Colonialism and the Berlin Conference of 1884–1885: A Historical Analysis of European Incursions into Africa

Introduction

The colonial incursion into Africa in the nineteenth century was not, as earlier European writers claimed, a benevolent “civilizing mission.” Rather, it was a calculated political and economic project rooted in the industrial transformation of Europe. The formal attack on African sovereignty took shape when European nations, energized by the Industrial Revolution, turned to the continent for raw materials, new markets, and investment opportunities.

It must, however, be emphasized that European involvement in Africa did not begin in the nineteenth century. Early contacts can be traced to the Portuguese explorations of the fifteenth century, when Africa served as a link in Europe’s trade with the East. Yet, what began as coastal trade evolved into territorial conquest once European economies industrialized and required direct political control to secure their interests (Hopkins, 1973).

Africa thus became the answer to Europe’s new problems of production, surplus goods, and capital investment. The Industrial Revolution had transformed Europe’s productive capacity, but also created crises of overproduction, unemployment, and capital surplus. The European powers saw Africa not as a partner but as a solution — a territory rich in raw materials, fertile for markets, and open for investment.

However, as multiple European nations advanced into Africa simultaneously, rivalry and conflict ensued. The struggle for territories in Africa became a struggle for prestige, influence, and survival among European powers. Disputes, such as Britain’s occupation of Egypt in 1882 (to France’s annoyance) and Italy’s clash with France over Tunisia, demonstrated the tension. This rivalry soon made a continental settlement imperative, resulting in the Berlin Conference of 1884–1885.

The Berlin Conference of 1884–1885

The Berlin Conference, convened between November 1884 and February 1885 by Otto von Bismarck of Germany, represented the peak of European efforts to formalize and regulate the “Scramble for Africa.” It was jointly initiated by Germany and France to avoid violent clashes among European powers over African territories. Attending nations included Germany, Britain, France, Portugal, Belgium, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Russia, the United States, and others.

The conference’s major objectives were to:

1. Prevent conflict among European states in Africa.

2. Lay down rules for territorial acquisition.

3. Secure the Congo Basin for international trade, under the guise of humanitarianism.

In essence, the Berlin Conference institutionalized European cooperation for African exploitation, with Africa itself excluded from the deliberations.

Decisions and Agreements of the Berlin Conference

Under Bismarck’s chairmanship, the Berlin Conference reached several agreements, collectively called the General Act of Berlin (1885):

1. Notification Principle:

Any European power acquiring territory or establishing a protectorate on the African coast must notify other signatories. This was designed to avoid overlapping claims and diplomatic disputes.

2. Principle of Effective Occupation:

Territorial claims would only be recognized if the occupying power could demonstrate “effective control.” This meant establishing administration, police, and infrastructure to assert sovereignty — effectively encouraging conquest and subjugation.

3. Doctrine of Hinterland:

A European power with coastal possession had rights to its hinterland. This principle spurred further inland expansion and became the legal basis for the partition of entire regions.

4. Recognition of the Congo Free State:

King Leopold II of Belgium was granted personal ownership of the Congo Basin, presented as a humanitarian effort to end the slave trade, but in practice a brutal system of economic exploitation (Pakenham, 1991).

The immediate outcome of these agreements was a massive acceleration of European conquests across Africa. “Effective occupation” required military presence, thus legitimizing the use of force. Africa became a battlefield of European ambition, where African societies were subdued, partitioned, and ruled without consent.

Significance of the Berlin Conference

The Berlin Conference was beneficial to Europe but disastrous for Africa. Its significance can be discussed in three main ways:

1. Peaceful Division of Africa (Among Europeans):

It reduced open conflict among European powers by setting clear boundaries. The conference helped prevent intra-European wars, though it intensified the wars of conquest in Africa.

2. Formalization of Colonialism:

It provided international legitimacy to European colonial acquisitions. Many territories already occupied — like Algeria (1830), Tunisia (1881), and Lagos (1861) — received international recognition under this agreement.

3. Expansion of European Conquest:

The Conference encouraged further territorial occupation. The guidelines for “effective control” meant that European nations hastened to invade, subjugate, and administer African societies to justify their claims.

While Europeans hailed the conference as a triumph of diplomacy, it was, in reality, the beginning of a coordinated continental plunder.

COLONIALISM 

Colonialism can be defined as the political, economic, and socio-cultural domination of one people by another. In Africa’s case, it was the foreign control and exploitation of dependent territories by powerful European states. As Offiong (1980) argued, colonialism was not merely a system of exploitation but one designed to repatriate profits from African labor to Europe. The development of Europe, therefore, came at the dialectical expense of Africa’s underdevelopment.

Reasons for the Colonization of Africa

Colonial expansion was driven by multiple motives — economic, political, social, and strategic.

1. Economic Factors

a. Search for Raw Materials:

Industrialization required a steady supply of raw materials such as cotton, palm oil, rubber, and minerals. Africa’s tropical environment provided these in abundance, making it a natural target for exploitation (Rodney, 1972).

b. Search for Markets:

European factories produced more goods than their domestic markets could absorb. Colonies were seen as captive markets for European products. Otto von Bismarck’s statement captures this motive: “Colonies would mean new markets for German industry, the expansion of trade, and a new field for German capital and civilization.”

c. Investment of Surplus Capital:

Industrialization created vast capital surpluses in Europe. Africa provided an ideal site for profitable investment. As Jules Ferry of France remarked, “Colonies are for rich countries one of the most lucrative methods of investing capital.” Thus, colonization became an economic safety valve for European capitalism.

