Caner elebiolu

THIRD WORLD, IMPERIALISM and THE WEST

A Vicious Circle
As of 21st century, most of the world population is poor. Majority of those people are living mainly in the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The people whom we mention are living under hard living conditions. Many of them suffer from malnutrition, immense hunger and chronic diseases. Some portion of them even cannot find clear water for drinking at all. Life standards of the aforementioned people are definitely too below than those who living in industrialized Western countries. The third world refers to the poor of the world, those who are franchised in an international system dominated by the industrialized countries: the North, the developed, the rich1.And the South usually refers to the opposite. Of course this NorthSouth differentiation is in general terms; there are some underdeveloped countries in the North (mostly in Asia) and there are a few developed countries in the South (Australia, New Zealand). Etymology of Third World: We will come from there to the origin and definition of Third World term. The French demographer Alfred Sauvy first said the expression ("Tiers Monde" in French) in 1952 by analogy with the "third estate. It refers to the commoners of France before and during the French Revolution-as opposed to priests and nobles, comprising the first and second estates respectively. The first estate was the Lords Spiritual (clergy); the second estate the bourgeoisie of commercial class2.Power was in the hands of the first and second estates in terms of politics. The rest of people were third estate as having the majority of population yet no powers and rights in politics and economics. Third estate became a sort of slogan in the French Revolution. We can see their desire to be equal citizens in the famous three words of the 1789 Revolution; libert, galit, fraternit. Third World term, originated from the end of 18th century, became a label of all poor and oppressed people of world in the 20th century. Some famous writers\thinkers such as Jean-Paul Sartre used the term. Usage of the Third World term: During the Cold War period; Third World word is used also for political categorization of the world in blocks. Industrialized Western countries were the First World. More precisely, it composes of USA and its capitalist allies. From the view of Western approach, First World introduced as the ideal, supposed to be world for people. Soviet Union and its communist Eastern Europe allies were called as Second World. It was an inhuman, non-democratic and lesser world for human beings according to the West. The living standards of the 2nd World werent good as capitalist 1st World. In addition to these two worlds, the rest of the world accepted as Third World. These were mainly non-industrialized, underdeveloped and post-colonial states. They were mostly former colonial states of Western powers (e.g. Britain, France, Netherlands, Spain), gained their independencies after the Second World War in 1950s, 1960s and so on. These countries were neither capitalist or communists and struggling with hunger, poverty and misery. Therefore they labelled as the Third World.

1 Isbister,John, Promises Not Kept, (Connecticut,Kumarian Press,2006) p.16 2 Ibid, p.15

The plight of the Third World is not only economic; it is social and political as well 3. Independence and democratic movements were promising and optimistic at first, however most of them turned to authoritarian regimes or simply tyrannies. In the countless civil wars and regional conflicts; millions of people killed in Third World countries such as Vietnam, Congo, Somalia, Rwanda, Iraq and many others. On the other hand; Third World is a too big realm for evaluating all the members of it as same, resembling units. Some countries which were traditionally accepted as 3rd World are much more developed than other countries in the 3rd World. These countries are mostly petroleum exporting Arab countries, with a more precise explanation the OPEC countries. With the assistance of huge petroleum export to the industrialized West, especially Gulf States including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Qatar and Kuwait reached huge national incomes. In fact; according to 2010 IMF country list by purchasing power parity Qatar had 1st rank, UAE had 6th and Kuwait had 15th rank4. There are indeed some progress and developments in the certain areas of Third World. East Asia showed an impressive advancement. Poverty is better in China rather than India. East Asian Newly Developed Countries (NICs) have transformed themselves so carefully and have become such industrial that they are almost at a European level, though many other Asian states are still badly poor5. In the future; we may need more detailed classification than todays third world. It would not be a surprise if a new term will be spoken as Fourth World. . The Third World was not born as a free and fully autonomous entity; the process of colonial and imperial rule was in the nature of a big melting pot into which third world societies were sucked and moulded6. Imperialism played an important role in determining todays world. Its most recognizable effect can be seen on the 3rd world. First European powers, then Americans (simpler words, the West) created colonies expanded their dominions all over the world including Americas, Africa and Asia-Pacific. In many areas, imperialism took the form of colonization by white settler families who displaced the local people7. Therefore its no secret that it often took place violently. Some people dont think that the situation of third world is because of the western colonialism. According to them those countries called as third world have always been poor and quite traditional. Modernizationists are in this category. On the other hand; especially Marxists and dependency theorists think third world is third world by the hand of the imperialism. Marxists see imperialism as having shattered old class structures; they see the classes and class conflicts of third world countries today as having arisen in response to the dislocation of imperialist domination8.Dependency theorists are more accusative against imperialism: Imperialism and its todays form neocolonialism created the poverty and underdevelopment of the third world. We will first introduce Marxist theory of imperialism;

3 Ibid, p.3 4 Data refer to the year 2010. World Economic Outlook Database-September 2011, International Monetary Fund.
Accessed on September 20, 2011.

5 Isbister,John, Promises Not Kept, (Connecticut,Kumarian Press,2006) p.25 6 Ed.Ayoob,Mohammed, Conflict and Intervention in the Third Worl d(London,Croom Helm, 2011,vol.86)S.D Muni, p.38 7 Isbister,John, Promises Not Kept, (Connecticut,Kumarian Press,2006) p.65 8 Ibid, p.66

Marxist theory of imperialism: They construct the theory on the base of production mode of capitalism. Imperialism word is used in a technical way. The Marxist theory uses the term to describe a special stage of capitalist development and, by extension, it speaks of the epoch of imperialism in which that has become the dominant form and emphasizes the new, distinguishing features of this stage9. Actually, Karl Marx didnt write a Marxist theory of imperialism however he made some analysis of capitalist mode of production. That gave new generation Marxists (and Leninists) a starting ground for a theory of imperialism. These are introduced in the chapters of the reproduction schemas, the tendency for the rate of profit to fall and the concentration and centralization of capital of Das Kapital. Capitalist mode of production emerged and spread out all Europe and North America. However, this increased production exceeded the geographic limits of the West. Capitalism needed more lands, more people therefore it resulted capitalist states to find new markets and cheap labour force. Rise of capitalism made world into a big market. European states became nation-states in the 19th century, bringing different national interest onto surface. According to the Marxists, it led to the beginning of imperialism in that century. Non-Marxists see imperialism mostly in a political way; therefore they tend to think that imperialism is over because the colonization epoch ended. However Marxists see imperialism in a broader sense and consider colonization of weaker countries in the past as a stage of imperialism. If we simply look into the capitalist reasons of imperialism by the angle of Marxism; we may evaluate it under three points: Firstly, capitalists, under the form of enterprises, needed to grow their markets more. Having developed military technologies, advanced states used their power over weak states in Africa and Asia to force them to become their trade partners. Second; by creating colonies, other areas of the world connected to the advanced economies of the West. A great flow of primary resources, raw materials emerged in favour of the capitalist states .Thirdly; this required the export of capital to underdeveloped regions to build railways and ports, opening up their interiors and thus bringing sections of their economies into dependence on the world market10.Fourthly; international division of labour became perceptible by the requirements and needs of the advanced countries. Later; Lenin, who was the worldwide-known practitioner of Marxism, developed more these ideas.

Modernization theory and imperialism Modernization theory is a grand theory encompassing many different disciplines as it seeks to explain how society progresses, what variables affect that progress, and how societies can react to that progress. The foundations of modernization theory go back to the Age of Enlightenment, when a number of philosophers began to look at how society changed and progressed11. It plays an important ecol about poverty and economic, social and political structures in the third world. The concept of traditional society is a vital point in this approach. The modernizationists think of todays third world societies as being largely traditional; they also think of Western Europe as having been traditional in the long period before the era of modern economic growth and cultural change12. For the modernization view;
9 Owen,Roger-Sutcliffe,Bob Studies in the theory of imperialism, Bristol,Longman Group, 1972, edited by Roger Owen,Bob Sutcliffe) p.18 10 Ibid, p.21 11 http://c.wisegeek.com/what-is-modernization-theory.htm Accessed on 22 December, 2011 12 Isbister,John, Promises Not Kept, (Connecticut,Kumarian Press,2006) p.32

