The White Man’s Burden and generational change: the evolution of imperialism. Part 4

Thus far within this series of posts on the historical evolution of imperialism and colonialism we have seen the centrality of the paternalistic approach by the European powers towards the less advanced groups of people. The pro-colonial propaganda about “freeing the Africans” or “bringing civilization” was still prevalent during the interwar years - a period in focus in our previous commentary. But just as this idea of “civilizing mission” had undergone ideological transformation since the early 19th century, so the whole issue of European sovereignty over non-European peoples was also bound to evolve.

Of course, the purely economic interests of the colonial powers were by no means covert during the 19th century. But, to a certain extent, the economic rationale appears to have lost its moralising veil as the 20th century progressed:

“This tension was not born in the 1950s. It had deep roots in the inter-war articulations of Eurafrican ideas. At the Volta Congress of 1938 in Rome, for instance, European officials, intellectuals and colonial planners had already argued for a continental project that would bind Europe and Africa together in an economic and political bloc. There, Africa was portrayed as a reservoir of resources whose ‘rational exploitation’ would ensure Europe’s strength in the global order. The concept of ‘rationality’ was itself ideological: what counted as rational was defined in European industrial terms, with little regard for African interests. This inter-war ‘colonial internationalism’ linked Eurafrica to broader projects of European unity, anticipating the post-war conviction that Africa was indispensable for Europe’s recovery and competitiveness.”

“In D’Agostino Orsini’s initial concept, the Eurafrica project had essentially economic and demographic goals: once again, Africa was needed by Europe as a source of raw materials, a market for European industrial products and a territory to be populated by European settlers. This was meant to solve the problem of overpopulation in Europe and emigration in search of better living conditions, which in the interwar period was one of the main socio‑economic problems experienced by various European countries, including Italy.”

According to Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, the leader of the Pan-European movement, “Africa could provide Europe with raw materials for its industry, nutrition for its population, land for its overpopulation, labor for its unemployed, and markets for its products.” This he stated in 1929. Quite a contrast to the contemporary fantasies regarding the so-called “Great Replacement” of white Europeans. It would be interesting to ask the saviours of the white European race of 2026 whether they would equally condemn those colonial migrations from Europe to Africa by their white predecessors. In any case, let’s continue with the economic interests of the European states in the middle of the 20th century.

“The Congress of Europe heralded the establishment of the Council of Europe one year later in 1949. This organization immediately turned colonial cooperation in Africa into one of its defining priorities. The chairman of the Council of Europe’s economic committee, former French prime minister Paul Reynaud, summarized the matter in 1952: ‘We must also, if free Europe is to be made viable, jointly exploit the riches of the African continent, and try to find there those raw materials which we are getting from the dollar area, and for which we are unable to pay.’ This resonated with practically all of the representatives in the Council’s Consultative Assembly. For instance, Denmark’s Hermond Lannung emphasized ‘the overriding importance of greater co-operation and of a major joint European effort in Africa if we do not wish to see Africa lost to European influence, culture, trade, etc., and, in the long run, for that influence to be replaced by that of another continent.’ Europe had just lost the ‘battle of Asia,’ Lannung asserted, and now its nations needed to unite in order not to also lose ‘the battle of Africa.’”

Still no questions asked over whether the Africans themselves wanted to be bound by European influence, culture, or trade. But the incessant historical economic development inevitably brought yet another ideological shift:

“By the late 1950s, however, the language of Eurafrica had evolved. With the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and the EEC, it was increasingly recast in terms of equality, partnership and modernisation. New federal ties would substitute the relationship still existing between metropoles and colonies, thus accommodating the liberal democratic promise of self-determination, while maintaining political unity. Yet beneath this more benign vocabulary lay persistent assumptions of racial, technological and moral superiority. Europe was imagined as a donor extending the benefits of its civilisation, while Africans were cast as recipients of industrial know-how and political tutelage.”

And furthermore:

“Even for what concerns the ideological aspects of Eurafrica, researchers often distinguish between an ‘old’ and a ‘young’ version of Eurafrica, the former emerging in the inter-war period and fading during the early 1950s, the latter emerging in the post-war and finally disappearing after political decolonisation. While inter-war Eurafrica, despite the different declinations, would be characterised by an explicit imperialist language and by the ambition to organise, at a European level, a rational exploitation of African resources, post-War Eurafrica would be connected to the imagination of a post-imperial space combining Western Europe and the decolonising colonies.”

