Evaluation of factors (Colonisation/Decolonisation)

Question 1

Evaluation of economic concerns

Answer 1

• Doesn’t explain exp. in areas w/ no viable econ. potential
• Though led to initial involvement, wasn’t enough to trigger formal exp!
  
  • Nature/speed of Scramble dependent on rivalry that encouraged this!
• While limited impact alone, must acknowledge that w/o econ. interest, would’ve been nothing to compete over/protect!
• While rivalry triggered exp, wouldn’t have occured w/o underlying econ. potential

Question 2

Evaluation of imperial rivalry

Answer 2

• Triggered by Berlin Conference (1885)
  
  • Fear of not being dominant led to chartering
• Explains exp. in areas w/ little econ. interest
• BUT w/o other concerns, would’ve been nothing to compete over!
  
  • Was trigger, rather than primary reason!

Question 3

Evaluation of strategic concerns

Answer 3

• Key reason for occupation in East was to secure coastal position for trade to India/Cape
  
  • Sought to cement position to ensure unchallenged control of coast
• BUT Br ‘permitted’ Fr to occupy Madagascar (close prox. to Cape)
  
  • Could pose threat to trade shows strategic concerns weren’t motivating factor in exp

Question 4

Evaluation of impact of Suez Crisis (1956)

Answer 4

• Macmillan would’ve eventually adopted anti-empire policies due to changing views towards imperialism
• Nationalism by far pre-dates crisis!
• Though h.lighted econ. weakness, did not create it!
• Merely catalyst towards independence!
  
  • Other factors would have led to independence eventually!

Question 5

Evaluation of Br economic weakness/Audit (1957)

Answer 5

• Underlying factor towards acknowledgement of independence!
  
  • Suez merely h. lighted/sped this
• W/o econ. benefit of empire, was no reason for maintain it in light of nationalist pressure/EEC

Question 6

Evaluation of nationalist movements

Answer 6

• Had origins rooted firmly prior to crisis!
  
  • Inc. nationalism following Suez only gave final boost towards independence movements!