ndabaningi Si thole, in the earliest of the sources. The Crocodile Gang's killing of Oberholzer constitutes a historical equivalent to the famous old Japanese film, Rashomon, with its presentation of different but equally plausible narratives of a violent event.


1993 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 585-600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gino J. Naldi

The Government of Zimbabwe has only recently begun to implement the commitment of the liberation movements to give land to poor ‘communal’ farmers, especially those dispossessed by the whiteminority régime after Rhodesia's unilateral declaration of independence in 1965. It needs to be recalled that by virtue of the Land Tenure Act of 1969 almost half of the country's agricultural land was allocated to Europeans, who had ‘greater access to the regions considered suited to intensive crop and livestock production’, and that ‘On average, each of the nearly 7,000 European farms was roughly 100 times the size of any of the 700,000 or so holdings in the Tribal Trust Lands’. The fact that much of this land was under-utilised only served to increase African resentment.


2012 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-478 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dusko Dimitrijevic ◽  
Ivona Ladjevac ◽  
Mihajlo Vucic

After the Security Council had established the international administration in Kosovo on grounds of the Resolution no. 1244 of 10 June 1999 for the construction and reconstruction of the legal and economic systems, the support and protection of human rights, the provision of humanitarian and other assistance, it adopted the conclusion that the achievement of a political settlement for the southern Serbian province would primarily depend on the development and consolidation of peace and security. Accordingly, in May 2001, the international administration adopted the Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self- Government in Kosovo, which defined the status of the Serbian southern province as a whole and indivisible territorial entity under the interim international administration. The Constitutional Framework is regulated as a substantial transfer of state responsibilities by the peoples of Kosovo and Metohija to the provisional institutions of self-government and it should ?enjoy substantial autonomy within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?. This institutional development is aimed at establishing constructive cooperation among various ethnic communities in order to build a common democratic state. Since this solution is not quite legally balanced, it could not go without any negative consequences in terms of national sovereignty. The suspension of sovereignty of the Republic of Serbia in Kosovo and Metohija has eventually contributed to creating of the conditions for the socalled unilateral declaration of independence of the Republic of Kosovo. The analysis of the activities undertaken in the field of resolving the status issue after the unilateral declaration of independence of 17 February 2008 suggests that the solution for the Kosovo and Metohija should be primarily sought within the United Nations system.


2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 867-880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Muharremi

On 22 July 2010, the International Court of Justice (hereinafter the “ICJ”) delivered its advisory opinion on the accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo. The ICJ concluded that the declaration of independence dated 17 February 2008 did not violate any applicable rule of international law consisting of general international law, UNSC resolution 1244 (1999) (hereinafter the “Resolution 1244”) and the Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government in Kosovo (hereinafter the “Constitutional Framework”). The ICJ delivered the advisory opinion in response to a question set out in resolution 63/3 dated 8 October 2008 of the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization (hereinafter the “General Assembly”), which asked if “the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo is in accordance with international law.”


1967 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-213
Author(s):  
Alan Wharam

Throughout the Rhodesian crisis it has been repeatedly asserted that the Unilateral Declaration of Independence constituted treason. In the House of Commons on 12 November 1965, the Attorney-General himself said:It is right that I should point out in general terms that there is abundant authority for the conclusion that the conduct of the kind that has taken place is treasonable.


2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 799-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dov Jacobs

‘Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?’ It is to answer this question that the General Assembly of the United Nations (‘UNGA’) requested an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (‘ICJ’). The request, adopted in October 20081 and initially sponsored by Serbia, was triggered by the declaration of independence of Kosovo issued on the 17 February 2008.2 Some two years later, on the 22 July 2010, the ICJ delivered its Advisory Opinion.3 By a 10–4 vote, the ICJ found that the declaration of independence of Kosovo did not violate international law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document