Just look at the statement by the French politician Guy Mollet, issued in January 1957, regarding the Algerian situation. This was addressed to the UN General Assembly:

“France is negotiating at this time with her European partners for the organization of a vast common market, to which the Overseas Territories will be associated. All of Europe will be called upon to help in the development of Africa, and tomorrow Eurafrica may become one of the principal factors in world politics. Isolated nations can no longer keep pace with the world. What would Algeria amount to by itself? On the other hand, what future might it not have, as one of the foundations of the Eurafrican community now taking shape?”

And yet again, why not ask the people of Algeria themselves what they want their country to become? Maybe they would prefer cooperation with Japan instead of France? Or, if nobody else wanted to cooperate, maybe staying alone would be preferable to having links with a country like France? The Europeans have the right to dream, to project, to imagine their vision of political cooperation - even if it was purely for their own economic benefit. But it is also the right of other sovereign peoples to refuse all cooperation and relationships that they would find objectionable. This last aspect had only slowly been emerging within the social consciousness during the 1950s and 1960s:

“Most of the founders of the EEC - including Paul-Henri Spaak, Jean Monnet, Robert Schuman, Konrad Adenauer and Guy Mollet - endorsed Europe’s mission civilisatrice in Africa, and saw a renewed imperial project as inseparable from the project of integrating Europe with the goal of greater economic growth. This spirit of colonial optimism was similar to the energy with which Mollet spoke about the EEC as he met with American journalists and politicians on his visit to Washington in February 1957: “Eight days ago […] we settled the last difficulties concerning the Euratom Treaty and that of the Common European Market. We also made a capital decision: to associate Europe with the territories of Black Africa which today are linked with Belgium and France […]. In associating the Overseas Territories of our countries with this market, the road is open to the union of Europe and Africa, to what we are beginning to call Eurafrica.”

And finally, the dam had to brake. The historical progress of human economic development - with all of its repercussions on the collective human mind - can not be halted. Of course, the economic and geopolitical interests of the European powers did not disappear. But the time had come to start treating the former colonial subjects as equal partners. Or, at least, to start pretending to treat them as such. Even if only on paper - and this is also absolutely essential - the general principle of the sovereignty of all peoples had to be officially established:

“In June 1961, the Eurafrican Conference was held in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, intended to determine the forms of future cooperation between Europe and Africa. As Lorenzo Pacifici has noted, this conference was the first step in closing the period of the colonial past and the beginning of a new era, one based on dialogue aimed at creating cooperation and the development of the African continent. The aim of the conference in Strasbourg was to agree on new principles of association policy, based on the cooperation of equal members. The next stage in European‑African relations was the Yaoundé Convention of July 20, 1963. Being the first international treaty signed by European and African states to regulate trade and development cooperation, it represented an evolution from the ‘octroyée’ association, granted and managed by the Community, to a ‘negociée’ association, concluded between sovereign and independent states. In accordance with the provisions of the Yaoundé Convention (signed in 1963 for five years), 18 African countries that had gained independence decided to maintain their association with CEE. African countries were meant to become a market for Europe and receive financial aid in return. The principle of equality and cooperation was also emphasized in the Convention signed in Lomé on February 28, 1975, between the CEE member states and 46 African countries.”

Sources:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/contemporary-european-history/article/materialising-the-third-force-european-industrial-and-financial-cooperation-in-colonial-iron-and-aluminium-production-and-the-making-of-eurafrica-during-decolonisation/3235FD8CACD793A0713C5CF06BD030CA?utm_source=flipboard&utm_content=topic%2Famericanhistory
https://www.europenowjournal.org/2018/02/28/eurafrica-history-of-european-integration-compromise-of-decolonization/
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.4324/9781003458494-12/eurafrica-joanna-sondel-cedarmas

Image by magnific.com

The Progressive Optimist

Educational project dedicated to the understanding of historical progressive social change

© 2025. All rights reserved.