a traditional society is something static and inactive. It tend to be repetitive not progressive and changing. Family, spiritual values takes an important part in traditional societies. Individual are not important on their own, what is important is community. The modernizationists argue that the poverty and backwardness of the third world can be understood simply as the failure of those societies to stir up the same sparks of creativity as the West did13. They argue that without any significant effort in terms of science, technology, philosophy, democracy and modern state institutions; third world wasnt improved even before the Imperial age. Dependency theory Dependency theorists criticize the modernizationists. According to this theory; it is the rich Western countries which caused the underdevelopment and poverty in the third world by their acts and todays global capitalism still impedes the development of those countries. They argue that current misery and impoverishment of the third world were emerged to due to Western colonial powers and yet it still deprive from preventing poverty. That makes a vicious circle for the third world since past and to now on. Dependency theory was actually derived from Marxism. The most important forerunner of dependency school was Raul Prebisch, he was an Argentinean economist who was secretary of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) in the 1950s and of its Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in the 1960s. After him; other dependency theorists take place such as some Latin American scholars Celso Furtado, Theotonio Dos Santos and outside Latin America; there have been Samir Amin, Immanuel Wallerstein, Andr Gunder Frank. In modernizationists view; underdevelopment of the third world is a condition which its roots come from the traditional living styles of aforementioned countries and developed rich countries are not the cause of the third world. On the other hand; dependency theorists think that the underdevelopment of those states is a process, not a condition as modernizationists claimed. Underdevelopment is not just failure to develop; it is an active process of impoverishment14. Dependency theory doesnt believe that the third world countries are primitive. However, after the emergence and spread of European Capitalism; capitalists began to search new areas for making more profits. It opened the road to control and seize the other areas of the world by capitalist states. And as a result, these processes affected the structures and societies of the third world. Looking Imperialism from the Third World Sight In this section; we are about to mention a little of the views of thinkers/theorists from third world. We both examine their attitudes and also look into the used justifications of the Imperialism for having power over these countries. And so we can have an idea about the colonialist imperial way of action and what people from third think of imperialism which has been implemented on them for long decades. Before moving on, maybe its a good point to enlighten the relation between colonialism and imperialism. In general terms; classical colonialism denotes the actual conquest, occupation and settlement of a country, whereas imperialism suggest a broader set of practices, including those by which a great power in essence governs the world according to its own vision, using a variety of means and methods that may or may not include actual
13 Ibid, p.36 14 Ibid, p.42

conquest or settlement15.It is possible to say that; colonialism is a part or a branch of imperialism. Imperialism has more methods than just Colonialism. Effect of Colonialism on third world wasnt only in terms of economics but also in sociopolitical and sociologic terms. Apart from Western thinkers and scholars; there have been some writers from third world countries who examine imperialism and third world from their own eyes. They mainly studied that how did West became technologically developed and rest of the world remain backward in advancement, what have been the main effects of Western imperialism, and the colonial or semi-colonial systems to which it gave rise16. The effects on the societies of the colonizers and the colonized people; and the current situation of the third world also questioned. African theorists who wrote about imperialism period were aware of that era brought many differences from the pre-colonial period. The names of some of the third worlds thinkers are Edward Blyden, Marcus Garvey, Jamal Afghani, and Sultan Galiyev. The countries which lived under the colonial rule of British or French empires werent the same countries anymore. After the independence of former colonized countries; they also realized that the effect of the West still continuing in terms of politics, pressure, culture, economic influence and so on. They argued that the Epoch of Imperialism must be understood as simply the most recent stage in the all historical process which European powers used their developed technology and superior military power to enslave and make subjects non-Western peoples for exploitation and enrichment17. They pointed out the similarity between possible reasons or justifications of the Western imperialism and European slave trade. We can write a passage from the resolution on the Negro Question of the League against Imperialism and Colonial Oppression: The development of African peoples was abruptly cut short and their civilization (which, in several places, had reached a highly advanced state) was most completely destroyed. These nations were later declared pagan and savage, an inferior race, destined by the Christian God to be slaves to superiors Europeans18 The sentences above are a good example to have an idea about the imperialist Western way of thinking; at least in the simplest and broadest terms. As we can see; non-Western peoples (and also those who are non-Christian) are seen lesser human beings than the civilized Europeans. A pro-colonialist person of that times might have thought that as the peoples of colonized areas (todays third world) are non-believers and lacking in technologic developments; so they didnt deserve to be treated as equals and current laws and legal rights of Europeans cannot be applied to those who are primitive communities. The positivist idea of the 19th century assisted the colonialist actions. The positivist idea views that uncivilized peoples were not legal entities19. In addition; the occupation doctrine of that time gives more justification to the Colonial powers. Those caused eliminating the existence of many non-European nations. In this point, we should have a look for Oppenheims definition of this doctrine:
15 Anghie,Anthony Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2006) p.273 16 (Ed.) Owen,Roger-Sutcliffe,Bob Studies in the theory of imperialism, Bristol,Longman Group, 1972, Thomas Hodgkin p.95 17 Ibid, p.100 18 The resolution on the Negro Question of the League against Imperialism and Colonial Oppression, held in Brussels, 10-15 February, 1927, published in Voix des Ngres, March 1927, cited in Spiegler, p.140 and also in Das fiammmenzeieven vam Palais Egmot (Berlin,1927) 19 Anghie,Anthony Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2006) p.83

Only such territory can be the object of occupation as is no States land, whether entirely uninhabited, as e.g. and island, inhabited by native whose community is not to be considered as a State. Even civilized individuals may live and have private property on a territory without any union by them into a State proper which exercises sovereignty over such territory. And natives may live on a territory under a tribal organization which needs not to be considered a State proper20. According to this understanding; any territorial ground which native tribes living were considered as areas which subjected to occupation. It gives legal reason to occupy those areas in various regions of the world. Tribal organizations werent counted as states; it is because the definition of a real state was also made by the political philosophy of the colonial powers. Australian territories were occupied by the British by claiming that it was an uninhabited area (terra nullius21) even though native Aborigines were living for a long time in there. We can mention a few propositions of anti-imperialist thinking. First; Third world theorists argues that European civilization was imposed by force to them while imperial thinkers rejected that. It can be expressed better with a sentence from a book on African history: The colonial system came into being because a number of people in Western Europe holding certain ideas in matter of religion, social policy, politics and economics came into contact with African peoples holding different ideas and living under a different system.22 In this point; thinkers of third world are united to view civilization enforcement of the West as a somehow barbaric act. Ironically; Western civilization was seen as barbarism by the third world. Sultan Galiyev, a socialist politician and army officer and writer in Soviet Union with Turkic-Tatar origin, said notable words about this sort of imperialist barbarism. He addresses the foundations and Americanization of the USA: It was necessary for tens of millions of natives of America and American Blacks to die and for the rich culture of the Incas to disappear completely in order that modern America, with its passion for peace, with its cosmopolitan culture of progress and technology, should establish itself. The proud sky-scrapers of Chicago and New York and other towns of Europeanised America were built on the bones of the red-skins and of the Negroes murdered by inhuman planters, and on the smoking ruins of the Incas cities.23 Galiyev argues here that those who claimed third world as savages and barbarians actually behaved savagely against that world. He point outs that this non-humanitarian attitude against non-Western areas helped the rich modern countries became richer and more developed. Second proposition in this re-interpretation of the civilisation/barbarism contrast is that there is no necessary connection between the level of a peoples technological development

