LSC S1: RESPONSE TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF COLONIAL RULE IN EAST AFRICA

LSC S1: RESPONSE TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF COLONIAL RULE IN EAST AFRICA

Introduction
After studying this chapter, you will be able to understand how the East African communities reacted against colonial rule in primary and secondary response. In the previous chapters, we studied the reasons for the coming of Europeans to East Africa, and how East Africa was partitioned among European nations
without consulting Africans. In this chapter, you will be able to understand how East Africans responded to colonial rule you will know how different factors
played against or in support of the colonisers, and where it was necessary, theagreements signed to resolve tension and conflicts between the colonised and the colonisers. You will also be able to explain the impacts of those agreements on the past and current, and future generations.
After the effective occupation of East Africa by the colonialists, some East African communities were threatened by the new invaders, so they outrightly resisted them. Others saw it as an opportunity to create new alliances as a form of security from those they were not in good terms with. The desire of European
states to acquire territories meant that at some levels, African responses were not considered because conquest took place no matter what Africans did or did not do.

RESISTANCE AND COLLABORATION TO COLONIAL RULE IN EAST AFRICA
When the colonialists occupied East Africa, East Africans were faced with thechallenge of choosing how to respond. With little knowledge of the outside world or of the forces with whom they were challenging, they were very disadvantaged.
As a result, some African responses were neither effective nor dangerous. For example, some African chiefs were approached with a treaty of friendship to sign. Illiterate as they were, they simply signed without knowing the effects of signing
the paper agreement. When boundaries were drawn in Europe, East Africans were made part of the European colonies or protectorates without their consent. The impact of all this was felt many years later. It was after the local population felt the impact that they would resist the decisions of colonisers.

Activity 9.1: Response to the imposition of Colonial rule
a) Using ICT or library research, identify the reasons behind some Africans
collaborating with the colonialists.
b)Find out the reasons Africans resisted colonial rule.
c)How did the collaborating states benefit from colonial rule?
d)Share your findings with the rest of the class members.

RESISTANCE TO COLONIAL RULE IN EAST AFRICA
During resistance the East Africans refused to cooperate with the colonialists. They fought against the imperialists with the aim of protecting their independence. Resistance to colonial rule was either passive or active, and primary or secondary. The active resistance was a direct confrontation that often involved destruction Of European property like burning farms, and, where possible, it involved killing
the Europeans. People and societies picked up guns and weapons without negotiations and confronted the colonialists as shown in Figure 9.2 below. This was bescause they did not expect anything good from the negotiations. The Nandi, Nyamwezi, Yao, Banyoro and the Hehe resisted the colonialists through
military means.

The passive resistance was non-violent opposition that involved economic sabotage by refusing to pay taxes, delaying and stopping production of cash crops, and refusing to buy European goods. The African societies, which later found out that they had been cheated by Europeans, resisted. Some did not expect
that the colonisers would stay long and they used immediate harsh methods of resistance. To get rid of them, they had to resist their occupation in the hope that positive change would come.

Activity 9.2: Resistance to colonial rule
a) Identify the states that resisted the colonialists in East Africa.
b) What were the reasons for resistance by these states?
c) Explain the impact of resistance on these states.

Reasons for resistance to the colonialists
European colonialists sent out agents to sign treaties of protection with the leaders of African societies, states, kingdoms, decentralised societies, and empires. The treaties were often interpreted differently by the opposing forces and often led to conflict between both parties, and eventually to military encounters. To the Europeans, these treaties meant thatAfricans had signed away their sovereignties to European powers. For Africans, the treaties were merely diplomatic and commercial friendship treaties. After discovering that they had in fact been

deceived and lost their land, African rulers organised militarily to resist the taking of their land and the imposition of colonial control. In the early days of commodity commerce, Europeans got their supplies of
trade goods from African middlemen. However, as the scramble intensified, the Europeans wanted to bypass the African intermediaries and trade directly with sources of the trade goods. This was often met with a lot of resistance, with the
Africans insisting on a system that maintained their superiority as independent political and economic entities and actors. When they were faced with this situation, European merchants and trading companies called on their home governments to intervene and impose free trade by force, if necessary. Such contentions led to the military conflicts and organised African resistance to European imperialism.

THE KEY COLONIAL AGREEMENTS
The European colonialists justified the harsh colonisation of Africa through the signing of treaties and agreements. Treaties were international agreements in which African states were said to voluntarily agree, hand over territory or agree to specific conditions in return for benefits. These European colonial powers’ main aim was to exploit the African colonies. Each one of them had different ways of everning.

When African chiefs signed treaties with Europeans, they often did not understand the meaning and terms. There was no clear understanding of what the treaties were about or what the consequences of signing them would be. In some cases, military force was used to defeat a large amount of resistance, forcing the traditional leaders to sign their will. Having captured, and exiled Kabaka Mwanga
of Buganda, and Omukama Kabalega of Bunyoro, to the Seychelles Islands, the British found it easy to impose their rule over Uganda.

a) Using library or ICT research, identify key agreements made with the colonialists in East Africa and make a report on each.
b) What were the reasons for signing those agreements?
c) Explain the importance of these agreements to the people of East Africa.
d) Share your findings with the rest of the class. The 1900 Buganda Agreement
The Buganda Agreement was negotiated by Alfred Tucker, Bishop of Uganda, and signed by, among others, Buganda’s Katikkiro, Sir Apollo Kagwa, on behalf
of Kabaka Daudi Chwa, who was at that time an infant. Sir Harry Johnston signed on behalf of the British colonial government.

The Buganda Agreement was an agreement that specified relations between Buganda and the British, but it also caused an overnight political, economic revolution over land. It also became a component in efforts to create a republican state in Uganda. The signing of the Buganda Agreement affected the political life of Buganda, for it ended its existing system of administration in Buganda and replaced it with the British administrative system. The kabaka, along with his chiefs, were robbed of their political power and became subjects to the British administrators.
The agreement had three major clauses or parts. It recognised the British government authority over Buganda Kingdom beyond Lugard’s 1890 treaty with Mwanga of protecting Buganda. The Kabaka’s power was reduced and the little he had was exercised with the approval of the British. For example the colonialists had to approve the person chosen by the Lukiiko (Buganda parliament) for the
position of Kabaka.

Activity 9.4: The 1900 Buganda agreement
a) Using library or ICT research, identify the key clauses of the 1900 Buganda agreement.
b) Find out the weaknesses of land clause in the 1900 Buganda Agreement. write notes and present to the teacher.

Impact of 1900 Buganda Agreement
The signing of the Buganda Agreement affected the political life of the Baganda for it ended their existing system of administration and replaced it with the British administrative system. The Kabaka along with his chiefs were robbed of their
political power and became subjects of the British administrators. Indirect rule as a new system of administration was used to administer the kingdom. The 1900 Buganda Agreement reduced Buganda boundaries and divided
Buganda land. Buganda land was divided into Mailo land for the Buganda government, and crown land for the British government. The Buganda government land was further divided among the royal family members, the Lukiiko and the
chiefs. Some land was left for the private landowners. The agreement introduced taxation systems that involved payment of hut tax, which helped reduce polygamy. Polygamy was a traditional practice of African societies and a source of pride and joy to many. African men had to stop the practice because of tax. The more wives one had, the more huts he would own and, therefore, the higher the taxes he would have to pay.

The Devonshire White Paper
The racial difference in Kenya among the settlers was causing chaos in the colony. The White settlers wanted complete control over the colony without the participation of other settlers (Asians and Arabs) and Africans in the political affairs of the colony. The Africans and Asians were segregated against and
marginalised in the Legislative Council. The Asians demanded the same rights as Whites, whereas Africans were demanding their land rights that had been
taken by the settlers. The colonial government had to come in and restore order in the colony and address the interests of the three conflicting races. After serious investigations, the colonial secretary issued his findings and resolutions in a document that was later to be referred to as the Devonshire White Paper. It was a document written in 1923 by the colonial secretary, Victor Cavendish, who was
also the Duke of Devonshire.

The Devonshire White Paper, therefore, was a document that contained conflicting decision made by the British secretary of colonies in 1923, resolving the conflicted interests in Ken ya between natives and immigrants. The Paper was intended to serve as a compromise between the settlers and the natives in the Kenyan colony in particular and East Africa more broadly. It defended the interests of Africans against the Asian, European and Arab settlers and, blocked the move towards self-government advocated for by the colonialists.

The Paper pointed out that the East African societies under the British domination, including Kenya, were composed of three distinctively different racial or ethnic communities, that is, the White settlers, the Asians and the native Africans. These three groups occupied a distinct political, economic and social status. It was only
Africans who were the indigenous, while the rest were immigrants. The Paper set a new way of solving future conflicts among the various groups living in the colony. In the struggle to occupy political and economic dominion in Kenya, the conflict of interests emerged between the Europeans and Asians. The settlers were
demanding self-governance to be granted to them under minority rule. This was to stop them from purchasing land in the Kenya highlands, and to generally stop them from immigrating to Kenya.
The document principally upheld the interest of Africans. It provided that Kenyawas primarily a Black man’s country, and could never be a European colony.
It was contrary to the British colonial policy of allowing a small Kenyan settler community to have political control over large native communities. The interests of the African natives were paramount in case of conflicting interests between the immigrant races and the natives.

Terms of the Devonshire White Paper The Kenyan highlands were exclusively reserved for White settlers, and the Asian were not allowed to purchase land in that area. Africans were allowed to have representation in the Legislative Council (LEGCO) and a missionary would be nominated to the
LECCO to represent the interests of the Africans. This was done until 1944 when the
first African representative was nominated. The Indians were granted rights to have
representation in the LEGCO and would elect representatives to the council.

Racial segregation in all the residential areas, plus restrictions on immigration were abolished. Firstly, all elements of racial segregations were abolished. Secondly, settlers’ claim to restrict Asian immigration into the colony was abolished, and Asians were allowed to continue immigrating to Kenya.
Significance of the Devonshire White Paper
The Devonshire White Paper, to some extent, was an achievement for Africans. To Africans, it was a milestone for it committed the British Government to African interests on one hand, and migrant races on the other. The Paper brought positive changes regarding the welfare ofAfricans to be put in place. It allowed improvement of African conditions such as the establishment of technical schools for Africans.
It allowed African representation on the Legislative Council and formation of African political party, the Kikuyu Central Association, which presented

African grievances to the colonial government. The Paper was used by the British Government to retain control over the Kenya colony. It stopped the development of a White minority rule in Kenya as was the
case in South Africa and Southern Rhodesia.

Activity 9.5: The Devonshire White Paper of 1923
a) Using library or ICT research, discuss the impact of the Devonshire White Paper of 1923.
b) Compare the features of the 1900 Buganda Agreement and that of Devonshire White Paper of 1923.
c) Organize a debate on theme; “Collaborators lost more than resistors during colonial rule”.