I. Colonial Policy in Context: from the German Reich to Franco-German Relation (1870-1963)
1. Factors of Motivations
a) Attitudes and Pressure Groups: Supporters and Opponents
b) Germany’s “World Policy”
c) The Race for Africa: Economic Reasons
2. German East Africa (Deutsch-Ostafrika)
a) “The Society for German Colonization” Die Gesellschaft fur Deutsche Kolonisation (GFDK)
b) Economic Development and Education
c) WWI: The East African Campaign
3. German South-West Africa (Deutsch-Südwestafrika)
a) Early Settlements
b) Rebellion against German Rule: The Herero and Namaqua Genocide
4. German West-Africa (Deutsch-Westafrika)
5. Franco-German Cooperation and the Loss of Germany's Colonial Power
a) The Onset of Franco-German Cooperation
b) Elysée Treaty as an Example of Cooperation
c) The Bases of Franco-German Cooperation from the EC to the EU
Partial Conclusion 7
II. Multiple Collective Memories of Colonialism in Germany
1. The African Books (Afrikabücher) as Canon of Memory
a) Germany’s Colonial Revisionism
b) The First Prominent Aim of the African Books
c) The Second Prominent Aim of the African Books
2. The Celebration of Various Objects of German Memories
a) National Paradigm of Colonial Nostalgia
b) Colonial Products and Black Performances
3. New Political and Educational Framework: Textbook Tools for Spreading National Socialist Goals
a) Educational Policy and General Attitudes from Weimar to Nazi Germany
b) Punitive Expeditions and Colonial Wars
c) Leaving Colonial History: Didactic Aims
III. West Germany's Foreign Policy towards Africa after WWII (1949-1990)
1. Building-up West Germany’s Africa Policy
a) Immersion and Engagement outside of Europe
b) Hesitance and Emergence
c) Establishment and Evolution
2. Formal Institutional Frameworks and Informal Structures
a) The Chancellery and the Auswärtige Amt
b) The Ministry of Economic Cooperation and the Bundestag
c) Informal Agencies' Framework of West German African policy
3. West Germany's Economic Policy towards Africa after WWII
a) Socio-Economic Cooperation
b) Trade and Security
c) Content and Structure of Trade
4. Political Issues of West German Positions on Africa
a) Political Gratification and Cooperation
b) Free Trade in Terms of Policy: Import and Export
c) Leading Principles and Aims of Aid Policy
d) Development Aid Assistance Policy of West Germany towards Africa
IV. East Germany's Foreign Policy towards Africa (1949-1990)
1. The Evolution of East German Relations with Africa
a) The GDR's role in Africa and in the“Third World” policy in Context of the“Global South
b) The Development of Relationship
c) The Strategy of Affiliation
2. East German Delegations in Africa
a) Securing Diplomatic Recognition
b) Securing Cultural, Spiritual and Political Relationship
c) East German Development Links with North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa
d) East German Propaganda Campaigns against the FRG's Policy in Africa
3. The Intensification of East Germany's Economic and Political Involvement in Africa
a) Ideological Justification for GDR's Support
b) East Germany's Diplomatic Importance for Africa
c) Political Importance of East German Economic Involvement in Africa
d) The East German Profile in Africa and the Soviet Impact on GDR’s Africa Policy
Partial Conclusion 22
V. The A frican, Caribbean and Pacific Countries and Germany's Economic and Trade Cooperations after Germany's Unification 2
1. A stimulant Relation between EEC and ACP Countries and the Special Cases of Yaounde and Lome Agreements
a) The Historical Setting of Negotiations that led to the Yaounde Convention
-The Signing of the Rome Treaties with Respect to the Overseas Countries
-The Growth of African Nationalism
b) The Yaounde Convention
-Yaounde I Convention
-Yaounde II Convention
-Tariff Provisions of the Yaounde II Convention
c) The Lome Convention
-The First ACP-EEC Convention: Lome I
-The Second ACP-EEC Convention Lome II
-The Third ACP-EEC Convention: Lome III
-The Fourth ACP-EEC Convention: Lome IV
-The Modified Lome IV Convention
d) The Economic Performance of the Lome Convention
-Supplementary the Lome Convention Constraints
-Technology Transfer between the EEC and ACP Countries
-Technology Transfer via Imports from the EEC
-The Green Paper between EU and ACP Countries
2. The Cotonou Agreement: A New Way of Cooperation
a) From the System of Reciprocal Trade Preferences to a System of Non-Reciprocal Trade Preferences
-Historical Overview of the EU-ACP Relationship
-The Cotonou Agreement and Compliance with WTO
-The Great influence at the WTO by the World Economic Powers
b) Cotonou Agreement: Rules of Origin and New Trade Agreements
-The Rules on Originating Products
-New Trade Agreements with the Non-LDC ACP Countries
-The Commodity Protocols and Development Co-Operation in the Area of Services and Finances
c) Regional Integration
-Pitch-Increase of the Notion of Regional Integration in ACP Countries
-Promoting Regional Integration in Non-LDC
d) The Cotonou Agreement and Systematization the Development of Finance Co-operations
-Increase Finance Co-operation for Financial Assistance and Technical Assistance
-STABEX and SYSMIN Instruments to Stabilize the Export from Agricultural and Mineral Commodities
-ACP Countries-EU Tradition of Supporting Private Sector Development
e) Political Dialogue under the Cotonou Agreement
-Strengthening the Relationship between the Community and the ACP Countries
-ACP-EU Human Rights Dialogue
3. Institutionalization of Germany's Economic Relations with Africa in Common European Policies' and Markets' Context 29
a) The New System of Relations of Reunified Germany with Africa
b) Foreign Affairs Minister's Meeting of ACP-EC and the Importance of Germany
c) Germany and the Cotonou Agreement
d) Germany's Main Public Agency on Trade and Economic-Aid Cooperation
4. ACP Countries Growing Participation in the Global Economic 3
a) The Movement of Goods and Raw Materials between Germany and ACP Countries
b) Growing Demand of Germany's Economy
c) Labor Migrations ACP Resources and Germany
d.) Basic German Layers of Attitude towards Immigrants
5. German Development Aid to ACP Countries
a) German Development Assistance through Organizations
b) Germany Pledges to Increase the Development Assistance
c) The Inflow of Foreign Direct Investments
General Conclusion and Outlook
Tables and Figures
I would like to express my sincere gratitude and thanks to my advisor Professor Dr. Michael Gehler, you have been a tremendous mentor for me. I would like to thank you for encouraging my research and for allowing me to grow as a research scientist. Your patience, motivation, and immense knowledge and guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis. I could not have imagined having a better advisor and mentor for my Ph.D study.
Apart from my advisor, I would like to thank my second advisor Professor Dr. Jürgen Elvert, for his insightful comments and encouragement, but also for enlightening me the first glance of research.
My sincere thanks also goes to Mrs. Eva Löw who always help me to improve research facilities here in Germany. Without her precious support it would be difficult to move on with this research.
I would like to express my special appreciation and thanks to Dr. Joss Schnurer, Mrs. Ulrike Bädecker-Zimmermann, Mrs. Jessica Schwarz for encouraging my research and for allowing me to grow as a research scientist. Your advice have been invaluable.
I thank my fellow mates in for the stimulating discussions, for the sleepless nights we were working together before deadlines, and for all the fun we have had in the last fives years. Also, friends in the following institutions: History, Political Science, Wirtschaftsinformatik, Phylosophy. Iam in particular, grateful to Mrs. and Mr. Lucas Dos Reis Martins, Valentin Bodarwe and Hyacinthe Gires Tsamo Ngoune for their unconditional support.
A special thanks to my family. Words can not express how grateful I am to my brother and sister. Your prayer for me was what sustained me thus far. I would also like to thank my beloved wife Pelagie Chimene Bollinwos, for supporting me for everything, and encouraging me throughout this experience. To my beloved children Joèl Kassi, Eva Veranne Kassi and Zoé Kassi Kassi, I would like to express my thanks for being such a good children always cheering me up.
Finally, but by no means least, thanks go to mum Effono Pauline, dad Jean-Pierre Kassi and my brother from USA Frederic Kassi, for almost unbelievable support. They are the most important people in my life and I dedicate this thesis to them.
