Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

European Colonialism and Neo-Colonialism

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The International Criminal Court at the Mercy of Powerful States

Part of the book series: International Criminal Justice Series ((ICJS,volume 13))

  • 1236 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter analyses the historical notions of colonialism and neo-colonialism. It characterises these concepts as transformative frameworks existing between actors of unequal capabilities. Both patterns of domination are not limited to a specific historical or temporal context; rather, over the course of time they have appeared and continue to appear in different contexts. In view of this diversity of manifestations of colonial patterns of rule, this chapter—to comply with the overall focus of this study on the African cause—focuses on European colonialism on the African continent, which was most pervasive in the period between 1884 and the nineteen-sixties, when most African colonial possessions were formally transformed into sovereign states. While the concept of European colonialism is dealt with in the first part of this chapter (Sect. 3.1), the term neo-colonialism, which was originally used to describe ongoing (informal) interference of former colonial powers into their former colonial possessions, is analysed in the second (Sect. 3.2.1). Reference to the Latin American Dependency Theory provides an understanding of the crucial role of ‘asymmetry’ within neo-colonial dependency relations (Sect. 3.2.2). An analysis of the ‘patron-client concept’ confirms the assumption that colonial and neo-colonial forms of domination require not only external structures, but similarly and internal client who is interested in establishing unequal relationships with a dominant counterpart (Sect. 3.3). To distinguish neo-colonial forms of domination from pure patron-client relationships, the chapter closes with an assessment of the concepts of structural and relational power (Sect. 3.4).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Thornton 1962, pp. 341f.

  2. 2.

    The term colonialism derives from the Latin word colonia, meaning ‘farm’ or ‘real estate’ (Curtin 1974, p. 22).

  3. 3.

    On the justification of colonialism see Anghie 2005, pp. 96ff.

  4. 4.

    An electronic version of the poem is available at http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5478/. Accessed 12 November 2016.

  5. 5.

    On the indeterminacy of the term colonialism, Osterhammel 2005, pp. 3f.

  6. 6.

    Curtin 1974, p. 22.

  7. 7.

    Ibid., p. 23.

  8. 8.

    Osterhammel 2005, pp. 16f.

  9. 9.

    Ibid., p. 4.

  10. 10.

    See infra Chap. 4, Sect. 4.1.

  11. 11.

    For a detailed overview over European colonial expansion during this period, Osterhammel 2005, pp. 29ff.

  12. 12.

    Menski 2006, pp. 445ff.

  13. 13.

    See, e.g., Osterhammel 2005, p. 34; Menski 2006, pp. 445ff.; and Crowder 1968, pp. 23ff.

  14. 14.

    Menski 2006, p. 446.

  15. 15.

    See Osterhammel 2005, p. 34. A thorough assessment of the European influence on the African continent is provided in: Oliver and Atmore 2005, Chaps. 1–8. See also Crowder 1968, pp. 23ff. and Roberts 1963, pp. 302ff. An account on the colonial history of Senegal is provided in Crowder 1967, pp. 9–20.

  16. 16.

    See Menski 2006, p. 446; and Oliver and Atmore 2005, pp. 43ff. For an analysis of African-Muslim imperialism on the African continent, Crowder 1968, pp. 31ff.

  17. 17.

    See infra Sect. 3.4. A detailed analysis of the partition of Africa is provided Oliver and Atmore 2005, pp. 118–160.

  18. 18.

    See Birmingham 1995, p. 5.

  19. 19.

    Kämmerer 2012, p. 335, para 8.

  20. 20.

    See Osterhammel 2005, p. 115; Roberts 1963, pp. 18f.

  21. 21.

    An overview over the different regions and the prevailing colonial influences on the African continent is provided in Oliver and Atmore 2005.

  22. 22.

    The development of colonial Africa illustrated through maps can be found at http://etc.usf.edu/maps/galleries/africa/complete/index.php. Accessed 12 November 2016. Other European colonial powers with African colonial possessions were Portugal, Spain, Italy, Belgium and Germany . After the First World War , the German colonies were divided between Great Britain , France , Belgium and the Union of South Africa (see infra Sect. 3.4.).

  23. 23.

    On the process of the decolonisation of African countries see, Oliver and Atmore 2005, pp. 226ff.; and Birmingham 1995.

  24. 24.

