The Winds Of Change Flashcards
What happened in the years between 1947-67 with decolonisation?
-The years between 1947 and 1967 saw the dismantling of the British empire, as former colonies were granted- or won- their independence. This was not a process which affected the British alone; the empires of other European powers also came to an end, notably those of France in Asia and Africa and the Netherlands in South east Asia
-In this respect, British decolonisation was part of a wider international phenomenon
What were the reasons for decolonisation?
-The economic impact of ww2
-The changed international situation
-Emergence of powerful nationalist movements in the colonies
-Changing priorities in Europe
-Specific problems
How was the economic impact of ww2 a reason for decolonisation?
-All of the imperial powers emerged from the war economically much poorer than they entered it
-None could really afford to fight a series of prolonged colonial wars, fighting against insurgent nationalist movements who made imperial control unsustainable
How was the changed international situation a reason for decolonisation?
-The new dominant powers, the USA and USSR, were both hostile to old style European imperialism, though they arguably both created ‘Empires’ of their own in the years following the war
-Since Britain and other colonial powers were heavily dependent on the USA for defence and economic support, they were susceptible to American pressure to speed up decolonisation
How was the emergence of nationalist movements in the colonies a reason for decolonisation?
-Movements to secure independence from the European empires and establish free independence from the European empires and establish free independent states appeared in all parts of the world
-The strategies employed to secure these aims varied, but all posed a challenge to the imperial governments
How was changing priorities in Europe a reason for decolonisation?
-By the 1950s, Western Europe was experiencing a dramatic post war economic recovery, with full employment and rising living standards.
-This made it less dependant on colonial support
-The emergence of EEC from 1958 (which Britain joined in 1973) helped refocus trade within Europe itself
-As a result, from the 1950s, support for Empire, especially among powerful business interests, dwindled in all main European imperial powers
How were specific problems a reason for decolonisation?
-Neither Britain nor the other imperial powers immediately ‘gave up’ on their empires after the Second World War
-The decolonisation of India and Burma and the withdrawal from Palestine in the late 1940s came in response to specific problems in those regions, based on the belief that the benefits of holding onto these possessions were outweighed by the costs that their possession would incur
-Decisions to relinquish empire were often forced by specific developments rather than being the product of an immediate post war shift in thinking
What was the EEC?
European economic community; a free trade community originally comprising France, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Italy
What was the post war decolonisation in Africa?
-Britains post war imperial policy placed emphasis upon developing the African colonies so that they could contribute significantly to Britains post war economic recovery.
-British policy was enshrined in the creation of the colonial development corporation and the African colonies were earmarked for extensive development initiatives
-However, the Second World War had already accelerated the economic growth of most of the African colonies in response to the needs of the war effort and this, together with a measure of industrialisation in some colonies and the expansion of towns and cities, enabled new urban and middle class nationalist ideas and thrive and spread
What was the decolonisation in West Africa like in 1947?
-In 1947, Andrew Cohen, head of the Africa department in the colonial office in London, described the Gold Coast as the most advanced African colony in terms of the political ‘maturity of its people and their ‘fitness’ to rule themselves
-However, he did not envisage that independence for it’s people would be feasible for at least a generation, and he warned that elsewhere it would take much longer, despite the emerging African nationalist movements
What was the decolonisation on the Gold Coast?
-To some degree, British colonial administrators had anticipated during the war that the rise of an educated African elite would mean allowing some degree of African political representation. However, the British wanted any change to be gradual and managed in a way that did not impair British economic and political interests
-In 1946 the Burns constitution was drawn up in the Gold Coast. This established a legislative council of 12 British nominees and 18 elected African members
-This was a breakthrough. However, final power still remained in the hands of the British governor and a wave of unrest spread across the country, as protests against British colonial rule gathered momentum
What was the CPP?
-The convention peoples party was founded by Kwame Nkrumah in 1949 and pressurised the British administration to make sure her concessions; the Legislative council was enlarged and renamed the legislative assembly, and the number of people who could vote for it increased, but still the British Governor retained ultimate power
What did Kwame Nkrumah do?
-He was gaoled in 1950, and the CPP won 2 thirds of the seats in the legislative assembly in 1951 and it became clear to Burns that the CPP would have to be brought into government in order to bring resistance under control
-Nkrumah was therefore released and given the position of prime minister from 1952, with members of the CPP taking posts as government ministers
What happened to Nkrumah’s elected government?
-This elected government was given extensive control over internal affairs, and Nkrumah’s popularity and standing grew. In 1956, a plebiscite in the neighbouring British mandate of Togoland delivered an overwhelming vote in favour of unification with the Gold Coast
-The support for independence was such that in 1957 new elections were held on full adult suffrage. The country became fully independent on 6th March 1957 as Ghana, the name of an ancient African state on the edge of the Sahara desert
-But Nkrumah proved a divisive figure and in the years that followed he became increasingly authoritarian to hold onto power
What happened with decolonisation in Nigeria?
-There was a similar momentum to independence in Nigeria after the war, although the situation was much more complex. In 1946 the ‘Richards constitution’ was drawn up. As in the Gold Coast, the new arrangements allowed for greater African representation, but with the Governor-general and the executive council, which the governor appointed, retaining ultimate power
-The country was regionally and ethnically divided and the British took the view that any move towards an independent Nigeria should take the form of a federation of separate regional states
-Thus although an expanded legislative council was created to discuss issues affecting the whole country, three assemblies for each of the three major regions (West, East and South) were also established, to debate local matters and to advise the British governors in these regions
What happened due to greater pressure in Nigeria?
-Greater pressure for change from nationalist movements forced the British to amend the constitution. The Macpherson constitution of 1951 extended the right to vote and created a national council of ministers, answerable to a 185 seat federal House of Representatives
-This stimulated the growth of Nigerian political parties, which began to compete in elections to the new house
-However, the regions were also strengthened, with each region being allowed its own government as well as an elected assembly
-The federal House of Representatives could not over rule these regional governments. The effect was to exacerbate tensions between the different ethnicities rather than ease them
What happened with new political parties being established in Nigeria?
-New political parties were established representing different ethnic groups and regions and the British found themselves being pushed along the path of granting concessions more quickly than they had originally envisaged.
-Following further revisions of the constitution and federal elections in 1954, a government was formed consisting of three British officials together with nine ministers drawn from the various regional political parties in order to strike a balance at the national level between the different regions
-However, more power was increasingly devolved to the various regional governments and following federal elections in 1959 moves were made towards full independence for the country in October 1960
What similar happened with decolonisation in Sierra Leone amd Gambia?
-Similar tensions to Nigeria manifested themselves in Sierra Leone and Gambia and as the 1950s progressed the British concluded that independence was the best option
-Sierra Leone became independent in 1961 and Gambia in 1965
-In all cases, demands for reform compelled British colonial administrations to introduce reforms much faster than they had originally hoped or intended
What happened with decolonisation in East Africa?
-Progress towards independence was much more violent in parts of East Africa where rapid economic growth brought urbanisation, greater political consciousness, political activism, nationalism and labour disputes
-Settler colonial communities were also more common in these areas, had been responsible for decades of displacement and economic exploitation, and continued dominance
-During the years of war, the population of Nairobi in Kenya increased by a half, while the populations of Dar-es-Salaam and Mombasa both doubled and high inflation, poor housing and overcrowding which followed fuelled protests
-Initially the British saw this region as being ideal for economic development, with a view to generating large dollar earning exports
-Perhaps the greatest symbol of these aspirations was the ill fated Tanganyika Groundnut scheme of 1946
-The failure of this scheme provoked East African peasants into supporting the nationalist movements
What was the Tanganyika groundnut scheme?
-In 1946, Britain and many countries experienced a severe shortage of cooking fats. From this emerged the idea of growing in Tanganyika large quantities of groundnuts (peanuts) which could be processed into cooking oil and sold to the world economy
-The project involved massive investment in tractors, equipment and the construction of a railway to transport the crop
-However, the terrain proved too difficult to cultivate and the scheme was abandoned in 1951 having cost £49 million. Furthermore, the land was turned into an uncultivable dust bowl
What happened with the Mau Mau?
