•••[Britain & Decolonisation]•••
Subject.
•Empire
->Mother country (Metropole) who has control over other areas of territory outside of itself.
->Eg. Roman Empire
•Colony
->Land or territory controlled by another Country.
-->Could be legal or economic control, cultural imposition or just close co-operation
-->Can be 'dominion' status where country has control over domestic policy. Eg. Canada & Australia.
•Imperial
->Derivation from word empire.
->Eg 'of the empire'
- - - - - - - - - -
Exam Vocab
•Turning point
->Comparison of situations before & after 'event'. Differences noted & explanation of how important 'event' was in bringing about the differences.
->Eg. Was y a turning point in Britains relations with x.
->Eg turning points : assasinations, wars, revolution. Social & economic trends not really seen as turning points
•17th Century to Mid 19th Century.
>Definitions
•The Settlement Empire
->Countries that had been granted self-government for their internal affairs.
-->Eg Canada, Queensland etc. Note: all those granted early self rule = white citizenship & government nations.
•The Dependant Empire
->Countries under direct rule.
-->Usualy economically under developed nations.
•Free Trade
->Tariff free trade, without economic bariers etc.
-->Eg. Ending of corn laws.
--->Meant Britain was competing with its colonies for trade.
•Devolution of Political Power
->Transfering of power from a central economy to local authorities but without a sacrifice of sovereignty.
Colonisation and decolonisation went on in parallel. E.g. Canada was a self-governing colony by 1867, but Britain was still gaining colonies in 1919.
•1880 - 1900 90% of Africa was aquired by European powers.
->Only Ethiopia & Liberia not colonised.
->Pre 1880 only limited British colonies (basically trading posts)
•••[The Scramble for Africa]•••
•Nation state imposed on Africa by European powers.
->Concept was alien to Africa. No established state system for tribes to unite within to campaign for independance.
->Colony borders often straight lines drawn on maps by European.
•African History.
->Arab & Muslim influence in Northern states from 7th C. conquests by Arabs.
-->Seed for religious conflicts when Europeans arive.
->Ethiopia survived as an Xian state. Many African states had been Xian pre-Islam.
->Slave trade led to fire arms being introduced into Africa.
-->Control of fire arms affected development of nations.
->16 C. Only Europeans in South. Established trading posts. Brought in slaves from other areas. Led to conflicts between indiginous people and colonisere (and their slaves)
->1814 Britain took over trading post in South.
->Exploration in 19th C. led to moves into the interior
->Missionaries moving into Africa also added to move into interior.
]->Commerce & Christianity function of entry into Africa.
->Industrial revolution made Britain the world power. Trade increase 10x w/ Britain at the centre.
-->Britain needed raw materials from Africa. Consumer society caused the demand.
--->Eg. Ivory Trade, Cocoa etc.
->Pre-1870s trade had generally been private enterprise. British gov. wanted Trade but Not Rule.
-->Began to change in 1870s. Free trade ended & protectionist policies grew up as result of economic depression.
--->European powers asserted spheres of influence and colonies developed.
---->Colonies often 'aquired' by explorers etc. ahead of Gov. wishes.
---->Breakup of North African countries governments led to more British colonies in these areas.
•European view of Africa
->Pre-1850 : seen as series of coasts.
->1850 onwards : view of Africa as whole began to evolve.
->During 16 C. Portugese developed coastal forts & trading posts.
->Europe, American & African trade system evolved w/ Europeans dominant.
->Slave trade developed.
-->90% of trade w/ Africa in Slaves. Led to perception of inferiority of Blacks.
->Exploration in 19th C. led to moves into the interior. Explorers helped perception of Africa as a whole.
•Internal African Empire Building
->Not only Europeans building empires.
-->Internal religious of teritorial empires developed through fundamentalist Jihads.
-->Eg. Zulu nation.
•South Africa
->Discovery of Gold and diamonds in the interior meant British interest switched to interior from the coast.
-->Much of takeover of South Africa down to Rhodes (oxford graduate and imperial ruler)
--->Used many methods to ensure British had control of African interior.
---->His mistakes led to Boer war which led to annexinq of Boer states.
- - - - - - - - - -
•••[Key Points]•••
•Power Differentiation between Europe and Africa.
->Industrial
->Technoloqical
->Organisational
•Informal franco-english aqreements replaced by 'free for all'
•Important of colonies as status symbols. Projection of developinq internal nationism onto Africa by European states.
•••[Egypt]•••
•Egypt
->Former technological & cultural development of Egypt meant it was not considered 'backwards' in the same way as Sub-Saharan Africa was.
->North coast of Africa on the Med.
-->Britain had control of many islands in the Med.
-->Suez canal & NE corner of Egypt.
--->Suez canal of significant strategic & trade importance. Save large amounts of shipping time. Suez canal also v. important for communications with the empire & transport of millitary.
]->Britain wanted to maintain good relationships with Egypt for access to the Suez canal from its openning in 1869.
•Egypt became hiqhly reliant upon European loans.
•Instability in Egypt and with colapse of Otaman empire meant Britain gained control of Egypt.
->In order to gain control of Egypt in the 1880s Britain used force.
•••[Sudan]•••
•South of Egypt.
->Control of the Nile.
-->Fear that French could take control of the Sudan and 'take revenge' for British take over of Egypt.
•Religious Leader (the Mahdi) causing problems in Sudan (pro-Muslim & anti-xtian). British 'hero', General Gordon, sent to region. Was killed. British desire for revenge.
->Many nations scrambling for control of Sudan.
-->Britain sent well equipped troops to defeat Mahdi groups.
•1898 - Fashoda incident - Britain used force to ensure French could not block the Nile
- - - - - - - - - -
•Suez built by French & initially controlled by a French company.
->Benjamin Disraeli bought 51% share in Suez canal company.
•British had captured Cape Colony in 1806 & had a significant navac base in the Cape of Good Hope.
•Boers - Protestant Dutch farmers.
->Anti-British
->Came into conflict with British & Zulus.
•British & Boers came into conflict. Boers moved inland where they came into conflict w/ the Zulus.
->Boers asked British for help.
-->British move into Transvaal (Boer territory) & defeat Zulus but do not move out again.
--->Boers then attack British and Boers gain limited self governance.
(•Motive for holdinq Boer territory
->Keeping Germans or others from gaining the teritory
->Potential for resources)
•••[Background]•••
•Cecil Rhodes - British coloniser
->Arived in South Africa in 1870 (age 17) & made a fortune diamond mining.
->Became interested in 'improvement of Africa'.
->Believed in English (term used interchangably with British at the time) / anglo-saxon superiority as a race and viewed Africans as uncivilised. Had an aim for furthurance of the empire - 'bringing the whole of the uncivilised world under British rule'.