    See Osterhammel 2005, p. 115; and Oliver and Atmore 2005, Chapter 16.

  25. 25.

    Birmingham 1995, p. 4.

  26. 26.

    See infra Sect. 3.2.

  27. 27.

    Examples of patron-client relationships conducted by the U.S. and the Soviet Union are provided in Shoemaker and Spanier 1984.

  28. 28.

    See Osterhammel 2005, p. 115.

  29. 29.

    For an overview over the dates of independence of African states, Birmingham 1995, pp. 67–74.

  30. 30.

    Young 1991, p. 2.

  31. 31.

    See Spivak 1991, p. 220.

  32. 32.

    Kwame Nkrumah was the leader of Ghana and its predecessor state, the Gold Coast, from 1952–1966. He died in 1972 and was author of two main contributions relating to the topic of neo-colonialism (Nkrumah 1970 and Nkrumah 1965).

  33. 33.

    Nkrumah 1965. An analysis of Nkrumah ’s concept of neo-colonialism can be found in: Gassama 2008, pp. 327–60.

  34. 34.

    Nkrumah 1965, p. xiii.

  35. 35.

    Ibid., p. ix.

  36. 36.

    Knorr 1975, p. 255 (emphasis in the original).

  37. 37.

    See ibid., pp. 252f. For a description of informal modes of rule, Osterhammel 2005, pp. 18–21.

  38. 38.

    See Knorr 1975, pp. 252ff.

  39. 39.

    See Bodenheimer 1971, pp. 338f.

  40. 40.

    All African Peoples’ Conference. ‘Resolution on Neocolonialism’ (25–31 March 1961). https://www.pambazuka.org/global-south/africa-all-african-peoples-conference-statement-neocolonialism. Accessed 12 November 2016.

  41. 41.

    Nkrumah 1965, p. 239.

  42. 42.

    Spivak 1991, pp. 224f. For an overview over the various existing forms of colonialism, Osterhammel 2005.

  43. 43.

    See ibid, p. 19; Knorr 1975, pp. 253f.; and Woddis 1967, p. 51.

  44. 44.

    See, among others, Osterhammel 2005, pp. 19f.; Anghie 2005, pp. 67ff.; Alexandrowicz 1975, pp. 33–38; Gallagher and Robinson 1953, pp. 1–15. An assessment of pre-colonial informal commercial relationships between the natives and Europeans is also provided in: Mann and Roberts 1991, pp. 9ff.

  45. 45.

    See Nkrumah 1965, p. xvii.

  46. 46.

    See ibid., p. x; and Spivak 1991, p. 225.

  47. 47.

    See, among others, Nkrumah 1965, p. 239; Woddis 1967, pp. 46ff., 70; and Osterhammel 2005, p. 19.

  48. 48.

    Osterhammel 2005, p. 18.

  49. 49.

    Several authors have assessed the relationship between Western companies and underdevelopment in African states. See, among others, Nkrumah 1965; Amin 1973; Lanning and Mueller 1979.

  50. 50.

    On the influence of international financial institutions on developing countries, Anghie 1999, pp. 243–90. See also T. Obadina . ‘The myth of Neo-colonialism’ Africa Economic Analysis (04 November 2008). http://www.africaeconomicanalysis.org/articles/gen/neocolonialismhtml.html. Accessed 12 November 2016.

  51. 51.

    On the dependency theory, see, e.g., Frank 1969; and Bodenheimer 1971. On the dependency theory in an African context, Ahiakpor 1985, pp. 535–52.

  52. 52.

    See Frank 1969, pp. 4ff.

  53. 53.

    Ibid., pp. 6f.

  54. 54.

    Ibid., p. 4.

  55. 55.

    Assessing the dependency of African states, Walter Rodney similarly links the European expansion to economic objectives: ‘The concept of metropole and dependency automatically came into existence when parts of Africa were caught up in the web of international commerce. On the one hand, there were the European countries who decided on the role to be played by the African economy; and on the other hand, Africa formed an extension to the European capitalist market. As far as foreign trade was concerned, Africa was dependent on what Europeans were prepared to buy and sell.’ (Rodney 2012, p. 76).

  56. 56.

    Bodenheimer 1971, pp. 334f.

  57. 57.

    Rodney 2012, p. 236.

  58. 58.

    See, in particular, infra Sect. 3.3. Also, Bodenheimer 1971, pp. 337ff.

