This first international conference on Africa has created a model on how the world treats the continent. Today, Africa is seen above all as a source of raw materials for the outside world and as an arena around which it can compete. Conferences on the continent rarely take place on the continent itself and rarely care about the views of ordinary Africans. At the time of the conference, 80% of Africa remained under traditional and local control. The Europeans had only one influence on the coast. After that, they began to put bits of land inland and eventually created a set of geometric boundaries, superimposed on the indigenous cultures and regions of Africa. However, in order to accept their claims on African lands, European states had to prove that they could actually manage the territory. The conference was an opportunity to channel latent European hostilities outwards; to create new areas of support for European powers in the face of increasing US, Russian and Japanese interests; and constructive dialogue to limit future hostilities. In Africa, colonialism was introduced across most of the continent. When Africa`s independence was regained after World War II, it was in the form of fragmented states. This principle allowed Europeans to conquer Africa, along with other writings at the conference, but to do as little as possible to manage or control it. The principle did not apply so much to the African hinterland at the time of the conference. This is where the “backcountry theory” was born, which basically gave any coastal colonial power the right to claim political influence over an indefinite area within the country. As Africa was irregularly formed, this theory caused problems and was subsequently rejected.  Including a short break for Christmas and New Year, the West African Conference in Berlin was to last 104 days and end on February 26, 1885. Over the past 135 years, the conference came to represent the European struggle and the division of the continent at the end of the 19th century. In the popular imagination, delegates are tied up by a map, armed with rules and pencils, that outlines the national borders on the continent without having any idea what existed on the ground they were distributing. But that`s not true. The Berlin conference did not start the brawl. That was a good thing. Nor has it divided the continent. Only one state, the ephemeral horror that was the free state of Congo, came out of it, even if it was not a creation of the conference.
The Berlin conference did not initiate European colonization of Africa, but it legitimized and formalized the process. In addition, it has generated new interest in Africa. After the end of the conference, the European powers extended their claims to Africa so that European states claimed almost 90% of The African territory until 1900. Other historians discuss the historical legal implications in international law. The emphasis on the principle of efficiency and spheres of influence meant that the Berlin conference did not lead to a great development of international law and imperialism.  Some argued that the conference was rather a failure, and used to make Germany responsible for the scramble for Africa.  While the number of voters varied by country, the following 14 countries sent representatives to the Berlin conference and signed the following law in Berlin: Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, the Ottoman Empire, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden-Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Categorised in: Uncategorized
This post was written by rb_ad