-Long simmering Kikuyu grievances at their treatment by white settlers exploded into violence, when white people sought to mechanise farming and further displace the peasant growers
-The move prompted many of the most desperate among the Kikuyu to resort to violence and led to the Mau Mau uprising between 1952 and 1956
-The British army ruthlessly crushed the rebellion and also fought a propaganda campaign against the insurgency, describing the Mau Mau as ‘dark’, ‘evil’, ‘foul’, ‘secretive’ and ‘degraded’
-The Kikuyu people were divided by the British, with the ‘loyalists’, the colonial appointed chiefs and their followers who supported the colonial government during the insurgency, receiving lavish privileges in return
-These tactics only increased the support for nationalist movements across the region, and Tanganyika was granted independence as Tanzania in 1961
-Uganda followed in 1962 and Kenya in 1963
What happened with decolonisation in Southern Africa?
-In Southern Africa, the white minority had enjoyed full control over South Africa’s internal affairs since 1931 following the granting of Dominion status by the Statute of Westminster
-This meant their increasingly divisive racial policies had become firmly entrenched. In 1948 the Afrikaner nationalist party won power, and implemented the policy of apartheid, segregating races in all walks of life.
-In practice, non white people were severely repressed and opposition to apartheid emerged, led primarily by the African National Congress
-Throughout the 1950s and 60s, the South African state responded with brutal suppression of all protests; 69 protestors were killed by the police at Sharpevill in March 1960
-International opinion became increasingly critical of South Africa, and relations with Britain grew strained. This was not just about apartheid. From 1948, South Africa had pressed, unsuccessfully, for Britain to hand over it’s remaining colonies in the region to South Africa.
-The British refused and in 1961 the South African white population voted to become a republic and to leave the commonwealth
What other colonies possessions did Britain build up near South Africa?
-Northern Rhodesia- a mineral rich (copper) province
-Southern Rhodesia-an agriculturally rich territory with a substantial white settler
-Nyasaland- relatively economically undeveloped territory
What happened with northern rhodesia, southern rhodesia and Nyasaland in ww2?
During the Second World War the administrators of these 3 territories had worked together to assist the war effort, and the British came to the view that a joint administration-effectively creating 1 consolidated colonial state- would provide an effective colonial counter weight to South Africa. Thus, the idea of a Central African Federation (CAF) of the 3 territories emerged.
What was the CAF?
-It was created in 1953. It’s constitution included some protection for African rights: discriminatory legislation against Africans could be vetoed by Britain. There was also some limited provision for African rights: discriminatory legislation against Africans could be vetoed by Britain
-There was some limited provision for African representation in the new federal assembly- but powerful African nationalist movements emerged in all 3 territories, led by Africans who were suspicious of Britain’s intentions
-The white governors of the CAF responded fiercely. Nationalist leaders were arrested and imprisoned: actions which brought increasing disorder
What happened by the end of the 1950s in Africa?
-By the end of the 1950s, line with it’s policies elsewhere in Africa, Britain had concluded that decolonisation was necessary. In 1960-61, the British government ordered the release of nationalist leaders in Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland and drew up new constitutions for these territories which paved the way for majority rule and independence
-In 1963, the CAF was formally dissolved, and in 1964 Kenneth Kaunda led Northern Rhodesia to independence as Zambia, and Dr Hastings Banda led Nyasaland to independence as Malawi
What happened to Southern Rhodesia?
-Southern Rhodesia embarked on a very different path. There, the white settlers were determined to avoid being absorbed into an independent black African dominated country. In 1961, when the CAF looked doomed, a large section of the white population switched their support to the new Rhodesian front party, which was dedicated to achieving independence for Southern Rhodesia- but under white control
-It won the elections in that year and in 1965 the prime minister of Rhodesia, Ian Smith, illegally declared Southern Rhodesia to be independent
-British sanctions proved unsuccessful, and in 1969 Rhodesia became a Republic and the country was plunged into a long guerrilla war between the ruling white people and black African nationalists
Who was Harold MacMillan?
Harold MacMillan was an Oxford educated conservative, who had first entered politics in the 1920s. He was prime minister between 1957 and 1963, and presided over a time of post war prosperity. He was succeeded by Alec Douglas-Home but both leaders’ ‘Edwardian style’ appeared at odds with a more modern form of politics, represented by Labour under Harold Wilson, who came to power in 1964
How did the post war years so a change in British colonial policy?
-It saw a change in the wake of international, domestic and colonial upheavals. Despite the loss of India, Palestine and Burma in 1947 and 1948, in the 1950s there was a belief that Britain’s future prosperity lay in trade with the empire and commonwealth rather than with Europe
-It was felt that the Empire was important in the re establishment of Britain’s ‘great power’ status’s
What role did colonial administrators play in the 1950s?
-Colonial administrators thus found themselves taking on a different role in the 1950s. No longer were they just concerned with keeping order and balancing budgets but they were required to raise colonial production and modernise economics at all speed
-This often involved rapid improvements in agriculture, as well as steps towards industrialisation. The administration took on a new aggressive edge, sometimes known as ‘economic colonialism’
-The administrators’ tasks were, above all, to protect trading commodities in Britain’s interests, guard vital supplies and destroy insurgencies- particularly those associated with communism
What was the ‘Wind of change’?
-The idea of managed decolonisation was seen as consistent with a speech made by Harold MacMillan in 1960, I’m which he made it clear that Britain would grant independence to its African territories
-His speech became known as the ‘wind of change’. However, the interruption put upon both thr speech and government policy can be questioned
What was the ‘wind of change’ speech?
-The speech given by British PM Harold MacMillan in Cape Town, South Africa on 3 February 1960 warned the white South African parliament that, ‘the wind of change is blowing through this continent and whether we like it or not, this growth of national consciousness is a political fact’
-The significance of Macmillan’s words may have been exaggerated by the press but the speech certainly appeared to suggest a shift in conservative thinking and to signal Britain’s intention to withdraw from its colonies
-It was met with some surprise and accusations of betrayal by British conservatives
What did colonial administrators display with the wind of change speech?
-Colonial administrators tried to convey the idea of working in collaboration with nationalist movements to prepare colonies economically and politically for independence
-However, the reality was not always quite like this. British claims to have the best interest of the colonial peoples at heart did not necessarily ring true and withdrawal was all to often bumpy
-Although much skill was used to suggest that decolonisation came as a British ‘gift’, for which the countries concerned were duly grateful, the pace of change set by the British rarely satisfied the nationalists and in practice the British were often compelled to move much faster than they had originally intended
What were the developments in Egypt in 1947?
-By 1947, Britain was fearful about communist Russia’s ambitions in the Middle East: an important British sphere of interest. Despite the withdrawal from Palestine, Britain still had 10,000 troops in the Suez Canal Zone (as agreed by the 1936 Ango-Egyptian treaty) as well as control over Aden and Cyprus and Air Force bases in Iraq
-Britain also financed and provided officers for the Jordanian army, giving the illusion of a strong presence
-However, when the British tried to negotiate with the nationalist Arab league to resist communist infiltration, it found that the Arabs were not prepared to support Britain while Britain maintained its Suez garrisons and controlled the Sudan- where its presence was seen as an affront to Egypt, the leading Arab nation
What were the developments in Egypt between 1947-54?
-The years after 1947 saw constant skirmishing around the Canal Zone and in 1951 King Farouk of Egypt independently renounced the 1936 treaty and proclaimed himself King of the Sudan.
-In January 1952, however, Farouk himself was overthrown in a military coup by a group of army officers led by colonel nasser. Anthony Eden, Foreign secretary in Churchill’s conservative government, immediately sought to negotiate with egypts new rulers and in 1953 an agreement was made on stages towards Sudanese independence.
-In 1954, the British also agreed to a phased withdrawal of troops from the Suez Canal Zone over the next 20 months, subject to certain rights of re occupation in time of war
-This concession not only reflected Britain’s desire to improve Anglo Arab relations, but also showed Britain’s financial difficulties; the British could ill afford to maintain their bases and fortify the suez garrisons sufficiently to resist the constant nationalist guerrilla attacks
What did the Egyptians promise Britain in return in 1954?
