From Tranquility to Turmoil: Imperialism in Somalia
No force has had a greater impact on modern nations and their cultures than imperialism. Imperialism is a policy of extending a nation’s rule over foreign areas by acquiring and holding colonies. During the nineteenth century in particular, imperialism became a trend among wealthy European nations such as Great Britain, France, and Italy, as countries competed to gain resources and expand their empires. In enforcing these policies, imperial powers spread numerous effects over the span of the globe. The question is, were the effects of imperialism beneficial or detrimental to the colonized nations? For the nation of Somalia, it is clear that imperialism was nothing but a perversion of justice, as their bloody post-independence history in particular shows when compared with the peace that existed pre-imperialism. The British and Italian imperial policies proved destructive to the nation of Somalia, as shown by the current absence of governmental stability, lack of economic prosperity, and increasing ethnic conflict.
Governmental stability is a key component of evidence that imperialism was detrimental to Somalia. Before imperialism, Somalia operated as an Arab sultanate. Society was divided into clans, each ruled by a sultan. The government was not unified under one body but it was functional and there has been no history of dissatisfaction prior to imperialism. In 1886, Britain made a treaty with the Sultan of Tajura and captured northern Somalia while Italy gained control of the southern portion by making a treaty with the Sultan of Hobyo (“Background Note” 1). Both British and Italian Somaliland, the resulting colonies, were protectorates (“Italian Somaliland” 2). The protect...
... middle of paper ...
...o be extinguished. So from the perspective of ethnic conflict, too, it is clear that imperialism brought Somalia from better to worse.
Historians will, until the end of time, continue to debate over whether imperialism caused more benefit or harm to the world as a whole. In the case of Somalia, though, there is no question as to the immense harm imperialism caused. Imperialism resulted in governmental instability and corruption, an equally unstable economy thrown off balance by imperial rule, and incessant ethnic conflict with Ethiopia and Kenya. Britain and Italy took advantage of a weaker country for their own economic and nationalistic benefits, and then left it under the pretense of preparing it to be more modern politically and economically, when really all they did was derail an innocent nation, and leave it alone to glue its shattered remains together.
At first glance, one would not expect to find any similarities between the countries of Somalia and the United States. Even though the differences outweigh similarities, after deeper examination, Somalia and the United States do share a few similarities. These similarities include British rule, Civil War, and acts of domestic terror. A few differences may be government, climate, and military.
The purpose of this document is to discuss the horrible acts one may recognize as the genocide in Somalia. One may deliberate regularly on the reasons or circumstances that lead to the mistreatment and killings of a whole country; how could this happen? Why are no other countries willing to step in and give aid to the Somali people whom are suffering on a daily basis? In reality, many concerns have been addressed, whether by discussions or actions. There may be different philosophies or viewpoints as to why the genocide was conducted and not stopped. Genocide is a cruel and inhumane event and is a world problem.
Before the war, Somalia had a well-functioning democratic republic government. Under the 1979 Constitution, the president held executive power. The president was the head and leader of the country’s sole legal political party, The Somali Revolutionary Socialist Party. Elected to serve a 7-year term, the president was nominated by the party’s central committee. Ever since the civil war in 1991, when the government collapsed, Somalia has been in a state of civil war and anarchy (“Somalian Government”).
Introduction: The epoch of imperialism cannot be defined simply as a proliferation of inflated egos tied to the hardened opinions of nationalists, but also a multi-faceted global rivalry with roots of philosophies tainted with racism and social Darwinism. The technique of each imperialist was specific to the motivations and desires of each combative, predominantly Western power and subsequently impacted the success of each imperialist and its colonies. Driven by industrialization, Europeans are aware of the urgent need for raw materials and new markets to maintain a constant rate of expansion and wealth. Imperialism became a competition; in general, the European countries led with fervor while the non-Western regions deemed likely to be stepped on.
At that time in the early 1990’s, the U.S. was the only superpower country left in the world. The Soviet Union collapsed after the Cold War and the left the U.S. at the top. With the U.S. being the only superpower left, it meant that they were the only ones who could try to keep peace between other countries and hopefully end violence in the world. At the time, Somalia was a complete disaster and still is to this day. They have no structural government and warlords rule parts of the country.
A. Adu Boahen's African Perspectives on Colonialism neatly classifies African responses to European colonialism during both phases of invasion and occupation during the 19th century with precise labels according to their nature or time period. However, the reactions can also be loosely grouped into two diametric characterizations: peaceful and violent. Although creating this dichotomy seems a gross generalization and oversimplification of the colonial African experience, it more importantly allows for a different perspective- one that exposes the overwhelming success of the typically peaceful or pacifist reaction in contrast to the little gain and large losses of the violent response.
Although imperialism helped the colonized people by improving the economy and the lives of the people, for the most part imperialism hurt the colonized people because the people were forced to grow cash crops which led to death by starvation. First of all, imperialism improved the lives of the colonized people by aiding economic growth. The imperial powers prompted industrialization in the colonies, which is the development of advanced technology, leading to modernization in the colony. This is the change to a more modern, a more advanced country with new technology and better standards of living. These improvements then led to an increase in self-sufficiency, being able to maintain the colony’s economy by itself.
New Imperialism began in the last quarter of the nineteenth century and was a time when European powers began to pursue a structured (more formal) political control over other areas. Yet it is important to keep in mind that informal empires tend to have an expiration date. As time progresses, history shows us that one of the parties involved will start pushing for change, whether that change is for power or independence is based on the side that provoked the change. In this case, the party that pushed for change was the superior one. The push for power was motivated by greed and an overwhelming desire to control every aspect of valuable foreign areas. One of the biggest moments in the history of colonization was the ‘Scramble for Africa’, as historians (and Professor Hopkins) refer to it as. As slaves were the biggest resource of the time, the banning of slave trade in Africa in the early nineteenth century caused European disinterest in continent that they were once heavily dependent on. Although there were localized replacements, like ivory trading, they were not as effective in keeping Europe’s interest. As a result, Africa was desperate to be relevant again, their economy depended on it. Because of the ban on the slave trade, there was a sudden demographic collapse of middle aged persons, which was also counterproductive to the growth of the continent. Before the scramble, Africa was naturally
A true saying is “Colonization often does more damage than contribution.” Colonialism encouraged Africa’s development in some areas, but in many others it severely damaged the natural progress of the continent. If colonialism was never imposed on Africa, Africa’s developments would be significantly different and many of the problems that the continent faces now would not exist today. In conclusion, at first it seems that colonialism has both positive and negative effects, but the truth is it only damages the colonized nation.
A weak argument can be brought forth as to the good that colonial expansion brought to Africa; education was improved, trade was increased, the infant mortality rate decreased, the infrastructure was improved, and religion and western influence were introduced, these last two are very arguable as to the benefit, but these improvements no matter how large or small will always be overshadowed by the suffering, torture, death, and destruction caused by this colonization.
In the 19th Century King Leopold II was the king of Belgium and he was looking for a way to expand his power and influence of the Belgium state. During this time imperialism was becoming very prominent, especially in European countries. Imperialism was a way for a country to easily gain wealth by implementing military force on another country or group of people. They would extract resources and goods from these places and, in its wake, imperialism destroyed these societies and their cultures. King Leopold II is a perfect example of European Imperialism and in his book King Leopold’s Ghost; Adam Hochschild details the effects that King Leopold II had on the Congo in Africa. Hochschild also argues that Leopold’s rule had an impact in the Congo
In the Africa, lies the country Somalia, which is located on east coast of the continent. Its capital, Mogadishu, however has inconveniently brought its own problems, from colonization to politics, disagreements arise, causing tension throughout the country. Somalia’s historical background and culture ultimately lead to the war in its capital, it lead to the War of Mogadishu.
Throughout history, imperialism has led countries to extend their rule over weaker countries and then colonized those countries to expand their own power. Imperialism allows the ruling countries to use the weaker countries for their resources. Colonizing other countries would then lead to growth and a better reputation for the dominating country. There are many examples of imperialism throughout European history. When many European countries “scrambled” for Africa, it seemed as though Africa had no say in anything. During the 19th century, Europe found a way to use Africa for their own growth and power. Using Africa for their resources, the Europeans colonized Africa without a second thought. European imperialism in Africa had a negative impact because of social disarray, cultural loss, and death it caused.
In the early 1880’s, the powers of Europe started to take control of regions in Africa and set up colonies there. In the beginning, colonization caused the Africans little harm, but before long, the Europeans started to take complete control of wherever they went. The Europeans used their advanced knowledge and technology to easily maneuver through the vast African landscape and used advanced weapons to take control of the African people and their land. The countries that claimed the most land and had the most significant effect on Africa were France, England, Belgium, and Germany. There were many reasons for the European countries to be competing against each other to gain colonies in Africa. One of the main reasons was that the Europeans believed that the more territory a country was able to control, the more powerful it could become and the more powerful it would be seen as by other countries. Other reasons for the desire to control African land included the many natural resources that could only be found in Africa, such as diamonds, gold, and as time progressed, rubber. It also provided new markets in surrounding places so that manufactured goods could be sold for a larger profit. The Europeans had many motives for imperialism in Africa. Yet the true motives were often shielded as they tried tom present themselves as humanitarians when in reality they were making Africa a terrible place to live with brutality and harsh treatment of the African natives. The ways of the Europeans had many physical and emotional costs for the people of Africa. The imperialism process also took a toll on the people of Europe. The European imperialistic colonization in Africa was motivated by the desire to control the abundant natural resources an...
...e seems valuable as holding one group to high-esteem than others always leads to a conflict as the other groups react due to the inferiority sentiments. In the African context, this was not only the case in Kenya during the post-election violence but the cause of the Rwandan genocide as well. In a societal set up, one group attitudes of superiority often leads to the other group feeling inferior and insecure thus leading to outbreak of conflict. As much as the other two authors also manage to bring out their arguments and back them up with relevant sources, Macharia’s article holds more water as it is more logical and he has well-articulated his arguments and his opinion. He manages to clearly show that one of the lasting legacies of colonialism in Africa was indeed the ability of the colonial powers to leave colonies whose people were divided along ethnic lines.