Skip to content

Desolation on the Veld: Forced Removals in South Africa

Literature › Works

Robin Hallett (1984). Desolation on the Veld: Forced Removals in South Africa. African Affairs, Vol. 83, No. 332. Oxford University Press on behalf of The Royal African Society.
Type journal article
Scope Wider apartheid literature
Method synthesis review
Period studied 1913–1982
Regions Ciskei, Eastern Cape, Natal/KwaZulu, Transvaal/Bophuthatswana, Orange Free State/QwaQwa, Western and Northern Cape
Themes bantustans removals influx, agriculture land, inequality poverty unemployment, origins segregation, demography urbanisation, resistance social movements, politics ideology elections
Citation key hallett1984

Argument

This is a review article on the five-volume Surplus People Project (SPP) reports on forced removals (1983). Hallett argues the reports document the structure of apartheid more thoroughly than any earlier work, and that Pretoria's reform rhetoric has not changed the policy of relocation. Through case studies, life histories and SPP's aggregate estimates, he shows removals fall into several streams: farm evictions, 'black spot' and consolidation removals, urban relocation, Group Areas removals and clearance of informal settlements. Their common effect is to push 'surplus' people into the poverty-stricken bantustans. He locates the policy in a long history of segregation, shared by English-speaking and Afrikaner South Africans and intensified by the Nationalists. He concludes the apartheid state is neither monolithic nor all-powerful, since local resistance, cost and publicity can sometimes stay its hand, but it always keeps opponents on the defensive.

Evidence and method

Hallett works almost entirely from the SPP reports (Vols 1-5, 1983). These draw on field surveys and questionnaires, case studies of communities, life histories and interviews, maps, and official statistics and legislation. He adds a few outside references (Huddleston, Desmond, Black Sash, Mare's 1980 survey).

Place in the debates

Findings

  • SPP framed removed people as 'surplus' because the economy needed fewer unskilled workers by the late 1970s. (p. 4)

    by the late 197Os it was becoming evident in South Africa (as in other industrialized countries) that the economy was requiring steadily fewer unskilled workers

  • Labour tenancy in Natal was large, and its abolition from the 1960s-70s displaced many people. (p. 7)

    In 1970 the number of labour tenants in Natal was put at 400,000.

  • Over a million African farm workers and dependants were removed from white farms. (p. 16)

    An estimated 1,129,000 African workers and their families have been removed from white farms.

  • Influx control in the 1950s helped farmers retain labour and hold down wages. (p. 16)

    by imposing strict controls on the movement of Africans from white rural to urban areas the government directly helped white farmers to retain their work force and to keep wages down

  • Mechanization in the 1960s turned farm labour shortage into surplus. (p. 16)

    In the course of the 1960s rapid mechanization provided white farmers with their agricultural revolution. The labour shortages of the 1950s turned into the surpluses of the 1970s.

  • Influx control blocked the normal rural-to-urban movement that follows capital-intensive agriculture, pushing evictees into bantustans. (p. 16)

    In South Africa such movements are rendered impossible by the provisions of influx control.

  • SPP estimates the aggregate scale of removals 1962-1980 and those still threatened. (p. 17)

    SPP estimates that between 1962 and 1980 3,522,900 people were subjected to removal and that more than 1,765,000 still have the threat of removal hanging over them

  • Bantustan job creation is inadequate: Dimbaza had high unemployment despite heavy investment. (p. 6)

    in spite of the R30m invested in the town, SPP found that the unemployment rate was 35 1 per cent, rising to as high as 48 per cent in the crucial male age bracket of 15-24

  • Bantustan elites are bound to the apartheid state, a form of political control that stratifies the bantustan population. (p. 15)

    The privileged elements are therefore more or less firmly tied to the bantustan system and hence to the South African State

  • QwaQwa illustrates the bantustans as dumping grounds for surplus population with no job prospects. (p. 21)

    Qwa Qwa today is a rural slum, a dumping gound for South Africa's relative surplus population in the Orange Free State

  • Financial cost may constrain removals more than protest does. (p. 20)

    Financial constraints may well be of more concern to the decision-makers and bureaucrats in Pretoria than the protests of local communities

  • The state is strong but not monolithic. (p. 20)

    The apartheid state is neither monolithic nor all-powerful. But it is powerful enough always to force its opponents onto the defensive.