This doctoral thesis starts with a general introduction and will end with a general conclusion, which summarizes the main output of the entire work. Each chapter will begin with a special introduction and finish with a partial conclusion. The study set off a description of the historical background of Germany's colonial policy in Africa and the circumstances which surrounded its conquest and exit. Furthermore the question of multiple collective memories will be raised up from the interwar to the post war period. In a next step the strategic goals of West and East Germany's Africa policies since 1949 will be analyzed especially with regard to their interests. The EC-ACP relationship became much more relevant starting up with 1960. This process already exist until today. Taken together, in 2016 the 28 EU member states and 79 ACP countries constitute more than fifty percent of the 193 UN members states1. In the last part, this work demonstrates the German contribution to development policies in general and how mechanism worked within the framework of the association policies pursued by Germany with the so called ACP countries.
Germany began its colonial expansion in the 1880s under Bismack's leadership, encouraged not only by bourgeoisie but also by gentry. Germany occupies a place in Africa's historical contemporary experiences. It was in Berlin in 1884/85 when the European great powers met in order to split up Africa into a patchwork of colonial possessions which later became states in theory. It was called the “Scramble” for Africa. The Conference also marked the dawn of one of the most brutalising and humiliating experiences endured by Africans: colonization. And although Germany was only a “minor” player at the Berlin Conference, the meeting had profound impact on the African governance, economics, culture politics and psyche. There is a lot of merit in the argument that Africa's position in the global economy, its place among other continents, its role in world politics and international relations in general, are related to the decisions in 1884/85. In short, it is not possible for Africa and Africans to say “good-bye to Berlin” because its legacies-tangible and intangible-continue to stare us in the face both within and outside Africa. In the Cold War period (1945-1989), the “German Question”, that is, the division of Germany into communist east and capitalist west, also had an impact directly and indirectly on Africa and its populations.
Furthermore, this study will challenge the conventional view of the German Democratic Republic's (GDR) role in Africa as solely that of a junior partner of the Soviet Union. Instead, as the study argues, East German foreign policy in general, and its Africa engagement in particular, should be understood as a strategy both for closer ties with the USSR and for international recognition and legitimacy. This doctoral thesis will provide the development of GDR relations with Africa and show how they remain of specific significance as a means for discrediting the West German presence on the one hand and supporting Soviet interests on the other hand. We would also discuss military involvement in the continent, trading relationships and the extent of GDR development assistance. Germany as well as other EU states, considered African Caribbean and Pacific countries (ACP) to be a zone of interests and special relations. The establishment of a legal, trade, economic, and political basis of these relations has occurred within the economic links of Germany and ACP countries. For all that, Germany employs various approaches to individual countries of Tropical, North Africa, and Caribbean and Pacific countries. Since Germany's trade and economic policies concerning ACP countries are today formulated to a critical extent, under the influence of decisions made collectively within the EU mechanisms and according to EU Guidelines, their analysis in this work is not justified, but also necessary for correct understanding of the reasons and developments of the German-ACP economic dialogue.
This study will enhance how German relations with its policies towards Sub-saharan Africa have seen several very distinct phases since the end of WWII, but these must be clearly viewed within the wider perspective of the general foreign policy considerations and priorities of the two separate German states until the unification of Germany in 1990. This is substantial because it was only in the 1990s that genuinely African developments and factors came into play with a somewhat more important role in shaping the whole of Germany's Africa policy.
As a result of the conspicuously low overall attention given to African questions in Germany, it seemed that no clearly focused and comprehensive Africa policy strategy has ever been formulated as a government document or even indirectly has been discernible.
A wide spectrum of different political, economic and societal actors and interest groups has shown an interest in intensifying German-African relations over the years. The pursuance of Africa-related interests and policies has, as a consequence, almost invariably been a minority concern promoted in a rather divergent and pluralistic fashion. By and large research focused on just a few areas and countries. The fact that six African countries (Burundi, Cameroon, Namibia, Rwanda, Tanzania and Togo) were German colonies until the end of WWI no longer seems to have any significant relevance for their relationship with the Germany of today, except Namibia with its remaining German-speaking minority.
3. State of the Art
This topic firstly needs a review of Germany's colonial past towards Africa. Secondly it presents a challenge to fill in some of the factual gaps which characterize the state of research so far. Thirdly, it calls for scrutiny of some of the theoretical and methodological undercurrent of this past research. The first five contributions address questions of a more general nature. They look into the fundamentals of Germany's Africa policy, inter alia tackling questions of intentions, images, motivations perceptions and effects. With this topic, we would try to define what exactly constitutes Germany's national interest vis-à-vis the African continent, playing on a theme which resourcefully has developed since the mid-1990s. This study will also analyze the role of powerful common images in policy making. Based on the contrasts in the way politicians and bureaucrats understand Africa on the one hand and the way Africa is interpreted on the other hand by some social and political historians scientists as well as political social scientists and economists calling for more realism in policy analyzing and formulating.
This study also provides an overview of the different phases in both East and West German Africa policies (1949/90). With regard to the latter our main thrust is on the tension between limited interests, low political profile and substantial aid donations. In his article on the 2000 Cotonou Agreement between the EU and ACP countries, Peter Molt professor emeritus at Trier University and former practitioner with the German Volunteer Service, United Nations Development Programm (UNDP) and the Federal State of Rhineland-Palatinate looks to a wider international scene. He asked how Germany's Africa policy was embedded in Europe (Council of Europe, European Communities etc.) and the adequacy of policy responses to Africa's development challenges beyond the national level.2
The second set of contributions focuses on specific policy actors who, in the past, have been more or less neglected by academic research on Germany's Africa policy. We would touch the role of the West and East German solidarity movement related to the liberation struggles in Africa.
In the last part contributions must be presented dealing with central policy areas: economics, democratization and conflict prevention.
This study also assesses the impact of preferential trade links with the EEC on the economies and growth patterns of the Global South (More details below on concept of Global South).
The controversial question of determining which system is appropriated for countries at specific stages of development or with differing economic structures is also considered. This study looks also at Germany's economic instruments vis-à-vis sub-Saharan Africa and explains the country's limited economic interest in this part of the continent. It is worthy of note, in this regard, that, in spite of Germany's status as a world economic power, its technological prowess and extensive trade links with African countries, as well as its historic roles in the affairs of the continent, not much has been written on its relations with Africa by Africans, and, for that matter by Cameroonians academics.
Classical works on the History of International Relations, German-African relations and ACP-EU are represented by Irina Abramova, Michael Eyinla Bolade, Thea Büttner, Hans-Joachim Döring, Ulf Engel, Horst Drechsher, Robert Kappel, Boniface Marcharia Kinyanjui, Ludger Kühnhardt, Frank Long, Ulrich Van der Heyden, Gareth M. Winrow, Wolfgang Petter, Jürgen Zimmerer and Joachim Zeller which underpin the basis of our research.