-->Note : Rhodes views were a minority view.
•••[Video notes]•••
•Started in farming & got on well with native Africans
->Whilst in Africa diamonds & qold are discovered in Kimberly in the Transvaal.
•Rhodes did well from diamond mines.
->Planned to use his money & power to create British owned belt from Cape to Cairo across Africa.
•Elected to the Cape Parliament.
->In cape colony blacks had siqnificant riqhts. But Boers did not want this. Rhodes for his own political reasons was willing to join with Boers.
-->Not for anti-black reasons but political.
--->But his political manoveurs took the vote from the blacks.
•In economic terms Rhodes attacks on black riqhts arguably functioned to create (or aimed to create) a controlled labour force.
->Needed to be native labour force (Europeans not suited to climate etc.)
•Next target was Northwards expansion.
->Through violence took control of teritory he called Rhodesia.
-->Machine guns of Rhode company vs. spears of natives.
•Made PM of Cape.
•Gold was discovered in Transvaal. Wanted to take control of Area to prevent Boers gaining strength.
->Attack launched into Transvaal. Attack was a failure and percieved as unprovoked attack on independent state.
-->British then sent troops to Boer War.
•Second Boer War
->British army sent to end Boer independence.
-->To finnish job Rhodes failed.
->British army ill prepared - not expectinq / ready for armed oponents.
->1/4 million troops sent to Boer war
-->British suffered major setbacks.
--->Eventually qained upper hand, but Boers fought a gorrilla war.
---->British fought war of attrition - concentration camps etc.
]->Victoria died
-->Realised that Rhodes had overstretched the empire
--->Boer states soon gained independence.
•Effect on Empire
->Watched closely in India.
-->Saw Britain militarily stretched.
->Destroyed Myth of British Military independence.
-->Encouraging to those who wanted to overthrow British.
->Potentially hastened setting up of Australian state.
->No real impact on Central Africa, Malaya etc.
•••[Metropolitan Theories]•••
Arguments based upon the 'metropol', centre (mother country).
•J.A.Hobson: Overseas investment
->Advanced in 'Imperialism, A Study' in 1902 by J.A.Hobson.
-->Purely economic explanation.
--->Saw partition of Africa as deliberate British policy for benefit of elite group of 'greedy capitalist' investors.
]->Criticisms
-->Most of the British investment in late C19 & C20 was going to the setlement colonies, the USA & Latin America, NOT Tropical Africa. (Economics & Empire (1973 - D.K.Fieldhouse))
(--->However - economic decisions at the time would have been on the basis of expected returns on investment, not the now known figures.)
•Lenin: Crisis of Capitalism
->Advanced in 'Imperialism: The Hiqhest Stage of Capitalism' (1916) by V.I.Lenin.
-->Purely economic explanations.
--->Put forward that 'a crisis in the capitalist economic system' in the late C19 was behind European expansion in Africa.
---->To many nations chasing to few markets. Therefore colonial expansion was to maintain capitalism.
----->For new markets & raw materials.
------>European governments were simply 'the puppets' of capitalist businessmen.
•Schumpeter: Crisis of Hereditary Elites.
->Put forward in 'The Sociology of Imperialism' (1951 J.A.Schumpeter)
-->A non-economic explanation for imperialism.
-->Old aristocratic elites were losing out in industrialised nations. Colonisation was a search for aristocrats to regain their 'glory'.
--->Seeking power and imperial glory abroad due to feeling a threat of extinction from the rising business class and working class movements in Europe.
]->Criticisms
-->British artistocracy didn't widely fit into this concept. Many were 'progressive, gentrlemanly capitalists'.
•Hobsbawm: Industry and Empire
->Put forward in 'Industry and Empire' in 1968 by Eric Hobsbawm (Marxist)
-->Suggests that because Europeans had the ability to take the colonies then they did.
--->Suggests that the technical superiority was the cause, rather than just the pre-requisite of colonisation.
•Peter Cain and Tony Hopkins : 'Gentlemanly Capitalism'
->Put forward in 'British Imperialism: Inovation and Expansion 1688-1914' (1993) by P.J.Cain and A.G.Hopkins
-->Strong challenge to marxist interpretations.
--->New London based capitalists developed along with existing elites into new 'Gentlemanly Capitalist Elite'
---->Not industrialists or laborours. Public school & oxbridge educated. Wealthy. Shared values.
----->These are the investors in the empire. British government supported these people, as the British government was made up of these people.
}->Post 1870 investment abroad and pressure on government to protect their interests. Whilst government presented its actions as in the national interest - they were really in the interest of the Gentemanly capitalist elite.
•••[Peripheral Theories]•••
Explanation looking at interactions between changes internally in Africa and European imerial ambitions.
•Gallagher & Robinson (1961)
->Put forward in 'Africa and the Victorians: The Official Mind of Imperialism' (1961) by Gallagher & Robinson.
->Britain wanted 'informal control' of trade. Company control and not British government control. Only wanted to support formal rule when trade was threatened by civil disorder or the ambitions of a rival power.
-->Indian and East African events seem to support this idea
-->Reluctant British government was 'dragged in' to control.
--->View that British involvment in South Africa was as a result of events in Africa, not as a result of pressure from London or capitalism or Britain. (argued that pull style involvment holds across all colonisation)
->Belief that throughout the duration of the partition Britain looked at her srategic role in the world and took tle notice of business lobbies or public opinion.
(A: Fawlklands is another good example of the Gallagher & Robinson theory that British intervention is reactionary to events on the ground in the colonised areas to protect British interests / principles. Protection of credibility and interests.)
•The 'Men on the Spot Factor'
->Looks at the importance of 'men on the spot'.
-->E.g. Rhodes in South Africa, Peters and McKinnon in East Africa.
--->Claimed that these ment had their own schemes and built their own local power, subsequently gaining the support of their government to enact colonisation.
•African Nationalism
->Emphasises the role of the Africans in the partition. Collaboration between African rulers, states and merchants and European powers.
-->Whilst some African tribes (e.g. Zulus) fought to retain their independence others sought agreements with the European powers.
--->E.g.One letter from African kings requests British control.
---->However, many African nations not 'nation states' with no specific boundries.
(A:->African culture was still largely spoken (passed down word of mouth), whereas European culture was written.
-->European historians had largely disregarded spoken tradition evidence. African historians have emphasised the value of this.)
•••[International Relations Theory]•••
Theories that set the partition of Africa within a Global framework.
