Scramble for Africa
The Creation of East African Borders
German East Africa
The colony was organized when the German military was called upon to put down a revolt against the activities of a colonial company during the late 1880s. It ended with Imperial Germany's defeat in World War I. Afterwards, the territory was divided between Britain and Belgium and reorganized as a mandate of the League of Nations.
Like other powers, the Germans expanded their empire in the Africa Great Lakes region on the basis of fighting slavery and the slave trade. Unlike other imperial powers, however, they never actually formally abolished it, preferring instead to curtail the production of new "recruits" and regulate the extant slaving business.
The colony began with Carl Peters, an adventurer who founded the Society for German Colonization and signed treaties with several native chieftains on the mainland opposite Zanzibar. On 3 March 1885, the German government announced it had granted an imperial charter (signed by Bismarck on 27 February 1885) to Peters' company and intended to establish a protectorate in the Africa Great Lakes region. Peters then recruited specialists, who began exploring south to the Rufiji River and north to Witu, near Lamu on the coast.
When the Sultan of Zanzibar protested, since he claimed to be ruler on the mainland as well, chancellor Otto von Bismarck sent five warships, which arrived on 7 August 1885 and trained their guns on the Sultan's palace. The British and Germans agreed to divide the mainland between themselves, and the Sultan had no option but to agree.
German rule was quickly established over Bagamoyo, Dar es Salaam, and Kilwa, even sending the caravans of Tom von Prince, Wilhelm Langheld, Emin Pasha, and Charles Stokes to dominate "the Street of Caravans". The Abushiri Revolt of 1888 was put down (with British help) the following year. In 1890, London and Berlin concluded the Heligoland-Zanzibar Treaty, returning Heligoland (seized during the Napoleonic wars) to Germany and deciding on the borders of German East Africa (the exact boundaries remained unsurveyed until 1910).
Between 1891 and 1894, the Hehe tribe, led by Chief Mkwawa, resisted German expansion. They were defeated because rival tribes supported the Germans. After years of guerrilla warfare, Mkwawa himself was cornered and committed suicide in 1898.
The Maji Maji Rebellion occurred in 1905 and was put down by the governor, Count Gustav Adolf von Götzen. But scandal soon followed, with stories of corruption and brutality, and in 1907 Chancellor Bülow appointed Bernhard Dernburg to reform the colonial administration. It became a model of colonial efficiency and commanded extraordinary loyalty among the natives during the First World War.
German colonial administrators relied heavily on native chiefs to keep order and collect taxes. By 1 January 1914, aside from local police, military garrisons of Schutztruppen ("protective troops") at Dar es Salaam, Moshi, Iringa, and Mahenge numbered 110 German officers (including 42 medical officers), 126 non-commissioned officers, and 2,472 native enlisted men (Askaris).
A partition was agreed in 1886
A partition was agreed in 1886, identical to the modern border between Kenya and Tanzania. You may read that Kilimanjaro was part of the British territory before Queen Victoria gave it to her cousin, the Kaiser, as a birthday present. This amusing story was possibly dreamed up by a Victorian satirist to reflect the arbitrariness of the scramble. It is a complete fabrication.
Map and Guide to Tanzania
Page Number: 05c
Extract Date: 1890
Another meeting leading to the 'Heligoland Treaty', was held in 1890 to ensure Africa 'The benefits of peace and civilisation' and settled the last disputes which still existed between Britain and Germany who abandoned some places in Kenya, receiving in compensation the Island of Heligoland in the North Sea.
A lingering controversy plagued the discussions concerning the area around Taveta claimed by rival German and British explorers and with Germany giving in, this is why it is the only stretch of this border which does not run in a perfectly straight line.
There is no historical evidence to support the story that the dividing line went on purpose around Mount Kilimanjaro and that Queen Victoria gave it as a present for the Kaiser's birthday as she already possessed Mount Kenya.
An Anglo-German Treaty divided Lake Victoria across the middle and continued the frontier to the eastern border of the Belgian Congo Free State. A last Belgian-German Agreement to share Lake Tanganyika along a North-South line ended the 'orderly' partition.
How Kenya got The Ten-Mile Coastal Strip
The ownership of Kenya’s coastline has been a matter of contention since the Sultan of Zanzibar officially signed it away in 1963. The claims for secession are often accompanied by the history of the great Zanzibar sultanate which once stretched to what is today the Kenyan coastline.
What complicated matters for Kenya in 1963 was the effect of the Anglo-German Treaty of 1886. In the 1886 pact, Britain and Germany outlined their spheres of
influence in East Africa. Noting the key position of the sultan of Zanzibar, both European powers agreed to allocate him the famous ten mile coastal strip that stretches from Kipini to Ruvuma River.