Evidence ledger

Sources used

Source Kind Period How used
Surplus People Project, Forced Removals in South Africa: The Surplus People Project Reports, Vol 1 General Overview (1983) author survey or fieldwork 1960-1982 Provides the national aggregate estimates of people removed or threatened with removal, which Hallett reports as the core quantitative picture.
SPP Reports Vol 2: The Eastern Cape (incl. Ciskei, Transkei, life histories, theoretical background) author survey or fieldwork 1960s-1982 Supplies case studies (Dimbaza, Glenmore/Klipfontein, Elukhanyweni, Mdanstane), life histories and the table of de facto African population distribution.
SPP Reports Vol 3: Western and Northern Cape and Orange Free State author survey or fieldwork 1960s-1982 Supplies case studies (Saltpan, Atlantis, Qwa Qwa) and farm wage data from Onverwacht residents.
SPP Reports Vol 5: The Transvaal author survey or fieldwork 1950s-1982 Supplies the Winterveld case study of non-Tswana harassment and insecurity.
SPP field surveys and questionnaires (Vol 1, section 3 'The SPP surveys') author survey or fieldwork 1980-1982 Underpins the community case studies and unemployment findings; questionnaires are reproduced in Vol 1.
Interviews and life histories recorded by SPP (Maria Zotwana, Mr E. Mngadi, Bangweni indunas) interviews oral history c.1979-1982 Gives first-person testimony on the experience and consequences of removal.
Richmond Farm survey (27 per cent sample) by Diakonia and Black Sash author survey or fieldwork c.1979 Establishes the residence length, employment and urban tenure of squatter families, reported via SPP Vol 4.
Black Sash 1977 map of forced removals maps spatial data 1977 (updated) Mentioned as a prior graphic overview of removals, with an updated version in the pocket of SPP Vol 1.
Gerry Mare, African Population Relocation in South Africa (SAIRR, Johannesburg 1980) secondary literature compilation late 1970s Cited as a preliminary survey of relocation preceding SPP.
Parliamentary statement by Minister of Bantu Administration and Development, 14 May 1975 (as quoted by SPP) parliamentary debates 1975 Shows the official rationale of 'homeland consolidation' behind the Tsitsikama removal.
Statement by Minister of the Interior Dr T. E. Donges introducing the Group Areas Act, 1950 parliamentary debates 1950 Evidences the explicit white-supremacist intent behind the Group Areas Act.
Land and segregation legislation: 1836 Cape ordinance, 1879 Cape Vagrancy and Squatting Act, Natives Land Act 1913, Natives (Urban Areas) Act 1923, Native Land and Trust Act 1936, Group Areas Act, Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act, Laws on Cooperation and Development Amendment Act 1982 legislation gazette 1836-1982 Provides the legal framework of territorial segregation and the basis of removals, mostly as reported through the SPP volumes.
Jan van Riebeeck's journal, 10 February 1655 (quoted in SPP Vol 3, p. 74) state archives 1655 Illustrates the antiquity of conflict over who lives where.
Letter from the Deputy Minister of Cooperation and Development to a Transvaal community, 1978 (quoted by SPP) commission or official report 1978 Shows the euphemistic official presentation of coerced relocation as voluntary.
Newspaper reporting and Ladysmith farmers' journal (1974) as quoted in SPP newspapers periodicals 1974-1982 Supplies quoted testimony (widow's diet at Sahlumbe) and white farmers' attitudes to 'black spots'.

Inference

Quantification: Descriptive tables.

Review essay summarizing and selectively quoting the SPP reports. Claims rest on SPP case studies, testimonies and aggregate estimates, supplemented by Hallett's own historical and political interpretation. There is no independent verification of the SPP figures.

Key claims

Claim Basis Strength
Between 1962 and 1980 about 3.5 million people were forcibly removed and over 1.7 million remained under threat of removal. (p. 316) SPP Vol 1 aggregate estimates, compiled from regional surveys and available data. Partial data
Removals shifted the African population distribution toward the bantustans, from 39.5% in 1960 to 54% in 1980. (p. 316) Table of de facto African population distribution by area, SPP Vol 2 p. 6. Systematic data
Categories of removal include about 1.13 million removed from white farms, 834,000 under Group Areas, 730,000 through urban relocation, 614,000 through consolidation and black spots, and 172,000 from informal settlements. (p. 316) SPP category estimates drawn from regional overviews and case materials. Partial data
Mechanization of white farming in the 1960s turned the labour shortage of the 1950s into surpluses in the 1970s, driving evictions of labour tenants and squatters to the bantustans, with influx control blocking migration to the towns. (p. 315) SPP analysis plus Onverwacht farm wage table and Natal labour tenant estimates; the argument is largely interpretive. Partial data
Relocation settlements such as Dimbaza, Glenmore, Sahlumbe and Elukhanyweni bring unemployment, poverty and deteriorating living standards. (p. 305) SPP community case studies, surveys, interviews and life histories. Illustrative or anecdotal
In Natal, around 300,000 people were pushed off land as labour tenancy was abolished, and 105,000 Africans were removed from black spots. (p. 313) SPP Vol 4 estimates for Natal. Partial data
The state has hidden the extent of removals and suppressed statistical data, and has moved toward less overt force and euphemistic 'voluntary' removal. (p. 319) SPP statements, the 1978 ministerial letter and the 1982 amendment act's secrecy clause, as quoted. Illustrative or anecdotal
Organized community resistance backed by liberal organizations has in some cases (St Wendolins, Reserve Four) forced concessions or delay. (p. 317) SPP case studies of St Wendolins and Reserve Four. Illustrative or anecdotal

The author's caveats

Hallett notes that SPP contributors acknowledged the difficulties of voluntary work, coordination over a large area, state intervention and detentions, and limited time and money for reaching remote areas. He adds that contributors flagged gaps in their knowledge, that the individual authors cannot be identified, and that SPP did no field work in Transkei. The reports also record that the state suppressed statistics.

Gaps in the evidence

As a review, the essay relies wholly on SPP's estimates without examining their methodology or checking them against official population census, Department of Cooperation and Development or Bantu Affairs Commissioner records. Case studies are selected for their vividness and are not representative, so a systematic sample of removed communities would be needed for generalisation. The causal claim linking farm mechanization to surplus labour needs agricultural census and farm wage series, which existed. Archival records of removal orders and ministerial files are now accessible.

Replicability: Data poorly documented.