•The Primacy of Political and Diplomatic Factors
->Put forward in 'The struggle for the Mastery in Europe' (1954 by A.J.P. Taylor)
-->Suggests Partition of African resulted from changes in the power politics and society in Europe. Advances that creation of Germany in 1871 upset the power balance in Europe. (France-Russia vs. Germany-Austria-Hungary became power ballanced and therefore a power deadlock in Europe) Power deadlock led to growth of Nationalism, which was acted out in overseas colonisation.
--->Colonisation as a result of rivalry between European powers, not events in Africa
]->Explains the partition of Africa as a result of an international power game as opposed to 'on the ground' events in the African continent.
]->This view formerly favoured by Historians scuh as D.K.Fieldhouse, but later greater emphasis was placed upon economic pull factors bringing European powers into Europe.
•The Rise and Fall of Great Powers
->Put forward in 'The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" (1988 by Paul Kennedy)
-->Examines the Partition in the context of rise and fall of major world powers in History.
--->Colonisation of Africa seen as the attempt by the European powers to emulte the British rise to status of a great power (during British industrial revoloution from 1815-1870 when Britain had developed the free-trade, naval power, investment and colony model of power)
---->As European powers went for African colonies, Britain responded and did the same.
----->While Britian did not have the population for armies of conquest, it had the technology to do so. E.g. Guns etc.
]->View that for European powers colonies became seen as a sign of prestige as a result of Britains initial economically motivated colonisation during industrialisation.
]->This argument combine s evidence from metropolitan and periferal theories.
-->Has the advantage of explaining the motivations of all the European powers.
•Boers - Protestant Dutch farmers.
->Anti-British
->Came into conflict with British & Zulus.
•Cecil Rhodes - British coloniser
->Arived in South Africa in 1870 (age 17) & made a fortune diamond mining.
->Became interested in 'improvement of Africa'.
->Believed in English (term used interchangably with British at the time) / anglo-saxon superiority as a race and viewed Africans as uncivilised. Had an aim for furthurance of the empire - 'bringing the whole of the uncivilised world under British rule'.
-->Note : Rhodes views were a minority view.
•1919 - ToV gives UK German colonies & mandates on ex-Ottoman empire countries.
•1922 - Egypt given complete independence.
->Apart from Suez Canal zone.
]•Both aquiring & relinquishing colonies at the same time.
•1923 - Rhodesia gains limited self governance.
->White farming elite minority gained self-governance powers, not black majority.
•1931 - Statute of Westminister
->Act to give effect to resolutions from Imperial Conferences 1926 & 1930.
-->Gave increased power to the Dominion states.
--->Complete control of domestic affairs and most foreign affairs
---->Still govenor general. Appeals still went to House of Lords. Few other small reservations of power but Dominion states made effectivly independent.
•1932 - Iraq gains independence.
•1932 - Ottawa conference.
->Empire countries got favourable trading terms with Britain.
-->Helped Dominion states (& colonies) but harmed Britain. Dominion states able to avoid protectionist tariffs & quotas within empire. Able to export raw materials to Britain.
-->Form of protectionism for the empire.
•Sept 1939 - Britain declared war on Germany. Colonies expected to join war also. Dominions declared war also.
- - - - - - - - -
•British attitudes towards colonies in 1930s
->People not v. Interested in empire issues, more concerned with domestic economic issues.
->Growth of Socialism. Incompatible with empire.
->Empire subsiding as neccessary symbol of British status. Changing moods.
->WWI changed attitudes towards war. Some turned against maintainance of control through force & war.
->Liberal & Labour parties hostile towards idea of empire.
-->Not big issue for public. Colonial issue had no significant impact on any British elections.
•WWII
->V. Significant.
•Key factors
->Growth of Socialism
-->USSR Influence.
--->Lenin regarded colonies as a stage of capitalism.
-->Labour governments in the UK.
--->Socialst attitude was generally anti-colonial.
->Population growth across the world.
->Growth of the middle classes
-->Particularly in India.
->Problems with world trade
-->Great depression etc.
->Growth in nationalism (?)
-->Historians disagree on this point.
•••[India]•••
Only 60% under UK control
India, located on the Asian continent, did not gain the status of British colony through a single event, but from the 1600s onwards British infuence and rule evolved both through consensus with Indian domestic rule and through conflict. The effective colonisation of India began with the East India Company's, a British Royal chartered body of merchants, opening trade with India. The company, recognising the strategic trading importance of India, a land rich in ???????, soon sought to establish a British presence in India, including the building of a British factory in India in 1619, and the founding of a British fort in Madras in 1639. The most significant 'landmark' in Indian colonisation was a British millitary victory in 1757 which led to the effective conversion of the East India Company into rulers holding political sovereignty. Although Britain only ever controlled 60% of India, the 1800s saw British expansion of teritory on grounds including that the native leaders were inept, corrupt of had no heirs. The imposed rule by British appointed govenors was partly justified by claims Indians needed 'civilisation' and the reliable system of Justice, rule of law and the notion of fair play the govenors could implement could provide this.
The assertion of of power by the govenors included outlawinq some disliked Indian social and religious practise; controversial action in the Indian nation where Islam, Sikhism and Hinduism were all common religions.
Turning Points
WW1 , aroused nationalist attitudes - why should they fiqht for Britain?
WW2 Indians feeling oppressed and beginning to call for independance during war.
Ghandi's release from prison in1944.
- - - - - - - - - -
Opposition to British colonial rule in India
•Trade with India began in 1600. East India Company granted royal charter.
•1609 - first (unsucessful) request to establish British presence in India. 1617 saw more success with British fort established in 1939.
•1757 - British victory in Bengal led to East India Company transforming to rulers exercising political sovereignty. Company control expanded and process of introducing India to British culture, history and social customs began.
•British appointed govenors authority partly justified by claims Indians needed 'civilisation' and the reliable system of Justice, rule of law & notion of fair play would provide this.
•Britain imposed its wishes, for example outlawinq some disliked Indian social & religious practise.
•1840s-50s saw expansion of teritories on grounds including that the native leaders were inept, corrupt of had no heirs.
•Raw Materials
->Salt
->&.......
•Religions
->Islam
->Sikhism
->Hinduism
•Strategic importance to Britain.
->Trading post etc.
•Map
james.mcinnes@havant.co.uk
•1526 - Mugal empire estabilshed by invasion through Afganistan. Muslim led invastion ended up covering a lot of the NW of India (Capital Delhi). Mughal empire spread South over next 150 years - Muslims and Hindus managed to live peacefully side by side.
->Period of relative peace and prosperity that encouraged setting up of European trading posts and forts.
