Neocolonialism

The term "neocolonialism" is used by some to describe how countries still seek to maintain a policy of influencing others to serve their own interests. Others see a more sinister purpose for neocolonialism, seeing it as an oppressive and unjust expression of power. This paper will explore the idea of neocolonialism as it has become manifest in the latter twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. The reader will glean a better understanding of the parameters of this area of study as well as its attributes, both positive and negative, as it relates to the current international climate.

Keywords Colonialism; Imperialism; Iron Curtain; North American Treaty Organization (NATO); Nation-state; Neocolonialism; Tolerant colonialism

Global Stratification > Neocolonialism

Overview

A Brief of History of Colonialism

Throughout world history, powerful nations, empires, and nation-states have expanded their influences and protected their political and economic interests by adding other regions to their purviews but by giving them at least a nominal sense of autonomy. Virtually every continent contained a region that was in fact governed by a European power until World War II. According to most historians, the colonial era, as it is known, largely came to an end at the end of the Second World War. Even so, the practice of colonialism in some ways has not disappeared entirely. Rather, an increasing number of political scientists are exploring the notion that colonialism is not dead, but has instead given rise to neocolonialism.

This paper will explore the idea of neocolonialism, particularly as it has become manifest in the latter twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The reader will glean a better understanding of the parameters of this area of study as well as its attributes, both positive and negative, as it relates to the current international climate.

Human history is filled with examples of cultures, societies, and nations (and later, nation-states) taking control of territories and societies that exist beyond their borders. Colonialism, which entails this practice, is a practice that has existed for centuries, from Viking conquests and influence-spreading in the tenth century CE, to the first British colony in Ireland in the twelfth century, to the colonization of the New World in the seventeenth century, to the European powers' influence in Africa, south Asia, and southeast Asia.

One of the most prominent advocates of colonialism was the nineteenth-century philosopher and economist John Stuart Mill. Mill asserted that there is a myriad of benefits of colonization, not just for the two countries involved in the expansion of influence, but for the international community in general. "To appreciate the benefits of colonization," he states, "it should be considered in its relation, not to a single country, but to the collective economical interests of the human race" (Mill, 1848/1998, par. 2). Indeed, Mill may have lived in an era long before the realization of a global community, but his views of the usefulness of colonization echoed many of those today — that by reaching beyond borders to societies and nations to add "less civilized" territories to their own purview, colonial powers were helping these cultures to become more developed, stable, and prosperous.

Still, Mill saw reason for concern about the path such colonization would follow. If the goal of colonialism is to bring progress and civilization to the colonies, the downside of such nation-building activity is that the dominant power could become corrupt and overly domineering. Such abuses of power could lead to violence against the subordinated nation and, thereby, foster rebellious behavior by the indigenous subordinate against the dominant power. Such violence, Mill argued, can render ineffectual the utilitarian benefits inherent in colonialism (Smits, 2008).

Mill's brand of tolerant colonialism would later become that which he found loath. Egalitarian rule would not be visible in many of the colonies of sub-Saharan Africa, India, and southeast Asia, and in most of these cases, violence (either toward the dominating colonial power or of a sectarian nature) and poverty did not stop when the colonial power departed but instead continued until the latter twentieth or into the early twenty-first century.

The practice of colonization, which involves a state that claims governance over another territory or society, largely ceased at the end of World War II. A major reason for the end of this extremely long trend is that so many empires fell as a result of that conflict and at the same time, so many new nation-states were born. Then again, while colonization has waned, colonialism has, according to many scholars, simply evolved into the concept known as neocolonialism.

The Rise of Neocolonialism

Even after the European colonial powers relinquished their holdings in Africa, south Asia, and southeast Asia, it has been difficult for many scholars and observers to believe that the spirit of colonialism was at the same time extinguished. In fact, some operate from the notion that colonialism (which is often interchanged with the term imperialism), with its theoretical framework focusing entirely on a society formally occupying and controlling another, is far too rigid in its definition.

For others, the imperialist occupation of another state or nation, which often involves military intervention as well as other practices of forced annexation, has simply given way to a less overt but nonetheless significant modification of imperialism. Neocolonialism has, in this regard, filled this description.