Although interest in the southern neighboring continent of Europe is increasing, too little is known about Africa. Sometimes it seems almost impossible to grasp even a small piece of African reality behind the thick curtain of prejudices and cliches. Dirk Van Laak follows the emergence and effects of modern imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries. He describes the prehistory, the intellectual background and the course of German colonial and world politics. In addition to the German colonies, he also devoted himself to attempts at imperial penetration in Southeast Europe to Baghdad and the conquest of “living space” in the east up to Stalingrad. The author shows that imperialism must be understood as a momentous stage of globalization, which was characterized by national insecurity and chauvinistic exaggeration, especially in Germany.3
Leonhard Harding describes changes that transformed African societies and states in the 19th century, the time of state building and the transition from slave trade to trade in goods, during the colonial period, the “Golden Age of Foreigners”, and since the step to freedom. Major political and economic transformations are presented and their effects on the social hierarchy and structure as well as on the cultural self-image of African peoples. The focus is not on external influences, but on the internal dynamics of African societies.4
Tanja Bührer examines the influence of African warfare on the protection force, the discussions about the global ability of the German empire to intervene and the militarization of the protected areas. The conflicting relationship between civil military and administration resulted in a military coup against the colonial government at the outbreak of the WWI.5
Raffael Scheck went through the Wehrmacht's historical literature for the war against France. Due to the archive sources that Scheck has opened up, the traditional picture can no longer be maintained. This means that the last legend of the Wehrmacht, that of the “clean western campaign”, is no longer tenable. The author reveals for the first time in detail that the Wehrmacht carried out massacres of black soldiers and prisoners of war who had fought in the French army in May and June 1940 and shows how far the Nazification of the troops had already progressed. Several thousand black prisoners were murdered during the campaign and an indefinite number of blacks were shot without any opportunity to surrender. The Germans often did not take prisoners in the search for scattered black soldiers. The author places the massacre of black soldiers on the continuity line of brutalizing German warfare since the colonial wars against the Hereros and the Maji Maji uprising. He also examines German propaganda against the so-called “black disgrace” during the occupation of the Rhineland which ended in 1936 with the invasion of the Reichswehr6 and represented the stationing of the colonial troops as a crime and provocation.7
Cameroon is probably one of the darkest German colonial history. The colony, which was hijacked under questionable circumstances, was turned into an inferno for the enslaved population in a profitable collaboration between Wilhelmine colonial officials and respectable merchants. A son of the former king was nevertheless allowed to study law in Germany. However, when Prince Manga Bell made use of what he had learned and sued the German atrocities in his homeland before the courts, he was accused of treason at the beginning of the WWI and hung up at lightning speed. Christian Bommarius, publicist and lawyer, rolled up the case: his story of a judicial murder is also a case study of racism, greed and profound political stupidity.8 Uwe Schulte-Varendorff also dealt with this war scene, which was hardly appreciated in public or in scientific literature. He describes the cruel way of waging war, the suffering of Africans and the effects on the so-called colonial Germans. This also includes a critical review of the legend of the “loyal Askari”, that is, the relationship between the local soldiers and the German troops.9
With 5 illustrations, taking Tanzania as an example, Andreas Eckert focuses on those Africans who initially held functions in the colonial state apparatus and then with independence took over the legacy of the European colonialists at the head of the state. The African administrative staff played a central role in the colonial order and acted as an intermediary and translator between the colonizing and the colonized. This position opened up new scope for action and possibilities that went far beyond what the colonial organization charts assigned to them as fields of activity. Against the background of her enormously heterogeneous experiences, behaviors and scope for action, the author writes a political history of Tanzania over a period of around fifty years.10
The main concern of Thea Büttner in this paper is to throw some light on the scope of the problem from the view of the development of African historical studies in East Germany after WWII. It is necessary first to discuss some negative and positive sides of German historical African studies before 1945. For several decades German research has demonstrated a startling lack of interest in the research problems of African history. In connection with the colonial conquests of the European powers, special institutes grew in social anthropology, colonial economics, and geography, although the historical development of the peoples of Africa was ignored. As an outward appearance of this development there grew in several German universities, departments for Oriental languages e.g., at the University of Berlin on the direct instruction of Bismarck, and in 1908 the Colonial Institute at Hamburg University.11
Leading German historians and Africanists of the past demonstrated their theoretical ignorance in relation to African history. They proceeded from the definition of Leopold von Ranke, who classed the African peoples with the “non-history possessing” peoples who have made no contribution to world culture. G. W. F. Hegel uttered only fatalistic and stereotyped ideas for him Africa was “no historical part of the World, it has no movement or development to exhibit.” These fundamental conceptions penetrated in one degree or another, the majority of publications on Africa up to 1945. Even Dietrich Westerman, one of the best known Africanists, who published one major book on African history in the German language, Geschichte Afrikas, in 1952 made his studies in the old tradition of seeing sub-Saharan Africa predominantly from the European point of view and continuing the image of an African peoples' history that was not accomplished by the world moulding civilized mankind and has not contributed its share to it. In short, the theoretical foundation of colonialism was rooted in German research in a deep racialist ideology. Only a few explorers and scientists swam against the tide.12
Based on life reports from veterans from the former colony of Obervolta (now Burkina Faso), Leonhard Harding and Brigitte Reinwald examine how army and war experiences have affected post-military, professional, social, political and cultural activities of men. Around 200,000 conscripts from the French colonies in West and Central Africa were involved as combatants on the part of France and the Allies in the fighting during WWII. These men were a generation of the Tirailleurs Sénégalais (Senegal shooters), which the “mother power” had used since the beginning of the colonial expansion 1857 to 1960/62 inclusive in all locations of the colonial wars.13
Joachim Zeller examines how the German colonial past was remembered in the medium of memorials and memoirs. The origins and reception history of the colonial monuments that were built or projected in Germany and in former German overseas areas are examined in detail. The work essentially builds on the historical didactic concept of consciousness and understands the evidence of the colonial German culture of remembrance primarily as its manifestation and medium. The monuments are particularly interested in their didactic significance for the persistence and change of historical-political mentalities during the past more than a hundred years. In particular, the work tries to show the changes to which public memory maintenance was subject in the course of the colonial to the postcolonial age.14
Klaus Storkmann, clears up legends and offers surprising answers based on extensive archive research and eyewitness surveys. The details include the training of foreign military personnel in the (NVA) and the arms deliveries from the GDR to the “Third World.”15 While the GDR's military activities in the “Third World” received special attention in the West, and speculation came even about a “Red Africa Corps” by Erich Honecker in the early 1980s, they were subject to the strictest secrecy in the East until the end of SED rule. Even after that, the question remained unanswered for a long time, whether the NVA was actually deployed to Africa with thousands, indeed tens of thousands, of soldiers.
Christiane Bürger emphasized that historiography in the GDR was always intended to reaffirm the anti-imperialist self-image. At the same time, the criticism of colonialism should recommend the GDR regime as partners to African independence movements and post-colonial states. According to the Marxist view of many historians, the Herero and Nama were proletarians. Their liberation war was viewed as a class struggle, to which the empire responded with a genocide. Research in the GDR was not afraid to show connections between colonialism and National Socialism. However, Bürger made it clear that despite anti-colonial and anti-racist demands, GDR research was also stuck in a Eurocentric perspective and continued to advance colonial discourses.16
South Africa can look back on thousands of years of history and is considered the place of origin for mankind. With the arrival of the first ships of the Dutch East India trading company, the colonial history of South Africa began, the forced immigration of slaves and the systematic submission of the indigenous population. The 20th century apartheid policy meant an intensification of racism, which became the basis of the state order. Christoph Marx provides memorable and catchy basic information on the history of the country up to the immediate present. In addition to the political history of events with a focus on the 20th century, the author also offers multifaceted insights into South African economic, cultural and social history.17
With its accession to membership of the United Nations in the early 1970s, the Federal Republic of Germany found new scope for its foreign policy, and it was at a time when the global North-South divide became a focus point of international politics. This is the background to the articles in the second volume of the German Yearbook of Contemporary History, edited by two historians from the Institut für Zeitgeschichte (Institute for Contemporary History Munich/Berlin). Agnes Bresselau von Bressensdorf and Elke Seefried together with Christian Ostermann from the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington deal with West Germany during a time of Cold War confrontation, issues of human rights and threat from radical Islam. Selected contributions from the quarterly Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte offer detailed analyses of West German policies toward “Global South” and international experts provide a vivid commentary.18
The SED leadership hoped that trading with “developing countries” would result in significant currency savings and the sale of goods that would otherwise be difficult to sell internationally. Hans-Joachim Döring uses the example of Ethiopia and Mozambique to reconstruct a core area of GDR policy towards the “Third World”. For the first time, it demonstrates that it was not primarily independence from Mozambique or the new revolutionary leadership in Ethiopia that gave rise to the extensive activities in these countries, but the impending insolvency of the GDR in 1977. The massive economization of relations with Mozambique, which was presented as an act of solidarity, made a decisive contribution to the fact that the country's foreign debt was now a central problem for economic development. The investigation is supplemented by a collection of documents and minutes of conversations with former officials.19
Kirsten Rüther explores a lot of ranging topics from migrants and cities to youth and religion to photography and fashion. Anyone who wants to get to know political, cultural and historical aspects that shape the history and present of numerous African societies will feel addressed. The book is intended to stimulate people to think from the everyday life of those with whom research and discernment are aimed at social transformations. This enables insights into personal reflection, science and artistic production.20
Dambisa Moro, wrote a provocative plea against development aid for Africa. She explains her arguments concisely, factually and compellingly. Development aid, in the sense of money transfers between governments, makes one dependent. It cemented the existing situation, promoted corruption and even financed wars. It destroys any incentive to do well and boost the economy. Obtaining development aid is easier than renovating a country.21
For Rupert Neudeck, Africa has a lot that we need in Europe as relief and compensation: oil and important raw materials in abundance, beautiful nature, good agricultural products that are not yet contaminated by chemicals and lot of sun and wind for alternative energies. And it has numerous people who are ambitious and want to improve their situation. But the continent has also been burdened by the legacy of colonialism and slavery and by the mismanagement of most African governments over the past 50 years. The lack of responsible political elites is the most important cause of the African misery, but Western development policy also needs to be reformed.22 Africa is considered as the cradle of humanity. The continent is almost three times the size of Europe. Nevertheless, the black continent remains largely undeveloped.