  59. 59.

    See ibid., p. 337.

  60. 60.

    As Bodenheimer notes, ‘dependency does not simply mean external domination, unilaterally superimposed from abroad and unilaterally producing “internal consequences”. The internal dynamics of dependency are as much a function of penetration as of domination. It is in this way that dependency in Latin America differs from that of a formal colony: while the chains binding the latter to the mother country are overt and direct (administrative control), those of the former are subtler and are internal to the nation—and for that reason are much more difficult to break. In this sense, the infrastructure of dependency may be seen as the functional equivalent of a formal colonial apparatus-the principal difference being, perhaps, that since all classes and structures in Latin society have to a greater or lesser degree internalized and institutionalized the legacy of dependency, that legacy is much more difficult to overcome’ (ibid., pp. 338f.).

  61. 61.

    Ibid., p. 339.

  62. 62.

    See ibid., p. 339; and Obadina , supra note 50.

  63. 63.

    Bodenheimer 1971, p. 337.

  64. 64.

    Berman 1998, p. 316.

  65. 65.

    On various forms of political patronage and clientelism in post-colonial Africa, Arriola 2009, pp. 1339–62; Van de Walle 2007, pp. 50–67; Lemarchand 1972, pp. 68–90; Berman 1974, pp. 3-25.

  66. 66.

    See, exemplarily, Arriola 2009, pp. 1340f.

  67. 67.

    Van de Walle 2007, p. 51.

  68. 68.

    ‘Africa’s political instability is conventionally attributed to the manner in which leaders sustain themselves in power. Leaders across the region hold onto office by purchasing support through the distribution of state resources; as such, any conflict over their allocation is thought to degenerate into a struggle over control of the state. Violence erupts either because some elites crave a larger share of the spoils controlled by the leader or because those outside the leader’s patronage-based coalition want access to resources to which they have been denied’ (Arriola 2009, p. 1339).

  69. 69.

    See, among others, Lemarchand and Legg 1972, p. 151; Kaufman 1974, p. 285; Carney 1989, p. 45; and Hicken 2011, p. 291.

  70. 70.

    Hicken 2011, p. 291.

  71. 71.

    See Shoemaker and Spanier 1984, p. 17; and Carney 1989, p. 47.

  72. 72.

    Shoemaker and Spanier 1984, p. 17.

  73. 73.

    Thornton 1962, pp. 341f. (emphasis added).

  74. 74.

    Strange 1994. On the dimensions of power existing in the domain of international relations see, among others, Dahl and Stinebrickner 2002, pp. 14ff.; Knorr 1975, pp. 3ff.; and Brown and Ainley 2005, pp. 80ff.

  75. 75.

    See supra Sect. 3.3.

  76. 76.

    In a similar vein, Vengroff 1975, p. 235.

  77. 77.

    This form of power is described by C.R. Beitz ‘as an actor’s capacity to cause other actors to act (or not act) in way in which they would not act (or would have acted) otherwise’ (Beitz 1999, p. 44). See also, Brown and Ainley 2005, pp. 83ff.; Strange 1989, p. 165; Pustovitovskij and Kremer 2011, p. 3.

  78. 78.

    A. Pustovitovskij and J-F Kremer. ‘Towards a New Understanding of Structural Power’ (2012). https://ecpr.eu/Filestore/PaperProposal/d8d7f4f1-ec98-4215-9f73-b9036ab53027.pdf. Accessed 12 November 2016, pp. 3f.

  79. 79.

    See, among others, Strange 1994, pp. 24ff.; Brown and Ainley 2005, pp. 89ff.; and Ward 1987, pp. 593–610.

  80. 80.

    See Carney 1989, p. 44; Kaufman 1974, p. 295; Gasiorowski 1986, pp. 60f.

  81. 81.

    See Strange 1989, p. 165.

  82. 82.

    See infra Chap. 4.

  83. 83.

    L. Oppenheim, in total, has listed five different modes of acquiring a territory: cession , occupation , accretion, subjugation and prescription (Jennings and Watts 1992, p. 679). However, not all of them were relevant in the context of colonialism.

  84. 84.

    Ibid., p. 679.

  85. 85.

    Lindley 1926, p. 45.

  86. 86.

    Ibid., p. 160.

  87. 87.

    Jennings and Watts 1992, p. 679.

  88. 88.

    For a comprehensive analysis of the right of conquest , Korman 1996.

  89. 89.

    On treaties between European and African states, Alexandrowicz 1975; Lindley 1926, pp. 169–177; Shaw 1986, pp. 38–45; and Anghie 2005, pp. 67ff.

  90. 90.

    In this context, it is noteworthy that a number of authors have argued that international law has been structured by European states to facilitate colonialism and subordination of non-European people since the sixteenth century (see, e.g., Anghie 2005).

  91. 91.

    For an introduction to the Berlin West Africa Conference , Robinson 1988, pp. 1–32.

  92. 92.

    The General Act of the Berlin Conference on West Africa was signed by the representatives of the United Kingdom, France , Germany , Austria, Belgium , Denmark, Spain, the United States of America, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Russia , Sweden-Norway, and Turkey (Ottoman Empire ) (see General Act of the Berlin Conference on West Africa (26 February 1885). http://africanhistory.about.com/od/eracolonialism/l/bl-BerlinAct1885.htm. Accessed 12 November 2016 [hereinafter Berlin Act]).

  93. 93.

    Fisch 1988, p. 347.

  94. 94.

    See preamble of the Berlin Act, supra note 92.

  95. 95.

    Chapter VI Berlin Act (Declaration relative to the essential conditions to be observed in order that new occupations on the coasts of the African continent may be held effective) (emphasis added):

    Article 34: ‘Any Power which henceforth takes possession of a tract of land on the coasts of the African continent outside of its present possessions, or which, being hitherto without such possessions, shall acquire them, as well as the Power which assumes a Protectorate there, shall accompany the respective act with a notification thereof, addressed to the other Signatory Powers of the present Act, in order to enable them, if need be, to make good any claims of their own.’ (Emphasis added).

    Article 35: ‘The Signatory Powers of the present Act recognize the obligation to insure the establishment of authority in the regions occupied by them on the coasts of the African continent sufficient to protect existing rights, and, as the case may be, freedom of trade and of transit under the conditions agreed upon’ (emphasis added) (Berlin Act, supra note 92).

  96. 96.

    See, among others, Mutua 1994–95, p. 1135, n. 84; and Anghie 2005, p. 91.

  97. 97.

    Lindley 1926, p. 34. In the same vein, Shaw 1986, pp. 31–39; Fisch 1988, pp. 358f. The ICJ, in the Western Sahara Advisory Opinion, came to the same conclusion (Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Rep. 1975, p. 12., at para 80).

  98. 98.

    See Fisch 1988, p. 347; and Koskenniemi 2004, p. 123.

  99. 99.

    Shaw 1986, p. 38 (emphasis in the original).

  100. 100.

    Fisch 1988, p. 348.

  101. 101.

    Article 6 Berlin Act, supra note 92.

  102. 102.

    See Koskenniemi 2004, pp. 123ff.; and Anghie 2005, pp. 92ff.

  103. 103.

    Robinson 1988, p. 1.

  104. 104.

    Ibid., p. 25.

  105. 105.

    An overview over disputed spheres of influence in colonial Africa is provided in Lindley 1926, pp. 212ff.

  106. 106.

    On the League of Nations Mandate system, Lindley 1926, pp. 247–269; and Chowdhuri 1955. For a critical account on these institutions, see Anghie 2005, pp. 119ff.; Mutua 1994–5, pp. 1137ff.; and Gordon 1997, pp. 940–946.

  107. 107.

    See Lindley 1926, p. 251.

  108. 108.

    Article 22(1) Covenant of the League of Nations (28 June 1919, 2 Bevans 48, Entry into Force 10 January 1920) [hereinafter Covenant].

  109. 109.

    Covenant, Article 22(9). On the functions of the commission, Lindley 1926, pp. 249f.

  110. 110.

    Covenant, Article 22(5).

  111. 111.

    Lindley 1926, p. 267.

  112. 112.

    Covenant, Article 22(6).

  113. 113.

    In a similar vein, Mutua 1994–5, p. 1138.

  114. 114.

    See Gordon 1997, p. 946.

  115. 115.

    See Chapters XII–XIII UNC. An introduction to the trusteeship system is provided in Gordon 1997, pp. 946–954. For a more detailed assessment, Chowdhuri 1955.

  116. 116.

    Chapter XIII UNC.

