ImperialismTheories of Causes and Motives

Economic explanations: Classical Economic TheoryStates annex areas because they need a secure

source of raw materials, export markets for industrial output and outlet for surplus capital

Capitalist system that works to maximize profitsWages kept low, purchasing power declines, selling

products and new investments becomes difficultOutside markets have to be found to avoid

overproduction and underconsumptionRadicals like Lenin claimed this was highest stage

of capitalism, Hobson-liberal-claimed not inevitable, but to raise purchasing power of the masses

EvaluationOverseas investment in africa by major imperialist powers

(france, germany, GB) didn’t go to africa—mainly europe or south america (france invested heavily in russia)—what was invested in africa was invested in old african empires (mainly egypt and SA)

Of the 5 main imperialist powers in africa, only GB had significant overseas investment—italy and portugal faced severe capital shortage during partition

But economic motives might be present, even though they didn’t materialize—territorial expansion perceived as necessary to safeguard future of industrial power, so hoped colonies would be good investment—Leopold II (belgium must have a colony like netherlands’ indies!) and de Brazza felt so, but Leopold was unsupported by traders, industrialists, financiers—belgium economy leaned on walloonian heavy industry, easily traded with european neighbours

Defensive imperialism/Closed Door TheoryCapitalist states best served by free trade Ricardian system,

each state produces best-suited product, international specialization and optimal advantages

But some states try to get advantage at cost of others by raising trade barriers

Other states forced to pursue imperialism to prevent economic losses

Economic recession of 1870s also felt in West Africa (senegal to laos)—led to increasing french and brit protection of trading interests there

In german trading circles, seemed whole west african coast being closed off by french and brits, threatened trading interests

Finding the door to africa closed pushed bismarck to imperialism

EvaluationIn reality, no question of german exclusion, but pro-

colonialism propagandists used this as argumentAnglo-french convention applied only to part of west

coast—senegal to sierra leone, and never ratifiedGermany’s interest in africa was open door,

guarantees of free trade and navigationBismarck’s decision to reject Anglo-Portuguese trade

agreement and to recognize congo free state was partly related to secure free trade for germany in congo area

But policy of formal imperialism was unnecessary for this

World System approachWith the start of economic recession, british

superiority and world economic hegemony declined

New industrializing powers (USA, Germany) threatening economic hegemony—these felt need for large markets and raw materials to do this

Period of protectionism and formal imperialism as each rival attempts to preserve its own portion of periphery

EvaluationDuring partition of Africa, economic rivalries

between great powers were increasingProtectionist measures in germany and

franceFrench rivalry and expansion of trade

threatened coastal powers britain relied on for security of merchants

But britain’s economic commitments and interests called for expansion regardless of international strategic rivalry—niger delta taken even before french and german rivals arrived

Political theories—Balance of PowerImperialism a safety valve for european

powers’ rivalryAfter franco-prussian war, germany strongest

continental power, Bismarck tried to maintain this

Concluded range of treaties and agreements to stabilize european balance of power

To prevent bond between france and russia, to isolate france

By aggressive colonial policy, britain (main obstacle to german hegemony) to be forced to political agreement

EvaluationBismarck did support anglo-french egyptian venture

and after france failed, backed french diplomatic efforts to have britain withdraw

Demarches in west and southwest africa were moves to encroach on british african preserves

But in most areas of conflict UK appeared to be appeasing france, bismarck feared anglo-french entente against german colonialism

National considerations in german elections also played a role

Aggressive colonial policy lasted only 1 year under bismarck

Social imperialismTerritorial expansion as political means to face

internal social unrest—increasing class conflicts in periods of rapid industrialization

Bismarck’s germany faced unrest because of unsteady growth of german economic development 1873-96—periods of rapid industrialization interceded by various industrial crises while recession in agricultural sphere in 1876

Imperialism a way of diversion from social troubles and preservation of economy in time of recession

Maintenance of traditional power structure (domestic) with bismarck on top

EvaluationIf staying in powerwinning elections, then this policy may have

been factor, effective as wellBismarck’s anti socialist lawsBismarck protected iron and steel, and agriculture sector in

1879 by general tariffPolitical support of hamburg, Bremen and other north German

citiesColonial lobbies politically useful because they appealed to

same middle class audience providing support for political rivalsBut effort to achieve social imperialism in stalemated political

society only led to militarism, destruction of representative gov and WW1—failed to integrate forces of order (agrarian junkers and industrial middle class) against socialism and democracy

Mythical theory—irresponsible leaders, Warrior class interestsFrench expansion in west africa and towards upper nile based on

illusions of politiciansReputed richness of interior may explain french striving for larger

empireexpansion towards upper nile to pressure britain into international

conference on egypt—illusion of support of other powers (Germany, Russia) and diplomatic reaction of GB

Great autonomous power of colonial department, frequent alternations of politicians, personal influence of decision makers, prevailing anti-british foreign policy, influence of public opinion and pressure groups and bad and incomplete information from anglophobe expansionist army officerspersistance of colonial/imperial myth

Greatest misperception of european powers—leopold’s adventure would fail

Prestige ImperialismTerritorial expansion fed by feelings of national

consciousness and pride—goal unto itselfItalian expansion prompted by german expansion—

italy didn’t react to French takeover in tunisia despite 50,000 italians there, but after Bismarck started annexation, politicians convinced Italy couldn’t stay behind

Portuguese gov justified imperial policy by appealing to heroic colonial past—a matter of prestige

Recognition of her claims in Congo considered question of honor, (brit) interference in colonial affairs was vehemently rejected

Strategic Interests (robinson and gallagher)Consider british takeover of egypt 1882 start

of imperialism in africa—laid foundation of anglo-french rivalry in africa

Afrikaner nationalism in SA threatened status quo—british trade and mining interests, route to india in case of problems with the suez

Nearly all interventions consequences of threat to british influence and security in the world

EvaluationTheory suggests french expansion in africa search

for compensation for egyptian losssAnglo-french rivalry did last through majority of

period, only resolved after fashoda crisisFrench convention with Leopold 1884 regarding

right to pre-empt his territory if adventure failed partly motivated by fear that if leopold were forced to dispose his possessions, they would go to britain

But france in congo was also a search for old grandeur, not entirely due to anglo-french rivalry and compensation for egypt

Partition process in Africa1875-79 Penetration of central africa by Leopold II

from east (with Stanley’s help) and de Brazza from west, for exploration and on personal terms

1879-82 Leopold and de Brazza still on personal title, penetration directed towards exclusive rights

1883-84 brazza acts officially in french name, leopold and france try to obtain sovereign rights, Portugal and Brits step in, conflicting territorial claims between france and portugal on one hand and portugal on other

1884-5 partition becomes european diplomacy issue, guided by Bismarck, conflicts solved by diplomacy

The StartUntil 1875 european interests along west

african coasts limited, interests in interior of africa even more so

West African trade dominated by BritsMid-1870s, central africa became interest of

european geographic associations, african ‘mysteries’ of interior

Great african rivers not just geographic interest but also economic and strategic as potential function as main lines of communication

Leopold II of Belgium attracted by economic promises of congo, but not supported at home, so acted alone

Association internationale du CongoUnder a philanthropic cover of opening up central africa to

western trade and civilization and removing slavery, Belgian expeditions dove into Africa

From 1877 onwards, directed towards Congo—leopold heard of Stanley’s journey through Central Africa, enormous trading potential in congo basin and river as grand highway of commerce

Stanley recruited by leopold to establish posts along river and obtain sovereign rights from local african rulers to open up congo area

Competitor: de Brazza, french naval officer, wanted to set up french trade imperium, rejected by french government but funded by minister for the navy (under whom colonies fell), Montaignac, friend of Brazza family

Leopold-FranceBrazza concluded treaty with King Makoko for protectorate on area

bordering north right bank of congo In 1882, french policy had changed to protectionist-colonialist, call for

colonies especially by naval officers and geographers, Brazza-Makoko treaties ratified

Real scramble up for the upper congo and kwilu-niari basin between brazza and stanley—easier communication line from upper congo to atlantic for france, leopold couldn’t be sure of lower congo because of portuguese claims

Stanley won—almost whole kwilu-niari basin with coastline, while france got just few posts and in area and on congo

Leopold got recognition of AIC from USA, concession from france: promised to respect AIC territories in return for pre-emption of possessions if leopold forced to dispose of them

Became european problem as french dominance in africa far more threatening than Leopold’s adventurism

Portugal-Britain-France Renewed negotiations between portugal and britain on portugal’s territorial

claims in the region—britain had never recognized these because of slave trade and portuguese protectionist colonial policy and britain’s growing trade interests there

With makoko treaty, threat of french trade monopoly in congo area—great threat for existing and future trade, because of french return to formal imperialism, britain informal imperialism based on free trade and paramountcy worthless

Best alternative to place portugal at mouth of congo, in return for portuguese trade and navigation concessions in all of africa

1884 treaty recognized portugal in lower congo, north and south banks—leopold’s outlet to sea by lower congo blocked

Storm of protest—portugal trading houses thought treaty a humiliation as brit recognition had been very conditional, british humanitarian organizations and chamber of commerce protested because of portuguese protectionism and inefficiency and corruption of authorities in territorial possessions

French protests, and also German refusal to ratify treaty—claimed it was threat to free trade rights of all nations

Germany—Bismarck AussenpolitikGerman reaction part of emerging anti-british colonial policyRecession hit both industry and agriculture, demands for colonies

and protectionColonial movement came into existence 1882, gov and ruling

political parties couldn’t ignore colonialismNew german policy’s first sign here (one year later: cameroon

coastlines, togo, german east africa (tanganyika), south-west africa (namibia)

By making britain a reichsfeind, hoped to touch nationalist sentiments and win elections in 1884

Had to appease france to cultivate anglo-french rivalry and prevent franco-russian alliance—rapprochement

Supported french at london conference 1884 on egypt, agreed to force settlement on west africa and congo basin, organized berlin conference

Berlin Conference 1884-5At french request, territorial matters not included on agenda—french

preferred bilateral discussion with weak portugal and even weaker belgian AIC

Territorial questions discussed behind the scenes, emphasis on free trade and navigation in conference

Britain uneager to join conference—Ferry and Bismarck included niger river on agenda, GB considered lower niger ‘british’ like ‘french’ senegal

But not joining meant complete isolation; bismarck recognized AIC 1884 just before start of conference (AIC at least promised free trade in meantime, better than French and portuguese protectionists)

Ferry also happy with bismarck’s move—AIC free trade meant no revenues for AIC, only making french purchase more likely

Britain had no choice but to recognize AIC territory as well—congo Free state established

ConclusionsBritish role—status quo of free trade to be preserved,

protector and ally of weak portugal (brits willing to discuss portuguese territorial claims even before france-leopold congo affair), this offered opportunity to demand better trading conditions in portuguese colonies—repeated and lengthy negotiations 1876-82 showed free trade first, portugal second

De Brazza and leopold may represent elite characterized by militarism and nationalist class with imperialism as goal unto itself, but neither france nor belgium was such an elite at this time, ventures never supported in belgium and only lately supported in france

ConclusionsDevelopments in technology--transport and communications

made imperialism possibleIncreasing economic and political rivalry in europe made

imperialism probableTransition from liberalism to ideology based on aggressive

nationalism and racism (social darwinism)Although economic stagnation started 1873, effects intensified

in 1882, protectionism grew in france, germany, portugal1881 Dreikaiserbund (germany, russia, austri), 1882 Triple

alliance created (Germany-Austria-Italy)—france isolated as britain in splendid isolation

Imperialists like Ferry came to power in FranceBritain took over Egypt in 1882, as a matter of strategic interest

—french prestige hurt, compensation not received