1. The Global South on the Global Stage
CHAPTER 22
The End of Empire:
The Global South on the Global Stage
1914–present

3. I. Toward Freedom: Struggles for Independence
A. The End of Empire in World History 1. Mobilization of the masses around nationalist ideology 2. Fall of many empires in the twentieth century
I. Toward Freedom: Struggles for Independence
The End of Empire in World History
Imperial breakup wasn’t new; the novelty was mobilization of the masses around a nationalist ideology and creation of a large number of new nation-states. Some comparison to the first decolonization of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, but in the Americas, most colonized people were of European origin, holding a common culture with their colonial rulers. Attempts to create a “Pacific Way” in Oceania emphasizing consensus.
Fall of many empires in the twentieth century: Austrian and Ottoman empires collapsed in the wake of World War I, Russian Empire collapsed but was soon recreated as the USSR, German and Japanese empires ended with World War II, spread of idea that people should be organized into “nations,” African and Asian independence movements shared with other “end of empire” stories the ideal of national self-determination. The United States’s nonterritorial empire in Latin America came under attack, disintegration of the USSR (1991) was propelled by national self-determination (creation of 15 new states).

4. I. Toward Freedom: Struggles for Independence
B. Explaining African and Asian Independence 1. Explanations for imperial collapse in Independence contested everywhere
I. Toward Freedom: Struggles for Independence
B. Explaining African and Asian Independence
Few people would have predicted imperial collapse in Several explanations for decolonization have emerged: fundamental contradiction between dominant European ideologies and the nature of colonial rule, historians use the idea of “conjuncture” to explain timing of decolonization, changes in social values were enormously encouraging to Africans and Asians seeking political independence.
Independence was contested everywhere: independence efforts usually were not cohesive movements of uniformly oppressed people, fragile coalitions of conflicting groups and parties.

6. II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
A. The Case of India: Ending British Rule 1. Cultural identity primarily local before British rule promoted growing sense of Indian identity : establishment of Indian National Congress (INC)
II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
The Case of India: Ending British Rule
The role of Mohandas Gandhi (1869–1948): had studied law in England but wasn’t a very successful lawyer, in 1893, took a job in South Africa, developed the political philosophy of satyagraha (“truth force”), back in India, Gandhi became a leader of the INC, attacked not just colonial rule but also mistreatment of India’s untouchables and the evils of modernization.
Gandhi embraced efforts to mobilize women: asserting spiritual and mental equality of women and men, without breaking with older Indian conceptions of gender roles.
Not everyone agreed with Gandhi: Jawaharlal Nehru embraced science, technology, and industry as future for India, others rejected nonviolence, especially important was a growing Muslim/Hindu divide, 1906: creation of an All-India Muslim League, some Hindu politicians defined the nationalist struggle in religious terms, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, head of the Muslim League, argued that regions of India with a Muslim majority should be a separate state (Pakistan, the land of the pure).
Independence in 1947 created two countries: Pakistan (Muslim, divided into two wings 1,000 miles apart), India (secular but mostly Hindu), process was accompanied by massive violence; some 1 million died, 12 million refugees relocated.
1948: a Hindu extremist assassinated Gandhi.

7. II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
A. The Case of India: Ending British Rule 4. Mohandas Gandhi ( ) 5. Gandhi embraced effort to mobilize women 6. Those who disagreed with Gandhi 7. Independence in 1947: Pakistan and India : Hindu extremist assassinated Gandhi
II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
The Case of India: Ending British Rule
The role of Mohandas Gandhi (1869–1948): had studied law in England but wasn’t a very successful lawyer, in 1893, took a job in South Africa, developed the political philosophy of satyagraha (“truth force”), back in India, Gandhi became a leader of the INC, attacked not just colonial rule but also mistreatment of India’s untouchables and the evils of modernization.
Gandhi embraced efforts to mobilize women: asserting spiritual and mental equality of women and men, without breaking with older Indian conceptions of gender roles.
Not everyone agreed with Gandhi: Jawaharlal Nehru embraced science, technology, and industry as future for India, others rejected nonviolence, especially important was a growing Muslim/Hindu divide, 1906: creation of an All-India Muslim League, some Hindu politicians defined the nationalist struggle in religious terms, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, head of the Muslim League, argued that regions of India with a Muslim majority should be a separate state (Pakistan, the land of the pure).
Independence in 1947 created two countries: Pakistan (Muslim, divided into two wings 1,000 miles apart), India (secular but mostly Hindu), process was accompanied by massive violence; some 1 million died, 12 million refugees relocated.
1948: a Hindu extremist assassinated Gandhi.

10. II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
A. The Case of South Africa: Ending Apartheid 1. Freedom from Great Britain in Mature industrial economy by early 1900s 3. African National Congress (ANC) founded in 1912
II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
The Case of India: Ending British Rule
South Africa won freedom from Great Britain in 1910, but its government was controlled by a white settler minority. The white population was split between British descendants (had economic superiority) and Afrikaners (Boers) of Dutch descent (had political dominance). Afrikaners had failed to win independence from the British in the Boer War (1899–1902), both white groups felt threatened by any move toward black majority rule.
By the early 1900s, South Africa had a mature industrial economy: by the 1960s, had major foreign investments and loans, black South Africans were extremely dependent on the white-controlled economy.
The issue of race was overwhelmingly prominent: reflected in apartheid laws separating races.

12. II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
A. The Case of South Africa: Ending Apartheid 4. Underground nationalist leaders 5. Growing international pressure 6. Negotiations began in the late 1980s : national elections brought the ANC to power
II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
The Case of India: Ending British Rule
African National Congress (ANC) founded in 1912: like India’s INC, it consisted of elite Africans who wanted a voice in society, for 40 years, the ANC was peaceful and moderate, women denied full membership until 1943, but took action in other arenas including protests and boycotts, 1950s: moved to nonviolent civil disobedience, the government’s response was overwhelming repression.
Underground nationalist leaders turned to sabotage and assassination: opposition came to focus on student groups, Soweto uprising (1976) was the start of spreading violence, organization of strikes.
Growing international pressure: exclusion from international sporting events, economic boycotts, withdrawal of private investment funds.
Negotiations began in the late 1980s: key apartheid policies were abandoned, Mandela was freed and the ANC legalized.
1994: national elections brought the ANC to power: apartheid was ended without major bloodshed, most important threat was a number of separatist and “Africans only” groups.

15. III. Experiments with Freedom
A. Experiments in Political Order: Party, Army, and the Fate of Democracy 1. Conditions prevented establishment of political order 2. Variety of government types used 3. Western-style democracy succeeded in India
III. Experiments with Freedom
Experiments in Political Order: Party, Army, and the Fate of Democracy
Common conditions confronted all efforts to establish political order: explosive population growth, overly high expectations for independence, cultural diversity, with little loyalty to a central state.
A variety of types of government used, including communist governments, one-party states, and democracies. In the 1950s, some European authorities set up democratic institutions in their African colonies.
In India, Western-style democracy succeeded. Tthe independence movement was more extended, and power was handed over gradually; many more Indians than Africans had administrative and technical skills at the time of independence; the Indian Congress Party embodied the whole nationalist movement, without too much internal discord.

17. III. Experiments with Freedom
A. Experiments in Political Order: Party, Army, and the Fate of Democracy 4. Democracy more fragile elsewhere 5. Various arguments as to why Africans initially rejected democracy 6. Widespread economic disappointment for early African democracies 7. Well-educated elite benefitted most
III. Experiments with Freedom
Experiments in Political Order: Party, Army, and the Fate of Democracy
4. Elsewhere democracy more fragile: few still survived by the early 1970s, many swept away by military coups, some evolved into one-party systems or personal dictatorships.
5. Various arguments as to why Africans initially rejected democracy. Some argue that the Africans were not ready for democracy or lacked some necessary element, some argue that African traditional culture (communal, based on consensus) was not compatible with party politics, some argue that Western-style democracy was inadequate to the task of development.
6. Widespread economic disappointment discredited early African democracies: African economic performance since independence has been poor, widespread economic hardship, modern governments staked their popularity on economic success.
7. The well-educated elite benefited most, obtaining high-paying bureaucratic jobs that caused resentment. Economic resentment found expression in ethnic conflict; repeatedly, the military took power in a crisis.

19. III. Experiments with Freedom
B. Experiments in Economic Development: Changing Priorities, Varying Outcomes 1. Belief that poverty isn’t inevitable 2. Expectation for states to spur economic development 3. Debate over shielding economy 4. Urban vs. rural development 5. Debate over foreign aid, investment, and trade 6. Degree of economic development varied by region
II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
B. Experiments in Economic Development: Changing Priorities, Varying Outcomes
The belief that poverty isn’t inevitable won out; however, in many states, colonial rule had not provided much infrastructure for modern development, most developing countries didn’t have leverage in negotiation with wealthy nations and corporations, leaders got contradictory advice on how to develop successfully.
General expectation in the developing world that the state would spur economic development: most private economies were weakly developed, Chinese and Soviet industrialization provided models, growing dependence on market forces for economic development over several decades.
Debate over shielding economy or engaging with the world market while industrializing: Latin America sought to shield their economies following a model of import substitution industrialization, East Asia chose integration into world economy producing products for export.
Urban vs. rural development has been an important issue: in some areas, the “urban bias” has been partly corrected, women’s access to employment, education, and birth control provided incentives to limit family size.
Debate over whether foreign aid, investment, and trade are good or bad.
The degree of economic development has varied widely by region: East Asia has been the most successful, 1990s: India opened itself more fully to the world market, Brazil now eighth largest economy in the world, Turkey and Indonesia are in the top 20, most of Africa, much of the Arab world, and parts of Asia didn’t catch up, and standards of living often declined, some signs of new growth in Africa and talk of “Africa Rising,” no general agreement about why such great variations developed.

21. III. Experiments with Freedom
C. Experiments with Culture: The Role of Islam in Turkey and Iran 1. Relationship between Western-style modernity and tradition 2. The case of Islam 3. Turkey 4. Iran
II. Comparing Freedom Struggles
C. Experiments with Culture: The Role of Islam in Turkey and Iran
The relationship between Western-style modernity and tradition has been an issue across the developing world.
The case of Islam: Turkey and Iran approached the issue of how Islam and modernity should relate to each other very differently.
Turkey: emerged in the wake of World War I, led by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (1881–1938): major cultural revolution in the 1920s and 1930s, effort to create a thoroughly modern, Western society, much of the Islamic underpinning of society was abolished or put under firm government control, men were ordered not to wear the fez; many elite women gave up the veil, women gained legal rights, polygamy was abolished, and women got the vote (1930s); but this was state-directed feminism, not a popular movement, electoral success of moderate Muslim party since 2002, but also pro-secular demonstrations in 2013.
Iran: became the center of Islamic revival (1970s): growing opposition to Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi’s modernizing, secularizing, U.S.-supported government, many of the shah’s reforms offended traditional Islamic practices, the mosque became the main center of opposition to the government, the shah was forced to abdicate in 1979, and Khomeini assumed control of the state, cultural revolution based on the Islamization of public life, sharia law replaced secular law codes, women required to wear the hijab, segregation in public life, restrictive marriage laws, women found greater educational opportunities, retained the right to vote, Iran sought to export its revolution, revolution continues, but opposition amongst some in Iran, country continues to pursue economic modernity.