| | In the Debate raised by Martin Doornbos in ROAPE 69 on the classification of Uganda as an 'international Bantustan' by David Himbara and Dawood Sultan (No 63), I would claim that they are all wrong. Martin Doornbos provides a useful corrective to the unduly pessimistic presentation of the current state of the Ugandan economy and polity that is given by Himbara and Sultan, and is also correct in reminding us of the extensive degree of control exercised by external powers in many other African countries, but he is too quick to dismiss the use of the expression 'Bantustan' in an oversimplified few lines. Likewise, Himbara and Sultan base their analogy on only a few, mainly fiscal, characteristics of the South African Bantustans. |