-Free access through the Suez Canal
-The maintenance of the former British bases in an operational condition
-To respect the independence of the Suez Canal company (ownership of which would revert to the Egyptian government in 1968)
What were the developments in Egypt in1955?
-The settlement led to a constructive period of British diplomacy and Britain engineered the Baghdad pact between Turkey, Pakistan, Iraq, Britain and Persia in 1955 to repel any soviet threat to the Middle East
-However, Nasser refused to sign this agreement and when the British tried to bring Jordan into the pact, put pressure on Jordan’s young king Hussein to remain out.
-Fearing that the pact threatened Egyptian dominance, Nasser turned to communist Czechoslovakia for arms and signed an alliance with Syria. Anthony Eden, who succeeded Churchill as Pm in April 1955 in the midst of these developments, was alarmed.
What were the developments in Egypt in 1956?
-In June 1956, Nasser made himself president of Egypt. He was determined to establish Egypt as the leading power in the Middle East and his plans for a new Egypt centred on the construction of the Aswan high dam which he hoped to make the core of a programme of irrigation, flood control and electrification
-He had obtained promises of financial aid from both the west and from Russia in 1955, but in July 1956, the USA (followed by Britain and the world bank) announced that they were withdrawing their funding because of Nasser’s continued association with communist powers
What was the Suez Canal crisis?
-On 16th July 1956 Nasser announced the nationalisation of the Suez Canal company. This was a direct blow to to the British government, which held approximately 44% of the shares in the company, and an indirect attack on the position of the British in the Middle East.
-The British tried to use diplomatic pressure on persuade Nasser to reverse the decision, while preparing for military action in a case of failure
-The French were also outraged by the nationalisation, and invited Britain to join France in a joint assault on Egypt, in alliance with Israel, which was also affected by Nasser’s hard line attitude towards their state
-Although efforts continued to be made to resolve the issue by diplomacy through the UN, secret Ango-French military discussions took place and attitudes hardened to a point in October when Eden believed that only the removal of Nasser from power would ensure the security lf nrktjsn and French interests in the Middle East
What happened with the removal of Nasser?
-In 1956, Eden proclaimed in an emotional and somewhat irrational outburst that he wanted Nasser destroyed (he may even have said ‘murdered’)
-This uncharacteristic declamation has been put down to a serious liver condition from which he suffered and his determination (as he judged Nasser to be another Hitler) not to repeat the mistake of the appeasers of the 1930s
What happened in the suez crisis after the removal of Nasser?
-A plan was hatched through ‘the protocol of sevres’ whereby Israel would attack Egypt on 29th October. On the following day, France and Britain would demand that both sides cease fighting and withdraw troops from the vicinity of the canal.
-This would be followed by a Franco- British Invasion of the Canal Zone on 31st October, to ‘defend’ it
-The Israelis routed the Egyptian forces and forced them back through the Sinai peninsula towards the canal, at which point Britain and France intervened in a supposed ‘police ‘ action. An Anglo-French force knocked out the Egyptian Air Force and landed at the north end of the canal but the Egyptians put up a solid resistance and blocked the canal with sunken ships
-The British had miscalculated the international (and particularly the American) reaction. They had embarked on military operations without even informing the USA, and the USA immediately condemned the attack and refused to support sterling in the currency crisis which the war brought upon Britain
-Isolated, even within the commonwealth, the British announced a ceasefire within 5 days, and both Britain and France began to withdraw troops within weeks
-Eden was forced to resign and a United Nations force moved in to clear the blocked canal and restore peace
What were the consequences of the suez crisis?
The long term consequences of the suez for British imperial policy were profound. While it did not end Britain’s belief in its ‘world power’ status, nor its commitment to defend remaining imperial interests, nevertheless, after suez, there was a growing realisation across the political spectrum in Britain that the days of empire were numbered
-Never again would a British government seek to act alone in imperial or international affairs without the approval of, and close consultation with, the USA. In this respect, the illusion that Britain might by means of imperial revival or adjustment restore itself as a major independent power in the world was finally dispelled
-It suggested to the nationalist movements seeking to achieve independence that if they pushed harder, the British could be forced to surrender. It therefore made Britain’s desire to contain independence movements increasingly difficult
-It called into question the whole credibility of plans to hold onto formal colonies in Africa and elsewhere and encouraged British politicians to accept that it was best to accept to nationalist demands for independence sooner rather than later, while hopefully retaining some measure of British influence
-It dispelled the notion that Britain could ‘manage’ and control its retreat from the empire in ways that would preserve British power intact
What happened with decolonisation in Burma?
-Burma gained independence shortly after the war, following the violent activities of the nationalists and the ascendancy of the AFPFL, led by Aung San
-Although clement Attlee had originally planned a programme of measured and slow steps to independence, the breakdown of British order hastened withdrawal
-Talks took place between Aung San and Attlee’s government in London in January 1947 and it was agreed that elections for a constituent assembly would take place in April 1948
-These produced a huge AFPFL majority. However the different factions within the AFPFL could not agree on Burma’s future path and in July 1947 Aung San and 6 of his cabinet ministers were assassinated by a rival political faction
-Consequently, the achievement of independence for Burma in January 1948 was not the quiet and measured withdrawal the Attlee government had envisaged
-Instead, it brought the eruption of civil war and the Burmese completely turned their backs on Britain, even rejecting the idea of joining the British commonwealth
What was the Malay Peninsula?
-The British faced a number of serious problems when they tried to re establish control in the Malay peninsula in 1945. The peninsula suffered from ethnic tensions between the Malay peoples and the Chinese and Indian populations, who had been encouraged to come to the colony by the British
-The United Malays national organisation (UMNO) was created in March 1046 to argue for the rights of the Malay peoples. The Chinese, on the other hand, were represented by the Malay Chinese association (MCA) or the Malayan communist party (MCP)
-The Chinese population was prominently represented in labour unions and involved in a series of strikes between 1945 and 1948
Who were the malayan Chinese?
-Large numbers of Chinese immigrants arrived in Malaya in the late nineteenth century, encouraged by the British who needed labour for the tin mines and rubber plantations
-More Chinese migrants arrived during the Chinese civil war and by 1947 the Chinese compromised 38.4% of the population compared with 49.5% Malays
-By 1957 the Chinese compromised 45%, although this fell to 36% in 1961
-Chinese malayans developed their own communities and schools and flourished in business and commerce, enjoying one of the highest standards of living among the minority demographic groups in the Malay peninsula
What happened in 1947 in the Malay peninsula?
-By 1947, ethnic tensions were running so high that the British colonial administration had to abandon its original plan to create a ‘Malay union’
-This would have ensured equal Malay citizenship for all ethnic groups while keeping Singapore as a separate crown colony
What was produced by the British in 1947 in Malaysia?
-In June 1947 the British produced a new scheme, which offered a much more restricted definition of malay citizenship (including proven competence in the Malay and English languages, which was discriminatory against many of the Chinese population)
-The new arrangements, creating the federation of Malaya, were enacted in January 1948 and established:
-The ‘federation of Malaya executive council’, with 7 official and 7 unofficial members, headed by the British high commissioner. This held the real power
-The ‘federation of Malaya legislative council’ of 62 members representing the various states and other groups. This became an elected body in 1955
-Governments within the individual malay states to which some of the financial powers of the central colonial administration were developed
What happened to the new federation of Malay?
-The new federation of Malaya was beset by problems. This was partly the result of the difficult post war economic circumstances and partly the product of Chinese grievances.
-The British were so frightened by the potentially damaging impact of rebel attacks on rubber plantations that they declared a state of emergency in June 1948
-This empowered the colonial authorities to use military force and additional sweeping legal powers to arrest suspects and to impose order on the country
-Troubles raged between 1948 and 1952, and saw the assassination of Sir Henry Gurney, the British high commissioner, in October 1951
-By 1952, order had been restored, and the British believed that their hold on Malaya had been secured
What happened in Malaya between 1952 and 1955?
However, the British position became increasingly untenable. To keep support during the state of emergency, the British had made promises of Malay independence. They had even promoted the malay Chinese association (MCA), which also wanted independence, but with equal rights for the Chinese, in an attempt to win over the Chinese population
-However, between 1952 and 1954, both the Malays and Chinese United against British rule and together won 81% of the votes in the federal elections of 1955
-The British feared that if they denied Malay independence much longer, there would be a violent military rebellion
What did the Reid commission do?
-The Reid commission led by Lord William Reid was established in 1955 to draw up a New Democratic constitution and in 1957, an independent Malaya was created
-A continuing British military presence in nearby Singapore was accepted and Malaya also continued to collaborate economically with Britain, remaining in the sterling area
-In a sense, the British had exchanged colonial rule for informal influence, which still offered the prospect of meeting their key economic hopes
-This is sometimes called ‘the imperialism of decolonisation’
What happened to Malaya in 1963?
-In 1963, Malaya United with Singapore, Sabah (North borneo) and Sarawak to form Malaysia. However, less than 2 years later in 1965, Singapore was expelled from the federation. Thereafter, Malaysia forged its own path
What happened with decolonisation in Singapore?
-Singapore- an island which had enjoyed a high degree of internal control over its own affairs, had a predominantly Chinese population (brought in by the British) and houses significant military resources- was treated separately from the rest of the Malay peninsula
-During 1947 and 1948 it was given its own government, with an executive and legislative council. However, although 6 of the 25 seats on the legislative were elected, only British subjects (c23,000 people or 10% of the population) had the vote
What happened in Singapore similarly to Malaya?
-As in the federation of Malaya, the government in Singapore struggled to contain communist insurgency. In addition to arrests and imprisonments, an attempt was made to win the loyalty of the population by enlarging the legislative council to 32 seats, with 25 of these chosen by an electorate of c300,000 in 1953
-The first elected council had been dominated by the Singapore progressive party (SPP), a conservative group favouring businessmen, but in 1955, the SPP won only 3 seats and several new left wing parties emerged, including the labour front, the people’s action party and the United Malays national organisation/Malay Chinese association alliance
What happened with Singapore in 1959?
-In 1959, Lee Kuan Yew of the PAP came to power and although the fear of Singapore’s businessmen, and of Britain, proved unfounded, the British decided, in 1963, that Singapore’s future wojld be best assured as part of the federation of Malaya- which became Malaysia that year
-Thus scheme proved unworkable, however, as race riots between Chinese and Malays led to a breakdown in public order
-In august 1965 Singapore was expelled from Malaysia and became a fully independent state in its own right
What happened with international relations between 1947 and 1967?
-Between 1947 and 1967, British imperial policy was moulded by a changed international scene. The USA and USSR had emerged from world war 2 as ‘superpowers’ and they were to dictate international developments in the post war world
-Nevertheless the emergence of the cold wr between the US dominated capitalist west and the ussr led communist east initially gave a renewed impetus to British imperialism
-Despite American anti imperialist attitudes, it suited the USA to have a strong Britain, in a position to resist communist advances in all quarters of the globe
-America was therefore prepared to turn a blind eye to the post war re imposition of British control over its colonies- particularly where it involved driving out communist insurgents
What happened in the Balkan area between 1947-67?
-In the Balkan area, the USA was even prepared to step in when the British support for monarchists fighting communists in Greece could no longer be sustained because of financial considerations
-By the Truman doctrine of 1947, the USA pledged its help to countries ‘resisting attempted subjugation’ and provided financial and military aid to prop up Greece and Turkey as Britain withdrew from the region
How had Britain emerged from ww2 in relation to the USA?
-Britain had emerged ww2 as a strong ally of the USA and liked to think of itself as an equal partner (despite suez their association was referred to as a ‘special relationship’), Britain was, in practice, limited by its financial and military dependence on the USA
-The Us marshall plan of 1948-52, for example, provided Britain with $3.3 billion of support, while it was the USA’s economic pressure that forced Britain and France to end their invasion of Egypt in 1956
-It was clear by the 1960s that, without the US backing, the British were in no position to combat nationalist independence movements
What did Britain also rely on after ww2?
NATO and Americas nuclear capacity. Britain co operated with the USA in the Korean War of 1950-52, but, despite a United Nations mandate, the command was American
What was the effect of Britains reliance on America after ww2?
-Britains weakness and reliance on the USA became increasingly obvious. Even Britain’s relations with the dominions were affected by the changes in Britain’s global position after 1945
-Whereas the dominions had previously looked to Britain as guarantors of their safety; they increasingly turned to the USA
-The formation of SEATO in 1954, was an acknowledgment of the need for an American led protective alliance
What did Britain stay apart from in the 1960s?
-Until the 1960s, Britain’s hopes of reconstituting and preserving its empire kept it apart from the EEC which brought Belgium, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany together in an economic union in 1957
-By the time Britain realised that its economic future lay more with Europe than with the Empire, the French under De Gaulle conspired to keep Britain out
-British membership of EEC was vetoed twice in 1963 and 1967 and Britain only joined in 1973
What was the commonwealth?
-The commonwealth had originally been conceived in the 1920s as an ‘exclusive club’ of dominions enjoying a high degree of domestic self rule.
-It was given increased status by the statute of Westminster of 1931 which established legal self rule for dominions
-By implication these were now part of the ‘British Commonwealth of nations’, a status which implied theoretical equality with Britain, although in practice much of the real power continued to reside in London
What happened with the commonwealth after ww2?
-The meaning of the commonwealth evolved significantly in the period after the Second World War, when independence for India, Pakistan and Burma revived the issue of commonwealth membership
-The British came to see commonwealth as a way of surrendering the costs of formal imperial control whilst maintaining informal ties which would help protect Britain’s global economic interests and influence
-Both India and Pakistan joined in 1947, although Burma refused to join in 1948. Nehru’s decision to declare India a republic led to a change in the rules for commonwealth membership in April 1949
-Membership was broadened so as to allow a wider range of regimes to join- most importantly republics. The British monarch became a ‘symbol of the free association of its independent member nations and as such, the ‘head of the commonwealth’.
-This was subtly but crucially different to claiming that the monarch enjoyed royal authority over each former colony
What other purpose did the commonwealth serve for Britain?
-The commonwealth served a purpose for Britain in allowing some continuation of British global power by means other than formal empire. Britain linked to think of the commonwealth as a family of ‘friendly’ nations around the world, which would lend critical and qualified support, or even mediate in disputes, as Robert Menzies, PM of Australia, attempted to do so over suez
-The commonwealth thus became a body of ‘free and equal’ states, with no legal obligation to one another but United by their history and their shared ‘British’ values of democracy and human rights
-It thus acquired an idealistic purpose to uphold the ‘rule of law’, although the scale and extent of its power remained questionable
What happened between 1947 and 1967 for British imports and produce?
-Between 1947-67 there was a dramatic change in the importance of the Empire as a supplier of British imports and a market for British produce
-Until the 1960s, the empire and commonwealth were extremely important for Britain’s international trading position. They provided essential imports of food and raw materials at a time when Britain’s reserves of foreign exchange were too limited to source imports from many other parts of the world
-A great deal of British investment also went to the empire. In 1956 approx. 58% of all overseas investments in the Uk in shares and securities were in Empire companies and governments
-However, from the 1960s, other parts of the world, and especially western Europe, became more important to Britain
What happened with the European economy after ww2?
-The European economy recovered from the war much more quickly and impressively than might have been expected. This was partly thanks to US Marshall plan aid, the continuing support offered by the USA and the political climate, which favoured private enterprise
-Advances in science and technology as well as changes in industrial relations also played their part. The result was that by the mid 1950s, there was full employment throughout Europe, growth rates were high and living standards, at least in the west, were rising rapidly
What did Britain do with trade after ww2?
-The British, trusting to their traditional reliance on the empire, had chosen not to join the EEC in 1957 and had, instead, set up their own rival trading bloc, EFTA.
-However, the EEC flourished and the British were increasingly torn between a future based on a commonwealth of global trade links and one in which trade and economic relations with Europe would become the basis of future policy
What happened with Britain and the EEC?
-With exports to Europe outstripping those to the empire in the early 1960s, Britain applied for membership in 1963 and again in 1967, only to be rejected partly because the British insisted on special concessions being allowed for British commerce with the commonwealth
-However, the sterling devaluation of 1967 destroyed thr old ‘sterling area’ by weakening international faith in the value of sterling and hit at Britain’s global imperial pretensions. Eventually Britain was allowed to join in 1973
What did Britain do for post war reconstruction?
-Britain initially met the challenge of earning dollars and building up foreign exchange reserve with which to pay for imports by continuing rationing at home, to cut the cost of food imports, and prioritising British industrial production for the export rather than the domestic market
-They also tried to develop the productive and export capacities of the colonies, particularly in Africa, where the relative under development of local resources offered huge opportunities for growth.
-This was in order to both increase dollar reserves from colonial sales and to ensure a steady supply of goods to Britain from within the sterling area, thus saving precious reserves of dollars and other scarce foreign currencies
What did Britain use for post war re construction?
-The British used the colonial development and welfare acts of 1940 and 1945 to expand agricultural production and promote new technology in the colonies and, in 1948, the colonial development corporation was set up to co-ordinate major projects and develop self sustaining agriculture, industry and trade
We’re all colonial development schemes successful?
-Not all the colonial development schemes were successful. The Tanganyika groundnut scheme launched in 1948, for example, was an abject failure
-However, malay rubber proved a crucial dollar earner, and as a member of the sterling area, malaya became a major contributor to the hard currency pool
-This helps explain why the British would not countenance immediate independence for malaya, and responded so fiercely to the communist attacks against economic targets there in 1948 by imposing a state of emergency
-The impact of Britain’s policies of post war reconstruction was to prove long lasting
Who was Kwame Nkrumah?
Nkrumah was pivotal in Ghana’s independence struggle, providing strong leadership and mobilizing support both domestically and internationally. His vision of Pan-Africanism and his tireless advocacy for African unity resonated beyond Ghana, influencing other nationalist movements across the continent. Nkrumah’s efforts laid the foundation for Ghana’s successful transition to independence in 1957, making him a key figure in Africa’s decolonization.
Who was Onn bin Ja’afar?
-Onn bin Ja’afar was the founder of the United Malays national organisation (UMNO). This campaigned to rally the Malays against the Malayan union, established by the British in 1946 to unite British possessions on the peninsula
-He became UMNO’s president in May 1946
-Drawing on the hostility of many of the traditional Malayan rulers he organised allies and amassed sufficient public support to force a British climb down in favour of the ‘Federation of malay states’ in 1948
-One of his supporters was Tunku Abdul Rahman, a law student who first studied in England and was to become Malaya’s first Pm after independence in 1957
What were nationalist leaders in the malay peninsula driven by?
-Nationalist leaders in the malay peninsula were driven by ideology and race. Onn faced opposition from malayan communists (members of the MCP) under Chin Peng, a middle class Chinese malayan man who had been awarded an OBE by the British for his services in wartime
-He was also oppressed by Tan Cheng Lock, a well to do Chinese malayan businessman educated in Singapore who led the malayan Chinese association, formed in 1949
-Tan was fiercely anti communist and was trusted by British colonial officials. He fought for constitutional change and inter ethnic cooperation
What happened in malaya due to nationalism?
-Nationalism in Malaya brought the ‘malayan emergency’, a violent guerrilla war between 1948 and 1960 between armed forces of the military arm of the malayan communist party (MCP)
-Tan deciding that partnership with UMNO (in 1954) was the best way of protecting the Malaysian Chinese and both Onn and Tan participated in the successful negotiations for independence from the British in 1957
Who was Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe?
Azikiwe’s leadership and activism were instrumental in Nigeria’s path to independence. As a prominent nationalist figure, he played a vital role in articulating the aspirations of the Nigerian people for self-rule and in organizing movements that pressured the British colonial authorities to grant independence. His contributions helped Nigeria achieve independence in 1960, marking a significant milestone in Africa’s decolonization process.
Who was Jomo Kenyatta?
Kenyatta’s leadership was indispensable in Kenya’s struggle for independence. He effectively mobilized the Kenyan people against British colonial rule, advocating for self-determination and leading negotiations for independence. Kenyatta’s efforts culminated in Kenya gaining independence in 1963, with him becoming the country’s first Prime Minister and later its President. His leadership was crucial in uniting a diverse nation under the banner of independence.
Who was Apolo Milton Obote?
Obote played a significant role in Uganda’s journey to independence, albeit with less prominence compared to some other leaders. He was involved in negotiations with the British colonial authorities and played a part in shaping Uganda’s political landscape post-independence. However, his leadership during Uganda’s early years of independence was marked by political instability and authoritarianism, overshadowing his contributions to decolonization.
Who was Nelson Mandela?
Mandela’s role in achieving decolonization was exceptional, particularly in the context of ending apartheid in South Africa. His leadership and activism were instrumental in the struggle against racial oppression, both domestically and internationally. Mandela’s steadfast commitment to non-violence, coupled with his unwavering determination for reconciliation, played a crucial role in transitioning South Africa from apartheid to democracy. His release from prison in 1990 and subsequent election as South Africa’s first black president in 1994 marked the culmination of decades of struggle and paved the way for a new era of freedom and equality in South Africa.
Who was Sir Andrew Cohen?
-In 1947 he was appointed assistant under Secretary of State for the colonial’s office African division. Cohen was a realist who knew that decolonisation was inevitable.
-He believed in listening to nationalist leaders, and cultivated contacts across the continent. He believed in devolving power to indigenous elites, and his Cohen report of 1947 set out a new direction for colonial policy, mapping a route, through gradual reform, by which the colonies could eventually emerge as independent, democratic and stable nations
-However, many nationalist leaders wanted this change to happen rapidly, not gradually
What was Sir Andrew cohen concerned about?
-He was concerned about the extreme white supremacy inherent in the Afrikaner-dominated apartheid system, which was in danger of spreading north from south Africa
-As he saw it, the more ‘paternalistic’ colonialism of British run colonies was the preferable option, and he proposed the confederation of rhodesia and Nyasaland as the Central African federation
-This was carried out in 1953, although it proved unsuccessful and was dissolved in 1963
What did Sir Andrew Cohen do in Uganda?
-In 1952, Cohen was appointed Governor of Uganda where he served until 1957. Here, he brought Ugandans into government and encouraged the development of political parties as well as expanding the university of Makerere
-His initial response to the Buganda emergency was heavy handed, though he later showed that ability to compromise.
-Despite his conviction that the best path to independence lay in gradual change, he has been credited with heloinh to lay the groundwork for Uganda’s independence in 1962
Who was Sid John Macpherson?
-He was the British official responsible for managing the transition to independence in Nigeria. As the 7th Governor General from 1948-55, he moved the colonial administration gradually towards reform, opening the higher levels of the colonial administration to Nigerians, and organising a major conference in 1951 to open discussions on a constitution which could include participation in government by Nigerian officials from the different regions, which all had competing political authorities
-The federal ‘Macpherson constitution’ of 1951 meant that Nigerians were included in the government of their own country for the first time, but the nationalist leaders were dismayed by the fact that Macpherson as Governor General still had the power to veto any decisions
-It also led to conflict and competition between the politicians from the ethnically, linguistically and religiously diverse regions of Nigeria.
-This left the British colonial secretary, Oliver Littleton, to approve a new constitution allowing for greater regional autonomy in 1954
-Nevertheless, Macpherson had helped to ensure that, notwithstanding the wrangling between the regional factions, an independent, federal Nigeria emerged in 1960
Who was sir Charles Arden Clarke?
-He had various appointments in Africa before becoming governor of the Gold Coast in 1949. He was very similar to Macpherson.
-The part he played not only in securing the release of Nkrumah from prison in 1951, but also bringing nim into government, was central in diffusing what had become a volatile situation in the wake of riots, strikes and imprisonments in west Africa
-Arden Clarke acted as a intermediary between Nkrumah and Asante politicians who were concerned about the domination of an educated elite in a new Ghanaian state
-When independence came in 1957, Arden Clarke became the country’s first honorary ‘Governor general’.
What were the political events and immigration legislation between 1947 and 1967?
-British nationality act 1948- gave full British citizenship to inhabitants of Empire/commonwealth
-Successful recruitment and drive to encourage the take up of work in public transport and national health service, in 1956 London transport took on over 4000 new employees
-Oswald Mosley’s anti immigration union movement also increased its activities and in a survey in 1962, 90% of the British population supported legislation to curb immigration and 80% agreed with the proposition that there were too many immigrants in Britain already
-A group of conservative MPs from the West Midlands, encouraged by pressure groups pushed for political action, arguing that unless something was done, Britain would cease to be a European nation and become a mixed African Asian society
-The 1962 commonwealth immigrants act- This was an attempt by the conservative government to appease the public and win political support by controlling increasing non white immigration
-A work permit scheme was put in place. Although this did not explicitly discriminate against black or Asian workers, it had the same effect
-Issues of immigration featured strongly in the 1964 general election campaign.
-The new labour government reduced the quota of vouchers and barred children over 16 from entering Britain as family members
-1965 race relations act which forbade discrimination in public places ‘on the grounds of colour, race or ethnic national origins
-Other complaints could be made to a race relations board
What were the phases and key events between 1947-67?
-Caribbean immigration 1950s
-Pakistani/Indian immigration 1960s
-Kenya in 1967
What was the residual impact of empire and cultural ties?
-Society became more subject to Americanisation and interest in Europe was fuelled as much by charter flight holidays as by political concerns about joining the EEC
-The remembrance of the victory in the Second World War helped encourage support for some sort of imperial links, perhaps imparting the nostalgic idea of the ‘family’ to be nurtured by the mother country
-The Empire had enabled a British diaspora of 10 million spread around the world, who sometimes clustered in vibrant ex patriate communities or maintained elements of British traditions and continued contracts with British family members or kin networks
-People in post colonial states often continued to bear and use anglicised names, live in anglicised communities with neo Gothic churches and British style railway stations and speak variants of the English language
-The Union Jack was retained in the corner of many flags, from Fiji to New Zealand
-The most obvious residual impact of empire was in sport. Football, racket sports, snooker and even croquet were all exported across the empire while rugby had been firmly established in countries such as New Zealand and South Africa and cricket in India and Australia
-Commonwealth games brought nations together in post colonial competition every 4 years
-Words from Africa and India had entered British language and colonial contacts remained strong in British public schools, the military and in some professions
What were Britain’s political post colonial ties like?
-Politically, Britain still maintained strong ties with its former colonies. Britain soothed its loss of world power status by proclaiming its pride about ‘creating’ new ‘nation states’ with their representative institutions and practices
-Parliaments, ministries, wigged judges and British style legal systems were all legacies of the British empire
-More practically, in the new states, former colonial officials stayed in as expatriate advisers in some of the key positions
-Furthermore, the growth and development of the commonwealth, with its emphasis on a shared political tradition, helped maintain political ties
-Regular commonwealth conferences, attended by PMs or presidents, took place at least once every 2 years and there was a major commonwealth economic conference in 1952
-All meetings except 1 took place in London, reinforcing the view that Britain ‘dominated’ the commonwealth, much as it had the British empire
What was Britain’s international position for post colonial ties?
-Just as the empire had been deemed to make Britain ‘Great’, so Britain’s aim in creating the commonwealth was to bolster its international position in the post colonial world, providing a strong and wide ranging diplomatic network and ensuring its membership of key international bodies
-Britain’s place on the United Nations security council, for example, can be seen as a reflection of a residual British status acquired through empire and maintained through Britain’s world wide influence
What were the military post colonial ties for Britain like?
-Although the commonwealth was military alliance, Britain continued to maintain a military with a ‘global reach’ and recruited citizens from commonwealth nations, all of whom remained eligible to serve in the British forces
-Britain even retained a remnant of the old Indian army in the Brigade of Gurkhas
Who remained a symbol of the commonwealth?
-Above all, the Queen remained as a symbol of the commonwealth and personally reinforced the connections through regular commonwealth visits, sometimes with other members of the royal family, to all member countries
-The establishment of a commonwealth Secretary General and associated secretariat in 1965 permitted the co-ordination of many commonwealth activities, while the queen also held her own regular meetings with heads of government from commonwealth countries
-Citizens of the commonwealth remained eligible for British honours and many listened avidly to the monarch’s annual Christmas day message
What was another major legacy of the empire?
-Another major legacy of the empire was Britains status as a globalised economy. The city of London remained as one of the world’s major financial centres, the headquarters of banking, insurance and investment companies, service industries that had grown out of Britain’s role in the transatlantic slave trade
-The conventions of international trade and law had been spawned during the years of imperial rule and Britains imperial connections had given rise to multi national companies with branches around the world
-Britain was thus able to ensure its emergence from empire with a vast overseas investment portfolio and important trading links that continued to be of major importance- particularly given Britain’s exclusion from the EEC until 1973
-Certainly, the British government made every effort to keep ex colonies within the sterling area and it could be said that, in this regard, Britain replaced its ‘formal’ empire with a return to the old ‘informal’ one of trading links and economic ties
What was movement from Britain to the empire and commonwealth like between 1946 and 1957?
-Between 1946 and 1957 approx. 1 million people left Britain for the dominions, representing a marked acceleration of pre war levels
-This intensified the range and depth of personal contacts between ordinary British people and Australia, Canada and New Zealand
-There continued to be a flow of administrators, civil servants and senior army officers who left Britain to experience the empire at first hand. Such men were drawn from the upper ranks of society and had generally been through a public school system which instilled belief in, and prepared them for, imperial rule
-Of those lower down the social order, the only groups Likely to encounter the empire and commonwealth at first hand were men who were required to do national service and became involved in one of the late colonial wars, perhaps in Kenya, Malaya or suez
What was movement from Britain to dominions like by the late 1950s?
-By the late 1950s, improved living standards and full employment within Britain reduced the numbers of people migrating to the dominions, and their governments increasingly looked to other sources of skilled labour around the world, although racial hierarchies introduced during the imperial era often persisted, for example in Australia where the ‘white Australia’ policy barring immigration by ‘non white’ people continued after 1973
-Back in Britain, the national service ended in 1960 and as decolonisation gathered pace, the movement of British people tended to be from the empire and ex empire to britian, as colonial servants and soliders were repatriated
-By the late 1960s, direct personal experience of the empire among the British had become rarer
What were the challenges to colonial rule in Africa and Asia?
-The disruptive consequences of the Second World War are hard to overestimate. In Southeast Asia the effects of this were perhaps most stark. The rapid Japanese victories and conquests of Malaya and Burma destroyed colonial notions of British invincibility, and left a strong conviction among many indigenous groups that British power was vulnerable, even after it had been reinstated
-Similar processes were evident in Africa, where rapid economic development was generated during the war years by the need to provide raw materials and food to support the British war effort
-Thus major cities such as Nairobi and Mombasa in east Africa, and Accra and Lagos in west Africa, grew rapidly in the immediate post war period, and became major theatres of industrial conflict and anti British agitation
-An important factor was the return to the colonies of men who had served in imperial and commonwealth forces during the war. There was a feeling that their sacrifices should be rewarded with greater self determination, and the violence of conflict had also left its mark on many
-Close contact with ordinary british soldiers continued to puncture the myth of white supremacy
What were the factors that propelled nationalist movements across Africa between 1947-67?
-The legacy of war
-Economic and social discontent
-Ethnic and religious rivalries
-Charismatic and western educated leaders
-Mass political parties
Why was economic and social discontent a reason for the growth of nationalist movements?
-Despite the rapid post war economic growth of some colonies, local people had not often been sufficiently trained in skilled work to benefit from the job opportunities and some developments came at the expense of traditional farming and employment
-In places there was competition for land between foreign interests and indigenous farmers and when British projects failed (as in the Tanganyika Groundnut scheme) it was the local peoples that suffered
-Elsewhere there was a surplus of educated youth, unwilling to take Manual employment- the product of efforts to improve educational opportunities for indigenous peoples
Why was ethnic and religious rivalries a reason for growing nationalist movements in Africa?
-Tensions between ethnic groups within colonies, often previously encouraged by colonial rule, fuelled the nationalist movements. Some ethnic groups felt discriminated against when the British favoured other groups in the running of colonial government
-British acceptance that the defintion of ‘malay nationality’ be restricted to those of malay ethnicity in 1949, for example, encouraged the discontented Chinese support nationalist attacks upon Europeans
-Similarly, the political mobilisation of the Asante in the Gold Coast, and of the Yoruba and northern Muslims in Nigeria, was in response to suspicions that other ethnic groups were being favoured
Why was charismatic and western educated leaders a reason for growing nationalism in Africa?
-Key figures able to unite different ethnic groups and factions behind the drive for independence were crucial for the emergence of the nationalist independence movements
-Nkrumah in the Gold Coast, Azikiwe in Nigeria etc are all examples of nationalist leaders educated in westernised schools. Some actually travelled to Britain, Europe or USA, others attended western school’s and institutions in the colonies, but all learned to articulate their anti colonial thinking and criticism in ways recognised by liberal elements in the west, having intellectually connected with political ideas about nationalism, liberalism, socialism and marxism which challenged imperial rule
How were mass political parties a reason for growth Jn nationalist movements In the colonies?
-Nationalist movements relied on strength of numbers in support of their cause. By showing that they had a mass (and organised) following, leaders put the British in a publicly difficult moral position
-Given their stomp self perception as proponents of democracy and ideas of self determination, they were obliged to bow to respectable political organisations
-The creation of parties also enabled the dissemination of ideas and the opportunity to compete for power, once democratic elections were instituted
-The CPP in the Gold Coast, AFPFL in Burma, ANC in Rhodesia and South Africa and UMNO and MCA in malaya all used mass mobilisation and mass action to achieve their aims
Why were the nationalist movements in colonies a threat to British interests?
• They showed they had mass support which put the British in a difficult position because of their belief in democracy and self-determination
• They were obliged to bow to respectable political organisations
• Nationalist parties used mass mobilisation and mass action to achieve their aims
• Sometimes they were militant which made it difficult to maintain control
• However, The British allowed nationalist movements to exist through education and some political
representation
How did the Malayan Races Liberation Army (MRLA) and Malayan Communist Party (MCP) threaten British Rule in Malaya?
• They were militant and attacked farms and police stations
• They organised strike activity and disruption of transport and communication with provoked the Malayan emergency
• The MCP was declared illegal in 1948
• In 1951, the High Commissioner, Sir Henry Gurney was shot by MCP guerrillas
Why did the British co-operate with UMNO?
• In order to defeat the Communists
• UMNO offered a positive programme of action and was ready to combat the very different tactics adopted by the militant independence movements such as the MRLA and the MCP
To what extent did the ethnic tensions in Malaya slow down the path to independence?
-Britain decided that Malay nationalist would be restricted to those of Malay ethnicity in 1949
• Ja’afar left UMNO in 1951 to form his own Independence of Malaya Party (IMP) having failed to broaden his party’s ethnic membership
• Under Tunku Abdul Rahman, the UMNO increased its power through alliances, but the underlying friction remained
• Co-operation with the MCA (Malayan Chinese Association in 1954 and the MIC (Malayan Indian Congress) in 1955 ensured electoral success but did not resolve the issues of a racially divided peninsular
• The emergency created enough chaos to make UMNO look moderate so the British were more likely to work with them
• Tunku became the first Chief Minister of Malaya in 1955, however his discussions with Chin Peng of the MCP broke down – even the moderates didn’t agree. Tunku turned to London to support a deal that would lead to full independence in August 1957
• Even after independence ethnic troubles plagued the politics of the new state
To what extent were the British forced to accelerate the path towards independence?
• They were fearful of the rise of communism, for the safety of their economic resources – tin and rubber industry and for the loss of the key strategic position of Malaya
• To restore stability, they had to depend on the local indigenous elite – which they gained by offering staged self-government
• They remained in control because they fought the counter insurgency very successfully, but in order to do this they had to make concessions
Which regional groups were pushing for independence in Nigeria?
• The National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) – Dominated by the Igbo (SE) , under the commanding personality of Azikiwe, who owned newspapers through which he argued the nationalist cause. It had the widest appeal
• The Action Group – Dominated by the Yoruba (SW), resisted the concept of unitary government. Represented the comparatively economically advanced west. Despite divisions arising from conflict with the Yoruba community, its leader, Awolowo proved a formidable debater and political campaigner. It sought autonomous states within a federal structure
• The Northern People’s Congress (NCP) – dominated by the Hausa and Fulani (N). Led by western educated northern Muslims with the assent of the emirs (local elite). Led by Ahmadu Bello who wanted to protect northern social and political institutions from southern influence and insisted on maintaining territorial integrity of the northern region, including areas with non-Muslim populations. Peasant disaffection and rivalry among Muslim factions proved problematic
• In all three regions, there were other minority parties representing the special interests of ethnic groups
To what extend did the ethnic tensions slow down the path to independence?
• It was an artificial creation, made up of diverse people and regions so nationalism derived more from pan Africanism than from any sense of common Nigerian nationality
• North Islamic area had decidedly anti-western nationalist sentiments. There were also conflicts between the Yoruba and the Igbo which grew more acute as they competed for control
• The west was economically advanced and ambitions, seeking independent control
• Southern nationalism was more influenced by European ideas, professional organisations of teachers, lawyers and traders and independent Christian churches. It wanted to promote education and economic development
• All the different interest groups made negotiations with the British over constitutional change a difficult exercise in compromise and political expediency
• It took time to create a constitution that was workable and acceptable to all parties
• The cooperation that emerged was more the result of necessity in the face of an overall goal than the product of an emerging sense of national identity
To what extent were British reforms able to slow the path to independence?
• They drew up 3 constitutions from 1946 to 1954 amidst considerable political controversy as ethnic divisions intensified
• The ethnic tensions helped them limit reforms to slow concessions
What evidence is there that the British authorities were scared by the development of nationalist movements in the CAF?
• They created the CAF in 1953 to try to forestall a potential situation of Southern Rhodesian politicians extending their influence over the mineral rich northern Rhodesia in an attempt to protect Africans in Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland from discriminatory Southern Rhodesian laws
• However, southern whit people tried to use the federation to reinforce their own political leadership and to give the white northern Rhodesians the same political influence
• Black nationalist congress parties emerged in Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland a
• In 1959, Dr Hastings Banda of Nyasaland led a campaign to end the federation
• Robert Armitage, Governor of Nyasaland, fearing the collapse of British authority, promptly declared a State of Emergency and banned the Nyasaland African Congress (NAC) and imprisoned its leaders (including Banda and Kaunda)
• Around 1300 were also detained without trial and over 2000 were imprisoned for offences related to the Emergency
• Reinforcements from N and S Rhodesia were used to round up activists and 51 were killed by troops or the police, including 20 in an incident Nkata Bay in March 1959
• A British commission of 1959 concluded that the Emergency had been an overreaction. It denounced Nyasaland for employing illegal and unnecessary force and endorse the opinion that the majority of Nyasaland Africans were bitterly opposed to federation
• Macmillan and Macleod had little choice but to break up the federation
Why was the decision of the Rhodesian Front (RF) to declare UDI in 1965 so damaging to Britain’s process of decolonisation?
• It was rejected as illegal and unconstitutional by Britain, the United Nations and most of the rest of the world
• Britain imposed sanctions but they proved of little use as South Africa refused to cooperate
• It revealed Britain’s embarrassing impotence
• Whilst claiming a world role, it proved unable to deal with rebels in its own ex-colony
• Britain received criticism from the Commonwealth, accusing Britain of betraying commonwealth ideals
• It triggered a 15 year long civil war between white people and black nationalist in what Smith called
Rhodesia
Reasons why Britain still remained in control during the period of growing nationalist movements in Africa?
-Successfully fought counter-insurgency campaigns in Malaya and Kenya
-Able to find moderates to work with that joined the Commonwealth
-None of the countries fought against Britain – only parts of them did if at all
-All African colonies joined the Commonwealth (except Rhodesia)
Reasons why nationalists retained the upper hand during the period of nationalist uprisings in the colonies?
-Nationalists played into the idea of what Britain said their aim for the colonies was
-Mass nationalist movements were difficult for Britain to surpress
-Often they had something that Britain wanted to maintain access too e.g. Malaya rubber/tin, Egypt Suez Canal
What were the causes of the mau mau rebellion?
• Kikuyu had found themselves progressively squeezed off land in the ‘white highlands’ to accommodate an expanding number of white settlers
• They were confined to reservation lands which were inadequate for their needs
• Evictions (sometimes violent) added to growing Kikuyu concerns that their communities were falling apart
• Unemployment and poor conditions in the towns
• Significant over farming
• Colour Bar
To what extent was Britain to blame for the Mau mau rebellion?
• The regime was based on privileged white settlers who were determined that Kenya would be dominated politically and economically by them
• Many of the grievances were directly caused by actions of the white settlers
• The governor, Sir Philip Mitchell, announced in1948 that self-government would not be possible in the near future which fuelled the frustrations
What did the rebels hope to achieve in the mau mau rebellion?
• They were protesting against rising prices and racial discrimination
• Wanted to end colonial rule
Who was Dedan Kimathi?
• Leader of the Mau Mau rebellion
• He believed in compelling fellow Kikuyu by way of oath to bring solidarity to the independence
movement
• Used guerrilla tactics to fight against the British
• Captured in 1956 and executed the following year
• Kimathi is a national hero of the Kenyan people
• Kenyan government regretted that it took 40 years for the group to be officially registered despite the sacrifices the Mau Mau had made for Kenya’s independence
Who participated in the mau mau rebellion?
• Part Kikuyu conspiracy
• Part peasant revolt
• Part criminal gang action
• The KLFA failed to capture widespread public support, partly due to the British policy of divide and rule
What methods did the mau mau rebellion use?
• It’s supporters killed 95 Europeans and 13 000 black people
• The Chief of Kikuyu, Kungu, spoke out against the atrocities and was assassinated in October 1952
• Intimidated people to take their oath and killed people if they refused
• Took ritualistic oaths of allegiance
• Committing extreme violence
• Mau Mau attacks were well planned and organised and fast and brutal
• The Mau Mau military strategy was mainly guerrilla attacks launched under the cover of dark. They used stolen weapons such as guns, as well as weapons such as machetes and bows and arrows in their attacks
• Lari massacres - Night of 25–26 March 1953, they herded men, women and children into huts and set fire to them, hacking down with machetes anyone who attempted escape, before throwing them back into the burning huts
How did the British respond to put down the mau mau rebellion?
• Britain sent thousands of troops to Kenya
• It declared a State of Emergency in 1952 which suspended all black African political rights and the Mau Mau were treated as political terrorists
• Kenya became a police state, dispensing racist terror
• Black leaders were imprisoned, including Kenyatta
• Kikuyu were also tortured, mutilated and murdered by Mau Mau on many other occasions
• Supressing the uprising cost Britain £55m
• The British security forces formed ‘strike squads’ to carry out assassinations, show civilians in cold blood and massacred the innocent with the guilty
• Kikuyu villages were uprooted and relocated which cut the Mau Mau off from their sources of support
• Mau Mau suspects were routinely tortured to extract information
• 10s of 1000s of the Kikuyu population were resettled in hundreds of gaol-villages where there was a regime of searches, curfews, restrictions, interrogations and forced labour
• Hola Camp Atrocities March 1959: 11 Mau Mau detainees were beaten to death and 77 received serious injuries
• Britain was fortunate that many black Kenyans showed little desire to help a movement which would replace British supremacy with Kikuyu supremacy
• Britain recruited a ‘home guard’ of loyal Kikuyu to assist British ground troops aided by helicopters and planes
• Britain sponsored welfare programmes to help the ethnic groups who remained loyal
What were the results of the British response to the mau mau rebellion”
• Between 1952 and 1956, 11-1200 people were killed and 81 000 detained
• Kenyans were granted nearly all of the demands made by the KAU in 1951. On 18 January 1955, Evelyn Baring, offered an amnesty to Mau Mau activists. The offer was that they would not face prosecution for previous offences, but may still be detained. European settlers were appalled at the leniency of the offer. On 10 June 1955 with no response forthcoming, the offer of amnesty to the Mau Mau was revoked.
• In June 1956, a programme of land reform increased the land holdings of the Kikuyu. This was coupled with a relaxation of the ban on native Kenyans growing coffee, a primary cash crop. They also raised urban wages and accepted majority rule
• Some white people in Kenya were prepared to form a multiracial party
• Macmillan’s ‘wind of change’ speech of 1960 and the shift of policy towards independence was
undoubtedly linked to the Mau Mau insurrection
• The new governor of Kenya, Sir Patrick Renison paved the way for a move towards independence and black majority rule which was granted in 1963, whereupon 1500 remaining Mau Mau guerrillas laid down their arms
How was the mau mau rebellion and British response reported in the British media?
• The British press reported the incident at Hola Camp. Outrage in Britain grew as it emerged that no one would be prosecuted for any offence
• The state of emergency was not lifted until 1960, but the British government was left embarrasses and shocked
What were the consequences of the mau mau rebellion for the british?
• It showed that the colonial government were poorly equipped to deal with large-scale insurrection
What were the consequences of the mau mau rebellion for the Kenyan nationalists?
• Over 200 000 Mau Mua fighters were killed during the emergency
• Little had been done to reconcile the Mau Mau detainees
• Jomo Kenyatta the suspected Mau Mau leader was still in prison
• The ban on African political movements was lifted in a conference in London in January 1960 and a
constitution was devised which gave elected Africans a majority in the Kenan legislature
• Kenyatta was released from prison and became the leader of KANU
• Kenya became independence in December 1963
What was operation legacy?
• Operation Legacy was a British Colonial Office program to destroy or hide files, to prevent them being inherited by its ex-colonies. It ran from the 1950s until the 1970s. Documents that might embarrass the British government or show racial or religious bias, were destroyed or sent to the United Kingdom. Some of the files detailed torture methods used against opponents of the colonial administrations, e.g., during the Mau Mau Uprising.
• “Imperialists were often all too aware that if the true nature of their mission was exposed it would also undermine the image of liberal democracy that was deployed to distinguish the West from authoritarian regimes.”
• “David Anderson, historian of the British Empire in Africa, has stated that the lost files would lead to a fundamental revision of the history of decolonization. When the Nazi regime was placed on trial at Nuremburg it was its extensive record-keeping, detailing the manner in which the annihilation of Jews, gypsies, communists, and dissidents was carried out, which damned its senior figures. The British state was not to make the same mistake.”
• “The legacy of the British empire was deliberately tampered with, deliberately interfered with, deliberately made to appear far more benign than it was. Nobody colonises another group of people because they love them or because they want them to have democracy and the rule of law.” - Akala
Reasons why operation legacy undermined British rule?
-British rule was supposedly based on equality and justice and some of the methods used were questionable and questioned British motives in Africa
-Criticised in the eyes of the world
-Part of the reason why Kenya was granted independence
-Strengthened nationalist movements in Kenya and across Africa
Reasons why operation legacy did not undermine/strengthened British rule?
-Made Britain prepared for events elsewhere – it wasn’t going to commit troops to insurgencies elsewhere and became more conciliatory
-It was successfully countered the rebellion -Public supported it at first
-Easy for the British to portray the rebels as fanatics because of their actions
-Lots of Kenyan’s didn’t support the rebellion
