Samenvatting HIR2
The third world & Decolonization of Africa (1945-2007)
Chapters 13 + 17
1. Introduction: the Cold War form a Southern perspective
By concentrating on the ideological conflict, nuclear arms race etc. we forget about other important factors (as
poverty, inequality etc) in international relations.
Left not much space open for (open) political discussions for the future most important was for which
ideological bloc you would choose. So: not really place for alternative political and economic orders to the bipolar
world order.
The newly independent states of Asia and Africa rejected the global War not only on their conviction that
involvement in this conflict represented an unnecessary threat to their national security, but also on the belief that it
directed attention away from the issues that they found most important: expediting Western decolonization and
tackling the causes of economic underdevelopment.
Two historical forms of neutrality in Europe:
1. Long-term political neutrality right after 1945 (e.g. Switzerland and Sweden)
2. Neutrality as distinct outcome of the Cold War (e.g. Finland, Yugoslavia and Austria)
* Neutrality as a function in the Cold War: buffer states (between the communist and capitalist bloc), meeting places,
residential countries of IO‟s. would explain their long-term neutrality during war.
2. Bandung (1955) and the NAM (= Non-Aligned Movement, 1961)
Bandung
First intercontinental conference of coloured peoples
Organized on their own territory (strongly Asian oriented)
Challenges in the run-up: Nehru (prime minister)-Sukarno (president) rivalries India -Indonesia, doubts about
Chinese intentions („5 principles of co-existence‟; the border treaty signed in 1954 between India and China,
Nehru wanted to integrate the PRC into the Asian international political system) etc.
Actual outcome: less criticism of the Cold War (played a limited role), rejection of any form of colonialism
(also SU expansion in Eastern Eu), key terms of the later NAM formulated ***
“Spirit of Bandung” : a growing sense of political autonomy and rold in IR.
However, not so succesful as hoped, e.g. through these named challenges.
Respect for sovereign states and non intervention in domestic issues.
Respect for the UN Charter proves will for democracy.
Impact of the Bandung Conference:
1. On the Third World itself: political impetus on peoples on their way to independence (Africa) & intellectual
sharpening of a “Third Worldism”.
2. On the Superpowers:
USSR: more flexible approach after 1953 (Stalin died) to win the solidarity also from non-
revolutionary states. Various political initiatives to help countries fighting for independence. (e.g.
technological assistance, financing Aswan Dam Egypt following the American and British withdrawal
of funds in 1956)
USA: negative attitude on neutrality, but closer cooperation * with “big players” in the South such as
India. (*: idea Eisenhower 1959)
“Third Worldism” something leftist and they were afraid that they could make a resolution in
which they would criticize America.
World Bank provided food + USA financial aid during crisis in India (1958) to keep a good
relationship with this big player in Asia.
On the way to NAM
Two additional driving forces: Egypt (Nasser) & Yugoslavia (Tito)
Both had first hand experience with European expansion
, Belgrade Summit (1961): foundation of the NAM and two major concerns:
1) Reduce tensions between the 2 Cold War blocs
2) Draw attention to poverty and inequality and oppost Apartheid (most important one)
Cairo Conference (1964): strong African presence; emerging frictions: Casablanca Group (pan-Africanism)
versus Monrovia Group (more conservative, pro-Western)
Agenda shifting focus: from Cold War conflicts to superpower interventions and their consequences.
1960s: Decisive events in NAM history weakened it
Nehru died (political founding father)
1965: coup d‟ètat in Algeria
1966: fall of Sukarno (conference in Algiers postponed by PRC, with this the dream of Afro-Asian
solidarity finally came to an end)
NAM and the reform of IR today:
Changing patterns of membership: 1955: 29 attendants (mainly Asian) 2011: 120 global members
Support for the reform of the UN system to increase the efficiency of development efforts
Criticising the growing dominance of the UN-SC at the cost of the UNGA and ECOSOC.
Reforming the SC: no quick fix & no adeguate representation of developing countries (Africa 1/3 of the
member states and NO fixed member state: why?)
UN-SC: too many sanctions, more use of other instruments to restore peace.
More (multilateral) accountability of rich countries in their development-related obligations (e.g. Millenium
goals)
3. Pan-Africanism and the end of the empires in Africa
Key ideas pan-Africanism: Africans, wherever they live, share common cultural, spiritual heritage political,
economic, social and racial unity! & get rid of all these borders (colonial heritage)
Fouding fathers:
1. Edward Wilmot Beyden (1832-1912)
2. William Edward Burghardt du Bois (1868-1963)
pan-Africanism not founded in Africa, but came from African intellectuals around the world.
Pan-Africanism not so succesful; why it failed:
Limited interest of many African leaders to delegate (recently gained) power.
Vague ideas about the concrete state structure after colonialism
Nkrumah‟s (Ghana) reduced reputation after the Congo Crisis (1961, Lumumba) – Monrovia Group became
majority
Foundation of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) 1963 in Addis Ababa: they should cooperate, but not
giving up their sovereignty and therefore keeping the boundaries.
Since 2002: The African Union
The process of decolonization in Africa occured in a rather short period of time.
First: 1. Egypt, 2. Libreria and 3. Ethiopia (domestic explanations are only partly useful)
Growing political contradictions of colonial rule after WWII;
Britain and France fighted for democracy and freedom in WWII, but after 1945 they continued with colonialsim no
freedom!
“The development project” : rhetoric and reality reason for remaining colonialists
Resulted in rising social costs of colonial rule after 1945.
The power of “citizenship” after 1945; rising demands of the colonized elites (e.g. from the French Union)
4. “Development”: creating a new political and economic order
* 1951: “Measures for the Economic Development of Underdeveloped Countries” – official document UN, as the
central concept of North-South relations:
1. Development: replacing the colonial „civilising mission‟; increased represssion against those refusing to
modernize.
2. Development: as an opportunity for the US to support its global ambitions.
3. Development: as a continuation of colonial concepts (state + development) in post-colonial times.
1960s = “Development Decade”; Dialogue created between the West and the Third World over development
issues.
The third world & Decolonization of Africa (1945-2007)
Chapters 13 + 17
1. Introduction: the Cold War form a Southern perspective
By concentrating on the ideological conflict, nuclear arms race etc. we forget about other important factors (as
poverty, inequality etc) in international relations.
Left not much space open for (open) political discussions for the future most important was for which
ideological bloc you would choose. So: not really place for alternative political and economic orders to the bipolar
world order.
The newly independent states of Asia and Africa rejected the global War not only on their conviction that
involvement in this conflict represented an unnecessary threat to their national security, but also on the belief that it
directed attention away from the issues that they found most important: expediting Western decolonization and
tackling the causes of economic underdevelopment.
Two historical forms of neutrality in Europe:
1. Long-term political neutrality right after 1945 (e.g. Switzerland and Sweden)
2. Neutrality as distinct outcome of the Cold War (e.g. Finland, Yugoslavia and Austria)
* Neutrality as a function in the Cold War: buffer states (between the communist and capitalist bloc), meeting places,
residential countries of IO‟s. would explain their long-term neutrality during war.
2. Bandung (1955) and the NAM (= Non-Aligned Movement, 1961)
Bandung
First intercontinental conference of coloured peoples
Organized on their own territory (strongly Asian oriented)
Challenges in the run-up: Nehru (prime minister)-Sukarno (president) rivalries India -Indonesia, doubts about
Chinese intentions („5 principles of co-existence‟; the border treaty signed in 1954 between India and China,
Nehru wanted to integrate the PRC into the Asian international political system) etc.
Actual outcome: less criticism of the Cold War (played a limited role), rejection of any form of colonialism
(also SU expansion in Eastern Eu), key terms of the later NAM formulated ***
“Spirit of Bandung” : a growing sense of political autonomy and rold in IR.
However, not so succesful as hoped, e.g. through these named challenges.
Respect for sovereign states and non intervention in domestic issues.
Respect for the UN Charter proves will for democracy.
