Impact of WWII on Africa

The Growth of Nationalism in Africa

By attacking and invading Poland in 1939, the Nazi Germany started world war two. It then went ahead to attack Belgium, France and Holland, though its attempt to invade Britain did not succeed. Italy and Germany joined forces in 1940 and were, later on in 1941, joined by imperialist Japan to form the Axis powers which successfully defeated its enemies till 1942 when the Allied powers (which was composed of Britain, the Soviet Union and United States) fought back with success. Trapped on both fronts, Germany ceased fighting just after May 1945. Japan shortly surrendered thereafter after the United States atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This war affected not only the colonialists, but also Africa as the war took place in the Horn and North of Africa.

Basil Davidson (2014) viewed World War II as a conflict that began between the Europeans but that to some extent went on to become an anti-colonial as well as an anti-racist war. He went on to describe it as a case of some good coming out of the evil. The war not only affected those who were directly involved in it, but also the world, and Africa in particular. The World War 2 was a war of freedom and a catalytic event that pushed African countries towards their freedom and independence according to Basil Davidson, 2014. The war left in its wake several effects. The effects of the war could be classified into political, psychological, military and economical. Hargreaves (2014) notes that as destructive and violent as it was, world war 2 was critical in helping Africans fight for and subsequently gain their independence as well as political freedom, and goes on to think that had the war not happened European colonialism of Africa could have probably gone on for a good number of years.

While world war two could be seen as a war that was not for Africans, the Africans fought nonetheless by virtue of being drafted to fight for the supposed freedom of allied powers, yet they themselves were not free. This irony was, however, not lost on all Africans in the continent. Fighting in the war was not entirely of no benefit to the Africans. This is because, from fighting alongside the Europeans, they learnt many lessons (most of it valuable and that ‘enlightened’ them) that they would have otherwise lost. The war served to arm the Africans with military and leadership knowledge and skills, key among them communication skills and ability to work together and for a united cause, which they would later on use during their fight for political liberation and self-rule. It is this lack of unity among them which had led to African countries being colonized in the first place. However, after the war the lack of unification was no longer going to be an impediment. They united for a common cause, which was to end the bondage and achieve independence. By uniting and being in larger groups, their voice grew louder and concerns (especially demands for independence) could no longer be ignored. By voicing their demands worldwide, they were able to bring down European imperialism in Africa.

World War 2 was a significant step towards the growth of nationalism in Africa and among Africans post the war. This is because the colonial governments, in a bid to each protect their interests, recruited close to two million African soldiers who returned to their colonial states that still thought of them as inferior. Besides air ticket home, the Africans were neither recognized nor rewarded by the colonial governments they fought for, whereas the European men (soldiers) they fought alongside were awarded, celebrated and hailed as heroes in their countries. They instead returned home a dejected lot, and to even worse conditions as a result of weak global economies resulting from the war. The return to their previous exploitation and colonial indignities left the soldiers really discontented and very bitter, leading to them raising their voices in protest. Out of this anger within them, a fire that had long been burning inside of them was fueled and they became more determined to fight for their independence. The common anger and resentment that they had for the colonial masters knitted and bonded them together, further bringing them closer as African countries. From this anger and new-found unity sprout a new generation of ideologists who expressed belief in racial equity and agitated for personal freedom. These were the African nationalists. In the early 1950s, the colonial powers were naïve to assume this African nationalism as homogeneous ideology and a force meant to push Europe to decolonize their colonies (Rickford, 2016). The colonialists were, however, wrong to believe this since the anti-colonialism bandwagon only kept growing in all the colonies throughout the African continent. The continued growth of nationalism further propelled the rhetoric for political freedom and self-determination.

The psychological effects that the war had also helped bring about the growth of African nationalism. Fighting in the war changed the Africans’ psychological perceptions that they had held of the Europeans for many years. They saw that during the war the Europeans, just like anyone else bled, were scared, cried and died when they were shot. This made the Africans realize that beyond the skin colour, there wasn’t much difference between them and the Europeans (Khapoya, 2015, p.150) thereby debunking the myth that they were superior, insurmountable and that they could not be defeated. With many defeat and degrading experiences in the hands of the whites, it was only human and natural that the Africans view Europeans as superior. This myth was however, threatened by the world war. The debunking of the superiority myth and change in perception made the Africans realize that the Europeans too could be defeated and their dream of achieving independence was indeed a possibility rather than a mere fantasy. Seeing that they were also not impenetrable as they had imagined, the war also had a psychological effect on the Europeans. The war destroyed the confidence they had that no one could pose any external challenge to their imperialism. They realized that they were not invincible. Seeing that they could be defeated by a common cause, the Europeans took African nationalism more seriously. Knowing that the nationalists would grow more disconcerted in their efforts and that nationalism could suddenly and forcefully erupt, the Europeans spent years following the war finding means to prevent such eruptions. The war also cost the Europeans a lot of men and money, that after the war it became economically unaffordable for the Europeans to resist nationalist movements in Africa. As a result some saw that they stood to benefit from granting their colonies self-rule. The first imperial power to acknowledge this was Britain. This was also informed by the calculations that there would be no need to guard the territories by armies should the demands for independence by nationalist become more aggressive and violent, a threat that was foreseeable. They therefore chose to go for a negotiated means of transferring power to the Africans as a means of avoiding the aforementioned scenario as well as cutting down on costs associated with running the colonies. They thought they could still maintain economic and strategic benefits without having to incur the costs that came with direct control.

The war also served to create awareness among Africans. It did this on three fronts. Being that the war was largely anti-racist, given that the allied powers were fighting to defeat the Germans (who wanted to create a superior race) and prevent further killing of Jews, the persistence with which the allied powers caught the eyes of Africans. Seeing how Europeans fought against German’s racist regime, yet the same Europeans still had their hold on African colonies, made the Africans want to fight for their freedom too. The Atlantic Charter signed by President Roosevelt of the United States and Britain’s Prime Minister Winston Churchill after the Allied forces won the war, and that stated it would respect the right of all people to decide how they would like to be governed and under which system of government to live (Davidson, 2014) also created awareness among the Africans. The charter led to the asking of a critical question with regard to the morality behind why it was okay for the Europeans to occupy Asian and African countries while it was not right for the Germans to colonize the French. With increasing political consciousness, Africans awareness was raised towards nationalist movements in other countries around the world. With nationalism in Asia expanding and succeeding by the day, African nationalists were inspired by these stories. They became more confident that by fighting, they could gain their independence and freedom. It is a general opinion that were it not for the impression created by the Second World War, majority of these nationalist movements would not have recorded the strides and achievements they did (Hart, 2014).

With the end of the war came the formation of many political organizations, key among them the United Nations. The creation of the United Nations at the end of the war (to replace the defunct League of Nations which was formed after World War 1) was an important aspect of the Second World War that went a long way in contributing to and promoting the growth of nationalism in Africa. The United Nations relabeled the concept of the League of Nation’s mandate system into trusteeship territories. The concept required that colonialists annually reported on their colonial territories, while also allowing Africans the right and ability to report or state any grievances they had against their colonial masters. Despite the failure of many plans or policies by the United Nations to materialize, just the attempt to implement them was a good sign that the world was eventually shifting away from the colonial nature to an anti-colonial one. The United Nations however, grew with time to become the single largest proponent for anti-colonialism.

The Pan-African Manchester conference was held later on after the war in 1945, and it made attempts to address the African needs by seeking to liberate all black people worldwide. By using the platform to attack the colonialists, African leaders gained more influence. This led to be movement becoming more ‘African’ after 1945. Because Pan-Africanism provided a means if overcoming regional and ethnic diversities to promote unity, and because it spoke against the oppression of Africans by the colonialists, more African nationalists came to embrace it, making it even more popular. With time more and more African nationalists including Kwame Nkrumah (Ghana), Kenneth Kaunda (Zambia), Haile Selassie (Ethiopia), Albert Luthuli (South Africa) embracing Pan-Africanism, they came to be highly affected and influenced by it. Kwame Nkrumah came to be viewed as the father of Pan-Africanism (Wilson, 2016) because of how he expressed and articulated the similarities between the struggle for independence by African Americans in the United States and those of African people and by urging Africans to regain their independence by whatever means, even if it meant using force. For this to happen, he further urged them to put aside their ethnic and religious differences and unite and simply fight as Africans. The zeal and enthusiasm with which he expressed disdain for the colonialists greatly popularized him throughout the African continent.

To conclude, it is evident that the end of the war left the landscape of Europe in ruins. The United States and Soviet Union on the other hand emerged even stronger, with both becoming superpowers. But neither the Soviet Union nor the United States had any interest whatsoever to help the Britain and France strengthen their colonial rule in their territories. Despite the USSR and USA having different agenda politically, both were seen and perceived to be anti-colonialist. The change in colonial views at global political levels was not in the favor of the colonialists, and thus, the African nationalists became stronger and even more vocal in their agitation for independence.

Bibliography

Arnold, G., 2014. Guide to African political and economic development. Routledge.

Arthur, J.A., 2016. The African diaspora in the United States and Europe: the Ghanaian experience. Routledge.

Bell, P.M.H., 2014. The Origins of the Second World War in Europe. Routledge.

Birmingham, D., 2008. The decolonization of Africa. Routledge.

Byfield, J.A., Brown, C.A., Parsons, T. and Sikainga, A.A. eds., 2015. Africa and World War II. Cambridge University Press.

Clayton, A., 2014. The wars of French decolonization. Routledge.

Davidson, B., 2014. Modern Africa: A social and political history. Routledge.

Hargreaves, J.D., 2014. Decolonization in Africa. Routledge.

Hart, G.P., 2014. Rethinking the South African crisis: Nationalism, populism, hegemony (Vol. 20). University of Georgia Press.

Khapoya, V., 2015. The African Experience. Routledge.

Leoussi, A., 2018. Encyclopaedia of nationalism. Routledge.

Myrice, E., 2015. The Impact of the Second World War on the Decolonization of Africa.

Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S.J., 2013. The entrapment of Africa within the global colonial matrices of power: Eurocentrism, coloniality, and deimperialization in the twenty-first century. Journal of Developing Societies, 29(4), pp.331-353.

Overy, R.J., 2014. The Origins of the Second World War. Routledge.

Reis, B.C., 2015. Myths of Decolonization: Britain, France, and Portugal Compared. In The Ends of European Colonial Empires (pp. 126-147). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

Rickford, R., 2016. We are an African people: Independent education, black power, and the radical imagination. Oxford University Press.

Robinson, A.L., 2014. National versus ethnic identification in Africa: Modernization, colonial legacy, and the origins of territorial nationalism. World Politics, 66(4), pp.709-746.

Smith, A.W. and Jeppesen, C. eds., 2017. Britain, France and the Decolonization of Africa: Future Imperfect? UCL Press.

Thomas, M., 2017. The French empire at war 1940–45.

Tordoff, W., 2016. Government and politics in Africa. Macmillan International Higher Education.

Wilson, H.S., 2016. Origins of West African Nationalism. Springer.