-->Whilsts Muslims only 21% of population, the Mughal empire meant they had more influence in India than this 21%
-->Mughal expansion South limited by hostile Hindu Marathas forces who pushed to expand Northwards,coming into conflict with the Mughals. (around 1670s)
-->European conflicts were speading to India, where for example British and French trading areas came into conflict to reflect Anglo-Franco conflicts in Europe.
--->British victory in Anglo-french conflicts in India led to Britain gaining more control and teritory.
--->British also came into contact with Hindu Marathas, who were not tollerant of European trading posts in the same way the Mughals had been. British won in these conflicts
---->In 13 Mughal Empire requested British protection from Marathas
->Much British foreign policy for india during colony time was concerned with securing the Mughal empire areas borders with Afganistan to prevent Russian invasion throgh this way.
•East India Company
->Royal Charter gave East-India company the authority to rule as well as trade.
-->East-India company gathered territory
-->1773 British Regulating Act & 1784 India Act - set that new areas coming under British control would come under Parliamentary Control. East-India company continued to be the representatives of the British government in India.
--->Parliament sent out Richard Wellesley to consolidate territories and bring them in line with Parliamentart guidelines. Under Wellesley expansion continued, much taking place under 'Protectorates', where local princes requested British influence.
---->1833 - East India company loses its comercial arm and centres on governing India on behalf of the crown.
----->Parliament asked that East-Indian company should ensure that the need, sensibilities and interests of the Indians should come above those of the Europeans where the two came into conflict.
•Views of India
->C18-C19
-->C18 - Idea of mutual dependence. Acceptance between the nations of customs etc. Under East-India company who were operating for profit, and with no great agenda for social change in India (or for 'civilisation')
-->Perception of British Parliament in early C19 as 'temporary foster parents' of India. Idea of Britain on a civilising mission.
•The Indian Mutiny
->Somewhere in middle C19 the British seemed to lose touch with the Indian subjects.
-->See Indian Mutiny Handout.
--->Steam ships meant British domestic bliss could be recreated in India, damaging the closeness between the Brisish and the India
--->Missionary intervention also caused tension.
---->It became easier for a recreation of Britian in India to take place. Many reforms to India were attempted by British governors, many of which strongy conflicted with Indian social customs.
•Causes of the Indian Mutiny
->Lack of respect for religious customes (Bullet cartridges given to Sepoys contained Pig and Cow fat)
->Economic Grievances
-->Post-East-India company - India was swamped with cheap British goods.
-->Land bought up by British property developers imposing high rent.
-->Low prices paid for Indian produced export goods.
->Political Grievances
-->Territorial expansion - w/ recent annexations including Punjab, Sind, Berar and Oudh.
-->Policy of Westernisation - impinging upon Indian everyday life. Villiage Schools, national laws, central legal system, English style postal system all introduced to India. Many Indians felt they were being forced for accept an alien culture.
->British failure to recognise the weakness of their own situation.
-->British reliant upon Sepoy forces for their own protection.
(cont)
•Results of the Mutiny
->Turning point in British rule of India.
-->Involvment of East-India company in governance ended.
--->Begining of total British government rule.
-->British army reformed. Sepoy influence limited.
-->Policy of appeasment adopted. Local governments (Princes etc) given control of matters of social, religious and cultural importance.
- - - - - - - - - -
•Nature of British Rule
->Less than 3,000 British appointed officials ruling over nearly 300 million people.
-->95% of Administrator were englishmen.
--->Variety of attitudes amongst adminstrators. Some aloof, some empathetically involved.
->General feeling amongst educated Indians that they were seen as 2nd class citizens.
->Whilst promise of ' equality of opportunity' for Indians was made, this did not occur. Discrimination on entry into the civil service for example.
->Britain eventually promised non-intervention in religous practises.
]->British 'authority figure' paternal relationship with India.
•Economic policy & devt.
->Rail network developed.
-->International goods could reach the Indian interior easily. Undermined local markets and industries.
-->Easy transportation of goods encouraged Indian to go in for cash-crops. Farmers then found themselves competing on the international grain market, where they could not compete well, and crop failure led to great damage to the agriculture. Undermined self sufficiency abilities of peasants.
->Big business did well but local peasantries suffered from entry to international markets.
-->Indians felt victims of Western ecomomic policies. Indian led entrepreneurial industry led to realisation india could survive independantly.
- - - - - - - - - -
•Only 61% ever directly governed by London. The rest under indirect rule where local governments or leaders with domestic control but foreign policy London controlled
•••[Development of Indian Nationalism]•••
The Indian association was founded in 1876 and was popular among young, proffessional Bengalis. It opposed lowing the age of entry to ICS as it disadvantaged Indian applicants. Campaigned against the Venacular Press Act (1878). Advocated for local self-government and tenent rights. Not heard of after 1888. Superceeded by Indian National Congress.
Indian National Congress first met in Bombay in 1885. 54 Delegates were Hindu, 2 were Muslim. Took over from the Indian Association. Its leaders were young and educated. It estabished local, provincial political associations,.
National Congress emerged as an elite of middle class intelectuals dedicated to peaceful action and protest.
National congress believed, amonst other things, that poverty in India was as a result of British exploitation of its natural resources and the import of cheap British manafactures.
Most Britains in India didn't think the National Congress had any great importance.
The partition of Bengal nearly caused open rebellion and was deeply unpopular and contentious issues for several years. Perceived by National congress as British 'divide and rule' policy. British set up seperate Muslim state.
Tide of nationalism rose in Bengal and spread across India. Boycotts of British goods by Bengali Hindus. Indians switched to only homespun 'swadeshi' cottens and cloths. Aided Indian industry. Demands for national education and swaraj (home rule) were made and apopted by National Congress as part of campaign platform in 1906.
Bal Gangadar Tialk was a journalist leading the more revolutionary elements of Indian nationalism. Inspired by orthodox Hindusm & Indian history. Jailed for sedition. Advocated swaraj & recruited nationalists from non-English educated Hindus. Alienated many Muslim Indian nationalists.
Indian Muslims founded the Muslim League. Aimed to safeguard Muslim interests in viceroys reforms. Muslim league generally supported British. National congress percieved British treatment of Muslims as continuation of divide & rule.
1906 UK Liberal government in Uk. Implemented more reform. General liberal approach is to prepare India for future self rule. Much from Morley's attitude. Indian representation in councils increased.
Moderate nationaists used reforms to pursue their aims peacefully. However, millitant Indian nationalism saw growth. Repression by viceroy encouraged more militancy
National Congress split in two in 1907.
British action in early 1900s found it tricky to satisfy both Muslims & Hindus.
Militancy continued but moderate aproach maintained.
British policy became meeting the 'just' demands ofte Indians for a greater share in Government.
Main exam focus.
•How did Britain maintain its control over India.
