Please refreshen my memory.At what juncture was "Divide and rule"
initiated? Was that not the strategy used to conquer Samori ? Who came
up with that ? Was the French or British ?
hous
-----Original Message-----
From: Baba Galleh Jallow <[log in to unmask]>
To: GAMBIA-L <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Mon, Nov 26, 2012 1:57 pm
Subject: Re: [G_L] Africa’s Political Skeletons – Part One
No Kejau, Africans did join both before and during the
conquest. European traders and companies had a presence on the coast of
Africa long before the onset of colonialism and had developed close
relations with local traders and rulers willing to do business with
them. From around the middle of the 1400s when the Atlantic Slave
Trade was started on a small scale by the Portuguese, there was a
constant European presence on the coasts of Africa. Only a few European
administrators, military officers and commanders were on the ground
throughout the colonial period. Once the colonizing project was being
contemplated, the Europeans started recruiting and training Africans
and developing their armies. It did not take them long to recruit
sizeable numbers of men with the help of local chiefs and traders. One
irony of European colonialism in Africa is that the Europeans
represented what has been called "a thin white line" on the continent
throughout the colonial period. Only a handful of Europeans actually
lived in Africa. The colonial administrative machinery was largely
manned by Africans - from chiefs, to clerks, interpreters, secretaries
and other minor officials. The exception was the setller colonies -
like Kenya, Rhodesia, South Africa - were large numbers of Europeans
settled and actually ran the colonial administration. And even in
settler colonies, the armies and police were largely composed
of African servicemen, with Europeans holding only a few senior
positions. In the case of South Africa, black South Africans
represented the backbone of the brutal military and police forces that
enforced Apartheid throught its existence.
Baba
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 19:22:23 +0100
Subject: RE: [G_L] Africa’s Political Skeletons – Part One
From: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
interesting Dr. Baba that the European Armies were largely composed of
African soldiers. Do you mean after the initial conquest as they could
not have join before the conquest. This must be the same trend we see
now African and Arabs joining western armies en mass and looking down
at everyone else especially those who join the African armies.
Cheers,
Kejau
>
> Indeed Kejau. The single most important reason for Africa's
failure to
> protect herself from colonialism is the fact that European armies
had
> superior firepower. There was widespread resistance to colonial
> encroachment and the African armies far outnumbered the European
armies
> which, by the way, were composed largely of African soldiers.
Samori
> fought the French for almost eight years before he was tricked
into laying
> down his arms and then captured and exiled. Thanks for the
feedback.
>
> Baba
>
>
>
>
> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:10:06 +0100
>
From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [G_L] Africa’s Political Skeletons – Part One
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> Thanks for this installment, Dr. Maudo Baba. It seems that the
only reason
> we were colonized was that we lacked superior weapons and it was
not the
> armies that failed us, but our industries and our pacifism. For if
we had
> the fire power invented decade before by the European scientist,
Samori
> and his warriors would have fended the invaders off our shores and
that
> would have taught them and ourselves that African is not for
scrambling.
> Cheers.
> Kejau
>>
>> Africa’s Political Skeletons – Part One
>> By Baba Galleh Jallow
>> Perhaps the single most visible legacy of colonial rule in
Africa is the
>> nation-state. The end of the slave trade in the early to
mid-1800s gave
>> way to the rise of legitimate trade, the trade in goods and
commodities
>> Europeans needed for the growth and success of the Industrial
>> Revolution.
>>
>
From being commodities of trade themselves, Africans became producers of
>> commodities for sale to European traders. The more industries
developed
>> in
>> Europe, the more Europe sought out sources of raw materials
for their
>> factories. And the more goods the factories produced, the more
Europeans
>> saw the need for stable overseas markets to which they would
export
>> their
>> finished products. A combination of these factors initiated a
search for
>> both sources of raw materials and markets for finished
products in
>> Africa.
>> As the 1800s drew to a close, Europeans grew increasingly
frantic in
>> their
>> search for raw materials and markets in Africa, which led to
the
>> beginnings of a barely concealed rush for territories on the
continent.
>> What has become known as the scramble for Africa was greatly
accelerated
>> after France’s humiliating defeat at the hands of the Germans
during the
>> Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71. In order to salvage her
battered
>> dignity,
>> France turned to the development of an overseas empire by
annexing
>> territories in Africa and elsewhere. Soon afterwards, France’s
>> traditional
>> rival Britain joined the scramble for Empire, followed by
Italy, Germany
>> and Belgium. So frantic did the grab for African colonies grow
that the
>> European countries were close to all-out war over parts of
Africa by
>> 1883.
