The Causes of the Partition and Scramble for Africa

The Causes of the Partition and Scramble for Africa


It has been Doted that in the last quarter of the 19th century, African territories were shared among European powers except Liberia and Ethiopia. Many reasons have been forwarded to explain this predicament, which can be categorised into social, political and economic aspects
Economic reasons
Economic imperialism was the most overriding factor that drove many Europeans into Africa in the last quarter of the 19th century. This was developed from the industrial revolution that had began In Britain in 17505. Britain for many years was considered as a workshop for European countries but after 1880 with the spread of industrial revolution to the rest of Europe, these counties, had to compete 'with Britain by protecting their young industries from the british high quality goods, for market of the products in the rest of the world even competition for raw materials.
2. North America as Britian source of material had got her independence; amidst acute competition, had north America (Canada)had got her independence by 1775 and Britain was forced to look for alternative source of raw materials hence switching to Africa for cotton, Sugarcane, coffee, mineral deposits etc.
3. High demad fo roil raw materials
The increased use of machineryin this period led to increased demand for oil products e g. groundnuts and Palm oil for the lubrication of their machines. Earlier on explorers had indicated the abundance of these raw materials in Africa especially West Africa. There was agricultural fertile soils in west Africa and at the same time missionaries had stopped slave trade and had succeeded in the struggle to develop legitimate trade hence the need for raw materials made the Scramble and partition of Africa inevitable.
4. Appeal for protection from their home governments made by trading companies in Africa: The appeal was for protection against competition from any European countries and for removal of African middlemen w hose profits h ad been reduced to the minimum amounts. Therefore, [he British intervention of areas like Niger Delta states and Oil rivers (Ghana and NIgeria) was a result of the business cries of British trading companies in West Africa hence making the Scramble for and partition of Africa inevitable
Impact of Economic depression in Europe:
This came about as a result of growth of industrial revolution and consquent business competition. Before 1880, business was prosperous and profits were high in Europe .
merchants had resisted 'the extension of their businesses in colonial Africa in order to avoid paying taxes and-custom duties. But the economic depression which affected Europe after 1880 made European merchants to change their attitude and they considered the extension of their business in colonial Africa for-better profits and ready markets e.g the R '!\:.Co, German East African Company, British South African company came to Africa partly to solve the problem of economic depression in Europe.
The investment of surplus capital:
According to Lenin who shared his view-with Hobson they argued that;
"Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism". I.e. they acquired colonies in order to invest their surplus capital there. That Europe had accumulated a lot of capital and "'vestment at home was not yielding the expected profits. Colonies were therefore an cutlet for surplus capital in Europe. However, little capital was invested in Africa and was done accidentally.Much of capital was invested in western developed colonies like canada and australia.
Impact of overproduction: J.A Hobson added on that;
"The overproduction in sense the of excessive manufacturing and surplus capital which could not find some investment within Europe forced great Britain, German, Holland and France to acquire larger pieces of land where they could market their products and get raw materials."
It was therefore agreed that without internal pressure for capital investment in Europe, the acquisition of new colonies would not have existed.
However, this argument is being criticised by many, historians as most European imperial countries did not invest much of their capital in colonies of Africa. They instead invested m developed countries like USA, Brazil, Canada and Australia, which by that time had developed infrastructure, facilities, and skilled personnel to assist in running of such investments e.g. engineers and statisticians.
Mineral discovery in South Africa:
David Field House, an American further argued that other than the above economic theories which Europeans targeted in Africa, there was also wide prospects for mining activities in Africa following the discovery of diamonds at Kimberly in 1867 and later the largest gold deposit in the world at Witwatersrand in 1886. This convinced many European powers that the whole of Africa was mineralised as this was followed by many oilier rumours e.g. the existence of the minerals in Katanga region of the Congo basin
..e. ace leading to a serious rush for colonies in Africa.