>>I suspect since the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya (if not earlier), the writing was on the wall for European colonialism in Africa.

Things got pretty nasty just to the North in Rhodesia as well. Britain had given African colonies independence some time earlier, but the new governments became a 1% who knew what would happen once the majority could vote, so they resisted.

>>SA hung on longer than most and it's to that nation's credit that a relatively smooth transition of power was negotiated.

Yep, democratic transfer of power from white parties to ANC once the majority could vote. But also the Brit colonies tended to involve a homegrown civil service as well as schools and good infrastructure, which helps smooth transfer of power especially compared to the mentality that subjugates the native and pours concrete into sewers when you're forced out. Which other African colonists did do, FWIW. So far SA seems to have escaped the tinpot dictatorship Zimbabwe has turned into along with many other colonies that wasted their wealth- e.g. in a brief visit to poverty-stricken Zaire I saw once-booming copper facilities that had reverted to jungle and huge rusted shapes. Ditto Mozambique that was the poorest country on earth at that stage, with the border with Zimbabwe clearly demarcated by energetic green fields on the Zim side that was Southern Africa's breadbasket, and a dusty plain on the Mozambique side. Today both sides are dust bowls, though Mozambique is on the way up and out of its mess.