21 Decolonization
Summary of events
At the end of WW2, certain nations of Europe still claimed ownership of vast areas of the rest of the world, particularly in Asia and Africa
Britain’s empire was the largest. It consisted of India , Burma, Ceylon, Malaya, Cyprus, Hong Kong, the West Indies, the Falklands and Gibraltar
France had the second largest empire, with territories in Africa, Indo China and the West Indies. In addition, Britain and France still held land in the Middle East taken from Turkey at the end of WW1. Britain held Transjordan and Palestine and France had Syria. They were intended to look after them and prepare them for independence
Other important empires were those of
Holland (Dutch East Indies)
Belgium (Congo and Ruanda Urundi)
Portugal (Angola, Mozambique and Guinea)
Spain (Spanish Sahara, Ifni, Spanish Morocco and Spanish Guinea)
Italy (Libya, Somalia and Eritrea)
By 75 most of these colonial territories had gained their independence
The Dutch and French colonies, they had to fight for it against determined European resistance.
The problems in different areas were quite complex. In India there were religious problems and in other colonies the whites were afraid to be ruled by the black
21.1 Why did the European powers give up their empires?
a) nationalist movements
· the nationalists wanted to get rid of the foreign rule
· The Europeans claimed that they brought the western civilization in the area but the local population had a feeling that the Europeans exploited them.
· The development and prosperity of the colonies were held back in the interests of Europe and most colonial people continued to live in poverty
· In India the nationalists wanted to get rid of the British since 1885, but nationalism was not so big in other areas and progress towards independence would have been much more slow without WW2
b) the effects of the second world war
1.
· Before the war, colonial peoples believed it would be impossible to defeat the militarily superior Europeans by force of arms.
· The Japanese successes in the early part of the war showed that it was possible for non Europeans to defeat European armies
· The Japanese captured British territories as Malaya, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Burma, the Dutch East Indies and French Indo China
· The colonial people have fought against the Japanese with guerrilla war, and if the Europeans would have tried to regain power in those areas, the local people would have used the same type of defence and attack, guerrilla war
2.
· Asians and Africans became more aware of social and political matters as a result of their involvement in the war
· Many Africans who had left their homeland for the first time to fight the Allied armies
· There were surprised of the comfortable conditions they experienced
3.
· Some European policies during the war encouraged colonial peoples to expect independence as soon as the war was over
4.
· The war weakened the European states, so in the end they were not militarily strong enough to hold on their empires which struggled for independence
· The British were the first to give independence to India (47) but then the British policy was to delay (slow down) independence as soon as possible, but to give way when the pressure became irresistible
· The French, Dutch. Spanish and Portuguese reacted differently and seemed to hold tight grip on their empires even if militarily campaigns were required
· Ultimately, they all had to admit defeat
c) Outside Pressures
· The Americans were against imperialism, also because they have been a former colony of the UK.
· The USA considered the newly independent nations as potential markers into which they could step and establish both economic and political reform
· During the war, Roosevelt said that the Atlantic Charter was for all peoples not only by the ones endangered of the Germans
· The UN demanded a step by step decolonization
· The USSR was also against imperialism
· This pressure encouraged nationalists all over the world to intensify their campaigns
21.2 Indian independence and partition
The British promised dominion status as soon as the war was over, this meant more or less independency, but still accepting the British monarch as head of state, like Australia
Ernest Bevin, the foreign secretary, wanted to prove that the British did not exploit the Indians by introducing a development programme fro India. However, the idea was dropped because the English did not afford and the Indians were suspicious of any delay (hold up, stoppage)
The British Prime Minister, Atlee, wanted to give India full independence, this turned out very difficult
It ended up in the division in two different states, Pakistan and India
a) why was the partition of India necessary
1. Religious hostilities between Hindus and Muslims
· This was the main problem
· The Hindus represented 66% of the population while the Muslim the rest
· The Hindus won their elections in 37 and asked the Muslim League to merge the Hindu National Congress Party
· The Muslims were afraid that in this case they would be dominated by the Hindus, there for required an own area
2. Compromise attempts failed
· The British proposed a scheme where the central government had limited powers and the local would be much greater. This would increase the possible Muslim independence
· This idea failed
3. Violence broke out in August 46
· This happened when Viceroy (king’s representative in India) invited the Congress leader to form an interim (temporary) government, with the hope that they will be able to solve problems in the future
· Nehru the Congress leader was convinced that he could not trust the Hindus to treat the Muslims fairly
· Nehru called for a day of direct action, which would support the idea of a Muslim country
· This ended up with Muslims slaughtering Hindus, and the country seemed on the verge of civil war
4. Mountbatten decides partition
· When the British realized that they lost control, they then announced that they would leave the country in 48
· This was announced in order to force the Indians into adopting a more responsible attitude
· Mountbatten, the new Viceroy, realized and decided that a partition was the only way of avoiding civil war
· This was accepted by Nehru although Ghandi believed in non violence and was still hoping for a united India
· Mountbatten decided for a withdrawal even earlier in August 47
b) How was the partition carried out?