  117. 117.

    See Chowdhuri 1955, pp. 112–117.

  118. 118.

    See Gordon 1997, p. 948, n. 227.

  119. 119.

    Article 76(b) UNC.

  120. 120.

    Shaw 1986, p. 38.

  121. 121.

    See infra Chap. 4, Sect. 4.1.

  122. 122.

    See infra Chap. 4, Sect. 4.2.

  123. 123.

    See supra Sect. 3.2.

  124. 124.

    A. Anghie, for example, has made the bold claim that international monetary institutions, in terms of structure and influence, strongly resemble the League of Nations Mandate system: ‘The technologies devised in the Mandate System to manage relations between the colonizer and the colonized continue to play a profoundly important role in managing relations between their successors, the developed and undeveloped/developing. In strictly legal terms, the Mandate System was succeeded by the Trusteeship System . But in terms of technologies of management, it is the Bretton Woods Institutions (BWI)—the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)—that are the contemporary successors of the Mandate System’ (Anghie 2005, p. 191 (in a similar vein, p. 288); see also, Rodney 2012, p. 236; and Anghie 1999).

  125. 125.

    See supra Sect. 3.2.2.

  126. 126.

    See supra Sects. 3.2. and 3.3.

  127. 127.

    See supra Sect. 3.2.

References

  • Ahiakpor JCW (1985) The Success and Failure of Dependency Theory: The Experience of Ghana. International Organization 39(3):535–552

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexandrowicz CH (1975) The Role of Treaties in the European-African Confrontation in the Nineteenth Century. In: Mensah-Brown AK (ed) African International Legal History. UNITAR, New York, pp 27–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Amin S (1973) Neo-colonialism in West Africa. Monthly Review Press, New York (translated by McDonagh F)

    Google Scholar 

  • Anghie A (1999) Time Present and Time Past: Globalization, International Financial Institutions, and the Third World. NYU Journal of International Law and Politics 32:243–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Anghie A (2005) Imperialism, Sovereignty, and the Making of International Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Arriola L (2009) Patronage and Political Stability in Africa. Comparative Political Studies 42(10):1339–1362

    Google Scholar 

  • Beitz CR (1999) Political Theory and International Relations. Princeton University Press, Princeton (reprint of original version from 1979)

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman BJ (1974) Clientelism and Neocolonialism: Center-Periphery Relations and Political Development in African States. Studies in Comparative International Development 9(2):3–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman BJ (1998) Ethnicity, Patronage and the African State: The Politics of Uncivil Nationalism. African Affairs 97:305–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Birmingham D (1995) The Decolonization of Africa. UCL Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodenheimer S (1971) Dependency and Imperialism: The Roots of Latin American Underdevelopment. Politics & Society 1(3):327–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown C, Ainley K (2005) Understanding International Relations, 3rd edn. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

    Google Scholar 

  • Carney CP (1989) International Patron-Client Relationships: A Conceptual Framework. Studies in Comparative International Development 24(2):42–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhuri RN (1955) International Mandates and Trusteeship Systems: A Comparative Study. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowder M (1967) Senegal: A Study of French Assimilation Policy, 2nd edn. Methuen & Co Ltd., London

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowder M (1968) West Africa under Colonial Rule. Hutchinson, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtin PD (1974) The Black Experience of Colonialism and Imperialism. Daedalus 103(2):17–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl RA, Stinebrickner B (2002) Modern Political Analysis, 6th edn. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisch J (1988) Africa as terra nullius: The Berlin Conference and International Law. In: Förster S, Mommsen WJ, Robinson R (eds) Bismarck, Europe, and Africa: The Berlin Africa Conference 1884–1885 and the Onset of Partition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 347–375

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank AG (1969) Latin America: Underdevelopment or Revolution. Monthly Review Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher J, Robinson R (1953) The Imperialism of Free Trade. The Economic History Review 6(1):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasiorowski MJ (1986) Dependency and Cliency in Latin America. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 28(3):47–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Gassama IJ (2008) Africa and the Politics of Destruction: A Critical Re-examination of Neocolonialism and Its Consequences. Oregon Review of International Law 10(2):327–360

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon R (1997) Saving Failed States: Sometimes a Neocolonialist Notion. American University International Law Review 12(6):903–974

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicken A (2011) Clientelism. Annual Review of Political Science 14:289–310