Impact of the Bandung Conference:
1. On the Third World itself: political impetus on peoples on their way to independence (Africa) & intellectual
sharpening of a “Third Worldism”.
2. On the Superpowers:
USSR: more flexible approach after 1953 (Stalin died) to win the solidarity also from non-
revolutionary states. Various political initiatives to help countries fighting for independence. (e.g.
technological assistance, financing Aswan Dam Egypt following the American and British withdrawal
of funds in 1956)
USA: negative attitude on neutrality, but closer cooperation * with “big players” in the South such as
India. (*: idea Eisenhower 1959)
“Third Worldism” something leftist and they were afraid that they could make a resolution in
which they would criticize America.
World Bank provided food + USA financial aid during crisis in India (1958) to keep a good
relationship with this big player in Asia.
On the way to NAM
Two additional driving forces: Egypt (Nasser) & Yugoslavia (Tito)
Both had first hand experience with European expansion
, Belgrade Summit (1961): foundation of the NAM and two major concerns:
1) Reduce tensions between the 2 Cold War blocs
2) Draw attention to poverty and inequality and oppost Apartheid (most important one)
Cairo Conference (1964): strong African presence; emerging frictions: Casablanca Group (pan-Africanism)
versus Monrovia Group (more conservative, pro-Western)
Agenda shifting focus: from Cold War conflicts to superpower interventions and their consequences.
1960s: Decisive events in NAM history weakened it
Nehru died (political founding father)
1965: coup d‟ètat in Algeria
1966: fall of Sukarno (conference in Algiers postponed by PRC, with this the dream of Afro-Asian
solidarity finally came to an end)
NAM and the reform of IR today:
Changing patterns of membership: 1955: 29 attendants (mainly Asian) 2011: 120 global members
Support for the reform of the UN system to increase the efficiency of development efforts
Criticising the growing dominance of the UN-SC at the cost of the UNGA and ECOSOC.
Reforming the SC: no quick fix & no adeguate representation of developing countries (Africa 1/3 of the
member states and NO fixed member state: why?)
UN-SC: too many sanctions, more use of other instruments to restore peace.
More (multilateral) accountability of rich countries in their development-related obligations (e.g. Millenium
goals)
3. Pan-Africanism and the end of the empires in Africa
Key ideas pan-Africanism: Africans, wherever they live, share common cultural, spiritual heritage political,
economic, social and racial unity! & get rid of all these borders (colonial heritage)
Fouding fathers:
1. Edward Wilmot Beyden (1832-1912)
2. William Edward Burghardt du Bois (1868-1963)
pan-Africanism not founded in Africa, but came from African intellectuals around the world.
Pan-Africanism not so succesful; why it failed:
Limited interest of many African leaders to delegate (recently gained) power.
Vague ideas about the concrete state structure after colonialism
Nkrumah‟s (Ghana) reduced reputation after the Congo Crisis (1961, Lumumba) – Monrovia Group became
majority
Foundation of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) 1963 in Addis Ababa: they should cooperate, but not
giving up their sovereignty and therefore keeping the boundaries.
Since 2002: The African Union
The process of decolonization in Africa occured in a rather short period of time.
First: 1. Egypt, 2. Libreria and 3. Ethiopia (domestic explanations are only partly useful)
Growing political contradictions of colonial rule after WWII;
Britain and France fighted for democracy and freedom in WWII, but after 1945 they continued with colonialsim no
freedom!
“The development project” : rhetoric and reality reason for remaining colonialists
Resulted in rising social costs of colonial rule after 1945.
The power of “citizenship” after 1945; rising demands of the colonized elites (e.g. from the French Union)
4. “Development”: creating a new political and economic order
* 1951: “Measures for the Economic Development of Underdeveloped Countries” – official document UN, as the
central concept of North-South relations:
1. Development: replacing the colonial „civilising mission‟; increased represssion against those refusing to
modernize.
2. Development: as an opportunity for the US to support its global ambitions.
3. Development: as a continuation of colonial concepts (state + development) in post-colonial times.
1960s = “Development Decade”; Dialogue created between the West and the Third World over development
issues.
