Monday, November 11, 2013

Rory McClurg
Response Paper #4
Post-Colonialism and Failed States
     The post-9/11 world has changed international concerns and priorities drastically. During most of the 20th century, the Europeans and Americans, the ones with international power at the time, were preoccupied with colonial assets and the Cold War. As terrorism became a more important issue, it became apparent that failed states were a huge problem that had been largely ignored in the past. This paper will be centered around how colonialism in Africa has doomed the continent to have a rash of failed states.
     The colonial era was one highlighted by exploitation and upheaval of the native norms. The Europeans essentially started grabbing up whatever territory they could get, but when drawing the lines on the map, they did not take into account any of the preexisting cultural differences between natives. The Europeans, very used to the idea of a nation state with concrete borders on a map imposed this system on natives in areas such as West Africa, that were not acclimated to such concepts. This “drawing of the lines” so to speak, lumped tribes that didn’t always get along or even those that had deep seeded for one another in the same country. This is readily apparent in Nigeria, where the borders were drawn not considering the fact there were many competing ethnic groups in the country such as the Igbos and the Biafrans. This led to much instability in the country, which even culminated in a civil war in 1967 resulting in over a million deaths. This is a common theme throughout postcolonial Africa, civil wars have erupted in Sierra Leone, Sudan, and Rwanda to name a few.
     The way Europeans treated their colonies speaks volumes about why many ex-colonies are failed states. Sometimes the Europeans even intentionally broke apart whole nations into competing spheres within a single state to more easily maintain control of the natives. During the Belgian occupation of what is now Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, they essentially exploited the country for its resources and left. They placed the wealthy Tutsi minority tribe in power, who treated the poor Hutu majority as nothing. In addition, the Belgians only concern was acquiring profit from this colony, and forced the peasants to work with no pay. After they were done with the colony, they essentially just left with no assistance to the natives. The toxic way this colony was run and subsequently abandoned by the Belgians paved the way for one of the worst genocides in history, and civil war. Considering how African colonies were exploited, it is no surprise fourteen of the top twenty failed states according to the failed states index, were previously European colonies in Africa.








Reference: Failed State Index, Foreign Policy Magazine

                        http://www.foreignpolicy.com/failedstates2013

5 comments:

  1. I agree with your response on failed states. I think you made a great point regarding colonialism and I believe that the way European states left their colonies has a great effect on where they stand today. I would also like to add that colonialism has effected those not even failed states because they fear colonialism and avoid help from other nations because of the possibility that their state may be taken over. Your examples were on point and prove exactly what negative effects colonialism had on these failed states. Perhaps if those states were able to govern themselves from the beginning, they would have been divided up according to tribe and ethnicity and would have a more successful future.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think you did a very good job of backing up your claim about failed states with examples of real failed states in Africa that had been colonized. I think your last statistic about 14 out of 20 failed states having been European colonies was a great note to end on, but I think your argument would of been even stronger if you had explained why those remaining 6 states failed but your argument about colonization still holds up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think you formulated your argument very well and your examples of the Igbos and Biafrans backed up your points very well. European nations came in to foreign states with a disregard for the native people that already lived there and there constant battle over territory did blur the lines of states. I also agree with your argument that this battle over land led to instability within nations because once the colonizing countries got what they needed they left the host country less established then it was before.

    ReplyDelete
  4. One of your best lines was when you said "Sometimes the Europeans even intentionally broke apart whole nations into competing spheres within a single state to more easily maintain control of the natives". I agree with what you're going with here that colonialism leads to failed states but are you also inferring that there's an ethical or moral problem created by the colonizers onto the colonized?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with you that colonialism by Europeans, especially in Africa, has hurt states majorly as they implemented their way of life on the native people and split up groups and put rival groups together. Also, I thought you gave very good contemporary evidence to support this. In the Rwanda genocide I'm also pretty sure when the Belgians left they switched the ruling and put the Hutu's in charge, which caused the Hutus to begin killing the Tutsis.

    ReplyDelete