2. Strategic Factors

Strategic interests also shaped colonial ambitions. Britain’s occupation of Egypt in 1882 aimed to secure the Suez Canal, a vital route to India. Territories like Sudan, Kenya, and Uganda were similarly prized for their geographic positions and access to trade routes.

3. Political Factors

European powers pursued colonies to maintain the balance of power and gain prestige. In the late nineteenth century, states measured greatness by the extent of their colonial possessions. Britain’s vast empire was viewed as the source of her global status, prompting France, Germany, and Italy to follow suit.

4. Social Factors

Industrialization caused mass unemployment and poverty in Europe. Colonies were seen as outlets for surplus population and social unrest. Africa was considered suitable for resettlement and for absorbing Europe’s “redundant” population.

5. Civilizing Mission

European nations justified colonization as a humanitarian and civilizing mission — spreading Christianity, education, and Western culture. This so-called “white man’s burden” concealed the economic motives of domination and exploitation.

Strategies of Colonization

Colonial powers employed diverse strategies to subdue and govern African societies:

1. Diplomacy and Treaties:

Europeans often used treaties - frequently deceptive - to gain control. African leaders, unaware of European legal concepts, signed documents that ceded sovereignty. Examples include the German acquisition of Tanzania and the disputed treaty between Menelik II of Ethiopia and Italy, which led to war in 1896.

2. Military Force:

When diplomacy failed, force was used. Resistant rulers like King Kosoko of Lagos, King Jaja of Opobo, and Asantehene of Ashanti were deposed. French and British expeditions in West Africa extended this pattern of conquest.

3. Indirect Rule:

The British perfected the indirect rule system, governing through local rulers under colonial supervision. This method was cost-effective but undermined traditional authority, transforming native leaders into colonial agents.

4. Religion as a Tool:

Missionaries prepared the ground for colonial rule by spreading Christianity, Western education, and European moral codes. Religion softened resistance and promoted loyalty.

5. Imperialism and Cultural Domination:

European powers used cultural imperialism to devalue African traditions. Indigenous beliefs and symbols were dismissed as primitive, while European culture was glorified. This psychological subjugation ensured long-term control.

6. Economic Instruments:

Colonial authorities imposed monetization, replacing traditional barter with cash economies to facilitate taxation and export production. Indigenous currencies (like cowries) were abolished, and cash crops replaced food crops - furthering dependence on Europe.

Effects of Colonialism

Colonialism profoundly reshaped Africa’s political, economic, and social structures, largely for the worse.

1. Political Fragmentation and Integration Problems:

Arbitrary borders created multi-ethnic states without regard for cultural unity. Conflicts such as those between Nigeria and Cameroon, Ethiopia and Eritrea, and Rwanda and Burundi stemmed from colonial boundary-making.

2. Economic Exploitation:

Colonial economies were extractive by design. Cash crops like cocoa and groundnut served European industries, while African farmers remained impoverished. European trading companies, such as the UAC and John Holt, monopolized exports and imports.

3. Destruction of Traditional Authority:

Indigenous rulers lost autonomy as colonial administrations imposed alien systems. Resistant kings like Kosoko, Nana of Itsekiri, and Shaka of Zululand were deposed or exiled.

4. Ideological Contradictions:

Colonial rule introduced capitalist structures without corresponding industrial development. The result was dependent capitalism, leaving Africa tied to external markets and unable to achieve self-sustained growth (Ake, 1981).

5. Developmental Stagnation:

Post-independence Africa inherited economies built for extraction, not growth. As Claude Ake (1981) observed, Africa’s problem was not failed development but the absence of genuine development.

6. Legacy of the Slave Trade:

The earlier slave trade drained Africa of its most able population, deepening later economic and social stagnation. Colonialism merely continued exploitation by different means.

Possible Positive Effects of Colonialism

Although colonialism was largely destructive, it did leave certain structural legacies:

1. Introduction of Western education, expanding literacy and exposure to global ideas.

2. Development of transportation and communication infrastructure — roads, railways, and ports.

3. Establishment of modern governance systems, including bureaucracy and political institutions

4. Introduction of monetized economies and banking systems (e.g., Colonial Bank, 1917).

5. Emergence of political parties and nationalist movements that eventually secured independence.

Nevertheless, these so-called “benefits” primarily served European interests, and their lasting advantages to Africa remain contested.

Conclusion

The colonization of Africa, formalized through the Berlin Conference of 1884–1885, was the culmination of centuries of economic ambition, political rivalry, and cultural arrogance. While Europe gained industrial raw materials, markets, and power, Africa endured dispossession, economic dependency, and political instability. The legacy of colonialism remains deeply embedded in Africa’s economic structures, borders, and governance challenges.

As Offiong (1980) rightly noted, colonialism assured Europe’s development while ensuring Africa’s underdevelopment. Unless Africa restructures its economies, governance systems, and collective identity beyond colonial frameworks, it will continue “running faster and faster only to remain where it is.”

References

Ake, C. (1981). A Political Economy of Africa. Longman.

Hopkins, A. G. (1973). An Economic History of West Africa. Longman.

Offiong, D. A. (1980). Imperialism and Dependency: Obstacles to African Development. Fourth Dimension.

Pakenham, T. (1991). The Scramble for Africa. Random House.

Rodney, W. (1972). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Bogle-L’Ouverture Publications.