Week 1: European Security and Nationalism as an Instrument for
Nation Building
Literature question – De Graaf and Hansard
- The ‘Concert of Europe’ can be seen as the first international attempt
to create security in Europe. How would you characterize the European
Concert? Was it, like the European Union now, a real organization with
headquarters in one of the European capitals? Was it a partnership of
equals? Did the Congress and the EU have similar members?
The ‘Concert of Europe’ was an informal organisation, with exclusive
consultation of the five ‘Great Powers’ (Austria, the United Kingdom,
Prussia (later France) and Russia) who met regularly in conferences,
such as those in Paris (1815-1818), Aachen (1818), Troppau (1820),
Laibach (1821) and Verona (1822). There was no permanent ‘building’
or administration, as we know it from the European Union; instead,
decisions were taken during occasional congresses and during daily
meetings of the ‘Allied Council’ in Paris. Smaller states, such as Spain,
Portugal, the German states, Italy and the Kingdom of the Netherlands,
occasionally participated in committees (including art restitution,
reparations and fortifications), but had no real ‘voice’ within the main
conferences. There was a clear hierarchy within the organisation; there
was also an ‘imperial affair’: the Great Powers considered it their task
to establish European security, making sharp distinctions between
higher and lower ranks within the state system. This was a real
difference with the European Union, where equality of member states
is central.
Literature Question – Ozavci
- The European Union sees itself as a ‘normative power’ that wants to
work for international peace and security for everyone, also outside
Europe. The European Union says it does not believe in power politics
but in international political cooperation with all countries of the world
on the basis of equality. How important were these principles for the
Concert of Europe in the 19ofcentury?
Although the European Union presents itself as a ‘normative power’
committed to international cooperation on the basis of equality, the
Concert was also concerned with political cooperation. The Great
Powers formulated a set of codes of conduct (including non-
intervention in each other’s territories, self-restraint instead of
expansion, and consultation instead of unilateral action) to promote
stability and peace. Conference diplomacy largely replaced imperial
warfare and became the standard form of dealing with crises. However,
these principles were fairly limited to a smaller group in the nineteenth
century; they were also not universal (as can be seen, for example, in
the exclusion of the Ottoman Empire during the Congress of Vienna).
Moreover, it did not prevent interventions outside Europe, such as the
humanitarian intervention at Navarino in 1827, which was about
‘commercial security’ (but at the same time served imperialist
interests).
,Week 2: Slavery, Imperialism and Resistance
Handbook Questions – Wiesner
- What does Wiesner mean by “new imperialism”? How did the “new”
imperialism differ from the “old”?
In simple terms, the new imperialism meant that European states
wanted to establish themselves politically in the overseas territories
(read: want to dominate politically) – which differed greatly from the
‘old imperialism’, which focused primarily on the economic exploitation
of colonial territories. This new form of imperialism manifested itself
primarily within Africa and Asia. ‘New imperialism’ was primarily fuelled
by economic motives, with European powers using Africa and Asia as
sales markets and a means to obtain cheap raw materials. This change
originated in the loss of industrial power of, among others, Great
Britain (whose market share fell from 33 to 14 percent between 1870
and 1914), which left them with surplus production, market saturation
and high unemployment. The transition from ‘old’ to ‘new’ imperialism
was made possible, among other things, by the invention of rapid-fire
machines. In addition, the invention of quinine was crucial in
combating malaria, which had previously been the cause of death for
European powers. Third, the invention of the steam engine contributed
in two ways: militarily, it provided a rapid means of transport for
moving armies; economically, it provided more ways of trading, both
on land and at sea. A primary goal of the ‘new imperialism’ was to
civilise ‘barbaric’ areas; in the eyes of Western powers, Africans and
Asians would benefit from Western education, modern economies,
cities, advanced medicine and higher standards of autonomous
government and Western democracy. Westerners would also protect
the colonised from ‘ethnic warfare’, the slave trade within Africa and
other forms of exploitation by white rulers. The concerted effort of
European rulers to justify their ‘missions’ was also summarised by
Rudyard Kipling as the ‘white man’s burden’.
- Describe the causes and consequences of European imperialism after
1880 and “the scramble for Africa” in particular.
The ‘scramble for Africa’ covers the idea that European powers
(including Great Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Spain and Italy)
each wanted to acquire a part of Africa before all areas were claimed.
This imperialist outburst can partly be explained by the abolition of the
Atlantic slave trade, which caused European states to focus on slavery
elsewhere. In addition, there was talk of “suffering of thousands of
enslaved Africans,” which Europeans would solve by introducing trade,
Christianity and civilization. In addition, the Belgian king Leopold II (r.
1865-1909) played a role in this outburst. Through his treaties with
Congolese areas and agreements with European powers about the
propagation of Christianity within these areas, he was able to expand
his power. These agreements were not maintained, however, and were
even widely violated (including through the introduction of slavery,
, “unimaginable savagery, and terror.”) Thirdly, the Berlin Conference
(1884–85) was central to the division of African territory, which
established rules on, among other things, ‘effective occupation’, which
stated that countries had to make agreements with local leaders before
domination could take place. It was also agreed that the local
population had to be taken into account; nevertheless, the main goal of
countries was to conduct trade – and this goal was always prioritized.
Fourthly, the rise of Germany as an imperialist power contributed to
the revival of the ‘scramble for Africa’. Germany may have created this
through ‘protectorates’, with which it offered its territories
‘independence’ but nevertheless retained power.
The consequences of this outbreak included a shift from ivory trade
to rubber production in the Congo; however, the rubber plants did not
provide enough rubber for large-scale production, which created
tensions among the African rulers. This tension was ‘resolved’ by
violent actions against the Africans, with the chopping off of hands,
feet, heads and the decimation of entire villages. Therefore, the Congo
is also called the “red rubber colony”. The discovery of diamonds in
Kimberley and quantities of gold in the Transvaal Republic
revolutionized the South African economy. However, the discovery of
gold resulted in a war between the Afrikaners and Britain, often called
the first ‘total war’. In addition, Britain and France wanted to create a
good government for Africa, mainly focused on “law and order”. This
government maintained a strong, authoritarian government, with a
small army, a police force and a modern bureaucracy, capable of
levying taxes and governing the population. However, colonial units did
not agree with these changes and were afraid that it would lead to
reduced incomes, a halt in production and the outbreak of waves of
revolution; therefore they wanted their colonies to pay for themselves
through taxes, in order to restrain them. Also central to Africa was the
introduction of railways. These could provide two things: the rapid
movement of troops and the earning of incomes for Africans (for the
first time!)
Literature questions – Hoefte
- What caused the transatlantic slave trade to increase in the 19ofcentury
ago?
The British Abolition Act of 1807 banned the British slave trade,
followed by a British naval patrol (West Africa Squadron) that
intercepted slave merchants. In 1833, the British themselves abolished
slavery in their colonies through theSlavery Abolition Act, which put
great pressure on other European powers (France 1848, Netherlands
1863). A series of international treaties also forced other countries to
prohibit the slave trade and enforce it with military patrols. This
combination of legal prohibitions, economic transformation
(industrializing economies became less dependent on sugar
cultivation), and humanitarian campaigns (anti-slavery movements)
caused the sharp decline of the transatlantic slave trade. The
combination of these actions led to the relocation of millions of Asians
Nation Building
Literature question – De Graaf and Hansard
- The ‘Concert of Europe’ can be seen as the first international attempt
to create security in Europe. How would you characterize the European
Concert? Was it, like the European Union now, a real organization with
headquarters in one of the European capitals? Was it a partnership of
equals? Did the Congress and the EU have similar members?
The ‘Concert of Europe’ was an informal organisation, with exclusive
consultation of the five ‘Great Powers’ (Austria, the United Kingdom,
Prussia (later France) and Russia) who met regularly in conferences,
such as those in Paris (1815-1818), Aachen (1818), Troppau (1820),
Laibach (1821) and Verona (1822). There was no permanent ‘building’
or administration, as we know it from the European Union; instead,
decisions were taken during occasional congresses and during daily
meetings of the ‘Allied Council’ in Paris. Smaller states, such as Spain,
Portugal, the German states, Italy and the Kingdom of the Netherlands,
occasionally participated in committees (including art restitution,
reparations and fortifications), but had no real ‘voice’ within the main
conferences. There was a clear hierarchy within the organisation; there
was also an ‘imperial affair’: the Great Powers considered it their task
to establish European security, making sharp distinctions between
higher and lower ranks within the state system. This was a real
difference with the European Union, where equality of member states
is central.
Literature Question – Ozavci
- The European Union sees itself as a ‘normative power’ that wants to
work for international peace and security for everyone, also outside
Europe. The European Union says it does not believe in power politics
but in international political cooperation with all countries of the world
on the basis of equality. How important were these principles for the
Concert of Europe in the 19ofcentury?
Although the European Union presents itself as a ‘normative power’
committed to international cooperation on the basis of equality, the
Concert was also concerned with political cooperation. The Great
Powers formulated a set of codes of conduct (including non-
intervention in each other’s territories, self-restraint instead of
expansion, and consultation instead of unilateral action) to promote
stability and peace. Conference diplomacy largely replaced imperial
warfare and became the standard form of dealing with crises. However,
these principles were fairly limited to a smaller group in the nineteenth
century; they were also not universal (as can be seen, for example, in
the exclusion of the Ottoman Empire during the Congress of Vienna).
Moreover, it did not prevent interventions outside Europe, such as the
humanitarian intervention at Navarino in 1827, which was about
‘commercial security’ (but at the same time served imperialist
interests).
,Week 2: Slavery, Imperialism and Resistance
Handbook Questions – Wiesner
- What does Wiesner mean by “new imperialism”? How did the “new”
imperialism differ from the “old”?
In simple terms, the new imperialism meant that European states
wanted to establish themselves politically in the overseas territories
(read: want to dominate politically) – which differed greatly from the
‘old imperialism’, which focused primarily on the economic exploitation
of colonial territories. This new form of imperialism manifested itself
primarily within Africa and Asia. ‘New imperialism’ was primarily fuelled
by economic motives, with European powers using Africa and Asia as
sales markets and a means to obtain cheap raw materials. This change
originated in the loss of industrial power of, among others, Great
Britain (whose market share fell from 33 to 14 percent between 1870
and 1914), which left them with surplus production, market saturation
and high unemployment. The transition from ‘old’ to ‘new’ imperialism
was made possible, among other things, by the invention of rapid-fire
machines. In addition, the invention of quinine was crucial in
combating malaria, which had previously been the cause of death for
European powers. Third, the invention of the steam engine contributed
in two ways: militarily, it provided a rapid means of transport for
moving armies; economically, it provided more ways of trading, both
on land and at sea. A primary goal of the ‘new imperialism’ was to
civilise ‘barbaric’ areas; in the eyes of Western powers, Africans and
Asians would benefit from Western education, modern economies,
cities, advanced medicine and higher standards of autonomous
government and Western democracy. Westerners would also protect
the colonised from ‘ethnic warfare’, the slave trade within Africa and
other forms of exploitation by white rulers. The concerted effort of
European rulers to justify their ‘missions’ was also summarised by
Rudyard Kipling as the ‘white man’s burden’.
- Describe the causes and consequences of European imperialism after
1880 and “the scramble for Africa” in particular.
The ‘scramble for Africa’ covers the idea that European powers
(including Great Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Spain and Italy)
each wanted to acquire a part of Africa before all areas were claimed.
This imperialist outburst can partly be explained by the abolition of the
Atlantic slave trade, which caused European states to focus on slavery
elsewhere. In addition, there was talk of “suffering of thousands of
enslaved Africans,” which Europeans would solve by introducing trade,
Christianity and civilization. In addition, the Belgian king Leopold II (r.
1865-1909) played a role in this outburst. Through his treaties with
Congolese areas and agreements with European powers about the
propagation of Christianity within these areas, he was able to expand
his power. These agreements were not maintained, however, and were
even widely violated (including through the introduction of slavery,
, “unimaginable savagery, and terror.”) Thirdly, the Berlin Conference
(1884–85) was central to the division of African territory, which
established rules on, among other things, ‘effective occupation’, which
stated that countries had to make agreements with local leaders before
domination could take place. It was also agreed that the local
population had to be taken into account; nevertheless, the main goal of
countries was to conduct trade – and this goal was always prioritized.
Fourthly, the rise of Germany as an imperialist power contributed to
the revival of the ‘scramble for Africa’. Germany may have created this
through ‘protectorates’, with which it offered its territories
‘independence’ but nevertheless retained power.
The consequences of this outbreak included a shift from ivory trade
to rubber production in the Congo; however, the rubber plants did not
provide enough rubber for large-scale production, which created
tensions among the African rulers. This tension was ‘resolved’ by
violent actions against the Africans, with the chopping off of hands,
feet, heads and the decimation of entire villages. Therefore, the Congo
is also called the “red rubber colony”. The discovery of diamonds in
Kimberley and quantities of gold in the Transvaal Republic
revolutionized the South African economy. However, the discovery of
gold resulted in a war between the Afrikaners and Britain, often called
the first ‘total war’. In addition, Britain and France wanted to create a
good government for Africa, mainly focused on “law and order”. This
government maintained a strong, authoritarian government, with a
small army, a police force and a modern bureaucracy, capable of
levying taxes and governing the population. However, colonial units did
not agree with these changes and were afraid that it would lead to
reduced incomes, a halt in production and the outbreak of waves of
revolution; therefore they wanted their colonies to pay for themselves
through taxes, in order to restrain them. Also central to Africa was the
introduction of railways. These could provide two things: the rapid
movement of troops and the earning of incomes for Africans (for the
first time!)
Literature questions – Hoefte
- What caused the transatlantic slave trade to increase in the 19ofcentury
ago?
The British Abolition Act of 1807 banned the British slave trade,
followed by a British naval patrol (West Africa Squadron) that
intercepted slave merchants. In 1833, the British themselves abolished
slavery in their colonies through theSlavery Abolition Act, which put
great pressure on other European powers (France 1848, Netherlands
1863). A series of international treaties also forced other countries to
prohibit the slave trade and enforce it with military patrols. This
combination of legal prohibitions, economic transformation
(industrializing economies became less dependent on sugar
cultivation), and humanitarian campaigns (anti-slavery movements)
caused the sharp decline of the transatlantic slave trade. The
combination of these actions led to the relocation of millions of Asians
