Both these former Boer generals were realists. They recognised the realities of Boer defeat and the ruin it had brought to South Africa. After the war they had come to preach a gospel of “conciliation”, whose rationale was to unite Boers and Britons into a single white nation, while repairing relations with Britain, whose aid they regarded as necessary for reconstruction.
They also had in mind the Transvaal as heading a drive for the making of a united South Africa – a long-held policy of Britain since the mid-19th century. In any case, Botha and Smuts regarded South Africa’s membership of the Empire and reliance on the British navy as necessary for its defence. We may question why this persuaded Botha to offer a valuable diamond to the king. Perhaps it was merely gratitude for the grant of self governance. Perhaps it was one of the more spectacular acts of international brown-nosing, to secure Britain’s goodwill towards South Africa.
But in the present debate, it introduces the complication that legally speaking, the Cullinan diamonds were given by a forerunner government of South Africa, rather than having been “looted”.Calls for the return of the diamonds, especially when not backed by any official request by the South African government, are unlikely to make any impression in London.
Such decisions would have to be made by the government of the day. Any thought of doing so would play into the hands of the right wing of the
مصر أحدث الأخبار, مصر عناوين
Similar News:يمكنك أيضًا قراءة قصص إخبارية مشابهة لهذه التي قمنا بجمعها من مصادر إخبارية أخرى.
مصدر: News24 - 🏆 4. / 80 اقرأ أكثر »
مصدر: News24 - 🏆 4. / 80 اقرأ أكثر »
مصدر: News24 - 🏆 4. / 80 اقرأ أكثر »