->Originally run by the East-Indian company till mutiny in 1857. From 1858 British actually governed India.
->Only ever controlled 60% of India.
-->Still exerted major social & economic influence over rest of India.
->Control maintained by force in case of mutiny. Most of the fighting by Indian sepoys loyal to the British.
-->No real nationalism or national identity amongst Indians. Many diverse groups, 'kingdoms' & communities in India. No actual 'entity' of India with a cohesive community.
--->Caste system - limited political awareness of masses. Who governs them is generally irrelevant to the lower castes. Only proffessional & upper-middle class interested in independence.
->Increasingly allowed Indians to participate in the governing of the country.
-->Few were demandinq independence but there was a wish for a greater say in decision making
->Main control in power of the Viceroys - governed India.
-->3,000 or so British directly involved in governance of country. Most control by Indians under British direction.
-->Increasingly centralised government replaced Indian princedoms. British had effective political controll, made laws etc.
->Economy became closely linked with Britain. Many reliant on Britain for jobs.
->Taxation.
-->Became illegal to make own salt. Had to be bought and was taxed.
->Education.
-->To advance english speaking was neccesary
->Much of British rule was with consent or acquiescence of Indians.
-->Helped by low material expectation of Indians.
->Style of rule varied with viceroy
•In what ways did Independence movements develop in the country?
•Turning points
->1857 Indian mutiny - end of control by East-India country & start of direct British rule.
•••[Expansion in India]•••
•1858 - Victoria became Emporess of India & British government took control
->Only minor expansion after this point. Small agreements.
->No contraction of India pre-1940.
•Amritsar masacre
->Had been civil unrest, breakdown of law & order & anti-Britisy political meetings.
-->Ghandi (moral leader) had been jailed.
--->Released on proviso that political meetings would stop.
---->Political meeting was taking place in Amritsar (illegally). Meeting was non-violent.
----->General Dyer ordered Indian troops under his command to shoot to break up political meeting. Death toll of 300+
------>Dyer court marshalled. Showed Dyers actions not representative of British - rouge action.
->Consequences
-->Serious damage to Britians reputation worldwide.
->Government of India act.
•Ghandi
->Moral leader
->Wanted British out of India
->Pursued campaign of civil disobedience.
>Declaration of war.
•Viscount declares war w/ no consultation.
->Sparked greater 'non-violent' resistance movement
-->Violence develops on both sides
•Jinnah (leader of Muslim league) became convinced of need for seperate Pakistan as Muslim state.
->Hindus still wanted united India
]->Disagreements in independance movement arguably slowed down decolonisation
•During war
->British empire in far-east lost to Japanese
->Some Japanese entry into India.
-->Some Indians join with British, some with Japanese.
--->Most with Britain. Majority British support from Muslims - Jinnahs strategy to
co-operate with British during war and then recieve repayment post-war.
•Congress Party (majority Hindu) began their quit India campaign.
->Congress party leaders imprisoned.
-->Active rebellions developed
-- >British decide to co-operate with Muslim Leaque.
•1943 - New Viceroy Wavell wanted to brinq Indians into government to prepare for independence. Denied by Westminister cabinet & Churchill.
->General political mood was pro-independence. Inevitable by 1945. Churchill was exceptional in wish to keep India.
-->Churchill pushed his policy in precedence of Wavells.
--->Near ellection Churchill gave in more to Wavell
•Ghandi released and met with Jinnah.
->Brouqht great publicity to Jinnah.
->Some compromise but still conflict between the two.
•Post WWI
->Wavell called discussions for the future.
-->Congress damaged post-war but Muslim league strengthened.
--->Jinnah got many concessions - but pushed even further. Wanted Muslim League to be sole represenative of Muslim people. Not accepted by Congress. Jinnah pushed for independant Muslim state.
•India due independence in 1948, but actually occurred in 1947 due to fear of violence.
->Mountbatton, last Viceroy of India, brought date forward.
•1920'-1930's Britain
->Economic depression.
-->High unemployment
--->Gov expenditure cut.
->Maintainance of India was big cost.
-->Gradually more power given to Indians.
--->Not quickly enough for those campaigning for independence.
•Early 1930's
->Series of 'Round Table' Conferences held in London.
-->Britain making an effort to keep dialouge moving - but still not enough, or fast enough for Indian seperatists.
->1935 Government of India Act
-->Show Britain trying to make concessions to independence campaigners.
--->However, the Act failed.
•Government of India Act (1935)
->Increased self governance for 11 Indian provinces.
-->40% of land of India was governed by Indian princes. All 570 princely states were supposed to jain provinces
-->Provinces would have degree of self-governance. There would be a central parliament also.
->Viceroy to retain control over Foreign affairs and finances.
]->British were aiming for a federal system of government
•Quit India Movement
->Hindu based independance movement.
-->Believed every concession from British had to be fought for.
-->Believed British only held onto power through opression
•Many Indians didn't care much about independence
->Only really an issue for the middle classes.
•Post WW1
->Britain concerned that empire of India was no longer economically viable.
->During WW1 British gov had declared aim of 'progressive realisation of responsible government in India'
-->1919 Government of India Act gave more indians the vote.
-->1919 India became a member of the LoN
•Who wanted Independence?
->Congress Party
-->Largly Hindu. Set up in 1880's by the British to get Indians to have a greater say in the running of the country. Not originally aiming for independence. This aim emerged post WWI.
->Quite Indian Campaign
-->Led by Bhose (Leader of Indian National Army)
->Muslim League
-->Led by Jinnah who wanted a seperate Muslim League.
->General View
-->Most people were a-political and held no views. Most just followed the masses and their publicity campaigns.
•Jinnah
->Without Jinnah Indian would have become independent as a single state.
•Post WWI British Attitudes
->British had duel policy of concession and repression.
-->Realised it was impractical to keep India due to virtual bankruptcy post WWI and the damaged trade systems (paricularly cotton).
->American gained more power and the international climate meant that colonial expansion was limited.
-->Pre-war colonies had been a status symbol. Post-war this was no longer so. Imperialism became a minority interest.
•Other Factors
->Japanese victories pushed India towards independence.
-->Japan had taken British-Asian colonies, so why shouldn't India become free of Britain too.
•Conclusions
->The Independence movements were all important and pushed British views.
-->But economic and political situations also played a big role.
->Ghandi was highly important as a Moral Leader.
-->He had support primarily from the Hindus, but more all classes.
--->Ghandi was sometimes seen as above criticism.
->Jinnahs actions seperated the Independence movement.
->The Indian perspective is that Britain was forced out by the Independence movements, although most historians would argue a lot more factors were involved.
•Indian view
->Action taken by groups like congress
•Alternative view
->Changinq political & economic situation of Britain made she could no longer keep controll of India.
-->No domestic objections in UK to Indian indedendence by WWII.
•To what extent was WWI a a turning point?
>Before
->1914 - No real doubt that India would remain a colony.
->Small amount of Indian involvement in administration.
>After
->1919 - Dual strategy ('Concession & Repression')
-->Government of India Act (increased role of Indians in admin of their own affairs,
-->Outlawing of political parties. Amritsar masacre (not British sanctioned but indicative of repression)
>Effect of WWI
->High reduction in trade between UK and India
-->India had to find markets for own goods.
-->Started domestically producinq goods formerly bought from GB.
]->India no longer economically viable for GB
]->India began to feel it could survive without GB
->Changing attitudes towards colonies. Woodrow Willsons ideas of self determination. Contratiction of Britain fighting for countries independence whilst maintaining its colonies.
•Ceylon
->Gained independence in 1948.
-->Two groups: Tamils (Indian Hindus) and the Sinhalese (Indigenous Buddhist Majority)
--->To avoid opposition the British funded the restoration of the central Buddhist temple.
---->Pleased the Sinhalese who remained happy with British rule.
--->British brought tea (and some coffee) to start highly profitable plantations in Ceylon.
->In the end Britain simply gave up Ceylon because India and Pakistan gained independence.
•••[Decolonisation]•••
•Geography
->Land linked to Thailand (not under British rule)
->Surounded by British & Dutch colonies.
->Pacific Rim area.
->When talkinq of Malaya reference is also made to Singapore, located at base of Malaya and now one of the worlds major cities.
-->Singapore had v. good harbour.
->Aprox. 45% of pop. Chinese, 40% Malay, 15% Indian.
•Pre-WWII
->Malaya had been under British rule
•During WWII
->Malaya taken by Japanese.
-->Major blow to British pride & confidence.
->Malayan Peoples' Anti-Japanese Army fought.
-->Chinese led. Dominated by the communists
--->Meant post liberation - Chinese & Communists in Malaya wanted say in Government of the country.
•Post WWII
->1945 - Japanese left.
->Britain needed rubber supplies from Malaya.
->Britain wasn't sure what to do with Malaya
-->Wanted to economically exploit empire post-war for raw materials. (with 1947 loss of India the impetus for this increased)
-->Britain not sure who to give independence to in Malaya. (Malayans or Chinese Communists)
--->Concern that if independence given to small states like Singapore & Malaya they would be taken over by communists. To weak to defend themselves. Seen in a cold-war context.
->Internal fighting in Malaya so bad that 1948 Britain declared a State of Emergency (martial law)
-->Not anti-British fiqhting but Chinese Communists vs. Malayans. Ethnic conflict but in terms of Malayans vs. Communists.
--->6 years of in-fighting. Britain sides with Malays to put down communist gorrillas etc. Eventually won in 1955.
-->Had Communist uprising & state of Emergency not occured then indepence would have come in late 1940's.
--->British troops fightinq 48-57 not to keep Malaya but as cold war battle against communists.
---->Fear of Communism as threat to Christian civilisation.
->1955 - Malay federation was set up.
-->1957 - Malay granted independence.
--->Gained independence as Malaysia
-->Gained independence under Tories.
->1963 - Singapore decided to break away and become independent state.
•Malaya gained independence because Britain defeated communism, not because of internal pressure.
->Not forced out, opted out.
-->British economy post-war couldn't support retaining Malaya anymore.
-->Change in international climate.
->Malaysia remained friendly with Britain. Joined the commonwealth.
•Today
->Malaysia is a strict Muslim state.
•Sylabus.
->Need to know Southern Africa & Eastern Africa.
-->South Africa, Rhodesia, Kenya, Uqanda, Tanzania, Malawi, (Botswana, Swaziland)
->Not needing to know about Nigeria & Ghana.
•Independence Dates.
->Ghana - 1957
-->First independant state w/ black majority rule.
->Nigeria - 1960
->Tanganyika & Sierra Leone - 1961
->Uganda - 1962
->Kenya - 1963
->Zambia & Malawi - 1964
->The Gambia - 1965
->Botswana & Lesotho -1965
->Swaziland & Maritius -1968
•Problems with decolonising as nation states.
->Nation states imposed upon African tribal systems by European powers in C19.
-->Borders cut across tribal areas.
--->Simply lines drawn by map makers onto 'the dark continent'
->Decolonisation to take place in terms of nation states.
-->Did not fit with social system of those in the African 'countries'
--->Percieved selves as members of tribes not country.
->Britain wanted to hand over colonies peacefully.
-->But fear between tribes of being dominated by other tribes.
•Need for a peacefull succession delayed decolonisation in Africa.
•Tanganyika
->Former German colony
->Gains independence as Tanzania 1961 with Black majority rule.
-->Britain effectivly gave up and left. No war.
•British set up Central African Federation in 1953
->CAF was not independant but was controled by British.
-->Made up of Nyasaland, N. Rhodesia, S. Rhodesia.
--->Idea was that it was more viable to group colonies.
--->Many Africans within CAF wanted independence.
•CAF Collapsed 1963
->Was never a viable option.
->Existance of CAF delayed states moving to independence.
-->1953 set up of CAF suggests British not wantinq to give up territories of CAF
---># of possible reasons.
---->Threat of small independent states turning Communism.
---->CAF seen as way forward for stabile colonies.
---->Britain not wanting to give up colonies but wanting to have stable situation.
-->Independence down to Tory gov.
•Independence Leaders
>Dr Hastings Banda
->Important independence leader in Nyasaland.
-->Nyasaland National congress leader.
--->Criticised CAF.
---->Mala
>Kenneth Kaunda.
->Zambian independance leader.
]->Pushed Tory gov. and made them move faster towards givinq independence than would have otherwised happen.
->Split Tory view. Some recognised colonies as 'thing of the past', others wanted to hold onto colonies for imperial prestige
•Macmillan spoke winds of change speach to South African parliament in 1960.
->Claim that speach was in fact warning to other European colonisers of the need to address colony issue.
->Interpretted as call for Black majority rule in South Africa & Rhodesia (as opposed to White minority rule)
•Macmillan himself (leader of Tories) did not want to hold onto colonies.
•Colonisation
->Formerly German colony since late 1880's
-->Picked up by Britain through ToV.
--->No expectation of being brought to independance.
•Situation
->White settlers owned much of best agricultural land in country.
-->Upset native tribes (inc. major Kikuyu tribe)
-->Africans restricted to overcrowded tribal reserves
--->Was regarded as land theft by the Europeas.