20 Oppenheim, International Law, p.292 21 terra nullius is a Latin expression comes from Roman law meaning "land belonging to no one" (or "no man's land"),which is used in international law to describe territory which has never been subject to the sovereignty of any state. 22 W.E.F. Ward, Colonial Rule in West Africa in Joseph C. Anene and Godfrey N. Brown, Africa in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (Ibadan, 1966), p.308 23 M.Sultan Galiyev, La revolution sociale et lOrient, Zhizn Nationalnostey, 42(50), (2 Nov.1919) cited in (Ed.) Owen,Roger-Sutcliffe,Bob Studies in the theory of imperialism, Bristol,Longman Group, 1972 p.104

and the quality of its civilisation24.This is also called as cultural relativist view. In simpler words; having high technology doesnt make a civilization high automatically and having considerable low technology doesnt necessarily cause a civilization become low. Altough it has a tough tongue; another quotation which is fitting this comes from Emile Faure in the 1930s: Because for centuries a few vicious rakes and whores succeeded in having succeeded in having palaces built for themselves at Versailles, and temples elsewhere, theyre called civilised...Peasant peoples, unambitious and hard-working, who till the land, tend their herds and venerate their ancestors, are despoiled and decimated by nations as industrious as they are inhuman25 He wrote these by thinking the experience of Italian invasion of Ethiopia. Nevertheless, it can be also accepted as true according to other third world countries. The third proposition of third world thinkers is might be thought as more assertive than the other prepositions. It defends that third world was already advancing somehow but it was interrupted by the Western Colonialism. Let me express the idea from the voice of Kouyat; He speaks of Samory Ture, an African leader who fought against French colonialists in the French West Africa. He was an important figure for the Africans. Kouyates words: Samorys ambitions tended towards the political unification of the West AfricaOn day history will say whether he was really a condottiere. Certainly the imperative necessity of national unity forced him to perpetrate, or to accept the perpetration of, abuses and a certain excessive rigour. A new social order against all resistance, a force just and salutary in reconstruction. Such, unfortunately, is human nature. Samorys mistake was to awaken too much fear in the Negro masses, and to have disaffected them, even though they loved him.26 The view defends that Africa actually had the power to develop into modern states and capable of conduction themselves. However, imperialist policies of the West in the shape of Colonialism impeded African countries (and the third world) for so long. Imperial apologists: Defenders of this view argues that colonialism of the third world was actually a reluctantly act in history. It is argued that, the imperial powers especially Britain, acquired their colonial possessions reluctantly, as a consequence of a series of historical accidents associated particularly with developments occurring in the non-Western world- For example; the breakdown of collaborating mechanisms of an informal type, the growth of xenophobic populist reaction to local Westernising tendencies, the increasing fragility, instability, etc. of non-Western states, or even the rise of new non-Western imperialisms27. On the other hand; without will to colonising by certain interests of the rulers of colonial powers, it would be hard to start colonising processing.

24 Ed.) Owen,Roger-Sutcliffe,Bob Studies in the theory of imperialism, Bristol,Longman Group, 1972, Thomas Hodgkin p.95 25 Emile Faure, Mon ami Indochinois, Race Ngre (Feb. 1932), cited in Spiegler, p.233, also cited in(Ed.) Owen,Roger-Sutcliffe,Bob Studies in the theory of imperialism, Bristol,Longman Group, 1972 p.105 26 Kouyat, Centenaire de la naissance de Samory Tour, 1830-1930, Race Ngre (July 1930), cited in Spiegler, p.158, also cited in Ed.) Owen,Roger-Sutcliffe,Bob Studies in the theory of imperialism, Bristol,Longman Group, 1972 p.106 27 Ed.) Owen,Roger-Sutcliffe,Bob Studies in the theory of imperialism, Bristol,Longman Group, 1972, Thomas Hodgkin p.106-107

Theres also another conventional thesis of imperialism; according to this, it was the collaborators with Western imperialism among the African political leaders of the late nineteenth century who were forward-looking and guided by rational considerations of national interests and good, and those who resisted them were backward-looking, reactionary, misguided and simply bad28. However; this view is criticized by many African theorists and also some other historians. For the European states, the local systems of justice were completely inadequate, flawed and there was no question of submitting one of their citizens to these systems. Non-European states were thus forced to sign treaties of capitulation which gave European powers extraterritorial jurisdiction over the activities of their own citizens in these non-European states29 Colonizing powers expected a level of civilization in the interior structure and governance of those non-European areas. A treaty had been signed between European colonial powers in order to have a standard in different policy attitudes for the civilizing efforts. The Treaty of Nanking in 1841 points out that how different European practices and policies would be introduced into non-European nations. John Westlake, an English law scholar, wrote about it: When people of European race came into contact with American or African tribes, the prime necessity is a government under the protection of which the former may carry on the complex life to which they have been accustomed in their homes.30 Westlake argues that Asian countries were eligible enough to catch the European standards. However it meant to colonial powers for only to take account Asian societies, not to consider themselves as equal societies to the West. They didnt even take account of African societies. Usually; capitulations were a part of the unequal treaty regime imposed on non-European countries and generally comprised one part of a treaty which often granted rights to trade and rights, for example to establish residences31. As long as the terms of these treaties allowed more rights for the European traders; it wasnt a surprise to see their scope of commerce expanded. Third World and International Law: Third World countries suffer from various deficiencies and inadequacies which can be refer to the colonialist actions within international law. On the other hand; it was again international law which eased colonised countries to gain their independency and sovereignty in decolonisation process .According to Antony Anghie; international law is created in part through its confrontation with the violent and barbaric Non-Western the others and the construction of the other and the initiatives to locate, sanction and transform it disrupt existing legal categories and generate new doctrines regarding, sovereignty and the use of force, very significantly32. Sometimes self-defence is used as a reason and justification for imperialism. It derives from the doctrine which is about aggressive states and those who were attacked by them. It
28 Ibid, p.107-108 29 Oppenheim, International Law, p.395,cited in Anghie,Anthony Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2006) p.83 30 John Westlake, Chapters on the Principles of International Law , p.102-103, 141-142 , cited in Anghie,Anthony Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2006) p.84 31 Anghie,Anthony Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2006) p.85 32 Ibid, p.274

gives right of attack to states in accordance with self-defence. It was seen many examples of imperialist and colonialist operations in the past by using this self-defence right. It still shows itself in the 21st century. We should have a look to the speeches and statements of President George W. Bush after the 9/11 attacks: ...Rogue states and terrorists do not seek to attack us using conventional means... The United States has long maintained the option of pre-emptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to our national security...To forestall or prevent such hostile by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act pre-emptively...33 In another speech of Bush, we can also see the remnants old imperialist view that considers themselves as civilised, modern and others as barbaric, uncivilised. He refers the Axis of Evil; which is consisting of North Korea, Iran and Iraq: States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an Axis of Evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger...They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic... The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons.34 In those sentences; President Bush simply addressing some countries as threat to the world peace and dangerous. He directly calls them as terrorist states and speaks of to take all possible measures to prevent those states. It is obvious that there is an intention to use self-defence doctrine as a tool of modern imperialism. It was revealed that no Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMA) in Saddams Iraq as the US claimed. Today, a resembling scene is being played against Iran. Theres a world-wide information campaign, especially in the West, emphasizing that Iran has developing nuclear weapons with intention to endanger the Middle East peace as theres a very strong possibility (of course not stated officially) already nuclear weapons in the Middle East in the hands of Israel. Last words Globalisation is a very fundemental feature of the world, and it seems quite unlikely that it will turn against. One thing is certain in today: It is a disgrace that in the 21st century real poverty, famine, malnutrition and lack of medical care still exist on earth. There are many national and international organizations, both governmental and non-governmental which are trying to decrease and prevent the poverty and underdevelopment of the third world. Although there many people who make effort genuinely to assist the third world; the assistance of great powers is still disputable and considerably weak. United Nations determined as a UN goal for rich states to give at least %0.7 of their annual income as aid to poor countries, however great powers such as US and Britain are too below of this level35. It seems more things needs to be done in order to live in a better world, for both the rich and the poor.

33 The National Security Strategy of the United States of America, 2002, p15. 34 Text of President Bush's 2002 State of the Union Address http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpsrv/onpolitics/transcripts/sou012902.htm accessed on 26 December, 2011 35 Isbister,John, Promises Not Kept, (Connecticut,Kumarian Press,2006) p.26