British Colonialism - Essay Example

British colonialism Colonialism has had a lasting impact on many countries of the developing world. Few countries of the world were immune to colonial penetration and the enduring influence of the colonial legacy can be found in the underdeveloped regions of the world today. The British colonial enterprise was one of the largest and most successful making the British Empire one of the largest known empires in human history. Stretching from the Western North American shores, down to the Caribbean, through the Middle East and into Asia, British colonialism was unmatched at its height in sheer global supremacy. The period of 1914 to 1941 is a fascinating period of analysis to study the British colonial empire because it includes the end of the First World War, the interbellum years and the first two years of the Second World War. This time frame captures some dramatic periods in global history and this essay seeks to address how British colonialism changed during this period. From 1914 to 1941, the British Empire had to compete with the emergence of budding nationalism in its colonies and increasing levels of anti-colonial resistance as time progressed. Seeking to explore the impact of the colonial enterprise on the countries of the Middle East and Africa, this paper will discuss European colonialism in Iraq, a country artificially created in the wake of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire following World War I. This analysis will address the impetus for colonialism and the dramatic changes which took place in Iraq during our established time frame. Iraq In 1914, the British army invaded Mesopotamia, and established military order during the First World War. The subjugation of present day Iraq was not the initial intent of the British, rather their primary objective was the security of the British military position in the Persian Gulf. The complete occupation of Iraq at British hands was not complete for years and British victory over Arab forces in the former Ottoman provinces which now make up modern Iraq was not declared until 1918. Following this, the British set up a civil administration organizational structure based upon that which was in place in imperial India (Tripp 2003). In 1920, the British received a League of Nations mandate to officially administer the three provinces of the Ottoman Empire and it did not take long in fact for the Ottoman provinces of Basra, Baghdad and Mosul to be welded into the new state of Iraq. This new country was pieced together and included three important groups which shared antagonism for one another, the Shi’a (Basra), the Sunni (Baghdad) and the Kurds (Mosul). Although ethnic conflict and strife between these three groups was simmering under the surface, these three ethnic communities managed to set aside their grievances – at least intermittently – and fight the occupying, infidel country of Great Britain (R. Simon 113). The Iraqi Revolt of 1920 was a watershed in world history because it was the first time in which chemical weapons were used in the Middle East and represented the first serious challenge of the new Iraq to British rule. Accordingly, it began in Baghdad with: mass demonstrations of urban Iraqis, both Sunni and Shiite, and the protests of embittered ex-Ottoman officers. The revolt gained momentum when it spread to the largely Shiite regions of the middle and lower Euphrates. Well-armed tribesmen, outraged by the intrusions of central government and resentful of infidel rule, seized control of most of the south of the country. It took the British several months, and cost thousands of lives - British, Indian and Iraqi - to suppress the revolt and re-establish Baghdads control (Tripp 2003). While attempting to quell the revolt, British forces spent almost a decade trying to pacify the new country, composed of three important and often antagonistic groups: the Shi’a, the Sunni and the Kurds. The British response to resistance included widespread use of firebombs, mustard gas and air attacks on villages throughout the occupied country (Tripp 2003). Understanding the Iraq would one day be independent and self-governing the British made a tactical agreement with Hashemite monarch King Faisal and installed him as King of Iraq. With independence in 1932, and at the behest of Faisal, the British kept their military bases in Iraq and enjoyed transit rights in the country. The British imposition of a monarch in Iraq was hotly contested and provided a rallying point for future nationalists. The monarchy of Iraq officially ended in 1958 with the regicide (assassination) of young King Faisal II, grandson of Faisal I (see R. Simon 1986). Concluding Remarks The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has been an economic powerhouse for centuries and as the “dominant industrial and maritime power of the 19th century, the UK has played a leading role in developing parliamentary democracy” (CIA World Factbook 2008). Accordingly, the Britain imperial legacy was not wholly negative. Yes, the UK did impart liberal democracy and establish democratic traditions in the countries encompassing the British Empire. Despite these positive attributes of British colonialism, the colonial enterprise has left a long lasting and generally quite negative imprint on the countries of the former British Empire in the Middle East and North Africa. Accordingly, Iraq was pieced together from the ashes of the Ottoman Empire and involved a political arrangement in which three distinct Ottoman provinces were joined together in union. This bred antagonism more than fifty years ago and continues to bread conflict and violence as modern Iraq today is on the verge of state collapse. Accordingly, Iraq may very well implode with an independent Shi’a, Sunni and Kurdish state on the horizon. Our exploration of the British imperial experience in Iraq further supports the argument that overall the British colonial experience in the Middle East did more to create tension and exacerbate problems than alleviate them. Accordingly, anti-colonial riots in Iraq were brutally repressed and involved the use of firebombs and mustard gas on the civilian Iraqi population. In fact, the use of chemical weapons against a civilian population sent a horrible precedent in Iraq: one that Saddam Hussein reacted more than sixty years later against the Kurds in Halabja. Nonetheless, anti-colonialism served as a rallying point for Iraqis of all stripes – Sunni, Shi’a and Kurd – who resented and fought against the Anglo colonial invaders. The Britain imperial legacy in Iraq had disastrous implications for the imposed monarchy as well as for the future security of the region. In fact, the British legacy in Iraq is shameful and an example of the worst of its colonial past. references Simon, Steven. 2008. The Price of the Surge. Foreign Affairs. 87:3 (May/June): 57-76. Tripp, Charles. 2003. Iraq: The Imperial Precedent. Le Monde Diplomatique. January, 17. Read More