->Some British did believe native Africans should have more rights and land.
-->But opposed by landed white settlers who feared losing their land and investments under Black authority.
•Political group
->Mau Mau - Secret rural organisation began 1952.
-->If anyone broke Oath of secrecy they were killed.
-->Not totally focussed on political independence - aims based more upon land ownership.
->Kikuyu Central Association
-->First group calling for Kenyan independence.
-->Led by Jomo Kenyatta
->NKG - Rose 1959
-->White businessmen wanting to protect their economic interests.
->Kenyan Trade Unions
-->Post-war began to argue for independence.
•Violence in Kenya 52 - 56
->Three way conflict.
-->Mau Mau rebelion.
--->Eventually put down.
•1957 - Africans have equal say on legislative council.
->54 - Swynnerton Plan to create class of African smallholders with interest in social stability.
->55 - Political parties re-legalised.
->56 - Franchise extended to more Africans.
•Negotiations at Lancaster House in 1962.
->Led to independence in 1963.
-->Effectivly peaceful move to independence
•How important were independence movements.
->Pushing at an open door.
•Misc
->British settlers planted Kenyan hiqhlands with coffee. (KenCo).
•Calls for decolonisation
->Major tribe (bugandans) wanted independence.
-->Other smaller tribes wantinq to keep British control for fear of being dominated by Buganda tribe.
->Bugandans however did not want to be merged into unitary state.
•Possible questions
->Qb - Did the cold war mark a turning point?
->What were the links between the cold war and decolonisation.
•The Cold War
->Disputes over start date
-->1945 at end of WWII.
-->1947 with introduction of Trueman doctorine & Marshall plan. (doctorine : America will support any risinqs against communism / Marsall plan = aid to none-conmunist countries)
->Cold war runs to approx 1990 with fall of USSR
->Cold war = conflict between USSR & Soviet Bloc, vs. America & Americas supporters.
-->Communism vs. capitalism
•Independence
->1947 - 48 : Indian sub-continent (India, Pakistan & Seylon) gains independence.
-->Movement towards independence pre-war.
-->Cold war did not influence India gaining independence.
•>Malaya
->Had been occupied by the Japanese in WWII. Retaken by Britain in 1945 at end of war.
-->Cold war influence.
--->Minor in comparison to Vietnam.
-->Those who had fought vs. Japanese in WWII were Chinese communists.
--->These Chinese wanted say in government when Japanese defeated.
---->Chinese were opposed by native malays.
]->British declare 'state of emergency' & send troops to supress communists.
-->May appear to be simply a cold war battle, but really was as much a racial conflict as political. Each community (Chinese & Malays) feared being in the minority
--->Malaya communists had no support from Soviets but did recieve support from Communist China post-1949.
-->Britain were preparing Malaya for independence under Atlees Labour gov.
--->Britains need to put down communist insurgence delayed independence in Malaya.
---->Britain recieved no/v. little support from international sources. Eg. America, UN etc.
•>Israel
->British mandate ended 1948 and Britain got out.
-->Cold war not an influence.
•>Suez
->Cold war issues involved in Suez crisis.
->Suez Canal Zone - inside Egypian territory but British controlled.
-->Runs from Mediteranian to Red Sea.
--->1956 - Nasar (Egyptian Leader) took control and nationalised canal.
->Aswan damn was initially American & British financed.
-->Stopped when Naser (millitary dictator) took control & Soviet Union stepped in to finance damn.
--->Cold war conflict for influence (not control).
->Suez Crisis was Britain, France & Israel vs. Egypt.
-->British withdrew because of lack of American support.
]->Only minor cold war elements. Both sides seeking influence.
•>African decolonisation
->Bi-polar world post 1945
-->Neither side wanted the other gaining infuence in Africa.
->Strikes in Nigeria etc. created worry about communism.
-->However, appears to be no direct link to communism.
->Tanzania
-->Chinese influence in late 50s-60s. Built railway in Tanzania.
--->Some moves towards chinese socialism in Tanzania. Socialist agriculture & land system post-independence.
---->Moves to socialism come post-independence rather than causing it.
•Turning point?
->No real evidence to suggest the cold war was a turning point.
•••[Misc]•••
•Fighting started in 1914
->Triggered by (Serbain Organised) assasination of Arch-Duke Franz Ferdinand.
•Wilhelm II - German ruler at the time.
->Had personal rivalry with Britain (was Victoria's grandson)
->Had disabilities - was at times v. aggressive
-->Pushed for Germany to be equal of Britain in colonial & naval terms. Expansionist & aggresive foreign policy.
--->Colonies increased British-Germany tensions.
---->Colonial issues not central factor in starting WWI.
•WWI & Colonies
->Started 1914
->Colonies taken into war along with Empire.
-->So colonies find selves at war with Germany etc about problems they knew nothing about and that had nothing to do with them.
--->Conlonies not consulted over going to war. Caused tension although generally accepted at first and not a major political issue at the time.
->Dominion states also taken to war with Britain, as their governments still had no control of foreign affairs.
-->Caused agreivance, although generally dominion colony governments were consulted.
•Significance of WWI
->Empire fought along with the British.
-->No major objections to this w/in the colonies.
->Major Outcomes
-->Germany was defeated & therefore lost her colonies. --->Most picked up by Britain. (Theoretically under LoN mandate)
---->Colonial expansion.
-->Ottoman empire collapsed (based around Turkey). Iraq, Palastine etc. come under British mandate.
--->Mandate was to bring ex-Ottoman countries to independance.
-->Britain was bankrupt.
-->Blockades having prevented Britain from trading
->Colonies had developed their own trade links and found new market for their goods & start home production of goods formerly imported from the UK
-->Eg. Indian cotton industry grew & traded w/ S. America.
->Britain also switched to more home production & war economy
]->WWI caused serious damage to Britains economic relations with colonies. Empire became less economically viable.
-->Britain had been fighting for European states independence.
->Post WWI USA is the major power (UK & European economies damaged by war) and is strongly anti-imperial.
-->Political factor in the inter-war years.
•Woodrow Wilsons - 14 pt. Plan.
->Pt. 5. The interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.
-->Equitable = fair. This allows for
colonies. Expectation of anti-imperial Wilson would be a call for populations to have greater say than imperial governments.
•Colonies were a factor for the Nazis in WWII. Nazis had been greatly offended by Versailles loss of colonies.
->Serious greivance.
- - - - - - - - -
•••[As a turning point]•••
•Pre WWII
->Only settlement colonies gaininq independence
->Britain still aquiring colonies.
->India already due independence.
•Post WWII
->Non-white colonies gain independence.
->Apart from two-small states in Malaya, no new colonies aquired.