The Germans opted to pay for the right to use the coastline on the German East African section. The British, on the other hand, paid an annual rent of 11, 000 pounds.
The Ten Miles Coastal strip: An Examination of the Intricate Nature of Land Question at Kenyan Coast
Dr. John M. Mwaruvie Department of History
Abstract In 1886, the Anglo-German Treaty was signed between Britain and Germany to determine their spheres of influence in East Africa. Since none of them wanted to be in direct conflict
with the sultan of Zanzibar, they decided to allocate him ten miles coastal strip running from Kipini in the north to Ruvuma River in the south. The Germans thereafter paid for the right to use the
sultan’s ten mile possession on the German East African section. The British on the other hand opted to pay annual rent to the sultan equivalent to the amount of tax collected by sultan in that part
adjacent to East Africa protectorate(EAP).
The complexity of this treaty came into focus in 1920 when the British government wanted to change the status of EAP into a colony. The British realized that the ten miles coastal strip could not be annexed without causing international conflict because of the various treaties that the sultan had entered with various powers guaranteeing their sovereignty and control over her coastal dominions. Thus, the colonial government went for a quick fix by renaming the territory, Colony and Protectorate of Kenya.
The protectorate designated the ten miles coastal strip while all the land from the ten miles became the colony. It was this quick fix that later reared its ugly face at the time of independence when the Arabs in the coastal strip rejected to be incorporated in independent Kenya. They wanted to secede to join fellow Arab administration at Zanzibar. Just like the colonialists, Kenyatta went for another quick fix by signing an agreement with the then Prime Minister of Zanzibar guaranteeing land ownership to sultans’ subjects at the expense of African inhabitants who for many centuries had remained as squatters. This paper examines the historical injustices that African inhabitants have endured over the centuries and how the various administrations have overlooked their interests.
Consequently, land at the coast has become so expensive to an extent that ordinary people cannot afford. It is argued that a solution has to be found to contain the recurrent land conflicts experienced every election year.
How Kilimanjaro ended
up in Tanzania
Line of demarcation… Kilimanjaro: Border
You may be told that the border curves around Kilimanjaro because Queen Victoria gave the mountain to Kaiser Wilhelm (her grandson) as a birthday present. While such an action would have been no different to the arbitrary partitioning of East Africa by these two monarch's own governments, there is no evidence that this story is true. But it remains one of the popular myths that add to the mystique and attraction of Kilimanjaro.
That was the wording in diplomatic language. Put more simply, the Germans had gained Kilimanjaro but not Mombasa, the British Mombasa but not Kilimanjaro. Now it becomes evident why Kilimanjaro is in Tanzania: because Mombasa is in Kenya.
Date: 23 February, 1901
Britain and Germany agree on boundary between German East Africa and Nyasaland.
Date: 7 February, 1910
Britain, Germany and Belgium agree on the borders of Congo, Uganda and German East Africa.
African Nations and Territory Identity
The dismantlement of African Land and Nations
and the artificial construction of the 1872 Colonial Africa c. -1960 c.
Henri Brunschwig analysed the decisions of the Conference of Berlin, and points out not to have had in Berlin the effective allotment of that as much is said, the truth is that the European national and intercontinental ideologies had finished to instrument the relation between borders of European dominance at the Conference of Berlin.
This operation represents a particular character in has much not to have had in Berlin the presence of any African individual or state.
The Berlin Conference of 1884–85, also known as the Congo Conference (German: Kongokonferenz) or West Africa Conference (Westafrika-Konferenz), regulated European colonization and trade in Africa during the New Imperialism period, and coincided with Germany's sudden emergence as an imperial power. Called for by Portugal and organized by Otto von Bismarck, first Chancellor of Germany, its outcome, the General Act of the Berlin Conference, can be seen as the formalization of the Scramble for Africa.
The Dividing of a Continent: Africa's Separatist Problem
Volume 5. Wilhelmine Germany and the First World War, 1890-1918 Anglo-German Treaty [Heligoland-Zanzibar Treaty](July 1, 1890)
Germans, French and British in Africa to 1900
A German company was in charge of the administration of German East Africa, and the company's demand for taxes and labor obligations provoked rebellion among local Arabs and from the He he and Yea tribes. This was the Obituary revolt. Germans were evicted militarily from the coast except for strongholds at Bagamoyo and Dar es Salaam. They returned with an elite force under the command of General von Wissman, and they captured and hanged the leader of the revolt – the half Arab half African trader, Abushiri.
