Decolonization: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #472

by Dane Kennedy

Millions of Africans, Asians, and other peoples were the subjects of colonial rule by overseas empires through the mid-twentieth century. By the end of the century, however, nearly all of these peoples had become citizens of independent nation-states. The United Nations grew from 51 member states at its founding in 1945 to 193 today. Its nearly four-fold increase is one measure of the historic shift in international relations that has occurred over the past half-century. Decolonization is the term commonly used to refer to this transition from a world of colonial empires to a world of nation-states in the years after World War II.

Both ex-imperial states and post-colonial regimes have promoted a selective and sanitized version of decolonization that casts their own conduct in a positive light, characterizing the process as negotiated and the outcome as inevitable. This book draws on recent scholarship to challenge that view, demonstrating that considerable violence and instability accompanied the end of empire and that the outcome was often up for grabs.

This book highlights three themes. The first is that global war between empires precipitated decolonization, creating the economic and political crises that gave colonial subjects the opportunity to seek independence. The second theme is that nation-state was not the only option pursued by anti-colonial activists. Many of them sought pan- and trans-national polities instead, but a combination of international and institutional pressures made the nation-state the standard template. The third theme is that the struggle to escape imperial subjugation and create nation-states generated widespread violence and produced huge refugee populations, leading to political problems that persist to the present day. By focusing on these crucial points, Dane Kennedy reminds us how the tumultuous, even tragic, changes caused by the decolonization profoundly shaped the world we live in.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics, Africa, World History, Race, Teaching

116 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 2016

Reviews

[Gerhard · Rating 3 out of 5]

'The United States, in turn, attained a level of global supremacy in the aftermath of the Soviet collapse that many commentators considered historically unprecedented. The French foreign minister coined the term “hyperpower” to communicate its special standing in world affairs. Others have pointed out that America’s military budget exceeds that of the next ten to twelve most powerful nations combined, and that it maintains more than a thousand military bases and other security installations around the globe. In the estimation of many observers, America’s ability to project its power almost anywhere in the world surely qualifies it as an empire. But it is certainly not a colonial empire, though it does exert quasi-colonial authority over such scattered territories as Puerto Rico and Guam. The question, then, is whether the collapse of this empire, which will surely come sooner or later, will produce something like a fifth wave of decolonization?'

[Justin Evans · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's very hard to do a good VSI on an historical period, but Kennedy does it very well. Highly recommended for anyone looking to get a handle on some of the most important events of the recent past.

[Amanda · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is what it is billed as: a short introduction to a much more complex and in-depth topic. Kennedy is very careful in approaching the topic, making sure to explain patterns, claims, and context with tangible examples. Much of the book is focused on explaining the process of decolonization itself, and I was surprised as to how little space was given to talking about the persistence of colonialism and neo-colonialism, and I think that this is where I feel like the length of the book impacted the overall quality. But as someone seeking a straightforward introduction to the topic, this book was very helpful.

[Tatiana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding. The biggest surprise to me was the necessary repatriation of 5.4 - 6.8 million colonial Europeans, many of whom had lived in their respective colonies for many generations. For example, 500,000 Portuguese from Africa, 300,000 Dutch from Indonesia, 1.38 million French from Algeria.

[Mishari · Rating 4 out of 5]

التحرر من الاستعمار: مقدمة قصيرة جدًا، تعرض الكتابة عرض استرجاعي رشيق لحركات التحرر من الاستعمار بداية من الموجة الأولى مع الثورة الأمريكية والهايتية وصولًا إلى المرحلة الثالثة في أفريقيا وآسيا واستراتيجيات الإخضاع والترغيب من قبل المركز الاستعماري وإستراتيجيات المقاومة وصولًا إلى مشكلة الدولة-الأمة.
ترى الكاتبة أن الدافع وراء اندلاع حركات مقاومة الاستعمار كان حالة الضعف التي تلي الحروب العظمى بين الإمبراطوريات مما يجعل المستعمرين قادرين على المساومة والتخلص من سلطة الاستعمار الضعيفة، ولاحقًا استدخال منطق الدولة-الأمة من قِبل الأباء الأوائل في نضالاتهم لحق تقرير المصير.
رغم أنها مقدمة قصيرة جدًا لكن احتوت على طيف واسع من المسائل المهمة وذكرت سياقات غير معتبرة عند ذكر موضوع التحرر من الاستعمار.

[Morgan]

In this book Dane Kennedy essentially uses the post-WWII period of political decolonization as a case study to illuminate decolonization in general. He places the period in context both of previous decolonial 'waves' and the neocolonialism which he acknowledges as still being with us today. In this he suggests that we should learn from the problems facing past 'waves' so that we can prepare ourselves for future reckonings with colonialism. This is an interesting endeavor which is very ill served by the author's narrow definition of decolonization as purely political.

By defining decolonization as the achievement by states of formal political independence, Kennedy ends up including phenomena which should be excluded and excluding others which should be included. Indigenous peoples in settler states are overlooked, but the colonizers occupying their land become decolonial when they break their own empires away from the colonial metropole. This is especially inexcusable given that the book was written several years after the publication of 'Decolonization is not a metaphor', the textbook modern assertion that decolonization is a social and economic process, and even more so given that it directly addresses its classical counterpart, the decolonial theory of Frantz Fanon, only to dismiss it based on the author's own narrow, purely political definition.

Kennedy's project would be better served by understanding decolonization as a social and economic process, regarding historical 'decolonization' instead first and foremost as restructuring of the imperialist order. Then we can see that decolonization has barely begun.

Nevertheless, as a book about the post-WWII wave of political decolonization it is decent enough. It provides a historical overview and some interesting discussions of the darker sides of the process, such as ethnic cleansings and the ultimate victory of the nation-state. But in moving from the particular historical period to the universal of decolonization as such, it falters.

[Matt Sautman · Rating 5 out of 5]

While this brief introduction to decolonization does not touch on movements amongst indigenous peoples in North America to reclaim land, this slim book provides a foundational understanding of the three waves of decolonization and some of the nuances involved in the process, including the rise of neocolonialism, colonial flight, and collective amnesia. A critique I have- but not one that I feel is strong enough to rate the book a star lower- is that Kennedy at one point tries to discredit Fanon’s claim that all colonialism is violent, and to a reader with some background in post-colonialism, this is an eyebrow raising moment. Still there is plenty of history here and accessible theory to interest the academically inclined.

[Jonathan Lifferth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overall, impressive work on the major events and themes of the collapse of European colonial projects. Great detail on independence movements across the world, although the organization of these stories was scattered. Well written sections include:

- European attempts to maintain and even expand power after WWII
- British use of minority groups in military and police forces
- Cosmopolitanism of independence leaders
- Alternatives to nation state (mostly anarchism and communism)
- French attempt at assimilation of “évolués”, thwarted by policies of racial discrimination which radicalized prominent subjects against the empire
- Good balanced discussion on triumph and tragedy of nation states, failed secession attempts

There was a relatively brief description of “dirty war”. Kennedy claims that the use of brutal tactics were considered to be justified by European belief that conquered peoples were savages and didn’t have human rights. I don’t doubt that this was often the case but the claim is not well developed, no specific evidence discussed.

[kieran ⋅˚₊‧]

The United States, in turn, attained a level of global supremacy in the aftermath of the Soviet collapse that many commentators considered historically unprecedented. The French foreign minister coined the term "hyperpower" to communicate its special standing in world affairs. Others have pointed out that America's military budget exceeds that of the next ten to twelve most powerful nations combined, and that it maintains more than a thousand military bases and other security installations around the globe. In the estimation of many observers, America's ability to project its power almost anywhere in the world surely qualifies it as an empire. But it is certainly not a colonial empire, though it does exert quasi-colonial authority over such scattered territories as Puerto Rico and Guam. The question, then, is whether the collapse of this empire, which will surely come sooner or later, will produce something like a fifth wave of decolonization?

[Heather Gibson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is effectively a very long, broad sweeping academic essay. It is, like it says in the title, a good introduction. It could be used as a springboard from which to conduct more research and does well to tackle the myth that decolonisation was a peaceful transfer of power head on. It is, however, difficult to get through. I struggled to motivate myself through it, despite its mere 100 or so pages. It feels a lot longer than it actually is. This is a good source if you are starting to research the topic but not one I would recommend for leisurely reading.

[Harris]

"The problem for the imperial powers was that their nationalist opponents espoused the very principles of freedom and self-determination that they themselves had advocated in their war against the Axis powers. This brought to a head the inherent contradiction of liberal imperialism—that coercive means and liberal ends could not coexist. By instigating such ultraviolent, extralegal measures against their colonial subjects, the European empires exposed the ideological bankruptcy of their own rule." (64)

[Alex · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this, I thought it was, as the title suggests, a brief overview and intro to some very complicated topics. I found it to be balanced, speaking of some of the both positive and negative aspects of different waves of decolonization. The author was engaging and my interest was maintained throughout the book.

[Peter Johnson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good, punchy work that seeks to cover the area from every possible angle. It is very informative and is prepared to challenge folksy understanding of what colonialism was all about. The author reminds us that what motivated imperialism remains with us, regardless of what has happened in history.

[Paige Stephens · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars

This was a readable and informative introduction to decolonization (like the title suggests). I read it for my class on Empires, and this is definitely one of the more approachable things I've had to read for that class. It's a fascinating topic.

[Bethan · Rating 5 out of 5]

These books can be a bit hit or miss, but I found this one gave me just what I wanted - an overview with sufficient detail to know where to look further. Really interesting, really useful. I’d recommend it to anyone remotely interested.

[Jesse Richards · Rating 3 out of 5]

Helpful, but a little repetitive. Hard to tell how it was organized. Maps and timelines would have been great, too.

[Manick Govinda · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this book extremely useful by way of giving a general introduction to colonialism and decolonisation, from the American war of independence to the post-colonial present.

[James · Rating 1 out of 5]

Reviewed for possible class adoption. While many of the VSI books are quite good this one is a very poor effort. Poorly organized and researched. Seems to have been written without much care.

[ei_tc Ryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Concise and Pukka.

[Emily · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5

[Aditya · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars

[Finton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Approachable and informative. Analysis was good if thin at times. I should have read this during my degree, I guess.

[Annie Wang · Rating 4 out of 5]

My preceptor kept talking about this book to me in office hours and that is how i realized i was supposed to have read it.

[Jeor · Rating 3 out of 5]

eh book was bad but I see it as an introduction to an already problematic subject, it did that job well enough

[Lehat Khalid · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great introduction

[Simone Firpo · Rating 4 out of 5]

E' un testo molto buono per avere un'introduzione al fenomeno della decolonizzazione più conosciuta (in realtà una ondata delle tante) ovvero quella dei paesi africani e mediorientali nella seconda metà del '900 in tutti i casi sui generis e le diverse sfaccettature e correnti di pensiero. E' molto equilibrato: non si riserva nell'elencare le atrocità commesse dai paesi coloniali e allo stesso tempo descrive in modo disincantato il pensiero "rivoluzionario" di alcuni suoi esponenti come Frantz Fanon o Kwame Nkrumah. E' anche corto quindi si legge in poco tempo.