The term neocolonialism is used by some to describe how countries still seek to maintain a policy of influencing others to serve their own interests. Others see a more sinister purpose for neocolonialism, seeing it as an oppressive and unjust expression of power. Kwame Nkrumah, the first post-independence president of Ghana, offered his thoughts about neocolonialism, suggesting that the sovereignty awarded to his nation after the colonial powers withdrew their occupying elements were at best token and inconsequential, and that neocolonialism helps perpetuate continued, if understated, subjugation:

Nkrumah is by no means alone in his concerns about a new form of colonialism, and a considerable amount of evidence in the post–World War II era would appear to justify such concerns. The most egregious example of this neocolonialism was connected to a similar example of colonialism as well. The birth of the Soviet Union entailed (in many cases) the physical annexation of Russia's neighbors, but many of the nations behind what Winston Churchill termed the Iron Curtain, such as Poland and East Germany, were not officially members of the Soviet aggregate. Nevertheless, externally-borne political influences, coming from the Soviet leadership, significantly impacted sympathetic authoritarian regimes in these nation-states who, in turn, imposed them on their constituencies (Kanet, 2007). Such Soviet-style influences permeated deeply into these countries’ respective ways of life, leading many observers to refer to this form of neocolonialism as cultural imperialism.

One of the principles attached to the relatively loosely-defined concept of neocolonialism is that its practice helps failed states (nations whose political and/or economic infrastructures are unable to effectively function autonomously), or those states that are at risk of failure, reverse course and move toward prosperity and stability. However, this seemingly altruistic notion, in the eyes of critics of neocolonialism, can lead to an intrusion into and subversion of domestic culture and political ideology not dissimilar to the circumstances affecting the Iron Curtain nations during the Cold War.

Further Insights

The biggest target of this criticism is the United States, which emerged as the dominant world power at the end of the Soviet era. Immediately following the Cold War, the US sought to aid failed states in the former USSR, the Balkans, and Latin America, in terms of political redevelopment, economic transition, and security. A decade and more later, the US expanded its stated policy of spreading democratic ideals around the globe in order to restore peace and foster economic growth. Then again, this doctrine was not borne of an altruistic nature, but rather of a need to defeat terrorism and strengthen American national security interests.

The United States & Nation-Building

In 2001, the horrific attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, which were committed by the international terrorist network al-Qaeda, created calls for taking the fight directly to this and similar terrorist groups wherever they may take root. The United States initiated what some called George W. Bush's "Freedom Doctrine," in which the US military would be deployed to regions in which these groups operate and, if necessary, engage regimes that harbor such terrorists. If such regimes were challenged and ousted (as was the case in Afghanistan with the removal of the Taliban regime and again in Iraq with the uprooting of Saddam Hussein), however, a vacuum is created. Such a lack of leadership necessitates redevelopment, and the United States, which caused the ouster, must help in nation-building. It is this nation-building (the reestablishment of a failed state's political, economic and security infrastructure) that many observers consider abhorrent. One scholar refers to the Bush policy as "a veiled attempt to exert and extend America's economic, military, and political hegemony globally" (Sikka, 2006, p. 102).

Interestingly, the practice of nation-building in regions populated heavily by Muslims is not a new experience for Americans. Since the Afghanistan and Iraq campaigns began, some observers have looked back at the very same situation cited earlier in this essay — the rebirth of the Philippines after the Spanish-American War. The United States, taking the reins of that island nation, also assumed control over a deeply divided nation comprised of a number of competing cultural and religious groups. American occupiers had to both build the nation's political infrastructure in a democratic framework and appeal to the interests of these groups as potential governors of the nation. The latter task proved extremely challenging, as Americans were not including Muslim groups (and concurrently, Muslims were not participating in American educational initiatives).

Certainly, attitudes concerning Muslims have become considerably more liberal and tolerant than was the case in the early twentieth century. However, there are parallels to be drawn between the two eras, and questions that are raised. Among them is the issue of how to include Muslims in the governance of failed states. The second, and perhaps more important in the twenty-first century, is how the United States' initiatives are received and intentions are read by skeptical Muslims who are encountering the American policy of combating terrorism and espousing Western-style democracy (Milligan, 2004).

The greatest shortcoming of the concept of neocolonialism is the fact that its definition is not entirely clear. Whereas its predecessor, the more classical concept of colonialism, is as definitive in its framework as is the practice — a sovereign entity assumes control over another autonomous geographic region or nation — neocolonialism speaks to the perception of a culture's values, ideals, and ideologies being infused into another society (either suddenly or gradually). Given the relative ambiguity of this "definition," it is understandable that those who have found colonialism abhorrent would deride its new relative. Similarly, however, this amorphous concept also lends to the view of many that neocolonialism is in fact helping failed states reemerge on the world stage as a result of using value systems and practices that have proven successful in bringing prosperity to other nations.

