Some Critical Reflections on South Africa-Swaziland Border Dispute

Swaziland claims that parts of its territory were unlawfully incorporated into South Africa in the 19th century. The contested portions of land are now found in Mpumalanga and Kwazulu-Natal provinces. Swaziland relentlessly presses for restoration of its pre-colonial boundaries. The other principal actors in the boundary dispute are South Africa and Britain. Swaziland offers legal, nationalistic, security, ethno-demographic and other reasons to reinforce its land claims. South Africa, for its part, leans on international law and OAU (now AU) advocacy for retention of colonially constructed boundaries while Britain offers counter argument to Swaziland’s claims to sovereignty and interpretation of protectorate. This paper critically examines the various views on the land question by Swaziland, South Africa and Britain, the colonial power. It takes the view that in spite of the historical “injustice”, Swaziland’s bid for land restoration appears increasingly futile in present circumstances: states are territorial beings which makes it unlikely that South Africa will agree to a land transfer. More importantly, international law and continental sentiment favour retention of colonially constructed boundaries. As an alternative, the paper suggests that both Swaziland and South Africa should see boundary through inclusive rather than exclusive lenses, that the boundary can be a line of contact, inclusion, cooperation and mutual development. The paper thus envisions the construction of transfrontier communities anchored in people-centred development