>> Seeing a chance to both manage the crisis and play a leading
role in
>> international politics, Chancellor Otto von Bismarck of
Germany convened
>> the Berlin Conference of 1884 – 1885 at which the contending
European
>> powers laid down ways and means of partitioning and colonizing
the
>> continent without coming to blows among themselves. The
conference
>> lasted
>> from November 1884 to January 1885, when the assembled European
>> countries
>> signed the Berlin Act laying down rules and procedures for the
orderly
>> partitioning and colonization of Africa.
>> The Berlin Act set out four major rules for the partitioning
of Africa.
>> One, any European country making claim to an African territory
must
>> inform
>> the others to see if there was a counter claim. In case of a
counter
>> claim, the matter was to be settled peacefully. Two, once a
European
>> country claims a territory, it must proceed to effectively
occupy that
>> territory. Three, all European countries were free to extend
their
>> territory as much as they could without encroaching on another
European
>> country’s territory. And four, the Congo and Niger rivers,
which were
>> hotly contested in the early stages of the scramble, were open
to free
>> navigation by all European countries. European countries
proceeded to
>> either forcefully annex African territories or sign “treaties
of
>> protection” with African rulers as a way of laying claim to
their
>> territories. Those rulers that resisted encroachment were
defeated or
>> otherwise “pacified” through superior European fire power.
While there
>> were instances of fierce and protracted resistance by African
rulers
>> like
>> Samori Toure, superior firepower meant that Europe was able to
>> effectively
>> subdue and colonize the entire African continent by the end of
the first
>> decade of the 20th century.
>> This meant that by the outbreak of the First World War in
1914, the
>> political map of Africa had been transformed into a series of
colonial
>> territories that became the basis for the present day
nation-state
>> system
>> on the continent. African colonies had most of the trappings
of European
>> nation states: they had clearly defined boundaries and
institutions such
>> as legislatures and judiciaries modeled on the European
system. However,
>> while the bare structure of the nation state system was in
place, the
>> substance of national sovereignty was clearly absent. The
rights and
>> freedoms enjoyed by European publics were not extended to the
subject
>> peoples of colonial Africa. Indeed, in a lot of cases, colonial
>> administrators enforced laws in African colonies that had long
been
>> extinct in their countries back in Europe. Moreover, even as
late as
>> 1939
>> when the Second World War broke out, no European country was
seriously
>> contemplating the idea of independent African nation states.
Indeed, it
>> was only after the end of the Second World War in 1945 that
countries
>> like
>> Britain and France started seriously thinking about preparing
their
>> African colonies for self-rule, a process they anticipated
would take at
>> least fifty years to complete.
>> As fate would have it, over 90% of African countries became
independent
>> by
>> 1965, only twenty years after the end of the Second World War.
The new
>> African nation states had all the trappings of European nation
states,
>> from a national flag to a national anthem and legislative,
judicial and
>> executive branches of government. However, like the colonies
they
>> replaced, these new nation states lacked the substance of
>> nation-statehood. Their beautifully written constitutions
looked just
>> like
>> European constitutions, with the rights, duties and
responsibilities of
>> citizenship neatly laid out in black and white. It now fell to
the new
>> governments to flesh out these skeletal nation states with the
substance
>> they needed to function effectively. Sadly, almost all of them
failed in
>> this very important task and for this reason, the great
majority of
>> African countries remain mere political skeletons to this day.
The
>> rights
>> and freedoms for which African independence was sought and
attained
>> remain
>> elusive for the great majority of Africans as the new nation
states
>> remain
>> mired in the aura of colonial authoritarianism. We will
examine some of
>> the reasons for this failure and its consequences in our next
>> installment.
>>
>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>> To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to
the
>> Gambia-L
>> Web interface
>> at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>>
>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
>> To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>> [log in to unmask]
>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
> --
> www.vollensolutions.com
> Tel: 66900249
> Mob: 91255698
> Email:
>
[log in to unmask]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
> To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the
Gambia-L
> Web interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To
contact the
> List Management, please send an e-mail to:
> [log in to unmask]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
--
www.vollensolutions.com
Tel: 66900249
Mob: 91255698
Email: [log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤To
unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interfaceat: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-lTo contact
the List Management, please send an e-mail
to:[log in to unmask]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
|