Viewpoints

The Benefits of Neocolonialism?

Certainly, the well-established practice of colonialism and the concept of neocolonialism have generated considerable debate, criticism, and outright opposition. Perhaps the issues that people like President Nkrumah have with this idea center around the negative effects of such policies and, in fact, the corruptive results of the practice. Most colonial powers gave in to the corruptive elements of dominance over other countries and regions, and given the oft-confrontational conditions between the so-called neocolonial powers and those they seek to influence, such negative attitudes about this policy continue.

In its purest form (and under the conditions in which the theory was introduced), neocolonialism, according to its supporters, does hold some positive benefits for those who are on the receiving end of it.

The example of the United States and the Bush "Freedom Doctrine" may provide evidence of the negative impacts of neocolonialism, but it also illustrates an important, positive implication. The US spent billions to help the former Yugoslavia rebuild after years of civil war and, and although many objected to the military intervention of NATO into this conflict, there have been no reproductions of the terrible incidents of ethnic cleansing that occurred during the war (Fatos, 2002). A similar argument may be made in East Asia, where a heavy US presence in Japan and South Korea has clearly injected a strong Western political, cultural, and economic influence into these two nations over a period of decades. While some argue that this presence has diluted the way of life for these countries, few can assert that the US presence has failed to ensure security, particularly in light of the nuclear aspirations of North Korea.

The point to be made here is that neocolonialism has become an important tool in enhancing security and even preventing conflict. One major example of this impact can be seen in the ongoing debate over the fate of Cyprus. The small Mediterranean island had been a regional hot-button issue for much of the twentieth century and has continued to be so in the twenty-first century. A long-standing dispute between Turkey and Greece has had the region teetering on the edge of major conflict, but the inclusion of both states in the US-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has given both parties equal footing in this security institution (Hitchens, 1997). The competitors have also altered their belligerence toward one another in the face of the monitors of international organizations such as the European Union. Turkey, in particular, has altered much of its domestic political and military policies as part of its stated determination to join the European Union and reap its economic benefits (Kinacioglu, 2006). Indeed, neocolonialism, in its purposeful dissemination of influence upon others, does show some benefit in bolstering security in at-risk environments.

In addition to the benefit of security, the concept to which many refer as neocolonialism also helps connect and build economies. The economic infrastructures of the West clearly have witnessed success as a result of free market and liberal economic policies. The emissaries of this success are the international financial institutions, who serve as the chief negotiators with national governments for the implementation of Western-style economic systems and policies. Some have deemed the pressures put on the governments of less-developed countries (LDCs) as another form of neocolonialism, as such financial institutions seek to build systems and infrastructures that are endemic to the global economy. According to one study, some African leaders have denounced such neocolonialism as reflective of the previous forms of colonialism that were prevalent throughout African history. Then again, domestic pressures have led to a home-grown charge in favor of these types of economic reforms. Put simply, what some deride as neocolonialism, others call globalization (Hanson & Hentz, 1999).

Conclusions

The practice of colonialism found at its core a fundamental belief that those who would colonize other countries and societies exist on a higher social and moral plane than do those who fall under their charge. Critics of colonialism suggest that a perceived moral obligation to help wayward societies simply by annexing them is as hypocritical as it is patronizing. When the centuries-old era of colonialism came to a close after World War II, those critics welcomed the emergence of sovereign nation-states from what were once imperialist collectives.

Then again, while the practice of physical annexation associated with imperialism has fallen away, many believe that a far more subtle and dangerous form of colonialism, neocolonialism, has arisen from the ashes of its predecessor. As shown in this paper, neocolonialism lacks definition primarily due to the fact that it involves varying degrees of impressing upon other cultures a myriad of values and ideologies.

To some, including many individuals who once lived under the supposed "care" of colonial powers, this shapelessness has sinister implications, potentially heralding the subjugation of a given society by replacing its values system with one that serves the interests of the dominant power. To others, the inter-state information exchanges inherent in the concept of neocolonialism are necessary for security reasons as well as the continued creation of an interconnected global community. In reality, it is likely that more time must pass before a greater understanding of neocolonialism may become manifest. With the passage of time, the passions stirred by those who experienced oppressive governance under a colonial regime may settle somewhat and a more objective framework of the practices of neocolonialism may be crafted. Likewise, those who see the moral imperative to project values and ideologies onto other cultures may be able to tailor their ideals in such a way that their pursuits will be viewed with beneficence.

