European Decolonization

Decolonization in very simple terms refers to the consecrate of colonialism and the subsequent establishment of authority in the countries being colonized (Duara, 2004). In Africa and opposite Asia countries which bore the brunt of the juvenile colonialism the word liberty better captures the science of self rule immediately after the First and Second man loving state of contend Generally, the word decolonization has come to be associated with the post-colonial period of the modern time and in particular immediately after world War One and Two.It is not a coincident that it is so but it is because of a combination of itemors that triggered the two state of wars that ultimately made colonization untenable thereby triggering an accelerated process of decolonization (Duara, 2004). Here are some of these reasonsThe fact that majority of local leadership from most of these countries that were being ruled by foreign powers had already received western education from these count ries that were colonizing them meant that there were an elite that was waiting in the wings to take over from these foreign leaders in the up to nowt that they succumbed to the popular call for their departure from the local cosmos (Thomas, 2007. In fact most of these colonies already had a leadership that was demanding independence all through peaceful means or through cerise means which at the time bordered on incitement of the masses.The kind of discontent that they created was at generation too much for the colonizer who had already came out of a war (either First or Second globe War) that had exhausted the finances that they would have used to maintain their grip on these colonies. Most other colonizer immediately after the war were futile to control these colonies (Thomas, 2007), this is better demonstrated by the Dutch request for attention from the United Kingdom to build in Indonesia a bridgehead which it urgently needed but it could not build solely imputable to i ts pecuniary situation after the World War One (Thomas, 2007).It is in addition due to monetary constraint that were occasioned by high spending during the war that prompted countries homogeneous the United Kingdom to introduce a indirect rule indemnity which was comparably less expensive because of the way it used the local administrative units and heads instead of importing leaders from the United Kingdom. The economic forms was fact changing making the maintenance of colonies less lucrative as compared to the period to begin with the First World War (Koos, & Granata, 2008).Colonies were important and profitable before the WW1 because among other things they provided cheap labor & law materials, market for the manufactured products from the colonizing countries and sources of recruiting soldiers in times of wars, however all that had changed with the end of the war, there were no more war that looked imminent, and the sovereign of states had been given new meaning by the p rotagonists in the war which also benefited the occupied states by default. Lastly and mostly the economic model had drastically changed after the war making colonies generally unprofitable (Koos, & Granata, 2008).Debate was also going on in the mother countries on the merit of keeping the colonies and it seemed like those opposed to maintaining these colonies were winning the argument. Among the reason that they were advancing against keeping colonies was the world rights abuses that they were being accused of perpetuating in those colonies, opportunity cost of maintaining them among other win over arguments against further maintenance of colonies (Thomas, 2007). In a sense the decision to let go the colonies enjoyed broad support within the mother countries.There was also the expel of the severe death toll that had been occasioned by both wars (WW1 & WW2). Each of the European country that was directly or indirectly involved in either of the wars had suffered a lot in form of soldiers and finances that not a single one was ready to commit some more resources in form of soldiers or funds to a cause like colonialism (Thomas, 2007). This was because to each one of those countries needed each and every penny that was available in build their economies that had been battled by the wars.For instance, a country like Germevery was devastated in the First World War such that it could not continue with colonization. It had even been restrained from any military expedition outside its border not to mention the financial burden that it was to suffer in rebuilding some countries that it was accused of destroying (Thomas, 2007). In a nutshell both of these wars led to a lot of poverty on the mother nations of the colonizers and a state of bankruptcy on these countries thereby underdeveloped a state of extreme nationalism in most of them.There were even cases where colonies declared their independence as their colonizers concentrated on their individual problems, ot hers comprehend the weakened colonizers armies upped their military resistance against them and in the process forced these colonizer to allow the to govern themselves. References Duara, Prasenjit, (2004). Decolonization Perspectives from Now And Then. Rutledge New York. Thomas, Martin, (2007). European Decolonization. capital of the United Kingdom Ashgate. Koos, A. Cheryl, & Granata, A. Cora, (2008). The Human Tradition in Modern Europe, 1750- To the Present. New York Rowman & Littlefield.