Colonialism within Africa in the Early 1900s - Term Paper Example

African History – British Imperialism and Colonialism within Africa and specifically Kenya in the early 1900s I. Introduction Traditionally, colonialism has been related with a series of severe consequences for the states that ‘lose’ their independence, i.e. for the states that are being set under the control of foreign governments after a short or long term military conflict. The above phenomenon occurred mostly in the past; however, even today there are many states that are being controlled by others even if such a fact cannot be directly observed mostly because of the global character of the financial and commercial transactions which prohibit in a way the observation of the phenomenon of colonialism in several countries around the world. In this direction, Oucho1 noticed that ‘the history of colonialism provides overwhelming evidence of how manipulation of “more friendly” people to conquer “more stubborn” people, through primitive expeditions of denial of basic social services to the latter, laid firm foundations for conflict-in-waiting, a time bomb which exploded when the colonial administration was succeeded by independent governments’. As a direct result of the above situation, in most cases those ethnic conflicts are appeared in post colonial areas the ‘former colonial powers simplistically dismissed them as the result of tribalism, without bothering to trace their evolution, maturity and eventually their occurrence’2. Of course such a finding, cannot lead to the assumption that the inappropriate administrative initiatives of the former colonial powers are the exclusive causes of the problems that the post colonial areas face today. However, it is a fact that there is a strong relationship between the actions of the former that cause to the latter severe turbulences in their entire social and financial framework. In this paper, the intervention of European states and particularly of Britain in the East Africa region with a special reference to Kenya is the main issue under examination. At a next level, the role of Britain in the development of Kenya is being analyzed trying to evaluate the role of the former to the financial and social progress – if any – of the latter. II. Imperialism in Africa Africa has been a continent that suffered – and still does – a lot from the imperialistic activities of foreign countries, especially the European ones. In this context, Cain et al.3 found that ‘during the first half of the nineteenth century reform and development made disappointingly slow progress in Africa, as indeed elsewhere while the belief that unfree labour was incompatible with modern capitalism, though morally appealing, proved to be mistaken; The external slave trade, far from withering away, continued to flourish while it remained profitable, and the institution of slavery was strengthened as slave labour was redirected within the continent to produce new, legitimate exports’. It has to be noticed that ‘the slave trade that devastated the African population preceded colonialism; In fact, as colonialism was arriving in Africa, most of the African Diaspora were experiencing emancipation of one sort or another; In 1880, Africans ruled over 80% of the continent and the resistance to the colonial efforts of the various European countries was fierce and widespread; However, with the exception of Ethiopia and Liberia, European powers colonized the whole of Africa by 1914’4. However, during the second half of the century, the expansion of financial and service activities in Africa created the necessary field for the instalment of foreign companies – especially British ones – offering a series of services and facilities especially in the financial sector. At a next level, the occupation of Kenya by British can be explained through the presentation of a series of facts that imposed to Britain the acquisition of the control of the general area of South and East Africa. More specifically, the research made by Denny et al.5 showed that ‘by the end of 1889, the occupation of Egypt, at first no more than an improvisation, was coming to be a necessary re-insurance against the decline of British strength and influence at the Porte while ministers came to rely more and more on Cairo rather than Constantinople as the pivot of security in the Mediterranean; this shift of grand strategy was to decide Britains future course in tropical Africa; Incongruous as it might seem, the founding of empire in Kenya, Uganda and the Sudan was an incidental result of the major shift in British interest from the European and Asiatic to the African shores of the Mediterranean’. The occupation of Kenya is characterized according to the above findings as a necessary step towards the application of the British financial and commercial strategies on the greater Mediterranean region. Furthermore, Winks6 stated that Britain ‘became involved in East Africa through her position in India; Her strategic interests in the route to India led first to the occupation of Egypt and then to a desire to control the whole of the Nile Valley; Thus the Imperial British East Africa Company, chartered in 1888, was urged to drive for Uganda; When control of this area with the building of a railway proved to be beyond its resources, the British government assumed control, proclaiming the Protectorates of Uganda in 1894 and, in 1895, of British East Africa, the later Kenya which appeared to be largely empty without appropriate basis to support the railway built up from Mombasa to Lake Victoria and completed in 1901; For this reason the British government then encouraged the immigration of both Europeans and Asians, the former predominantly as farmersettlers and the latter to fill jobs as clerks and craftsmen that the local African population did not then seem capable of performing’. The above historical events led to the complete occupation of Kenya changing drastically its social and industrial framework. In the specific case the intervention of Britain has been proved to be expanded over the necessary level in an effort to retain the control over the area and secure the position of the country regarding the commercial and financial activities inside the Indian market. IIa. Kenya and imperialism in the early 1900s Moreover, Betts7 noticed that ‘the economic development of the colonial territories may have been a European charge, but it was realized by native labor while with the exception of a few choice areas, such as the highlands in Kenya, the European found no great opportunity for comfortable or permanent agricultural or ranching activity’. The above writer refers specifically to the issue of development of the post colonial areas and he highlights that even during the era of colonialism the relevant areas were developed because of their resources and not because of the colonial powers’ support – the role of the latter has been proved to be in any case negative to the development of the areas under control. Specifically for England, colonialism seems to be related with the history of the country while there are still states that belong to its control even under a different form of governance which is more difficult to be identified. In the case of East Africa, the issue of colonialism by Britain appeared in the late nineteenth century when the latter tried to gain control over the greater area of South and East Africa by taking under its control two of the most important states of the area: Rhodesia and Kenya. In this context, the colonization of the whole area started from Rhodesia on the basis of its strategic position for the control of South Africa. On the other hand, ‘Kenya – at least in its initial configuration - had the appearance of an Indian frontier, adopting its currency, penal and civil codes, bureaucratic structures and personnel, and much else; from the start, the land drew a large influx of Indian immigrants while the European settlement began slowly and belatedly, with less spontaneity and more premeditation than occurred further south’8. The geographical position and the financial development of Kenya and Rhodesia have been the main issues of the study of Kennedy who found that these two countries ‘stood awkwardly between the two dominant forms of colonial societies being neither replicas of the temperate colonies of European immigration and settlement nor of the tropical colonies of European administration and exploitation but representing, like the more prominent cases of Algeria and South Africa, a distinct category of colonization that mixed certain features of the other modes into a unique and unstable blend’9. The research over the imperialism in Kenya showed that the activities of the foreign countries, especially of Britain, over its territory were extensive and covered almost all industrial sectors. In this context, Wesseling10 refers to the study of Lonsdale who presented a ‘summary of British activities in western Kenya between 1894 and 1914; in this twenty-year period there were 50 incidents in Kenya which, according to the English, were so serious that it was necessary to resort to (or at least consider the use of) force while in eleven cases the English refrained from action because they lacked the necessary military equipment; on two occasions the expedition ended in an English defeat or retreat; in thirteen cases the demonstration of British military power alone was sufficient; on twenty occasions a punitive military expedition was carried out’. The above figures are just an indicative example of the British interventions to Kenya’s administrative and commercial operations. The presentation of the above cases has to be considered however as a part of the whole ‘colonialism’ activity of Britain which has used Kenya as a strategic co-operator in order to obtain the control of the greater region. III. British Imperialism and Colonialism in Africa Britain involved in the colonialism of the African countries circa in 1807 in order to outlaw the slave trade. However, the country’s intervention in the local political and social frameworks has been proved to be extended and not always justified. On the other hand, the control of the occupied countries has been based on the need to enhance and support the development of the British capital. The relevant efforts were proved to be more intensive during periods of international crisis when the control over them would be limited. Of course, there were periods during which the metropolitan control was limited under the influence of severe political changes that occurred globally. Berman11 found that ‘the first (of such periods), during the 1921-2 depression, involved the promotion of colonial development through massive infrastructural projects, notably harbour and railway construction, intended to generate orders for British industry and provide employment and increasing profits at home, as well as facilitate the growth of export commodity production; The programme proved abortive because of the rapid economic recovery in 1922 and serious metropolitan opposition to any departures from laissez-faire and free trade practices; In Kenya, the programme resulted in extensive construction of railway branch lines and stimulated export production, but here too local forces intruded to influence the routing of lines through the settled areas of the Highlands’. The application of specific financial projects over the occupied states and especially in Kenya proved to be a risky decision for Britain. The reaction of the local society and the consequences in the country’s economy were also among the factors that had to be examined more thoroughly before the application of any relevant scheme. IIIa. Main elements of the British Imperialism and Colonialism in Kenya The occupation of Kenya caused a series of severe consequences to the country’s social and financial activities. In this context – with a special reference to the financial sector of the state – Schatzberg12 referred to the study of Brett in 1973 who noted ‘how colonialism catalyzed Kenyas absorption into the world capitalist system while fostering economic measures that resulted in unbalanced development while in order to be sure, the British had designed Kenyan economic policy to be complementary to, not competitive with, the metropolitan economy; This meant an emphasis on the export of primary products coupled with the import of British manufactured goods; The result was an unbalanced pattern of development that never produced the secondary and tertiary economic activities necessary to sustain local industrialization while the colonial state directly and indirectly discouraged local industrial initiatives’. The industrial and generally the financial development of Kenya have been ‘prohibited’ up to a significant level because of the policy followed by the metropolitan country – Britain. As for the use of the local resources, this has been limited to the level that the increase of the national economy could be retained stable to certain levels ensuring the ‘superiority’ of the colonial state. Towards this direction, Berman13 found that ‘metropolitan management of the Kenyan economy was even further limited by the Colonys inclusion in the Congo Basin Treaties, maintaining free trade and prohibiting discriminatory tariffs in favour of metropolitan products, thus eliminating it from inclusion in the system of imperial preferences being developed after 1932; Britains position as the dominant supplier of manufactured exports to and purchaser of commodity exports from Kenya actually began to decline in the face of increasing competition, notably from Japan’. The intervention of other countries in the country’s commercial market has been proved to be significant for the development of the local economy. Kenya has been depended on the British economy in order to retain its level of financial and commercial performance, a fact that has been caused by the strategy followed by the British governors during all the period of Kenya’s occupation by Britain. When the latter started to lose its control over the local commercial and industrial activities, the performance of the local economy started to be increased in accordance with the level of participation of the foreign counterparts. IV. Consequences of imperialism in Kenya – implications for the local economy The control of Britain over the commercial and industrial activities in Kenya led the country to severe financial and social problems as already presented above. Trying to explore the extension of the damages caused in the local economy Schatzberg14 referred to the study of Leys (1974) who ‘delineated the structural constraints of the neocolonial Kenyan economy on the emergence of indigenous capitalism arguing that Kenyas blend of neocolonialism was rooted in the transition from colonialism to independence, a transition resulting in the relatively efficient transfer of political power to a regime based on the support of social classes linked very closely to foreign capital’. However, Berman15 stated that ‘the seriousness of the weakness of metropolitan control over internal state policy in Kenya and of the decline of economic links with the colony was mitigated by a number of other economic and political factors; First, most of the products of settler estate agriculture were actually important to only limited sectors of British merchant and finance capital with specialized interests in the trade; Second, regardless of the loosening of economic ties and their inability to direct internal policies, the metropolitan authorities retained ultimate control of the constitutional form of the colonial state in Kenya, and here the economic weakness of the settlers revealed during the Depression proved their undoing’. The participation of foreign capital has been considered to be therefore crucial for the development of Kenya’s economy16. Although this observation is very important in order to understand the procedure of the relevant activities and the level of the country’s development, it should be criticized however as of its area of applicability. More specifically, in accordance with the above view, Kenya is considered to be a country with very low level of development and limited resources (natural, human etc.) although this assumption does not agree with the reality17. In this context, it would be very important to consider the findings of the study made by Oucho18 in accordance with which ‘although many English-speaking Sub-Saharan African states are creations of the British colonial administration, Kenya had one of the heaviest doses of colonial culture: in its politics, economy and social dynamics; At independence in 1963, Kenya became a multiracial state where the predominant African population has lived in harmony with Asians (Indians, Pakistanis and other Asiatics who have immigrated only since independence) Arabs, Europeans of various stocks, Americans and other Africans and non-Africans of different nationalities’. This study refers mostly to the social conditions of Kenya, as a former occupied country and offers a possible explanation for the delay on the country’s development since its independence. The influence of the political and financial changes imposed by the former ‘metropolitan state’, i.e. Britain has been proved to be intensive with a long term character19. However, the continuous effort for industrial and educational development should be regarded as the most appropriate method for the development of the country in all financial and social sectors. Conclusion The presentation of the above issues prove the assumptions made by Bawah et al.20 who stated that ‘the effects of European colonialism on Africa and its population have been devastating while the new borders of colonial Africa became the independent borders of postindependent African nations without social homogeneity; A consequence of this social heterogeneity has been constant warfare between socially and politically different groups that has resulted in many deaths and increases in the refugee population; The colonial transformation of Africa destroyed the indigenous institutions that controlled access to internal markets and resources, replacing them with structures linked directly to European trade and investment’. The above views are also in accordance with the level of financial performance of all African countries that faced the phenomenon of colonialism from foreign states particularly the European ones21. The consequences to the society can be even more severe but this is an issue that will be clearer in the future. In any case, the intervention of European countries in Africa has been extended and that led to the decrease of the financial and commercial performance of the particular African countries. In this context, Dixon22 stated that ‘the European powers divided Africa geographically with no concern for the people living in the newly colonized areas while in almost every case, this led to lumping together disparate ethnic groups; Kenya, for instance, includes 52 people groups; One of the goals of the early national governments, then, was to foster nationalism or national consciousness, rather than ethnicity, as a unifying factor; In participating in this effort, the media became direct allies of the government; In Kenya close cooperation between government and the institutionally independent newspapers continued at least until the late 1980s’. As the study of colonialism in Africa and particularly in Kenya has proved, the level of intervention of the ‘metropolitan’ states did not leave any chance for local development. On the contrary the control over every local financial and industrial initiative was intensive in order to ensure that the performance of the occupied country would not reach higher levels than the one of the colonial state23. Particularly for Kenya, the dependence on foreign policies, especially the British ones has been proved to be responsible for the significant delay in the country’s financial and political development. The creation of commercial and financial ‘bonds’ of cooperation with other countries and the independence from the colonialism should be considered as primary steps towards the further development of Kenya. The possible existence of influence from British strategies – remaining from the past – cannot be rejected. However, even in a limited area such cooperation should be evaluated constantly taking into account the emergent need for development that the country is facing. Works Cited Bawah, A., Noumbissi, A., Sibanda, A., Zuberi, T. ‘Population and African Society.’ Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 29 (2003), p. 465-478 Berman, B. Control & Crisis in Colonial Kenya: The Dialectic of Domination. James Currey, London, 1990 Betts, R. Europe Overseas: Phases of Imperialism. Basic Books, New York, 1968 Cain, P., Hopkins, A. British Imperialism: Innovation and Expansion, 1688-1914. Longman, London, 1993 Clough, R.H. ‘Some Notes on a Recent Economic Survey of Land Settlement in Kenya.’ East African Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 3 (1965), p. 78–83 Denny, A., Gallagher, J., Robinson, R. Africa and the Victorians: The Climax of Imperialism in the Dark Continent. St. Martins Press, New York, 1961 Dixon, D. ‘Press Law Debate in Kenya: Ethics as Political Power.’ Journal of Mass Media Ethics, Vol. 12, No. 3 (1997), p. 172-184 Glickman, H. and Furia, P., ‘Issues in the Analysis of Ethic conflict and Democratization Process in Africa today.’ in H. Glickman (ed.) Ethnic Conflict and Democratization in Africa. Atlanta, GA: The African Studies Association Press, 1995, p. 1–31 Gould, W.T.S. ‘Migration and development in Western Kenya, 1971–1982: A retrospective study of primary school leavers.’ Africa, Vol. 55, No. 3 (1985), p. 262–285 Harberson, J.W. ‘Land Reform and Politics in Kenya, 1954–70.’ The Journal of Modern Studies, Vol. 9, No. 2 (1971), p. 231–251 Joseph, R.A. ‘Africa: The Rebirth of Political Freedom.’ Journal of Democracy, Vol. 2, No. 4 (1991), p. 11–24 Kennedy, D. Islands of White: Settler Society and Culture in Kenya and Southern Rhodesia, 1890-1939. Duke University Press. Durham, NC, 1987 Leo, C. ‘Who Benefited from the Million Acre Scheme? Towards a Class Analysis of Kenyas Transition to Independence.’ Canadian Journal of African Studies, Vol. 15 (1981), p. 201–222 Lonsdale, J. M. ‘The politics of conquest: The British in Western Kenya, 1894-1908.’ The Historical Journal, Vol. 20 (1977), p. 858-859 Nnoli, O. ‘Ethnicity as Counter Revolutionary Force.’ Africa Review, (1977), p. 112 Ochieng, W., Ogot, B. Decolonization & Independence in Kenya, 1940-93. James Currey. London, 1995 Oucho, J.O. ‘Refugees and Displacement in Sub-Saharan Africa: Instability due to Ethnic and Political Conflicts and Ecological Causes’, in A. Adepoju and T. Hammar (eds.), International Migration in and from Africa. Dakar: Population and Human Resources and Development in Africa (PHRDA) in association with the Centre for Research in International Migration and Ethnic Relations (CEIFO), Stockholm, (1996), p. 161– 187 Oucho, J. Undercurrents of Ethnic Conflicts in Kenya. Brill, Boston, 2002 Schatzberg, M. The Political Economy of Kenya. Praeger Publishers, New York, 1987 Talbot, L.M. ‘Demographic factors in resource depletion and environmental degradation in East African rangeland.’ Population and Development Review Vol. 12, No. 3 (1986), p. 441–451 Wesseling, H. Imperialism and Colonialism: Essays on the History of European Expansion. Greenwood Press. Westport, CT, 1997 Winks, R. The Historiography of the British Empire-Commonwealth: Trends, Interpretations and Resources. Duke University Press. Durham, NC, 1966 Read More