Terms & Concepts

Imperialism: The practice of one country extending its control over another. Sometimes used interchangeably with colonialism.

Iron Curtain: Phrased coined by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to describe nation-states that were either absorbed into the Soviet Union or were under the heavy influence of the USSR.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO): A multinational security organization designed to repel military threats against its member states.

Nation-state: A sovereign political entity defined by a centralized government and economy.

Neocolonialism: Concept used by some to describe how countries still seek to maintain a policy of influencing others to serve their own interests. Others see a more sinister purpose for neocolonialism, seeing it as an oppressive and unjust expression of power.

Tolerant Colonialism: Form of colonialism espoused by John Stuart Mill to describe a form of imperialism that works to the benefit of humanity and does not foster conflict.

Bibliography

Connell, R. (2011). Southern bodies and disability: Re-thinking concepts. Third World Quarterly, 32, 1369–1381. Retrieved October 24, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=65523072&site=ehost-live

Fatos, L. (2002, February 14). Neocolonialism and responsibility: The western presence in the Balkans. Transeuropeennes, 17. Retrieved October 5, 2008 from Eurozine website http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2002-02-14-lubonja-en.html.

Hanson, M. & Hentz, J. J. (1999). Neocolonialism and neoliberalism in South Africa and Zambia. Political Science Quarterly, 114 , 479. Retrieved October 5, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=2602219&site=ehost-live

Hitchens, C. (1997). Hostage to history. New York: Verso Publishers.

Kanet, R. (2007). Identities, nations, and politics after communism. Nationalities Papers, 35 , 407–599. Retrieved October 5, 2008 from EBSCO online database SocINDEX with Full Text. http//search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=25727763&site=ehost-live

Leong Yew. (2002, May 14). Neocolonialism. Political Discourse: Theories of Colonialism and Postcolonialism. Retrieved October 4, 2008 from National University of Singapore http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/post/poldiscourse/neocolonialism1.html.

Mill, J.S. (1848/1998). John Stuart Mill: On colonies and colonialization, 1848. Modern History Sourcebook. Retrieved October 3, 2008 from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1849jsmill-colonies.html.

Milligan, J. A. (2004). Democratization or neocolonialism? The education of Muslims under US military occupation, 1903–20. History of Education, 33 , 451–467. Retrieved October 5, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http//search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=14573256&site=ehost-live

Namakkal, J. (2012). European dreams, Tamil land Auroville and the paradox of a postcolonial utopia. Journal For The Study Of Radicalism, 6 , 59–88. Retrieved October 24, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=73367538&site=ehost-live

Rosulek, L. (2012). Courtroom discourse and neocolonial control by Diana Eades. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16 , 297–301. Retrieved October 24, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=74280457&site=ehost-live

Sikka, Tina. (2006). The new imperialism: Using critical discourse analysis and articulation theory to study George W. Bush's freedom doctrine. Global Change, Peace and Security, 18 , 101–114. Retrieved October 5, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database International Bibliography of the Social Sciences. http//search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ioh&AN=3343366&site=ehost-live

Smits, K. (2008). John Stuart Mill on the antipodes: Settler violence against indigenous peoples and the legitimacy of colonial rule. Australian Journal of Politics and History, 54 , 1–15. Retrieved October 3, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=30068548&site=ehost-live.

Suggested Reading

Fouskas, V. (2007). Origins of neo-imperial governance. Socialist History, 31, 40–68.

Grondin, D. (2006). US neocolonialism, imperialism, and neoliberalism: How race/ethnicity at home played out abroad. Conference Papers — International Studies Association. 2006 Annual Meeting.

James, H. (2008). Globalization, empire, and natural law. International Affairs [London], 84 , 421–436.

Reyes, A. (2002). Mothering across cultures: Postcolonial representations. New York: The Haworth Press.

Van Eeden, J. (2004). The colonial gaze: Imperialism, myths, and South African popular culture. Design Issues, 20 , 18–33. Retrieved October 6, 2008 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=13269968&site=ehost-live

Wehbi, S. (2011). Key theoretical concepts for teaching international social work. Social Work Review / Revista De Asistenta Sociala, , 23–29. Retrieved October 24, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=70425269&site=ehost-live