Africa expert Ludger Schadomsky presents the vibrant continent in all shades. The consequences of the colonization, Africa's role in the global economy and the disease AIDS are highlighted, as are the success stories of courageous women and men who are committed to Africa.23
At present the EU is looking to establish new foundations for its relationships with Africa. Although the Cotonou Agreement of 2000 began a long-term approach between the EU and its ACP partners, the Economic Partnership Agreements that the EU is negotiating with various African partners have recognized that they are now confronted with the necessity of reviewing and conceptualising a new beginning. Urban Vahsen looks back to the history of relations between Europe and Africa. The beginning of the European African policy goes back to the foundation of the EEC itself. Through the Yaounde Convention, it succeeded in 1963 in transforming late colonial relationship into post colonial ones. At the same time, the association policy of the 1960s is the first demonstration of a Europeean development policy towards Africa. The Yaounde Convention of 1963 and 1969 are also the forerunners of the current Cotonou Agreement.24
4. Guiding goals and Relevance
The aim of this research is of practical significance not only for German business, but also Africa. Entering the African markets, especially of the member states of the ACP, German external economic agencies and companies inevitably came into contact with interests and spheres of influence in Africa. The knowledge of concrete mechanisms, customs, and standards of activity of German companies in Africa can foster the amplification of activity of the German business in the continent, and thereafter, possibly, lead to its partnership and cooperation with German capital. The object of research touches also particularities of Germany's foreign economic relations with the “Global South” after WWII and in the beginning of the 1990s. Thus, after the Cold War, the main focus is the analysis of new tendencies in such spheres as trade, export of private and state capital, and development aid. This research will provide an analysis changes which have occurred in scales, structure, directions, and forms of Germany's foreign economic relations with the “Global South” as well as in revealing probable prospects of development of such relations in the near future.
a) General Questions and Tasks
Although West Germany has been a major international player in Africa after its readmission to international politics in 1955, surprisingly little has been written about this topic and though even less reliable knowledge has been established. After its unification Germany was the second or third single most important bilateral donor in Sub-Saharan Africa in comparison with France and Japan. On average Germany has been the second most important trading partner of these countries and one of the five most important sources of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Africa.25
At the end of the Cold War (1987/89), both of the two Germanies maintained a dense diplomatic network in Africa South of the Sahara with 40 fully-fledged diplomatic missions. Yet this relative importance had not been in the focus of academic research compared with the Africa policies by UK, USA or France. Germany's Africa policy has remained an international enigma up to 1989 (through maybe also for smaller states).
The guiding questions of this study are the following ones:
Firstly: How Germany's policies can be explained?
Secondly: Are these policies governed by a mix of geostrategic and trade imperatives like the US policy towards Africa, or do they follow a more or less cultural mission like France?
Thirdly: How ACP can build on German markets for their industrialization?
Fourthly: How ACP countries could learn from Germany in order to diversify their energy mix?
Fifthly: How setting up of regional markets is a strategic element of German aid policy towards Africa?
Sixthly: To which extent the Yaounde, Lome and Cotonou Agreements could facilitate the attainment of their objectives and enable Africa to initiate a sustainable process of economic catching-up in order to protect both African states in the global economy and its citizens vis-a vis rapid process of modernization?
b) Specific Questions and Tasks
A series of specific questions has been set in order to accomplish the objectives of this study:
Firstly: to what extent the relative decrease of Germany's interest in Africa has affected the economic stand in the region?
Secondly: what were the reasons of the shift of accents of Germany's interest in the sources of raw material and markets in Africa, which have entailed changes in the value and commodity structure of the German-African trade?
Thirdly: it is important to assess German economic and technical aid to Africa, considering its focus on the support of structural reorganization programs, conducted in many countries across the continent;
Fourthly: it is necessary to characterize the shifts in scales, directions and forms of activity of German private and state capital in Africa, paying special attention to the combination of the traditional and so-called “new” forms of investment activities;
Fifthly: we have to define the special role of African state members of the ACP in Germany's foreign economic relations;
Sixthly: we should consider the issues concerning the traffic of labor forces (and more generally migration) from Africa to Germany, primarily in the context an analysis of the motives and consequences of this process for the economy of African countries and Germany respectively.
4. Concepts and Definitions
a) From “Third World” to “North” and “South”
The description and definition of some concepts should help this study to better understand that colonialism and its effects are still visible. The idea of categorizing countries by their economic and development status began during the Cold War with the classifications of “East” and “West”. The USSR and China represented the “East”, and the United States and their allies represented the “West”. The term “Third World” was used in the second half of the twentieth century. It originated from a 1952 article written by Alfred Sauvy entitled Trois Mondes, Une Planète.26
Early definitions of the “Third World” emphasized its exclusion from the East-West conflict of the Cold War as well as the ex-colonial status and poverty of the nations it comprised. Efforts to mobilize the “Third World” as an autonomous political entity were undertaken. The 1955 Bandung Conference was an early meeting also of “Third World” countries in which an alternative to alignment with either the Eastern or Western blocs was promoted.27 Following this, the first Non-Aligned Summit was organized in 1961. Contemporaneously, a mode of economic criticism which separated the world economy into “core” and “periphery” was developed and given expression in a project for political reform which moved the terms “North” and “South” into the international political lexicon.28
In 1973, the pursuit of a New International Economic Oder which was to be negotiated between the “North” and “South” was initiated at the Non-Aligned Summit held in Algiers.29 Also in 1973, the oil embargo initiated by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) as a result of the Yom Kippur War caused an increase in world oil prices, with prices continuing to rise throughout the decade. This contributed to a worldwide recession which resulted in industrialized nations increasing economically protectionist policies and contributing less aid to the least developed countries of the South.30 The slack was taken up by Western banks, which provided substantial loans to “Third World” countries. However, many of these countries were not able to pay back their debts, which led the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to extend further loans to them on the condition that they undertake certain liberalizing reforms.31 This policy, which came to be known as structural adjustment and was institutionalized by International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and Western governments, represented a break from the Keynesian32 approach to foreign aid which had been the norm from the end of the WWII.33
After 1987, reports on the negative social impacts that structural adjustment policies had affected developing nations led IFIs to supplement structural adjustment policies with targeted anti-poverty projects.34 Following the end of the Cold War and the break-down of the Soviet Union, some “Second World” countries joined the “First World”, and others joined the “Third World”. A new and simpler classification was needed. Use of the terms “North” and “South” became more widespread.
This level of global restructuring is embedded in the global vision of Olof Palme, Bruno Kreisky and Willy Brandt. They made it clear that the methodology of nations going their separate ways to meet the essential needs of people needed a review. The benchmark of a global welfare system should be the dignity and decent living of everybody in the planet, rather than the needs, survival and dignity of section or groups ethnic or any other and should be attuned to building up a new suistainable global civilization. There should be a global approach, keeping global public interests in view, to finding solution to global problems.35
b) The “Global South” and “Global North”: Controversial Terms
If “Less Developed Countries” (LDC) are low-income countries that face significant structural challenges to sustainable development, what would be the Global South and Global North countries? The first use of “Global South” in a contemporary political sense was used by Carl Oglesby, writing in the catholic journal Commonweal in 1969 , a special issue on the Vietnam War. Oglesby argued that centuries of “Northern dominance over the “Global South” […] [has] converged […] to produce an intolerable social order”.36 The term gained appeal throughout the second half of the 20th century, which rapidly accelerated in the early 21st century. It appeared in fewer than two dozen publications in 2004, but in hundreds of publications by 2013. The emergence of the new term meant looking at the troubled realities of its predecessors (“Third World” or “Developing World”). With its development, many scholars preferred the notion of “Global South” over its predecessors, such as “LDC” and “Third World.” Leigh Anne Duck, co-editor of Global South, argued that the term is better suited at resisting “hegemonic forces that threaten the autonomy and development of these countries”.37
Alvaro Mendez, co-founder of the London School of Economics and Political Science's Global South Unit, has applauded the empowering aspects of the term. In an article, “Discussion on Global South”, Mendez discusses emerging economies like China, India and Brazil. It is predicted that by 2030, 80% of the world's population will be living in “developing countries”.38 The popularity of the term marks a shift from a central focus on development and cultural difference and recognizes the importance of geopolitical relations. Critics of its application often argue that it is a vague blanket term. Others have argued that the term, its usage, and its subsequent consequences mainly benefit those from “bourgeoisie” of countries within the Global South who stand “to profit from the political and economic reality of expanding south-south relations”.39
The geographical boundaries of the Global South remain a source of debate. Critics and scholars like Andrea Hollington, Tijo Salverda,Tobias Schwarz and Oliver Tappe, agree that the term is not a “static concept”.40 Others, like Rodolfo Magallanes, have argued against “grouping together a large variety of countries and regions into one category because it tends to obscure specific (historical) relationships between different countries or regions and the power imbalances within these relationships.”41 He argues that this “may obscure wealth differences within countries and therefore, similarities between the wealthy in the Global South and Global North, as well as the dire situation the poor may face all around the world.”42 The term is not strictly geographical and is not an image of the world divided by the equator, separating richer countries from their poorer counterparts. Rather, geography should be more readily understood as economic and migratory, the world understood through the wider context of globalization or global capitalism.
