The long tail of decolonization

Apparently, this is the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism, as the UN General Assembly declared last year. I didn’t even know there was a First or Second decade, which have now receded into the immediate past.

Sixteen ‘non self-governing territories’ form the list that occupies this committee’s time – the remnants of the original bursts of decolonization in the 1960s and 1970s. These span the globe, from Western Sahara and the British and U.S. Virgin Islands, to Gibraltar, the Falklands and Guam. Kudos to the Associated Press for a little bit of reporting on this dusty corner of the UN machinery:

“The committee is one of the few forums in which colonialism’s last remaining subjects can make themselves heard. Its latest annual meeting, in June, featured voices as disparate as lawmakers from Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands, a headman from a cluster of New Zealand-ruled islets, and a spokesman for a Saharan territory that has been fighting for independence for 35 years.

“Some may see the U.N. committee as an anachronism, little noticed by anyone other than those who attend its meetings: two dozen ambassadors of countries with a direct interest in the decolonization process, and representatives of the territories in question.

“But Ahmed Boukhari of the Polisario Front, which seeks the independence of Moroccan-controlled Western Sahara, says its existence is vital.

“Not only do we need the committee, we need to enhance it,” he told The Associated Press. “For the people of the territories, it’s an essential element in their struggle for self-determination.”

The long history of this committee casts a fascinating light on how new states have been created over the past half century, and how we’ve moved to a world of 193 states. The special committee that takes up this question of decolonization finds its institutional forebears in the League of Nations’ mandates system, and the UN’s trusteeship scheme, but it was the 1960 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples that effectively turned independence, or national liberation, into a goal in and of itself, rather than some means to a higher end.

This is the establishment of self-determination as a right, irrespective of the political or economic state of that territory – and self-determination on the basis of colonial boundaries and definitions of what the ‘state’ is in territorial terms. The consequence, with which all these decolonized states have had to deal with in the decades since, is a presumption against the further secession or division of the territory, which has proved problematic for the many multiethnic groups contained within states aspiring to statehood of their own.

As K.J. Holsti pointed out (in The State, War, and the State of War, 1996):

“Having been a colony was sufficient qualification for attaining immediate membership of the United Nations. There was to be no scrutiny of post-colonial political arrangements and practices…

“The process of decolonization produced a single format – the Western territorial state. The heterogeneity of political forms that had existed throughout man’s organized history has now been reduced to a single form…It is clear, however, that the universalization of the territorial state format does not mean that all states share the same characteristics. In particular, artificial states – the creation of colonial authorities and international organizations – are in many ways fundamentally different from states that grew slowly through an organic process involving wars, administrative centralization, the provision of welfare entitlements, and the development of national identities and sentiments.”

And so the sixteen territories on the list are a snapshot of a previous time when they, like much of the world’s surface area, would have been organized into colonial empires. The list is itself a reminder of that historical moment when norms about what constituted statehood and claims to sovereignty were transformed, and its existence today the long tail of the wave of decolonization.

For newer secessionist struggles or movements over the past two decades – as most recently in South Sudan – the Special Committee on Decolonization has little to say. “Finishing the job” of decolonization, as its website has it, only extends to previously recognized colonial boundaries, and not to anything in between. The world map, for any would-be new states, looks frustratingly stable – and their battles detached from the particular label of ‘decolonization’.

Tagged , , , , , , ,

3 thoughts on “The long tail of decolonization

  1. Nick L says:

    Hi Nick. Agreed, ‘decolonization’ has always meant an end to white minority rule, which was why within the political arena of the General Assembly it was always linked to apartheid and the Israel-Palestine issue. Otherwise, yes the rule has been ‘uti posseditis juris’. No one, East West North South, wants to give the green light to every national minority by acknowledging a general right to succession. But this has meant that practices similar to colonialism in in the post-colonial world have escaped international scrutiny – minority rule by the Sunni royal family in Bahrain comes to mind.

    Have you read much by Craig N Murphy? He argues that international organisations and the UN in particular were key to the process of decolonisation – something which Mazower’s recent book on the early UN backs up.

    • Nick Chan says:

      That’s a rather neat and symmetrical way of putting it – the colonial practices that remain after decolonization, and puts a different spin on ‘neocolonial’ language usually associated with the behaviour of Northern/Western former metropoles.

      Haven’t read much Craig Murphy ( at least that I can recall), but the Mazower book – No Enchanted Palace – was a fascinating read in it’s take on the ‘what the UN’s founding fathers wanted’ question.

  2. CB says:

    Take a look at what’s happening in Turks and Caicos, recolonization by the British against the order of the UN. The UN made an express declaration warning the UK to return Turks and Caicos to the people. The UK has refused and has taken the government and rewritten the constitution without a referendum by the citizens. This is modern-day imperialism. Cayman is next.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: