“THE PRINCIPLE OF EFFECTIVE OCCUPATION ADOPTED BY THE EUROPEAN POWERS AT THE BERLIN CONFERENCE (1884-5) AND NOT THE RUDD CONCESSION (1888) MADE THE OCCUPATION OF ZIMBABWE INEVITABLE.” DO YOU AGREE? 1. Before choosing to agree or disagree, it is necessary to clearly articulate the major issues concerning the Berlin Conference and define what is meant by the principle of Effective Occupation. 2. It is also important to clearly establish the link between Effective Occupation and the colonisation of Zimbabwe. 3. It is also important to outline the major issues surrounding the Rudd Concession and then establish its link with the colonisation of Zimbabwe. 4. There is also a need to define the meaning of “inevitable”. SOME KEY ISSUES INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: 1. The Berlin Conference was convened essentially to avoid a general European war by finding peaceful solutions to the problematic issue of the European partition of Africa that had gained momentum from c.1876 and threatened to cause conflict among European nations 2. The main decisions of the Berlin Conference included: - the establishment of guidelines for the future annexation of African territory - one guideline was the establishment of “Spheres of Influence” for the major European powers in Africa - another was the doctrine of “Effective Occupation” which compelled a European country to prove that it had effectively occupied an African territory before claiming it as its own 3. The doctrine of effective occupation’s main result was the acceleration of the partition of Africa as the European countries tried to protect their spheres of influence by establishing effective occupation prior to annexing new territory. 4. Within 20 years most African states had lost their independence and were under harsh European rule. 5. The colonisation process was carried out in an arbitrary manner and the boundaries of the new colonies were drawn up without any input and consideration of the Africans. The boundaries reflected the bargaining and agreements among the European powers whose main interest was to share Africa among them without conflict. 6. The Rudd Concession was concluded in October 1888 between Lobengula and Charles Rudd in his capacity as Cecil Rhodes’s chief agent. Charles Rudd was assisted by Rochfort Maguire, Charles Helm and Francis Thompson. 7. The agreement was a mineral concession which purportedly gave Rudd the exclusive right to exploit all the minerals in Lobengula’s kingdom (taken to mean all of present-day Zimbabwe) and the full power to do anything necessary to obtain them. 8. The Rudd Concession was the basis of Rhodes’ successful application for a Royal Charter to colonise Zimbabwe on behalf Britain. CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE BERLIN CONFERENCE SHOULD TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE FOLLOWING ISSUES: 1. The conference laid down guidelines on the establishment of spheres of influence and the doctrine of effective occupation. These were two important concepts in the peaceful occupation of Africa and its partition among European powers. (Peaceful among European powers. It is important to note that Africans were sometimes violently brought under European rule) 2. The Conference made the occupation of Zimbabwe inevitable or unavoidable as it laid down rules for the general partition of Africa as a whole. Once there were clear guidelines for the occupation of the entire continent it was always going to be just a matter of time before Zimbabwe or any other part of it would be occupied by a European power. 3. The Rudd Concession which led directly to the occupation of Zimbabwe was itself a product of the Berlin Conference’s resolution that spheres of influence and effective occupation ought to be carried out in order to demonstrate that an African colony was indeed the possession of a European power. Therefore the Rudd Concession cannot be divorced from the Berlin Conference that had been held three years earlier. 4. All that the Rudd Concession did was to simply establish the identity of the European power that would colonise Zimbabwe but the matter of the occupation had already been established as a future and inevitable fact by the Berlin Conference. CONCLUSIONS IN FAVOUR OF THE RUDD CONCESSION MAY INCLUDE SOME OR ALL OF THE FOLLOWING ISSUES: 1. The Rudd Concession clearly established the identity of the European power (i.e. Britain) that would occupy Zimbabwe and it was the definite document that le directly to the granting of the Royal Charter that facilitated the occupation of Zimbabwe in 1890 2. On the other hand the Berlin Conference simply established the possibility or probability of the colonisation of Zimbabwe or any other African territory at some future date but it did not make that a definite and inescapable fact. 3. The argument in favour of the Berlin Conference is further weakened by the fact that Ethiopia was never colonised as would have been the case if the Conference had made it an unavoidable fact that all of Africa would be occupied. 4. In any case the Berlin Conference did not even lead to a scramble to occupy Zimbabwe- for three years after the Conference there was no significant interest until 1887 when Paul Kruger’s Transvaal state showed its interest by negotiating the Grobler Treaty. This was a local state which was ruled by whites from the African rather than the European continent. It was only then that individuals of British origin (i.e. Cecil Rhodes) made definite steps to occupy Zimbabwe via the Rudd Concession.
Posted on: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:05:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015