c) The Global South: An Incongruous Concept
Many people on the street would probably not have the lowest idea about the concept of “Global South”. In everyday speech and mass media, “Global South” has hardly become a common term. In academic and global policy circles, though, the term is used with much more gustoor keenness. Politicians refer to it. The United Nations organize their statistical data in accordance with the term. Academics write books about it or, as in our case, explicitly include the term in the name of reputable institutions: Global South Studies Center (GSSC). But what does the term entail? Why we should use it? What are the implications of making distinctions between the “Global South” and the “Global North”? We thought it relevant to address these questions in more detail.
Currently, the notion of “Global South” is used as a shortcut to anything from poor and less developed to oppressed and powerless. Despite its vagueness, the term is prominent in serious academic publications. But, its popularity notwithstanding, the “Global South” is an ambivalent term because it can be confusing and sloppy. Firstly, it is descriptively inaccurate, even when it refers to general criteria such as economic development. Secondly, it homogenizes important differences between countries supposedly part of the “Global South” and Northern groups. In this regard, the concept “Global South” is not better than alternatives what it is trying to replace, such as “LDC” or the “Third World.” Thirdly, the concept of “Global South” implies a geographic determinism that is misleading. Poor countries are not doomed to be poor, because they happen to be in the South, and their geographic position is not a verdict on their developmental prospects. Fourthly, growing disappointment about the effectiveness of development aid essentially results from wrong premises and hopes, wrong time conceptions and the failure to recognize the inevitable objective.
Even the basic assumption was wrong that there was such a thing as a “Third World”. There are a large number of countries that are developed to varying degrees if the industrialized countries are used as a benchmark. Above all, the “Third World” was postulated as a cartel of demands from very different partners, who often connected little more than the claim that their problems were caused by the industrialized countries and that they had to solve them with money. This community of interests found its institutionalized form in the United Nations, which in the 1970s almost managed to set up an international redistribution office. There are no short-term solutions. We have to realize that even if we redistribute all of our material and intellectual property, we could not solve the “Third World” problems. Aid can only serve as a midwife. Development aid policy must be geared towards this in the future more than before.43
To show how problematic the “Global South” is, let us focus on human development, broadly defined and measured by the United Nations Human Development Index (HDI). The HDI tracks life expectancy, education, and standard of living, so it captures more than purely economic aspects of development. The chart plots the geographic latitude of a country capital against the country’s HDI score for 2017. It is quite clear that a straight line from “South” to “North” is a weak description of the relationship between geographic latitude and human development. The correlation between the two is 0.48. A linear regression of HDI on latitude returns a positive coefficient, and the R-squared as 0.23.44 But, the relationship is not linear. In fact, some of the southern-most countries on the planet, such as Australia and New Zealand, but also Chile and Argentina, are in the top ranks of human development. The best summary of the relationship between HDI and latitude is curvilinear, as indicated by the Loess regression which is a nonparametric technique that uses local weighted regression to fit a smooth curve through points in a scatter plot.45
As a geographical notion the “Global South” refers to differences beyond the Equator. But, first, this is rather offensive to people in New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and the southern part of South America. And, second, there is still far from a deterministic relationship between human development and geographic position, as measured by distance from the Equator.
Still, there is important heterogeneity within the South close to equator and North far from equator countries. Singapore’s HDI is almost as high as that of Sweden, despite the two being on the opposite ends of the geographic scale. Ecuador’s HDI is just above Ukraine’s, although the former is more than 50 degree closer to the equator than then latter. Gabon’s HDI is higher than Moldova’s, despite Gabon being 46 degrees further south than Moldova.46 This is not to deny that there is a link between geographic position and human development. By the standards of social science, this is a rather strong correlation and fairly smooth relationship. It is remarkable that no country more the 35 degrees from the equator has an HDI lower than 0.65 (but this excludes North Korea, for which there is no HDI data provided by the UN).47 But there is still important diversity in human development at different geographic zones. Moreover, the correlation between geographic position and development need to be causal, let alone deterministic.
If the “Global South” is an ambivalent notion, what is the use instead? There is no obvious substitute that is more descriptively appropriate, less amalgamating and less suggestive of geographic determinism. But then we do not use any categorization that is so general and crude. There is good reason why there is no accurate alternative term: the countries of the world are too diverse to fit into two boxes: one for “South” and one for “North”, one for “developed” and one for “non-developed”, one for “powerful”, and one for “oppressed”. Be specific about what the term is referring to, and be concrete about the set of countries that is covered. It would be correct if one talks about 20 poorest countries in the world, instead of the countries of the “Global South”. If one means technologically underdeveloped countries, one has to say not countries of the “Third World”. If you mean rich, former colonial powers from Western Europe, say that and not the “Global North”. It takes a few more words, but it is more proper and less ambiguous. It is a bit ironic that the “Global South” “Global North” dichotomy is most popular among scholars and activists who are extremely sensitive about the power of words to shape public discourses, homogenize diverse populations, and support narratives that take a life of their own, influencing politics and public policy. If that is the case, it makes it even more imperative to avoid terms that are inappropriate, homogenizing and fallacious on a global scale.
And so if we return to the question: why to use instead? Our answer will be in this context of globalization48 to choose the notion “Global South” rather than just the“Less-developed World”, than“Majority World”, the “Non-Western World” the “Poor World”, the “South”, the “Third World”, the “Undeveloped World” or the “South”. The reasoning here, is that the addition of the word “Global” makes it clear that this is not a strict geographical categorization of the world but one based on economic inequalities which happen to have some cartographic coherence. It also emphasizes that both North and South are, together, drawn into global processes rather than existing as separate slices of the world. Conditions in the Global South are only understandable when they are set against those in the “Global North”, global processes and structures make all countries part of an increasingly integrated world. All that said, we also may feel doubt that the story ends here. It is obvious that, the “Global South”, too, will in time get tripped up by events.
5. Sources and Literature
A systematic research is necessary for gaining results of this complex topic. Due to the method of comparative analysis number of various agencies and institutions from Africa and Europe such as Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Library of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) in Geneva, the Library of the Ministère des Affaires Etrangères (MAE) in Paris, the Library of the University of Hildesheim, Göttingen and Hamburg have been widely used.
Also included are works of a number of scientists from the Institute for African Studies of the German Academy of Sciences and several other German scientific institutions. Furthermore, the materials of several international research centers of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the African Development Bank Group (AFDB), the Bank for Internal Settlement (BIS), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the Paul Ango Ela Foundation in Yaounde and Archives in Berlin, Yaounde, Buea, Paris and Geneva have been used.
Publications of German official bodies, namely of the Federal Statistical Office (Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland), the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (Bundesministerium für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung), German Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Deutscher Industrie und Handelskammertag), as well as publications of international agencies such as the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the United Nations Centre on Transnational Corporations (UNCTC), served with the statistical and factual data. For the first time after Germany's reunification an analysis on German-African economic, political and cultural relations could be provided under the conditions of intensified globalization focusing on development from Helmut Kohl's to Gerhard Schröder's government.
Recent Africa research covers mainly the Post WWII, the 20th and the beginning of 21st century. In some cases, as more thorough research for the phenomenon is required, earlier temporal periods have also been considered. This study attempts to provide a rather condensed and necessarily somewhat generalized overview of the key characteristics and elements of the two Germanies relations with Africa since the creation of the FRG and the GDR in 1949. For ease of presentation and interpretation, we will use the comparative analysis to compare FRG and GDR, two basically similar events which took place in the same context. This longitudinal overview is based on a combination of influencing factors (general foreign policy periodization of both FRG and GDR, major milestones in German development and cooperation policies, outstanding phases of development on the African continent). Although the FRG and the GDR were for fourty years, during the entire period of the Cold War, staunch members of their respective ideological camps and were fiercely engaged in their own specific conflict based on inner-German competition, their contact with Africa by and large proceeded in somewhat parallel steps and phases.
Rather than relying on a single data source we would use qualitative method to gather multiple forms of data, such as interviews, maps, tables, newspapers, graphics and various documents. This method will help us to gain an understanding of reasons, opinions, motivations and dive deeper into the problem of the German-African relations with respect to their specific economic contents, and an analysis of some aspects of the complex mechanisms of German-African trade relations created over decades of investment and aid policies.
We will also use the quantitative method in order to quantify the problem by way of generating numerical data or data that can be transformed into usable statistics. We should use this approach to quantify attitudes, opinions, behaviors and other defined variables and generalize results from the literature. The quantitative approach will be expressed in numbers and illustrations. It will be useful to test or confirm theories and assumptions. This method should guide us to establish general facts about isolated data from German official statistics on Africa, as well as the original documentary and statistical information of a series of official bodies of Germany, in particular.
I. Colonial Policy in Context: from the German Reich to Franco-German Cooperation
In comparison with other countries, Germany invested in colonies rather late. Nevertheless, discussions of acquiring colonies had gone on since the 16th century. In fact, from 1683-1717, the region of Brandenburg did maintain the colony Groß-Friedrichsburg, in today’s Ghana. But when it became too expensive it was sold to Holland. For the small German states, the financial risk involved in maintaining colonies was too high. The late start of German colonization has to be seen in relation with the late nation building process which was only came to achievement in 1871.49 Nevertheless, the rise of the German imperialism and colonialism coincided with the latter stages of the ‘Scramble for Africa” during which enterprising German individuals, rather than government entities, competed with other already established colonies and colonialist entrepreneurs. The German joining the race for the last uncharted territories in Africa and the pacific that had not yet been carved up, competition for colonies thus involved major European nations, plus several lesser powers. The German colonial empire50 lasted a mere thirty years, and is thus one of the most short-lived of all modern colonialism. The colonial experience was deemed marginal and insignificant, compared both to the long histories of the British and French empires and also to the towering impact, on German history and beyond, of subsequent events: the WWI, the Weiman Republic and the rise of National Socialism, the Third Reich and the Holocaust.51 In recent years, however, interest in Germany, colonial past has made a remarkable comeback, both in academia and in the wider public sphere, and the mainly for three several reasons.
Firstly, Germany’s Colonial Project may have lasted only three decades, but it was a significant and integral part of the period of high imperialism before the WWI. Powerful pressure groups as well as reckless colonial pioneers in Africa forced Bismarck, to some extent against his will, in government support for the occupation of overseas territories. In 1881/1885, Germany acquired large territories in Africa in today’s Togo, Cameroon, Namibia, Burundi and Tanzania. Secondly, colonialism also had a more significant role to play within German History than has long been assumed. Colonial experience continued after the formal end of the empire. Thirdly, the colonial past is still very much with us. Indeed, it is almost ubiquitous, and not just in the former colonies. The legacy of colonialism is equally evident in the metropolises, and colonial issues continue to be central to present-day political conflicts.52
1. Factors of Motivations
Many Germans in the late 19th century viewed acquisitions as a true indication of having achieved nationhood. Public opinion eventually arrived at an understanding that prestigious African and Pacific colonies went hand-in-hand with dreams of a high seas fleet. Both aspiration would become reality, nurtured by a press replete with Kolonialfreunde (supporters of colonial acquisitions) and by a myriad of geographical association and colonial societies.
a) Attitudes and Pressure Groups: Supporters and Opponents
In essence, Bismarck’s colonial motives were obscure as he had said repeatedly”… I am no man for colonies”53 and “remained as contemptuous of all colonial dreams as ever.54 Bismarck and many deputies in the Reichstag had no interest in colonial conquests merely to acquire sight, “even if the proposal is for the acquisition of paradise.”55 However, in 1884, Bismarck and deputies some consented to the acquisition of colonies by the German empire, in order to protect trade, to safeguard raw materials and export makes and to take opportunities for square miles of territory. Reichstag deputy Friedrich Kapp stated in debate in 1878 that whenever there is talk of “colonization”, he would recommend to keep pocketbooks out of capital investment, among other reasons.56 In the very next year, Bismarck shared personal involvement when “he abandoned his colonial drive as suddenly and casually as he had started it” as if he had committed an error in judgment that could confuse the substance of his more significant policies.57 “Indeed, in 1889, Bismarck tried to give German South West Africa away to the British. He said, a burden and an expense, and he liked to saddle someone else with it”. In addition to foreign policy consideration, which was important mainly to choose at the upper echelons of political decision-making, we can identify four main arguments for colonial expansion.
b) Germany’s “World Politics”
Germany began its world expansion in the 1880s under Bismarck’s leadership, encouraged by national bourgeoisie. Some of them claiming themselves of Friedrich List58 was a leading 19th century German-American economist who developed the “National System” a what some could call today the National System of innovation. He was a forefather of the German historical school of economics and considered the original European unity theorist whose ideas were the basis for the European Economic Community, thought, advocated expansion in the Philippines and in Timor, others proposed to set themselves in Formosa (modern Taiwan), etc. At the end of the 1870s, these isolated voices began to be relayed by a real imperialist policy, which was backed by mercantilist thesis. In 1881, Hübbe-Schleiden, a lawyer, published Deutsche Kolonisation, according to which the “development of national consciousness demanded an independent overseas policy.”59 Pan-germanism (Alldeutsche Bewegung) was thus linked to the young nation’s imperialist drives in the beginning of the 1880s, the Deutscher Kolonialverein was created, and got its own magazine in 1884, the Kolonialzeitung.
This colonial lobby was also relayed by the nationalist Alldeutscher Verband. Generally Bismarck was opposed to widespread German colonialism, but had to resign at the insistence of the new German Emperor Wilhelm II on the 18th of March 1890. Wilhelm II instead adopted a very aggressive policy of colonization and introduced colonial expansion in the 20th century with the Weltpolitik60 strategy. Germany thus became the third largest colonial power in Africa. Nearly all of its overall empires of 2.6 million square kilometers and 14 million colonial subjects in 1914 were found in its African possessions of Southwest Africa, Togoland, the Cameroons, and Tanganyika. The scramble for Africa led Bismarck to propose the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885. Following the 1904 “Entente Cordiale” between France and the United Kingdom UK, Germany tried to isolate France in 1905 with the first Moroccan Crisis. This led to the 1906 Algeciras Conference61, in which France’s influence on Morocco was compensated by the exchange of other territories, and then to the Agadir Crisis in 1911. Along with the 1898 Fashoda incident between France and the UK, this succession of international crises reveals the bitterness of the struggle between the various imperialist nations, which ultimately led to WWI.62
c) The Race for Africa: Economic Reasons
The Race for Africa also known as the Scramble of Africa or partition of Africa was the invasion, occupation, colonization, and annexation of Africa territory by European powers during the New imperialism period between 1881 and 1914. The Berlin Conference of 1884, which regulated European colonization and trade in Africa, is often cited as a convenient starting point.63 Consequent to the political and economic rivalries among the European empires in the last quarter of the 19th century, the partitioning of the Africa was how the Europeans avoided warring amongst themselves over Africa.64 The last 59 years of the 19th century saw the transition from “informal imperialism” (hegemony by military influence and economic dominance, to the direct rule of colonies.65 In fact, Sub-Saharan Africa, one of the last regions of the world largely untouched by “informal imperialism” was attractive to Europe’s ruling elites for economic reasons.
During a time when Britain’s balance of trade showed a growing deficit, with shrinking and increasingly protectionist continental markets due to the long depression (1873-96), Africa offered Britain, Germany, France and the other countries an open market that would raise them a trade surplus.: a market that bought more from the colonial power than it sold overall. Britain, like most other industrial countries, had long since begun to run an unfavorable balance of trade (which was increasingly offset, however, by the income from overseas investments). As Britain developed into the world’s first post-industrial nation, financial services became an increasingly important sector of its economy. Invisible financial exports kept Britain out of the red, especially capital investments outside Europe, particularly to the developing and open markets in Africa such as the white settler colonies, the Middle East, South Asia and Southwest Asia. In addition, surplus capital was often more invested overseas, where cheap materials, limited competition and abundant raw materials made a greater premium possible.
Another inducement for imperialism arose from the demand for raw materials unavailable in Europe, especially copper, cotton, rubber, palm oil, cocoa, diamonds, tea and tin, to which European consumers had grown accustomed and upon which European industries had grown dependent. Additionally, Britain wanted the southern and eastern coasts of Africa for stoping over ports on the route to Asia and its empire in India.66 However, in Africa, exclusively in the area which became the Union of South Africa in 1910, the amount of Capital investment by Europeans was relatively small, compared to other continents. Consequently, the companies involved in tropical African commerce were relatively small, apart from Cecil Rhodes’s De Beers Mining Company. Rhodes had carved out Rhodesia for himself, Leopold II of Belgium later and with considerable brutality, exploited the Congo Free Sate. These events might detract from the pro-imperialist arguments of colonial lobbies such as the Alldeutscher Verband, Francisco Crispi and Jules Ferry, who argued that sheltered overseas markets in Africa would solve the problem of low prices and over-production caused by shrinking continental markets.67
2. German East Africa (Deutsch-Ostafrika)
German East Africa was a German colony in South-east Africa (see map, appendix 4), which included what are now Burundi, Rwanda and Tanganyika the main land part of present Tanzania. Its area was 994.996 km² (384.170sqmi), nearly three times the area of Germany today. The colony came into existence during the 1880s and ended with imperial Germany’s defeat in WWI. Afterwards, the territory was divided between Britain and Belgium, and was later converted to a mandate of the League of Nations. Hehe-Sultan Mkwawa successfully resisted the German colonialists in East Africa for many years before he put an end to his life in 1898.68
a) Society for German Colonization. Die Gesellschaft für Deutsche Kolonisation (GFDK)
The society for German Colonization was founded on March 28, 1884, by Karl Peters. The goal was to acquire German colonial territories in overseas countries. In the Autumn of 1884, Peters proceeded, together with Count Joachim Von Pfeil and Klein Ellguth and Karl Jühlke, to Zanzibar, and from there to the East African mainland. During this journey, he concluded treaties with the chiefs of Useguba, Nguru, Issagari, and Ukami, in the name of Gesellschaft für Deutsche Kolonisation. Returning to Europe early in 1855, he formed the Deutsch-Ostafrikanischen Gesellschaft. On the 3rd of March 1885, the German government announced it had granted an imperial charter (signed by Bismarck on the 27th of February) to Peter’s company and intended to establish a protectorate in East Africa. Peters then recruited specialists who began exploring South to the Rufiji River and North to Witu, near Lama on the coast.69
When the Sultan of Zanzibar protested, since he claimed to be ruler on the mainland as well, German chancellor Otto Von Bismarck sent five warships, which arrived on the 7th of August on the Sultan’s palace. The British and German agreed to divide the mainland between themselves, and the Sultan had no option but to agree. German rule quickly established over Bagamoyo, Dar es Salaam, and Kilwa, even sending the caravans of Tom Von Prince, Wilhelm langheld, Emin Pasha, and Charles Stokes to dominate “the street of Caravan”. The Abushiri Revolt of 1888 was put down (with British help) the following year. In 1890, London and Berlin concluded the Heligoland-Zanzibar Treaty, returning Heligoland (seized during the Napoleonic wars) to Germany and deciding on the borders of German East Africa (the exact boundaries remained unsurveyed until 1910). Between 1891 and 1894, the Hehe tribe, led by Chief Mkwawa, resisted German expansion. They were defeated as rival tribes supported the Germans.70
After years of guerilla warfare, Mkwawa himself was cornered and committed suicide in 1898. The Maji Maji Rebellion occurred in 1905 and was put down by the governors, Count Gustav Adolf Von Götzen. But, scandal soon followed, with stories of corruption and brutality, and in 1907, chancellor Bülow appointed Bernhard Dernburg to reform the colonial administration. It became a model of colonial efficiency and commanded extraordinary loyalty amongst the natives during the WWI. German colonial administrators relied heavily on natives’ chiefs to keep order and collect taxes. By the 1st of January 1914, aside from local police, military garrisons of Schutztruppen (protective troops) at Dar es Salaam, Moshi, Iringo and Mahenge comprised 110 German officers (including 42 medical officers), 126 non-commissioned officers, and 2.472 native enlisted men.71
b) Economic Development and Education
Infrastructures such as railways, roads, the telephone or electricity have helped shape recent history. “Imperial Infrastructure” examines these phenomena of supply and disposal, traffic and communication. It draws attention to the plans and practices with which Africa was to be developed between 1880 and 1960. For three generations of Germans, Africa was a projection screen that had an impact on Europe itself. Technocratic integration via infrastructure proved itself as a foreign policy strategy and contributed to global networking.72 The change from colonial policy to development aid, but also important processes of globalization, can be illustrated using a specific example.
The work traces the German discourse on Africa in the area of overlap between politics, economy, space and technology. Commerce and growth started in earnest under German direction. Early on it was realized that economic development would depend on reliable transportation. Over 100.000 acres (40.000 ha) were under sisal cultivation-the biggest cash crop. Two million coffee trees were planted and rubber trees grow on 200.000 acres (81.000 ha), along with large cotton plantations. To bring these agricultural products to market, beginning in 1888, the Usambara Railway or Northern Railroad was built from Tonga to Moshi, Tanzania. The longest line, the Central Railroad covered 775 miles (1.247 km) from Dar es Salaam to Morogoro, Tabora and Kigoma. The final link to eastern shore of Lake Tanganyika had been completed in July 1914 and was cause for a huge and festive celebration in the capital with all agricultural fair and trade exhibition. Harbor facilities were built or improved with electoral cranes with rail access and warehouses.73
1 Ludger Kühnhardt, Maturing beyond Cotonou: An EU-ACP Association Treaty for Development. A proposal for reinventing EU relation with African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States. ZEI Discussion Paper. Center for European Integration Studies, Bonn 2016, p. 1.
2 Ibid., p. 7.
3 Dirk Van Laak, Über alles in der Welt. Deutscher Imperialismus im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, München 2005, pp. 8-9.
4 Leonhard Harding, Geschichte Afrikas im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, München 1999, p. 9.
5 Tanja Bührer, Die Kaiserliche Schutztruppe Koloniale. Sicherheitspolitik und transkulturelle Kriegführung, 1885 bis 1918, München 2011, p. 9.
6 The Reichswehr formed the military organisation of Germany from 1919 until 1935, when it was united with the new Wehrmacht (Defence Force). The Reichswehr was officially established on 1 January 1921, according to the limitations imposed by the Treaty of Versailles.
7 Raffael Scheck, Hitlers afrikanische Opfer. Die Massaker der Wehrmacht an schwarzen französischen Soldaten, Berlin 2009, p. 9.
8 Christian Bommarius, Der gute Deutsche. Die Ermordung Manga Bells in Kamerun 1914, Berlin 2015, pp. 9-10.
9 Schulte-Varendorff, Krieg in Kamerun: Die deutsche Kolonie im Ersten Weltkrieg, Berlin 2011, p. 11.
10 Andreas Eckert, Herrschen und Verwalten. Afrikanische Bürokratien, staatliche Ordnung und Politik in Tanzania 1920-1970, München 2007, pp. 8-9.
11 Thea Büttner, The Development of African Historical Studies in East Gemany. An Outline and Selected Bibliography, in: History in Africa 19 (1992), pp. 133-146.
13 Leonhard Harding/Brigitte Reinwald (Hrsg.), Afrika-Mutter und Modell der europäischen Zivilisation? Die Rehabilitierung des schwarzen Kontinents durch Cheikh Anta Diop, Berlin 1990, p. 10.
14 Joachim Zeller, Kolonialdenkmäler und Geschichtsbewusstsein. Eine Untersuchung der kolonialdeutschen Erinnerungskultur, Frankfurt am Main 2000, pp. 8-9.
15 Klaus Storkmann, Geheime Solidarität und Militärhilfen der DDR in die Dritte Welt, Berlin 2012, pp. 8-9.
16 Christiane Bürger, Deutsche Kolonialgeschichte(n). Der Genozid in Namibia und die Geschichtsschreibung der DDR und BRD, Bielefeld 2017, pp. 11-12.
17 Christoph Marx, Südafrika. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Stuttgart 2012, p. 6.
18 Agnes Bresselau von Bressensdorf/Elke Seefried, West Germany, the Global South and the Cold War, München 2017, pp. 7-8.
19 Hans-Joachim Döring, Es geht um unsere Existenz. Die Politik der DDR gegenüber der Dritten Welt am Beispiel von Mosambik und Äthiopien, Berlin 2000, pp. 3-4.
20 Kirsten Rüther, Afrika: genauer betrachtet. Perspektiven aus einem Kontinent im Umbruch, Hamburg - Wien 2017, p. 4.
21 Dambisa Moyo, Dead Aid. Warum Entwicklungshilfe nicht funktioniert und was Afrika besser machen kann, Berlin 2011, pp. 3-4.
22 Rupert Neudeck, Die Kraft Afrikas. Warum der Kontinent noch nicht verloren ist, München 2010, p. 9.
23 Ludger Schadomsky, Afrika. Ein Kontinent im Wandel , Würzburg 2010, p. 8.
24 Urban Vahsen, Eurafrikanische Entwicklungskooperation. Die Assoziierungspolitik der EWG gegenüber dem subsaharischen Afrika in den 1960er Jahren, Stuttgart 2010, p. 23.
25 Ulf Engel/Robert Kappel (Eds.), Germany's Africa Policy Revisited. Interest, Images and Incrementalism, Münster 2002, p. 8.
26 Bernard Tomlinson, What was the Third World?, in: Journal of Contemporary History 38 (2003), No. 2, pp. 307-308.
28 Dados Nour/Connell Raewyn, The Global South, in: ASA 11 (2012), No. 1, pp. 12-13.
29 Robert Warburton Cox, Ideologies and the New International Economic Order: Reflections on Some Recent Literature, in: International Organization 33 (Spring 1979), No. 2, pp. 257–258.
30 Walter Franz Stettner, The Brandt Commission Report: A Critical Appraisal, in: International Social Science Review 57 (Spring 1982 ), No. 2, pp. 67-69.
31 Augusto Litonjua, Third World/Global South: From Modernization to Dependency/Liberation to Postdevelopment, in: Journal of Third World Studies 29 (Spring 2012), No. 1, pp. 25-27.
32 Keynesian economics is a theory that says the government should increase demand to boost growth. Keynesians believe that consumer demands are the primary driving forces in an economy. As a result, the theory supports expansionary fiscal policy. Its main tools are government spending on infrastructure, unemployment benefits, and education. A drawback is that overdoing Keynesian policies increases inflation.
34 Jean-Philippe Thérien, Beyond the North-South Divide: The Two Tales of World Poverty, in: Third World Quarterly 20 (August 1999), No. 4, pp. 723–725.
35 Ben Vivekanandan, Global Visions of Olof Palme, Bruno Kreisky and Willy Brandt: International Peace and Security, Co-operation, and Development, New Delhi 2016, p. 12.
36 Carl Oglesby, Vietnamism has failed... The revolution can only be mauled, not defeated, in: Journal of Commonweal 90 (1969), pp. 199-200.
37 Andrea Hollington/Oliver Tappe/Tijo Salverda/Tobias Schwarz, Introduction: Concepts of the Global South https://web.archive.org/web/20160904205139/http://gssc.uni-koeln.de/node/451, accessed on 19.01.2020.
38 Alvaro Mendez, Discussion on the Global South, https://web.archive.org/web/20161026085516/http://gssc.uni-koeln.de/node/469 , accessed on 19.01.2020.
39 Andrea Hollington/Oliver Tappe/Tijo Salverda/Tobias Schwarz, Introduction: Concepts of the Global South https://web.archive.org/web/20160904205139/http://gssc.uni-koeln.de/node/451, accessed on 19.01.2020.
43 Rainer Barthelt/Gustav Adolf Sonnenhol, Die Dritte Welt. Mythos und Wirklichkeit, Bonn 2007, p. 9.
44 Dimiter Toshkov, The “Global South” is a terrible term. Don’t use it!http://re-design.dimiter.eu/?p=969, November 2018, accessed on 19.01.2020.
48 Globalization is the process of interaction and integration among people, companies, and governments worldwide. As a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, globalization is considered by some as a form of capitalist expansion which entails the integration of local and national economies into a global, unregulated market economy. Globalization has grown due to advances in transportation and communication technology. With the increased global interactions comes the growth of international trade, ideas and culture. Globalization is primarily an economic process of interaction and integration that's associated with social and cultural aspects. However, conflicts and diplomacy are also large parts of the history of globalisation, and modern globalization.
49 https://www.humanityinaction.org/knowledgebase/246-facing-the-past-to-liberate-the-future-colonial-africa-in-the-german-mind, accessed on 24.2.2014.
50 A colonial empire often called colonies is a collective of territories either contiguous with the imperial center or located overseas, settled by the population of a certain state and governed by that state.
51 Sebastian Conrad, German colonialism. A short history, Cambridge 2012, p. 1.
52 Ibid., p. 45.
53 Taylor Bismarck, The man and the states man, New York 1967, p. 215.
54 Edward Crankshaw Bismarck, New York 1981, p. 395.
55 Helmut Washausen, Hamburg and die Kolonialpolitik des Deutschen Reiches, Berlin 1986, p. 58.
56 Ibid., p. 115.
57 Ibid., p. 397.
58 Chris Freeman, The National System of innovation in Historical Perspective in: Journal of Economics 19 (1995), Issue 1, pp. 5-24.
59 Bernard Poloni, German Colonial Imperialism: a late and short-term phenomenon, in: Imperialism, hegemony, leadership , 26 March 2004 conference at the Sorbonne University, Paris 2004, p. 13.
60 At the beginning of the late nineteenth century, several groups extended the definition of the political community beyond nation-states to include much, if not all, of humanity. These “internationalists” include Marxists, human rights advocates, environmentalists, peace activists, feminists, and minority groups. This was the general direction of thinking on global politics, though the term was not used as such. The modern “world politics perspective” is often identified with the works , in particular their 1972 work Transnational Relations and World Politics. Here, the authors argued that state-centric views of international relations were inadequate frameworks to utilize in political science or international relations studies due to the increased globalization. Today, the practices of global politics are defined by values: norms of human rights, ideas of human development and beliefs such as internationalism or cosmopolitanism about how we should relate to each. Over the last couple of decades cosmopolitanism has become one of the key contested ideologies of global politics. See Evans Graham/Newnham, Jeffrey, The Penguin Dictionary of International Relation, London 1998, p. 578.
61 The Algeciras Conference took place in Spain, and lasted 16 January to 7 April 1906. The purpose of the Conference was to find a solution to the First Moroccan Crisis of 1905 between France and Germany.
62 Ibid., p. 13.
63 Patrick Brantlinger, Victorians and Africans: the Genealogy of the Myth of the Dark Continent, in: C ritical I nquiry 12 (1985), No. 1, pp. 166- 203.
64 Ronald Robinson/John Gallagher (Eds.), Africa and the Victorious, London 1965, p. 175.
65 Kevin Shillington, History of Africa, New York 2005, p. 301.
66 Lynn Hunt/Thomas R. Martin (Eds.), The Making of the west: Peoples and Cultures, Vol. C , Bedford 2009, p. 45.
67 Ibid., p. 46.
68 Martin Baer/Olaf Schroeter. Eine Kopfjagd. Deutsche in Ostafrika, Berlin 2001, p. 2.
69 Werner Haupt, Deutschlands Schutzgebiete in Übersee 1884-1918, Friedberg 1984, p. 32.
71 Ibid., pp. 33-34.
72 Dirk Van Laak, Imperiale Infrastruktur. Deutsche Planungen für eine Erschließung Afrikas 1880-1960, Paderborn 2004, p. 3.