According to Kevin Shillington in History of Africa, what reasons and justification(s) led to the "Scramble for Africa" and why was this scramble...
The "scramble for Africa" took place for several reasons, according to Schillington:
- Various other countries managed to catch up to Great Britain in terms of industrialization and manufacturing abilities. This made them decent competitors in the sudden search for new markets for the sale of goods once their home markets (in other words, European markets) became oversaturated.
- European nations were also motivated by the belief that African countries contained raw materials (and, thus, sources of wealth) that had gone untouched. The potential reward of moving "in" on Africa was huge.
These two factors (combined with the colonialists' ability to exploit the already existing conflicts between African states and the European "home advantage" of having much more advanced military technology) made African resistance pretty much futile.
The "scramble" itself was mostly delayed by how long Britain had managed to cling to the "free trade" market due to their advances in industrialization. As was already mentioned, other European countries' ability to catch up with Britain ended this singular control. France was the first to challenge the "free trade" policy by breaking ground on a railway from Dakar to the upper Niger valley. The British response was to support Portuguese claims to Angola and Congo. Germany quickly tossed in its hat to lay claim to Togo, Cameroon, and Namibia.
This scramble was ultimately resolved without open conflict due to the 1884 to 1885 Berlin West Africa Conference, which set up some parameters for the land claims by 1) recognizing Leopold's International Association as the authority of the Congo basin and 2) by declaring that a European nation attempting to claim land must effectively occupy that land.
Comments
Post a Comment