THE SERETSE PROBLEM
WHATEVER final conclusion may be reached on the action of the Government in deciding that Seretse Khama, the lawful chief of the Bamangwato, shall be deprived permanently of the chieftainship of the tribe, un- reserved tribute must be paid to the spirit in which the Secretary for Commonwealth Relations, Lord Salisbury, and his pre- decessor, Lord Ismay, have approached this almost hopelessly baffling problem. It is almost hopelessly baffling partly because of its handling by the last Government, partly because of the geographical situation of Bechuanaland, in which the Baman- gwato Reserve lies, partly because of the bearing the decision regarding Seretse may have on native questions throughout Africa. There are parts of that vast Continent, still only partially explored geographically or demographically or psychologically, where the ideal of the education of Africans for ultimate self-government has gone far towards realisation; the Gold Coast is the most notable case in point. There are others where the doctrine of white domination is being passion- ately preached and the doctrine of Africa for the Africans as passionately rejected; others, again, where the hope of an enlightened partnership between white and black, and the gradual destruction of barriers between the two races, is con- fidently entertained. That is the background against which all discussions of Seretse's future must be conducted. The Baman- gwato are a small tribe, numbering no more than 100,000 per- sons, but the principle raised by the controversy over the chieftainship, and the British Government's decision, is vital.
No exception can be taken to the outline of events given by Lord Salisbury and Lord Ismay in the House of Lords last Mon- day. Both Ministers showed themselves entirely sympathetic to Seretse personally. Both took the ground that so long as there was a prospect of his return to the Bamangwato Reserve the tribe would be left without a chief, because, recognising him as the lawful head of the tribe; it would elect no one else pending his hoped-for return. For that reason they thought it right to replace the Labour Government's sentence of five years' deprivation by a sentence of permanent deprivation. Everything here rests on the assumption, which many well- informed persons vigorously contest, that, Seretse once finally eliminated, the Bamangwato will proceed to recognise another chief from the Khama family, perhaps Rasebolai, and settle down peacefully under him. It is at least as probable that the tribe will continue to demand the return of Seretse as insistently as they are doing today. For about their desire for his return, and their full acceptance of his marriage and the possibility of the birth of an. heir of mixed parentage, there can be no question at all. The best of all testimony to that comes from an unexpected witness, Mr. Justice Blackwell, of the Supreme Court of the Union of South Africa, who strongly disapproves of the Seretse marriage, but who declared in an interview in Winnipeg a week ago that the tribe was "clamorously insistent" on its lawful chief's return.
That return, it may be observed, would remove all or most of the difficulty about Seretse's uncle Tshekedi Khama, son of the great Khama, who ruled the tribe as Regent from 1926 till his banishment by the Labour Government in 1950. He is a man of the highest character, a Christian like Seretse, and governed firmly and ably, but no doubt made himself many enemies in the process. His banishment was highly unjust to him, and Lord Ismay did essentially the right thing in revoking it, the more so since Tshekedi has publicly and solemnly re- nounced all claim to the chieftainship for both himself and his heirs. He is now allowed back to look after his extensive personal interests in the Bamangwato Reserve from time to time, with the prospect of returning altogether to settle down as a private person at a later date. So long as Seretse is banished large sections of the tribe will continue to suspect Tshekedi of aiming at the chieftainship in spite of everything. Seretse's return and acceptance as chief would settle all that finally. It is quite true that at first the tribe dis- approved of Seretse's marriage strongly. It is equally and incontestably true that, for various reasons, it has changed its attitude completely and will hear of no chief but the lawful chief, who is Seretse; his marriage is no longer regarded as an impediment.
Four different considerations have to be taken into account— justice to Seretse himself; the welfare of the Bamangwato tribe; the effect of the decision regarding Seretse on Africans throughout the Continent; and the effect on white opinion in the Union of South Africa. It is idle to suggest that opinion in the Union can simply be disregarded. The feeling against mixed marriages is as strong in the Union Party as in the Nationalist Party. An authorisation of the return of Seretse would almost certainly lead Dr. Malan to press forthwith the demand, which he is constantly threatening to press, for the incorporation of the whole of Bechuanaland (and Basutoland and Swaziland) in the Union; it would greatly increase his chances of success at the next General Election; and it might lead in the mean time to the exertion of overwhelming economic pressure on the Protectorate, which is absolutely dependent economically on the Union. No British Minister handling the Seretse question could close his eyes to those facts.
As to Seretse, that an injustice is being inflicted on him is indisputable. The only question is whether it is expedient that one man should suffer for the people. Seretse, having been educated at Fort Hare in South Africa, came on to Oxford. Is that wrong ? Unlike most of his tribe, he is a Christian and a monogamist. Is that wrong ? In England, at the church they both attended, he met an English girl, they fell in love and got married. Is that wrong ? Yes, says Lord Salisbury; an ordinary African can do that, but not a chief. The tribe itself originally took that view, but has now com- pletely abandoned it. As one of its representatives said rather movingly in an interview between the tribesmen and the new High Commissioner in December : " The tribe accepted Seretse despite his marriage. . . . We accepted Ruth. Seretse wanted her." It may well be true, as Lord Salisbury says, that the situation among the Bamangwato is deteriorating. He believes that the selection of a chief other than Seretse would put all that right. There seems the strongest reason to doubt whether the tribe would in fact select another chief at all, or whether, if it did, that would have the desired effect.
The bearing of the Seretse decision on Africans generally is of momentous importance. The political and social evolution of Africa is proceeding swiftly—perhaps too swiftly—but to check it forcibly would be to court disaster. Certain changes have their inevitable consequences. Once Africans become Christians they learn that under God there is neither Jew nor Gentile, bond nor free. Is marriage between black and white, even a black chief and a white woman, to be con- demned ? It may be inexpedient in present circumstances; it may be wise to try 'W dissuade the parties concerned, as Tshekedi did; but Christianity has its revolutionary side, and some processes, once started, cannot be stopped. To speak of miscegenation in terms of horror is no contribution to the solution of a very real problem. There has been miscegenation between Britons and Indians for generations, by no means always with unfortunate results; a former Indian High Comm' c- sioner in London, made a most happy marriage with a distinguished and gifted English lady. Indians and Africans are not to be equated, and analogies must not be pressed too far, but some lessons may be drawn from them. Few more perplexing problems haVe faced a British Minister than the Seretse problem. The wisdom of timing the announce- ment immediately on the precipitation of a crisis further south as a result of the Supreme Court's ruling regarding the franchise of Coloured Voters may well be questioned. For the rest, Lord Salisbury's decision to receive a Bamangwato delegation after all is to be welcomed warmly. He has said he is satisfied with the assessment of the situation by the British authorities on the spot. But those authorities have not displayed conspicuous sympathy with the Bamangwato; some of their communications to the tribe have been more minatory than conciliatory. Lord Salisbury is a man of integrity and courage. If, after having heard the tribesmen himself, and weighed all the disparate considerations on both sides, he should decide to advise the Cabinet to sanction Seretse's return after all he would deserve the support of all parties.
Previous page