->Indian independence occurred soon after WWII (brought forward by war)
->Anti-colonial opinion developed.
->Mandate in Palestine ended (Jews entering area post-war)
•Colonies lost to Japan during WWII
->Singapore, Malaya, Burma
->1942-45.
->Blow to British prestige (element of racism - shocked at being beaten not by Europeans, but by 'Japanese' natives)
-->Particularly loss of Singapore was a hit to British pride.
-->The fact the war in the Pacific was won by Americans also harmed British pride.
--->Realisation that Britain was no longer qreat player on world stage.
->Defeat of British in far east gave impetus to calls in India for independence.
•During war economy effectivly crippled.
->Trading with empire almost totally ceased. Britain permenantly lost markets.
->War-driven economy.
->Damage to land.
->Food shortages in UK
-->Britain encouraged food production in African colonies.
--->Stimulated rural economies in Africa.
--->Similar boost to economy with arms manafacture in Africa.
•Many colonial administrators left so as to fiqht in the war.
->Replaced by local settlers.
-->Not admin by experienced Ox/Etonian from UK but by white farming settlers.
•Britain effectivly bankrupt in 1945
->Not enough funds to expand or even maintain empire.
->Defence money not aimed at maintaining colonies, but to prevent spread of communism.
•Everything post 1945 is seen in the context of The Cold War.
->Biggest threat now is communism.
->America was v. anti-colonial.
->Colonialism was no longer on the agenda.
•Post War
->Great resource shortages in UK post war.
-->Bread rationing
-->Fuel shortages
->Housing shortages.
->Mismanagment of economy.
-->Eg. Privatisation of Steel etc.
->Begining of modern welfare state.
->Labour won 1945 general election.
-->Atlee & Labour party not pro-colonial.
]->Focus of Britain internalised.
-->Empire no longer a serious issue. Changed priorities.
->Rise of Nationalism worldwide.
Labour 1945-51
Tory 1951-64
Labour 1964-70
Tory 1970-74
Labour 1974-79
Tory 1979-97
Labour 1997-2002
•Economic perspective
->Communism favoured nationalism of land, banks, industry.
-->Threat to land owners, financiers, industry owners.
--->These economic elite linked closely with political elite. Could make government policy anti-communism.
•Religious perspective
->Communism was anti-religion.
-->Fear of loss of church property, power & of persecution.
--->Therefore reliqious elite anti-communists.
]•>Elites thus educated masses to be anti-communism.
->Creation of 'fear' communism.
•Pro-communists.
->Support in two strands.
-->Oppressed working class.
--->For own gain from a change in the system.
-->Intelectuals favourinq equality element.
--->Often support amoungst University proffessors etc.
•Effect of communism on decolonisation.
->Threat in Burma
-->Gained independence 1948
->Threat in Malaya
-->Communist insurgency.
--->Delayed granting of independence. Britain did not want to hand over power whilst there was serious civil disorder for fear of Malaya falling into Soviet sphere of influence.
---->Acting in 'Enlightened Self Interest' (percieved as morally good but also good for self-interest)
->Suez
-->Was cold war threat. Threat from Soviet Union under 'spheres of influence' argument.
•No impact from communism on decolonisation in:
->India, Pakistan, Ceylon.
-->Already going to get independence pre 1945/7
->Little impact on Africa.
-->Marginal impact on Rhodesia where Smith claimed insurgence against him is getting communist support.
->Nothing pre-1945/7.
•••[Revision]•••
•>Consists of number of Areas.
•South Africa
->Boer War in 1899 -1902
->Independence in 1910
-->No longer economic to hold onto.
--->Naval race w/ Germany taking place at same time.
-->Liberals in power when SA gained independence. Not a pro-imperial party.
]->SA gaining independence showed Britain willing to give up parts of empire. Encouraging to India.
•East Africa
->German East Africa gained post WWI through ToV.
•S. Rhodesia
]•>British colonies outside west-africa.
->Pre WWI Britain had v. few colonies. Gained through ToV.
->Colonial administrators important in control of colonies in inter-war years. Not much intervention from London.
->No real Black African middle class in existance.
->WWII not a big issue - declaration of war didn't cause same problem as in India.
-->Was 'Kings African Rifles' regiment.
-->Many administrators went to fight in WWII. Replaced with local white landowners ruling in white interests.
--->Quality of administration declined.
•>Post War
->View of some that Africa could become the new India. Built up economically etc. Supply men for British Army.
->Ghanan independence in 1957 w/ Black rule provided inpetus for other African states wanting indepdence.
-->Held back by the fears of the white minority of losing out under Black majority rule. Eg. Rhodesia.
--->White setlers could see British agenda for independence.
---->Ian Smith, White PM of Rhodesia declared Unilateral Declaration of Independence (1965). Feared country coming to Black majority rule in Independence & fear of Communism rising in post-independence power struggle.
----->Britain threatened and imposed sanctions (not kept to by South Africa). Held talks with Rhodesia, but not willing to use force.
------->Blacks started guerrilla warfare against Ian Smiths white government. In 1979 the British government pursuaded Ian Smith to give up and Rhodesia gained independence as Zimbabwe under Black majority rule with Mugabe.
->Some countries had political problems to be dealt with prior to independence.
-->Eg. Keyna & Mau Mau insurgency.
--->Britain does not grant independence until the civil strife is over.
---->However, possible that instead of delaying independence as in Malaya, the Keynan Mau Mau uprising may have hastened independence because of high cost of rebuilding power in Keyna & the fact it highlighted the economic inviability of empire in Africa.
•1960s
->British focus began to change more towards Europe.
-->Thinking of Europe rather than Empire
->'Wind of Change' speach.
-->Even the Conservatives not pro-empire.
->Note: post Suez.
-->Became clear to British they could not act on international scene without US aproval.
-->Showed limits of British military power.
-->Shows mood of British public. Not prepared to accept these overseas ventures any more.
•End of empire in Africa.
->No protest from the British people.
•1870 - Britain has an empire.
•1980 - Britain has no empire.
•Settlement countries
->Canada, Australia etc.
->All granted self-government before WWI.
-->Political (and military in case of SA) pressure from within settlement colonies for indepence.
•Britains attitude.
->From pro-colonial to anti/apathy
•Britain never forced out through military defeat.
•Independence movements in all countries.
->Don't force British out but put pressure on so that Britain believes its no longer viable to keep the colony.
->Much to do with economic & politically active.
•Hong Kong
->Already agreed that Hong Kong would go back to China.
-->Agreement re-inforced 1983
->Simply handing back Hong Kong in line with treatise.
-->No-one would have expected Britain to go back on this and attempt to keep Hong Kong.