Click on photo below to enlarge
ANGLO-ITALIAN TREATY (EAST AFRICAN TERRITORIES) BILL.
Ceded under Article 13 of the quadrilateral Agreement of 1915, made between Italy. Great Britain, France, and Russia, before Italy came into the war..
Italian Somaliland, with Jubaland (orange) acquired in 1925
The late 19th century had a huge impact on developments occurring in the Horn of Africa. The European powers (Italy, Great Britain and France) first gained a foothold in Somalia through the signing of various pacts and agreements with the Somali Sultans that then controlled the region, such as Yusuf Ali Kenadid, Boqor Osman Mahamuud, Ahmed Yusuf and Olol Dinle
Historic timeline of East Africa
History of Uganda
Hut/Native Tax by Colonials
During the Age of Exploration, the Portuguese Empire was the first European power to colonize the East Coast of Africa and gain control of Zanzibar, and kept it for nearly 200 years. Vasco da Gama's visit in 1499 marked the beginning of the European influence.
Berlin conference of 1885 further laid down rules of the game in scramble for Africa for the Europeans to do as they pleased, there was no such a thing as International law for the indigenous, in fact many places in Africa too had their laws under their own Kingdoms, some notable pre-colonial states and societies in Africa, similarily in India, New Zealand, Australia, Americas…etc as such…
Rules of the games were and only for the Europeans and do as they pleased in Africa without any limitations, fear of repercussions or accountability!
The European’s individuals’ policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another Country / Land varied, occupying it as settlers (more like invaders) and fully exploiting it economically to give its own Caucasian people the incentives to manipulate further as it pleased..
Colonials powers never asked any questions but were vanquishing what they saw or wanted, all land assets was carte blanche to them and did as they wished and pleased with it.
Colonialism further practiced of domination, which involves the subjugation of one people to another, further "the state apparatus that was dominant under colonialism created draconian laws for the indigenous or any other people of colour, this was through their own made up land ordinance and legislations for themselves that favoured the Colonials and its people"
When the British arrived and exploited the interior, more changes followed. A British Colonial tax policy was created on the grounds that Britain needed to
support its own economy by exploiting and creating foreign markets and sources of raw materials for her industries for their benefit and have full control of it all from raw material to the
manufacturing and finances.
In fact, there were resistances toward the Colonialism, Hut Tax War of 1898 transpired, when Protectorate chiefs declared war against the British for
imposing taxation on their territories Freetown colony and the Sierra Leone Protectorate and further insight into the Eye of Authority’: ‘Native’ Taxation, Colonial Governance and Resistance in
Inter-war Tanganyika by Andrew Burton covers this extensively.
Hut Tax Tokens issued by the British South Africa Company (1903 to 1916) in South Africa and was expanded further north to Northern, Southern Rhodesia, North Eastern Rhodesia…(Zambia, Zimbabwe and Malawi)..
Kenya Native Hut and Poll Tax Ordinances were introduced by the so called settlers upon its indigenous people and bring upon them the thrust in uprooting of
their lives, more hardship and strict control through subjugation by a foreign entity was the norm now.
European settlers forcibly moved into the Kenyan highlands in large numbers after the completion of the Uganda railway in 1902. The land they occupied belonged to the Kikuyu, Kamba and other indigenous people.
The European settlers claimed that the land was not being used to its full potential accordingly to them. One would argue, if the locals were self sufficient
and it suffices its needs how was this a problem unless one is thinking of exporting and exploiting it.
The Kikuyu, Kamba and others were forcibly moved to ‘Reserves’. Any Kikuyu, Kamba and others who remained on the land were described as squatters. Squatters were expected to work for the new European settlers. The Kikuyu, Kamba and others who were living on their forefathers land were then forced to work in lieu of rent. This tactic by European settlers was used in many African nations including South Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi…etc.
In the year 1900, the railway descended the highlands on its final stretch to the lake. Railway surveyors aware of the hostility of the tribes on the valley, found that there was no other path to the lake. Maps made by Railway Surveyor C.F.S. Vandeleur as early as 1896, show that what is now known as the Nyando plains was the habitation of Nandi and the Kipsigis. (The original maps are deposited in the University Library Cambridge in case you like to see them.) on April 25, 1902, a detachment of 500 Kipsigis warriors attacked another railway camp
The British then felt it was necessary to separate the Nandi and the Kipsigis as their combined forces would easily overwhelm the small detachment sent to guard the railway. It was then decided that the Kipsigis would be concentrated to the highlands of the Western Mau to clear them from the lowlands.
While the Nandi resistance was practically over with the death of Koitalel, the railway remained vulnerable. In a meeting held in Muhoroni on December 15,
1905, the new Commissioner Sir James Hayes Sadler told the Nandi that they had to move away from the lowlands into the highlands and made it clear that force would be used if need be. They were given
a month to move which they ignored.
Indeed on January 15, 1906 the operation to move the Nandi was initiated by Lt. Col. Edgar E. Harrison under the supervision of General Manning. The soldiers
began the rampage on January 19 and on that day alone 140 huts were burnt down (Meinertzhagen, 1955 ). In the process some 1,117 Nandi men were killed (Matson, 1974 ).The Nandi were forced to abandon
their habitations in Chemelil, Muhoroni, Miwani, Kibigori, Kibos, Koru, Kapere (Kopere). Some 16,216 cattle and 36,205 small stock were rounded off and sent to Naivasha where they were auctioned by
Thomas A. Wood to pay for the war. Wood managed to sell 865 ‘Nandi cows’ for a whopping 65,912.90 rupees. (Wood later became Mayor of Nairobi and Wood Avenue is named after
But the loss of their lands was the tragedy that continues to haunt the Nandi to this day. The Nandi were forced to ascend the highlands led by two
collaborating headmen Taptengelei and araap Sirtui who convinced them that their ancestors would follow them into their new reserve in Kabiyet – 100 kilometres away.
More trouble, the highland, most of the settlers later indeed came not from Britain but from South Africa but what history will not reveal is in fact there was a plan in Jewish settlements in the British East Africa Protectorate. There was a plan and a clear mention of the land between Nairobi and the Mau Escarpment that would be ideal, especially the Uasin Gishu Plateau.
These Kaburus trekked to Uasin Gishu, a place that looked like the South African kopjes, a place where “their women could breed in peace”.
The trek to Uasin Gishu was not happenstance. It is said that the first Afrikaner to settle in Farm 64 were the Van Breda brothers who arrived in 1903. In
1905, they were joined by the Franz Arnoldi family. But in August 1908, 58 rogue Afrikaner families, arrived led by Jan van Rensburg, and settled at the foot of Sergoit Hill on October 22 1908. Each
family built a shack, put up fences, hooked up oxen to simple ploughs and turned the first furrows. They sowed wheat, maize and vegetables transforming the plateau. The farms were later registered
and given reference numbers. This is how heavily-armed group of Boers ‘colonized’ Uasin Gishu.. The Crown Lands Ordinance of 1902 which permitted land grants to Europeans.
This was a time when the African continent was a white people playground. The Royal Engineers had carved out the extremely fertile Rift Valley into big farms, what was known as “the white highlands” — regions not less than 5000 ft above sea level, which is best suited for Europeans to settle in. But Africans had settled in these highlands, so the colonial government passed The Crown Lands Ordinance of 1902 which permitted land grants to Europeans — meaning that only Europeans could own and manage the highland areas.
The fact ”The 2000 settlers organisations “ who controlled 16000 square miles of PRIME LAND ... The Crown Lands Ordinance of 1902 allowed this clearly… Read into the EAST AFRICA PROTECTORATE (ECONOMIC COMMISSION REPORT) 1919 report on immigration on equal terms
Hut tax was first collected in North-Eastern Rhodesia in 1901 and was slowly extended through North-Western Rhodesia between 1904 and 1913.
It was charged at different rates in different districts but was supposed to be equivalent to two months' wages, to encourage or force local Africans into the system of wage labour. Its introduction generally caused little unrest, and any protests were quickly suppressed.
Zimbabwe 1894-1969: Taxation
- Taxes were introduced by the colonial government to serve two purposes, that is, to force Africans to work for Europeans to earn money to pay taxes and to fund the government
- Whites were not taxed even if their salaries were twelve times more than that of blacks
- The hut tax was pegged at one pound
- The Shona tried to avoid working for Europeans by selling their produce but after the agricultural reforms they were resettled
- Taxes got higher but labour requirements were not met
- Some of the taxes that were paid are poll tax, hut tax, dipping fee, a grazing fee, taxon cattle, dog tax and tax on polygamous tax
Before 1920, it was commonly charged at five shillings a year, but in 1920 the rate of hut tax was sharply
increased, and often doubled, to provide more workers for the Southern Rhodesian mines, particularly the coal mines of Wankie.
At this time the Company considered the principal economic benefit of Northern Rhodesia to be as a reservoir for migrant labour which could be called upon for Southern Rhodesia.
The settlers created a Masters and Servants Ordinance which gave European settlers power over their Kikuyu, Kamba and other workers. Africans would be jailed
if they did not fulfil the terms of their work contract and even for being disrespectful to the European employers. Chiefs were compelled to supply a set number of workers for European
In fact the idea of direct African taxation was proposed by British Commissioner, Sir Arthur Hardinge. It was a scheme of tax collection that would be steadily imposed, beginning along the railway centres from Mombasa to Machakos.
The Native Hut Tax was the first to be inflicted in 1901 under the Hut Tax Regulations of that year under the stewardship of Commissioner Sir Charles
In this regulation, all huts used as dwellings were expected to pay 1 Rupee annually. The British were commencing a journey to an ultimatum and began by encouraging the locals to work for white settlers and understand the value of money.
With assurance of some superiority, European settlement followed in 1902. The settlement in the colony further became a handsome idea when the Crown Lands Ordinance of that year declared that all land in the protectorate belonged to the British Imperial Government and it would be allocated at will.
However, this move initiated the forceful alienation of indigenous Kenyans from their hereditary land. To further scatter the Africans from their land, the railway station points had higher Hut Tax rates of 2 Rupees, and by 1903, the general Hut Tax had increased to 3 Rupees.
In the years prior to the pandemic, the British saddled African households with a hut tax intended to fund development and war operations. The hut tax was systematically increased as 1918 drew near.
This later was followed by “The Kipande” that was considered a vital tool in running the carrier corps and was introduced through the Native Registration Ordinance of 1916.
The ordinance was ultimately enacted in 1919 and would bring more misery to Africans as if what they were already enduring was not enough and further restricted them to chosen confined areas and constrained their free movements on their very own land.
Union of South Africa
By 1908 the following hut taxes were introduced in the colony of South Africa:
In Natal, under Law 13 of 1857, 14 shillings per hut. Africans that lived in European-style houses with only one wife were exempt from the tax.
In the Transkei, 10 shillings per hut.
In the Cape Colony, various forms of the "house duty" had existed since the 1850s. The tax was legally applicable to all house-owners in the Cape, regardless
of race or religion, but was only partially enforced, especially in rural areas. A full and universally applicable house tax was imposed in 1870 (Act 9 of 1870), and was more fully enforced, due to
the government's severe financial difficulties at the time.[1870 Note 1]
The highly unpopular tax was terminated in 1872 (Act 11 of 1872), but a new and higher duty was applied by the Sprigg administration during 1878, when government expenditure was extremely high. The Cape's most controversial "hut tax" was established under Act 37 of 1884, and specified 10 shillings per hut with exclusions for the elderly and infirm. It was repealed under Act 4 of 1889.
In the colony of Mashonaland, now part of modern-day Zimbabwe, a hut tax was introduced at the rate of ten shillings per hut in 1894. Although authorized
by the Colonial Office in London, the tax was paid to the British South Africa Company (BSAC), acting on behalf of the British government in the area. Various events such as the introduction of the
hut tax, disputes over cattle and a series of natural disasters contributed to the decision of the Shona to rebel against the company in 1896, which became known as the First Chimurenga or Second
The tax was also used in Kenya, Uganda and Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia). In Sierra Leone, it sparked the Hut Tax War of 1898 in the Ronietta
district, in which substantial damage was sustained to the establishments of the Home Missionary Society. The damage sustained by the Society led to an international tribunal regarding restitution
for the damages suffered, brought by the American
government on behalf of the Home Missionary Society. The society was compensated for damages done to them by Sierra Leonean rioters.
History of tax in Kenya
The Hut Tax War
Hut Tax Tokens issued by the British South Africa Company
(1903 to 1916)
Kenya's Talai clan petitions Prince William over land eviction
UK's blood tea in Kenya | Africa Today
Demarcation of East Africa
The Colonials, as well as the British empire has always left its deceitful mark in terms of “Divide and Rule” where ever it left, India (Kashmir),
Afghanistan/Pakistan (The Durand Line), Large number of the Balochi people are scattered in several sovereign states and have no state of their own, just as the Kurdish people in the Middle East are
experiencing, as well as in Arabia and Yemen…etc
In Africa, Zambia and Barotseland is in dispute, Lado Enclave, Uganda/Congo/Sudan is in dispute, the Uasin Gishu Plateau Kenya /Uganda in dispute that was initially reserved for the Jewish/Zionists
homeland, Kenya/Somalia argues that the maritime boundary should continue on in the same direction as the land border’s south easterly path. Kenya, meanwhile, insists that the border should
take a roughly 45-degree turn at the shoreline and run in a latitudinal line.
Mount Kilimanjaro area pasture dispute, Tanzania/Kenya…more on Africa’s border disputes that are set to rise
When part of eastern Uganda was transferred to Kenya
We are told British desire for a Cape to Cairo railway led them to negotiate with the Belgians to exchange the area that became the Lado Enclave for a narrow strip of
territory in eastern Congo between Lakes Albert and Tanganyika.
Well, the source of the Nile and the river Nile right up to Egypt and Suez Canal was the main reason.
Millions Of Conglese people suffered , killed under the Leopold II regime who was endured by all Western nations and they did nothing at all but instead were busy negotiating their own favoured demarcation lines ; Leopold amassed a huge personal fortune by exploiting the natural resources of the Congo just as other Colonials did within Africa , just Congo’s estimate of the death toll ranged to fifteen million, innocent men, women and children. Leopold II (9 April 1835 – 17 December 1909), Colonization 1876–1885, Congo Free State 1885–1908, Belgian Congo 1908–1960…read into that too..
Congo has and is being uninterruptedly raped, pillaged, and plundered like many countries in Africa, to this very day by many Western
Read about :
"THE HISTORY OF THE OCCUPIED TERRITORY OF WEST NILE AND MADI REGIONS OF LADO KINGDOM BY UGANDA FOR GREAT BRITAIN SINCE FROM 1912 / 1914 TILL TODATE....
Christian Persecution of Jews over the Centuries
A Jewish Homeland in East Africa
East Africa 1895-1920
The early years of the protectorate include several developments of significance in Kenya's subsequent history. One is the
decision to encourage settlement in Kenya's temperate highlands by farmers of European origin, this prosperous region subsequently becomes known as the White Highlands exclusively for the white
population that was to arrive, but arrive from where?
History tells us clearly that there were only limited number of British people who were interested in embarking on and into the unknown wilderness of Kenya?
The clear intention was to provide revenue for the railway driven northwest from Mombasa to reach Kisumu on Lake Victoria in 1901.
Most of the settlers later indeed came not from Britain but from South Africa but what history will not reveal is in fact there was a plan in Jewish settlements in
the British East Africa Protectorate. There was a plan and a clear mention of the land between Nairobi and the Mau Escarpment that would be ideal, especially the Uasin Gishu Plateau.
These actions would cause 2 million Jews to abandon the Russian Empire between 1881 and 1913, meanwhile, anti-Semitic persecution further increased in Russia,
culminating in the Kisinev pogroms in Bessarabia in April 19-20 1903. With nearly 75% going to the United States, and others settling in South America, Great Britain, Canada, South Africa, France and
other countries. However, the arrival of destitute and culturally foreign refugees from Russia led to increased anti-Semitism in the West.
The Dreyfus Affair in France in 1894, and increasing hostility to Jewish immigrants in England, and other countries led many Jews to push for the establishment of a Jewish homeland, where Jews would be able to govern themselves and maintain their customs, religion and no longer fear persecution. This would result in the Zionist movement, with the goal of creating a Jewish homeland in either Australia, Argentina, Kenya/Uganda, Palestine etc. Since there was growing anti-immigrant hostility in Britain itself, with nearly 100,000 Russian-born Jews living in the country by 1901.
Meanwhile in London, the first Alien Act was passed in 1904 in an attempt to limit Jewish refugees and other foreigners from settling in the United Kingdom.
Britain had seen an increased number of persecuted European Jews towards the end of 1800’s and was too feeling the strain in taking aboard people of different descent, who most probably spoke other European language, Eastern European or Russian language and had to establish what other options there were, with the goal of creating a Jewish homeland in either Australia, Argentina, Kenya/Uganda, Palestine….. etc.
Arriving in London in October 1902, Herzl met with members of the British cabinet seeking their assistance in establishing a Jewish settlement under British
protection. Leopold Greenberg, the head of the British Zionist Federation along with Herzl met with Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain and Foreign Secretary Lord Landsdowne in April 1903. It would
be in this meeting that Chamberlain proposed establishing a Jewish settlement in the British East Africa Protectorate. He mentioned that the land between Nairobi and the Mau Escarpment would be
ideal, especially the Uasin Gishu Plateau.
The British government had several reasons for wanting to settle British East Africa, besides simply assisting refugees. However, the Uganda Scheme as it became
called was vehemently opposed by the majority of the Russian delegates in Basel. Despite this, three days later, the British government declared the British East Africa Protectorate to be a "Jewish
Territory" under British protection.
As the Zionist movement spread amongst Jews in the West, the first Zionist Congress was held between 29 August and 31 August 1897 in Basel Switzerland with the ultimate goal of establishing a Jewish homeland in Ottoman-ruled Palestine. Though a small number of Eastern European Jews had been settling in Palestine since 1882, their numbers were insignificant and by 1900, Jews only constituted 6% of a population of 600,000.
However, the Zionist Organization, led by Hungarian-born Theodor Herzl, would continue to meet annually to pursue its goal and was committed to the idea of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. To that end, in May 1901, they approached the Ottoman Sultan for a Charter to settle Jews in Palestine, but were rebuffed. Attempts to secure support from Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany seemed promising at first, however his support for the idea was withdrawn once he began to seek an alliance with the Ottomans.
In January 1905, the first eighty families arrived in Mombasa and from there would take the Uganda Railway to their future home on the Uasin Gishu Plateau. The
settlers consisted largely of Jews from Moldavia, Wallachia and Bessarabia, many with little background in farming. In addition, a small number of English Jews began arriving as civil servants,
skilled professionals in the territory.
The new settlers had mixed success in agriculture, but many who already had experience as pedlars and traders in Europe were able to utilize their skills in Africa, trading with the indigenous African inhabitants, assuming the roles of middle-men, with many eventually becoming large commercial and industrial enterprises.
Mombasa Visit of Rt Hon Joseph Chamberlain ( he was briefly Britain's secretary for the colonies) and his wife in 1902, Mrs Chamberlain is seated next to Sir Charles Eliot in the lead push car , they spent 6 days in the country on their way to South Africa.
During his visit , he gained the impression of a largely uninhibited land, ripe for exploitation, the seeds were sown for his subsequent decision to offer the Zionists 50000 square miles of East Africa as a self-governing Jewish settlement under British protection. There was a public outcry however the offer was finally turned down by the Jews themselves for the sole reason that it would have compromised their demands to carve out a Jewish homeland in Palestine. But for that rejection, the future development of Kenya might have turned out differently.
Now, imagine this started WW1, for this ridiculous reason... The simplest answer is that the immediate cause was the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, the archduke of Austria-Hungary. His death at the hands of Gavrilo Princip – a Serbian nationalist with ties to the secretive military group known as the Black Hand – propelled the major European military powers towards war. All to bring down the Ottoman Empire....Caroline Kere
The early years of the protectorate include several developments of significance in Kenya's subsequent history. One is the decision to encourage settlement in Kenya's temperate highlands by farmers of European origin, this prosperous region subsequently becomes known as the White Highlands exclusively for the white population that was to arrive, but arrive from where?
History tells us clearly that there was only limited number of British people who were interested in embarking on and into the unknown wilderness of Kenya?
The clear intention was to provide revenue for the railway driven northwest from Mombasa to reach Kisumu on Lake Victoria in 1901.
Most of the settlers later indeed came NOT from Britain but from South Africa but what history will not reveal is in fact there was a plan in Jewish settlements in the British East Africa Protectorate. There was a plan and a clear mention of the land between Nairobi and the Mau Escarpment that would be ideal, especially the Uasin Gishu Plateau. They changed Uganda’s demarcation /border for this very purpose.
The Africaans (Kaburus) from South Africa were encouraged due to the fact that they were already acclimatized to Africa, but they were third choice after their second choice Zionist Jews from Russia Empire.These actions would cause 2 million Jews to abandon the Russian Empire between 1881 and 1913.
Britain wanted this problem off their hands due to "The Dreyfus Affair" in France in 1894, and increasing hostility to Jewish immigrants in England.
Africans and Asian were never allowed any of the prosperous farming land or prime locations. The coolies were indentured workers bound by a contract that offered them a monthly wage of 30 rupees and freedom to return to India or remain at the expiry of their contract. The Blue Book for the East Africa Protectorate and Kenya, the White Paper of 1923 and so on made sure…
A movement to establish a Jewish homeland. Hertz's pamphlet "The Jewish State (1896)" proposed that the Jewish question was a political question to be settled by a world council of nations
Read into Theodor Hertz Arriving in London in October 1902, Visit of Rt Hon Joseph Chamberlain ( he was briefly Britain's secretary for the colonies) and his wife in 1902, Mrs Chamberlain is seated (photo) next to Sir Charles Eliot in the lead push car in Mombasa, they spent 6 days in the country on their way to South Africa.
British Zionist Federation and Herzl with Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain and Foreign Secretary Lord Landsdowne met in April 1903 on the relocation.
The so called Zionist Jews had declined Britain’s offer in relocation in Kenya, Uganda, Argentina, Madagascar, Australia and had settled for Palestine as Colonial Britain had promised them Palestine that did not even belonged to Britain!
The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 during the First World War announcing support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population later gazumped by Eastern European Zionists.
After the war, the British government hoped to advance farming in Kenya and encouraged migration there, offering former soldiers land in Kenya on easy terms. White migration to Kenya rose along with the growth in number and size of European-owned farms.
JEWISH TERRORIST ACTIVITIES AND THE BRITISH
The Irgun Zvai Leumi (National Military Organization) was a Jewish terrorist organization that transitioned from a terrorist group to a political party. As a movement the group was founded in 1931 under Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s leadership, but even then their operations did not include violence against their enemies, the British or Arabs. Not until 1939, when group leaders recognized the need to start initiating violence, can the Irgun really be called a terrorist organization.
THE HISTORY, LEADERSHIP, AND ACTIVITIES OF THE MILITANT ZIONIST UNDERGROUND ARMY, THE IRGUN ZVAI LEUMI, ARE INVESTIGATED, AS WELL AS THE ACTIVITIES OF THE STERN GROUP AND THE HAGANAH, DURING THE YEARS 1929-1949.
Abstract: IN 1929, JEWISH-ARAB CONFLICT IN PALESTINE PRODUCED MANY DEATHS ON BOTH SIDES, DESPITE EFFORTS OF THE OCCUPYING BRITISH ARMY TO KEEP PEACE. THE HAGANAH HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED BY JEWISH ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS TO PROVIDE WHAT PROVED TO BE LIMITED SELF-DEFENSE FOR JEWISH COMMUNITIES, WITH ORDERS NOT TO ENGAGE IN INDISCRIMINATE ATTACKS ON ARABS. COOPERATION WITH BRITISH SECURITY FORCES WAS HAGANAH POLICY. DURING THIS PERIOD OF INCREASING HOSTILITIES BETWEEN ARABS AND JEWS, THE IRGUN WAS FORMED UPON THE LEADERSHIP OF VLADIMIR JABOTINSKY TO ASSUME AN OFFENSIVE TERRORIST STRATEGY AGAINST THE ARABS WITH APPARENTLY ARBITRARY VIOLENCE AGAINST ARAB POPULATIONS. ANOTHER UNDERGROUND JEWISH TERRORIST GROUP, LOHAMEY HERUTH ISRAEL (FIGHTERS FOR THE FREEDOM OF ISRAEL) OR LEHI, WAS FORMED UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF AVRAHAM STERN AND CAME TO BE PERCEIVED BY CONVENTIONAL EYES AS THE MOST VIOLENT AND UNRESTRAINED TERRORIST ORGANIZATION OF THE MODERN ERA. WHEREAS THE HAGANAH ACTED AS AN UNDERGROUPND MILITIA AND THE IRGUN AS AN UNDERGROUND ARMY, LEHI FOCUSED ON THE ASSASSINATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT BRITISH OFFICIALS, THE MOST NOTABLE BEING THE MURDER OF BRITISH AMBASSADOR MOYNE IN EGYPT. THE IRGUN, WITH LEADERSHIP PASSING FROM JABOTINSKY TO MENACHEM BEGIN, CONTINUED ITS AGGRESSION AGAINST THE ARABS AND THE BRITISH OCCUPIERS (FREQUENTLY IN JOINT ACTIONS WITH LEHI) UNTIL PARTITIONING OF PALESTINE OCCURRED BY UNITED NATIONS ACTION. ISRAELI GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS SOUGHT NONVIOLENT AND ACCOMMODATING RESOLUTIONS TO ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICTS, LEADING TO THE CENSURE OF IRGUN IN THE INTEREST OF A UNIFIED, OFFICIAL POLICY OF MODERATION. BEGIN EVENTUALLY DISMANTLED IRGUN TO ESTABLISH A LEGITIMATE POLITICAL PARTY. WHILE THE MODERATES OF ZIONISM AND ISRAELI OFFICIALDOM VIEWED THE VIOLENT ACTIVITIES OF IRGUN AND LEHI AS A MORAL BLIGHT ON THE JEWISH PEOPLE AND DESTRUCTIVE OF EFFORTS AT PEACEFUL RESOLUTIONS OF CONFLICTS, OTHERS VIEWED THESE GROUPS AND THEIR MEMBERS AS THE MOST DEDICATED, SACRIFICIAL, AND EFFECTIVE CONTRIBUTORS TO THE ZIONIST CAUSE. AN INDEX IS PROVIDED. (RCB)
Index Term(s): Assassination; Haganah; Irgun; Israel; Lohamey Heruth Israel; Revolutionary or terrorist groups; Terrorist profiles
Two of the operations for which the Irgun is best known are the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946 and the Deir Yassin
massacre, carried out together with Lehi on 9 April 1948. The Irgun has been viewed as a terrorist organization or organization which carried
out terrorist acts.
How Kenya almost became the Promised Land for Jews
How East Africa became home for Polish exiles