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings R, Watts A (eds) (1992) Oppenheim’s International Law: Peace, 9th edn. Longman Group, Harlow

    Google Scholar 

  • Kämmerer JA (2012) Colonialism. In: Wolfrum R (ed) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 332–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman R (1974) The Patron-Client Concept and Macro-Politics: Prospects and Problems. Comparative Studies in Society and History 16(3):284–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr K (1975) The Power of Nations: The Political Economy of International Relations. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Korman S (1996) The Right of Conquest: The Acquisition of Territory by Force in International Law and Practice. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskenniemi M (2004) The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870–1960. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanning G, Mueller M (1979) Africa Undermined: Mining Companies and the Underdevelopment of Africa. Penguin, Harmondsworth

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemarchand R (1972) Political Clientelism and Ethnicity in Tropical Africa: Competing Solidarities in Nation-Building. The American Political Science Review 66(1):68–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemarchand R, Legg K (1972) Political Clientelism and Development: A Preliminary Analysis. Comparative Politics 4(2):149–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindley MF (1926) The Acquisition and Government of Backward Territory in International Law. Longmans, Green and Co. Ltd., London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann K, Roberts R (1991) Law in Colonial Africa. In: Mann K, Roberts R (eds) Law in Colonial Africa. Heinemann, Portsmouth, pp 3–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Menski W (2006) Comparative Law in a Global Context: The Legal Systems of Asia and Africa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mutua M (1994–1995) Why Redraw the Map of Africa: A Moral and Legal Inquiry. Michigan Journal of International Law 16:1113–1176

    Google Scholar 

  • Nkrumah K (1965) Neo-colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. International Publishers Co., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nkrumah K (1970) Consciencism: Philosophy and Ideology for Decolonization. Monthly Review Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver R, Atmore A (2005) Africa Since 1800, 5th edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterhammel J (2005) Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview, 2nd edn. Markus Wiener, Princeton (translated by Frisch SL)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pustovitovskij A, Kremer J (2011) Structural Power and International Relations Analysis ‘‘Fill Your Basket, Get Your Preferences’’. Institut für Entwicklungsforschung (IEE) 191:1–20 (working paper)

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts SH (1963) The History of French Colonial Policy. Frank Cass & Co. Ltd., London (new impr.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson R (1988) The Conference in Berlin at the Future in Africa, 1884–1885. In: Förster S, Mommsen WJ, Robinson R (eds) Bismarck, Europe, and Africa: The Berlin Africa Conference 1884–1885 and the Onset of Partition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodney W (2012) How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, reprint of revised edn. 1981. Fahamu/Pambazuka, Cape Town

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw M (1986) Title to Territory in Africa. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoemaker C, Spanier J (1984) Patron-Client State Relationships: Multilateral Crises in the Nuclear Age. Praeger Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivak GC (interviewed by JC Young) (1991) Neocolonialism and the Secret Agent of Knowledge. Oxford Literary Review 13(1):220–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Strange S (1989) Toward a Theory of Transnational Empire. In: Czempiel EO, Rosenau JN (eds) Global Changes and Theoretical Challenges. Lexington Books, Lexington, pp 161–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Strange S (1994) States and Markets, 2nd edn. Pinter, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton AP (1962) Colonialism. International Journal 17(4):335–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Walle N (2007) Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss? The Evolution of Political Clientelism in Africa. In: Kitschelt H, Wilkinson S (eds) Patrons, Clients, and Policies: Patterns of Democratic Accountability and Political Competition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 50–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Vengroff R (1975) Neo-colonialism and policy outputs in Africa. Comparative Political Studies 8(2):234–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward H (1987) Structural Power - A Contradiction in Terms? Political Studies 35:593–610

    Google Scholar 

  • Woddis J (1967) An Introduction to Neo-colonialism. International Publishers Co., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Young RJC (1991) Neocolonial Times: Introduction to Neocolonialism. Oxford Literary Review 13(1):2–3

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Zürich, Switzerland

    Res Schuerch

Authors
  1. Res Schuerch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Res Schuerch .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 T.M.C. Asser Press and the author

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schuerch, R. (2017). European Colonialism and Neo-Colonialism. In: The International Criminal Court at the Mercy of Powerful States. International Criminal Justice Series, vol 13. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-192-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-192-0_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-191-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-192-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation