'Why Did European Powers Seek Colonies Overseas?\r'

'In 1871, a new form of settlement emerged in atomic number 63 and was later identify from the Empires of Spain and Portugal in the 15th and 16th centuries as New Imperialism. Intelligibly, it is also referred to as ‘the thrum for Africa’, as a forget of the spry rate at which nations clamoured to increment moderate of weaker regions in deviated areas from the 1600’s. There is much system surrounding the reasoning of such intensify expansion, stock-still, there is a clear correlation coefficient of events that earn been linked to New Imperialism.I do not attest the popular printing that this liquidation increased tension in atomic number 63 and, in this essay, I willing endeavour to present a synthesis of this premise. Similar to the explorers of old imperialism, atomic number 63an precedents were radd guide to Africa for economic benefits. The British economist, J. A Hobson, argued the purpose for new colonies was influenced by the desire of ca pitalists to salary from these regions. The credibility of this assertion is heightened by the acquaintance of the ongoing industrialisation of Europe, prompting a demand for larger markets and cheaper raw materials and labour.It was evenly the case of nations, such as Britain, that were at the end of the industrial boom, as they sought- subsequently(a) new markets for manufactured goods. The abandonment of let loose trade wind in Europe in the 1870s signified the introduction of a curve of tariffs on imported goods and resulted in a sweeping effect across Europe to search for alternative markets elsewhere. The validation of this is reflected in the leap of Britain’s everyplaceseas investments from 187 one million million million pounds in 1871 to 4,000 million pounds in 1914.Economic benefit was certainly a motivating factor, however, several(prenominal) European nations, such as France, netherwent shrimpy industrial growth and had gained little from colonising. I t appears imperialism was a source of national pride and acted as a distraction to unfavourable events at home. This was certainly the case in France, which was static recoering from a humiliating tear in the Franco-Prussian fight and was beneathstandably grasping of its European counterparts that were replete with wealth and power.It is thus unsurprising that the cut became one of the stellar(a) imperialists of the time, with an empire of Indo-China, north and west Africa and over 60 million people by 1914, although their colonies contri anded sparsely to the economy. Imperialism was an accepted route to regard, as was expressed by both the cut statesman, Leon Gambetta in the remark, â€Å"to remain a smashing nation/you must colonise” and the British writer A. C Benson, in his song, â€Å" destroy of Hope and Glory” which applauded colonisation.The most intriguing and lots bewildering explanation for imperialism was concerned with philanthropy. Although i t seems an abnormal concept in this day and age, nineteenth century Europeans believed they were a superior ply and it was their duty to cultivate European ideas and ship canal of living in Africa. This perspective was a manipulated adaptation of Darwin’s theory of infixed selection and was widely regarded, particularly in Britain and Germ either, as the truth.The view of the British writer, Rudyard Kipling, in ‘The White Man’s event’ is an appropriate reflection of this and depicts the so-c alled â€Å" onus” upon Europeans to help less fortunate slipstreams. Evidently, it was bootless; nevertheless, missionaries such as The White Fathers and Robert Moffat make progress in Africa to soothe troubles and, polemically, converted many from Paganism to Christianity. European Governments often used Darwin’s theory as an excuse to subjugate Africans and, thus, imperialism grew in popularity.Technological advances alike the railway, steamship and telegraph and improved weaponry like the rear of barrel-loading rifle, capable of spunk several rounds before the need to recharge also gave Europeans a distinct good over natives and made Africa much to a greater extent vulnerable to attack. Many saw medical examination advances, such as, the use of quinine as safeguard from malaria and advances in transport as an probability to explore what was cognize as the ‘ somber Continent’, as many of the national regions of Africa remained untouched until this time.The most renowned of which, Dr. David Livingstone, whom travelled from his native Scotland to the vast regions of Central Africa to transport out medical and missionary work, learn the imagination of the European public. In 1869, hydrogen Stanley of the New York Herald sent for Livingstone after a loss of contact for over four years, and eventually succeeded when Livingstone was found at Lake Tanganyika in east Africa, greeting him with the famous li ne, â€Å"Dr. Livingstone, I presume? ”. Following the manifestation of the story, Europeans became increasingly nterested in what Africa had to offer and wedge was put on governments to colonise; in Germany, many lobby groups, such as The German Navy League were created in support of colonisation and achieved their desires when Bismark, apparently â€Å"no man for colonies” acquired colonies in the Cameroons, Togal and east Africa, southernmost west Africa and the Pacific Islands, like marshal Isle. In fact, it was with adept explorers that ‘The Scramble of Africa’ began, when, in 1870, Henry Stanley took his experience from travelling Africa and, under the advice of King Leopold of Belgium, formed the International African Association.He consequently reached agreements with tribal leaders in the congo region, in which they placed themselves and their subjects under the protection of King Leopold. The French followed grammatical case with their expl orer, Savorgnan de Brazza, being sent to the north of the River Congo where he reached similar agreements with indigenous tribal chiefs. The Germans joined in with their protectorate over the Cameroons in 1884 and so the scramble commenced. Wilhelm II was in power in Germany from 1890 to 1914, at the height of imperialism. He is largely responsible for the damaged dealing in Europe as opposed to colonisation.Under the management of Bismark, 1871-1890, Europe was reasonably calm and traffic remained unchanged, disregardless of the imperialism taking place at the time. von Bismarck realised the potential tension that could ascend as a result of the race for colonies and called The Second Conference of Berlin, 1884-1885, to resolve the issue. It was agree that the Congo Free State would be controlled by an international organisation and was to charter on a free trade basis, meaning the importation of goods would go without taxation.Natives were not to be exploited by European po wers and the slave trade was to be abolished. to the highest degree all-important(a)ly, Africa was to be divided into spheres of influence, whereby European powers were to be given economic and political rights in particular areas of the continent. This move cleared any uncertainty regarding where one could colonise, with the exception of The Fashoda Crisis, 1898, which grand resulted in improved Anglo-French relations, following a brief clash over interests in a small village on the Nile in southern Sudan.In 1896, full general Kitchener led the British in an attempt to sterilize Sudan from the north, period French forces, under General Marchand, arrived in Fashoda, 650km from the British-occupied Khartoum, seeking the very like result. Both leaders confronted one some other at Fashoda and remained there for six months, until the French Foreign Minister, Theophile Delcasse, stood down, as the French were impromptu for warfare without their Russian ally and their delicate time after the Dreyfus Affair. The chance finish peacefully. Following the resignation of Bismarck in 1890, European relations were severed and the remainder of power shifted uneasily.However, this was not the result of colonial rivalry; Wilhelm II made legion(predicate) mistakes in his administration of German unconnected policy to disrupt European relations and cause tension. This began with his poor response to Britain’s humiliating vote down in what is known as, the Jameson Raid. In 1895, the British Colonial Secretary, Joseph Chamberlain, along with Cecil Rhodes, Prime Minister of the Cape addiction and Dr. Starr Jameson, official to the British South African Company led a seriously organised attack on the Boers in the Transvaal area of South Africa. They were easily discomfited and Jameson himself was captured.This incident humiliated the British moreover did not affect European relations; it was the unnecessary telegram sent by Wilhelm II to Paul Kruger, Presi dent of the Transvaal, congratulating him of his defeat of the British, â€Å"without appealing to a friendly power” that caused uproar and hostility through with(predicate)out Europe. The incident to follow †the First Moroccan Crisis, 1905-1906 †was a means of sabre rattling or troublemaking for Wilhelm II. In 1905, having been suspicious of French intentions, he landed his yacht at Tangiers and inform his support of Moroccan independence to the sultan and pledged German protection of that independence.He then demanded a conference to be held in Algeciras to discuss the matter which France reluctantly agree to. The main intention of Wilhelm II at this point was to test the strength of the entente cordiale Cordiale between France and Britain and he hoped to weaken it through this intervention. However, Germany managed only to get the support of Morocco and Austria-Hungary, while France was supported by Britain, the US, Russia, Spain and even Italy. The crisis al ter rather than weakened the Entente and was a direct result of the sabre rattling of Wilhelm II, not colonial rivalry.He interceded once over again in the Second Moroccan Crisis, 1911, when he accused France of annexing Morocco. The grounds of his argument, after the vocation of French troops of Morocco when a war had broken out in the capital, fez and foreigners were in danger, was a supposed breech of the terms agreed in the Algeciras Conference, 1906. Wilhelm II sent a gunboat, the Panther to Agadir, however the British then intervened by bossy his retreat and threatening to send naval forces to stop him. He surrendered and Anglo-French ties were further strengthened.Wilhelm II was viewed as a warmonger †a seeker of war †and tension at bottom Europe was strong, as a result of his conduct. New Imperialism did not occur as a result of one factor, but of an accumulation of vacillating events, for example, industrialisation that prompted scientific advances, which e ncouraged explorers and eventually a fecundation of industry or a disappointment to industrialise and a need to gain prestige elsewhere †all of which contributed hard to imperialism. Regardless of the reasoning, by the 19th century, all of Africa with the exception of Abyssinia and Liberia had been conquered by European powers.However, the important question remains on how colonisation affected European relations; was it very a contributing factor to being War I or was it then a derivative of existing tension at home that was actually speed by distrust between nations? Is it practicable that imperialism was simply a distraction for Europeans from their cursorily diminishing relations and may throw away delayed the inevitable outburst of war? It remains unanswered but I simply hope I have justified a slightly distinguishable interpretation of the affairs outlined above.\r\n'