The Indian independence act, was rushed by the British (Aug 47)
This would separate the Muslim majority areas in the North West and north east from the rest of the country. They would become the independent state of Pakistan
Independence day was 15th August 1947, problems occurred immediately:
It was necessary to divide million of people. Unfortunately, this meant that millions of people found themselves on the wrong side of the new frontiers.
Millions of Muslims trying to get to Pakistan and millions of Hindus trying to et to India met on the way. This turned out into mob violence, especially in Punjab
In Bengal, Ghandi managed to calm down the spirits
3. Violence began to die before the end of 47, but in January Ghandi was killed by a Hindu fanatic that did not tolerate Ghandi’s tolerance towards Muslims
The chock seemed to bring people to their senses
Atlee argued that Britain could not be blamed for the deaths
4. In the longer term, Pakistan did not work well as a divided state, and in 71 East Pakistan broke away and became the independent state f Bangladesh
21.3 The West Indies, Malaya and Cyprus
· As these three territories moved towards independence, interesting experiments in setting up federations of states were tried, with varying degrees of successes
· A federation is when a number of states join together under a central or federal government which has overall authority; each of the states has its own separate parliament which deals with internal affairs
· This kind of system is found in USA, Canada, and Australia and many people thought it would be suitable for the British West Indies, Malaya and neighbouring British territories
· The West Indies was the first one to be tried, but it proved to be a failure, only survived until 62.
a) The West Indies
· These were groups of islands in the Caribbean Sea, like Jamaica and Trinidad, altogether with a population of 6 million people
· Britain was prepared to give them independence, but there were some difficulties:
1. Some of the islands were very small, and there were doubts about whether they were viable (workable) as independent states
2. The British felt that a federation would be the ideal way, but some of the islands objected.
· Like Honduras and Guiana were against a federation, this left Jamaica and Trinidad to worry with the problems of the smaller states
· Other islands did not wish that either, they wanted to be under British independence
· The British went ahead and established the West Indies Federation in 58
· This never functioned, the only thing they had in common, was a passionate commitment to cricket
· Jamaica and Trinidad withdrew in 61
· 62 Britain decided to abandon the federation, and gave independence to all islands that wanted
· Jamaica and Trinidad were the first in 62
· All of them became members of the British Commonwealth
· The islands realized that there were economical benefits to be gained
· The Caribbean Trade Association 68 was set up. This soon developed into the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM)
b) Malaya
· Was liberated from Japanese occupation in 45 , but there were 2 difficult problems to be faced before the British could withdraw
1. The area was multi racial, and it consisted of nine states each ruled by a sultan. The British decided to establish the Federation of Malaya 48, while Singapore remained a separate colony. Each state had its own legislature for local affairs, the sultans retained some power but the general government had overall control. All adults had the right to vote, but this meant that the Malays, the largest group, usually dominated affairs
2. The Chinese guerrillas started now to stir up strikes against the British, in support of an independent communist state. The British state of emergency which dealt with the communists remained in the area until 60
UN’s rapport showed that the people were pro the federation and this was later proclaimed. Brunei did not join, but they joined the Commonwealth (84) and Singapore became an independent republic in 65. The rest of the federation continued successfully
c) Cyprus
· The British wanted to give Cyprus independence, but this was delayed by complications
· On the island were 80% orthodox Greeks and 20% Muslim Turks
· The Greeks wanted to merge the island with Greece, but the Turks opposed to this
· Churchill’s successor dropped the idea of Greek independence thinking that the island was needed as a military base to protect interests in Middle East. However, the Greeks claimed that they would allow this even if the island would merge with Greece
· The British sent about 35 000 troops because the Greeks started a guerrilla campaign against the British
· The situation worsened when the Turks set up a rival organization in support of a dividing country
· Macmillan, Eden’s successor, decided to compromise:
The Archbishop dropped the idea of unity with Greece and in return Cyprus was granted full independence
Turkish interests were safeguarded; Britain gained two military bases and guaranteed independence of Cyprus
This seemed the perfect solution
· In 63 Civil war broke out between the Greeks and the Turks
· In 74 the isle divided into two, with the Muslims in the North and the Orthodox in the south
· UN has made many attempts but all of them failed
· The possibility of a federation may still work
21.4 The British leave Africa
African nationalism spread rapidly since 45, also because they were educated by the English and Americans, where they were made aware of racial discrimination
The British were willing to give the Africans independence, but this process was very slow. The Africans had to act sometimes with violence in order to make things move quicker
The British thought that if the Africans would gain independence, they would still be able to exercise influence through trade routs, this was neo colonialism
NEO COLONIALISM means that the Western powers still exerted a great deal of control over the new states, which continued to need the markets and the investment that the west could provide
The British colonies in Africa fell into distinct groups which had important differences in character which were to affect progress towards independence
1. West Africa: Gold Coast, Nigeria, Sierra Leone and the Gambia
· Here there were relatively few Europeans and they tended to be administrators rather than permanent settlers with profitable estates to defend
· This made the independence rapid
a) the Gold Coast
· was the first African state south of Sahara to win independence after WW2, taking the name of Ghana (57)
· it was achieved smoothly, but not without any violence
· the nationalist leader, Kwame, educated in London and the USA and since 49 leader of the Convention People’s Party, organized the campaign for independence
· there were boycotts of European goods, violent demonstrations and general strike (50) and Kwame Nkrumah and other leaders were imprisoned fro a time
· the British realized that he had mass support, soon released him and agreed to allow a new constitution including:
The vote for all adults
An elected assembly
An eleven person Executive Council, of which eight were chosen by the assembly
in 51 elections, the first under the new constitution, the CPP won and Nkrumah was released and became Prime Minister
Until 57 the government worked under British supervision, when it received full independence
b) Nigeria
Nigeria was the largest of Britain’s African colonies
It was a difficult proposition because of its great size (60 million)
It was difficult also because the vast Muslim north, dominated by Hausa and Fulani tribes
The leading nationalist was Nnamdi Azikiwe
After his return in Nigeria in 37 he gained enormous prestige and in 45 he organized a great strike
In 54 a new constitution introduced local assemblies for the 3 regions with a federal (CENTRAL) in Lagos, the capital
The country became independent as a whole in 60
Tribal differences caused civil war to break out in 67
c) Sierra Leone and the Gambia
These gained independence without any serious incidents- Sierra Leone 61 and Gambia in 65
2. East Africa: Kenya, Uganda and Tanganyika
Here, especially in Kenya, things were complicated by the settler factor
They were afraid to be settled under Black rule
The British believed that independence for East Africa was not as necessary as for West Africa. The thought that when independence would come , this would come in the form of multi racial governments where the Europeans would play a significant part
During Macmillan’s government (57-63) the English realized the strength of the African nationalism
a) Tanganyika
· Here the nationalist campaign was conducted by Tanganyika African National Union (TANU), led by Dr Julius Nyerere, educated in the UK.
· He insisted that the government had to be black and that the whites had nothing to be afraid of
· The country became independent in 61, Nyerere remained president until his retirement 85 and the country changed its name into Tanzania (64)
b) Uganda
The tribal ruler objected democracy
Uganda became independent in62 with Dr Milton Obote as Prime Minister
b) Kenya
Kenya was the most difficult to deal with because of the big number (66000) white settlers violently opposed to black majority rule
The refused to negotiate with African nationalist leader Kenyatta and his party KAU
The whites provoked a confrontation hoping to destroy the African party
KAU made little progress, the only British concession being to allow 6 Africans to join the Legislative Council of 44 members
The Mau Mau secret society organized terrorist attacks against European owned farms and black workers
A state of emergency was declared and Kenyatta and others were arrested
British troops crushed the terrorists
The terrorists have been defeated by 60, but then the British changed their mind and allowed Kenyatta to become Prime Minister, because he was considered a moderate. Kenya became independent in 63
He treated the whites OK
3. Central Africa: northern and southern Rhodesia
Especially in southern Rhodesia, the settler factor was at its most serious
Here, the Europeans had a lot of ownership
This was the most troublesome area for Britain to deal with because there was a huge numbers of Europeans that were deeply entrenched and because the whites made sure to abolish all the major education for blacks
The whites persuaded Churchill’s government to divide the area into Central African Federation
The aim of the whites was to preserve their supremacy so the government was to favour the whites, who hoped that the federation would soon gain full independence from Britain , with a dominion status
The Africans watched their leaders that began campaigns, die.
A part of the British population supported the Africans
a) Nyasaland and Northern Rhodesia
· Here, the British introduced constitutions which allowed the Africans to have own parliaments
· The both countries wanted to leave the federation, which was therefore terminated in December 63, signalling defeat of the settlers
· 64 they became fully independent and changed names into Malawi and Zambia
b) Southern Rhodesia
It gained independence only in 1980
Here the whites fought most fiercely to preserve their privileged position
There were about 200 000 whites, 20 000 Asians and 4 million Blacks
A right wing white racist party was convinced never to surrender, the black parties were banned
The whites thought the it would work the same way as in Malawi and Zambia, but the British conservative government refused and made it clear that independence would be granted only if constitution was changed to allow black Africans at least 1/3 of the seats in parliament
Ian Smith (Prime Minister of Rhodesia) rejected the new idea and claimed that white rule was necessary in order to avoid the problems faced by the black governments faced in other African states
Harold Wilson, the new British Labour Prime Minister 64-70 continued to refuse independence unless the constitution was changed to prepare black majority rule
Smith declared Rhodesia independent against the wishes of Britain (unilateral declaration of independence or UDI )
There were mixed reactions about UDI:
Britain had not much to do about it, since the government decided not to use force. Britain then decided to stop buying products from Rhodesia, thinking that, doing so, they will surrender
South Africa, also ruled by a white minority, and Portugal, which still owned neighbouring Mozambique, were sympathetic to the Smith regime and refused to obey the Security Council resolution, which meant that Rhodesia could still trade through these countries. Also many nations and companies evaded (avoided) the embargo (prohibition, ban), so Smith’s regime was not much affected by the resolution
The Commonwealth was seriously shaken. Countries as Ghana and Nigeria wanted UK to use force, but other countries such as Zambia and Tanzania hoped that economic sanctions would suffice. Relations became cool, when Britain seemed to treat different African countries in different ways
· In 70 Rhodesia declared itself independent, and the blacks started to suffer same treatment as the blacks in South Africa
· In 76 the whites began to compromise, why did they give way?
Mozambique became independent from Portugal and the new president sent guerrilla forces that activated and strained (damaged) the white security forces
The South Africans became less inclined to support Rhodesia after invasion of Angola. The Americans and South Africans were afraid that if no compromises would be made, USSR or Cuba might become involved in the conflict. This is why they urged Smith to make concessions
By 78 nationalist guerrillas controlled vast areas of Rhodesia and the whites were on the verge of defeat
Smith still tried everything to delay black majority rule as long as possible
There were some parties or divisions between the nationalists. Smith accused them for slowing down the progress and that they caused disunity
The parties:
ZAPU the party of the veteran nationalist Nkomo. Zimbabwe African People’s Union
ZANU Zimbabwe African National Union, party of the Reverend, Sithole
UANC, United African National Council, party of Bishop Abel
Mugabe, leadear of guerrilla wing ZANU, was a powerful figure
· Smith introduced an own scheme, with the whites and UANC, the most moderate of the nationalist parties.
· ZANU and ZAPU had massive support and they continued their guerrilla war
· Smith had to admit defeat and Britain had to agree with:
1. a new constitution which followed the black majority rule
2. The country would adopt the name of Zimbabwe and the government would contain 100 seats where the blacks were reserved 80
3. The Party UANC, with the moderate Bishop Muzorewa would step down as Prime Minister
4. the guerrilla war would end
· the transference to black majority was welcomed by all African and Commonwealth leaders as a common sense and moderation
· civil war between ZAPU and ZANU did not take place and the parties merged together in 87
· ZANU’S Mugabe became the countries first president and was re elected for a further mandate in 96.
21. 5 The End of the French Empire
The main possessions at the end of the WW2 were:
a) Syria, French withdrew 46
b) Guadeloupe and Martinique (West Indies)
c) French Guiana (mainland of South America)
d) Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria (together known as Maghrib)
e) French West Africa
f) French Equatorial Africa
g) The large island of Madagascar
· The French began with trying to hold back all nationalist agitation
· But the French were influenced by Britain’s moves towards decolonization and after their defeat in Indo China their were forced to accelerate the process
Indo China
· France had protectorates over Annam, Tonkin, Cambodia and Laos.
· Protectorate means that the country was officially independent with own ruler, but was found under the protection of France (mother country) that controlled affairs in the protectorate just as in the colonies
· During the war the area was occupied by Japanese and resistance was organized by Ho Chi Minh and Vietminh
· When the Japanese withdrew, Minh declared Vietnam independent
· This was unacceptable for the French. This ended with a French defeat in 54
· The French defeat caused political crisis, the government resigned
· At the Geneva conference it was agreed that Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia should become independent
· The French had withdrawn, but the Americans came*J
Tunisia and Morocco
Both areas were protectorates
Tunisia had a ruler known as the Bey and Morocco had a Muslim king
Nationalists campaigned for independence already before the WW2.
Tunisia had about 250 000 settlers and Morocco about 300 000 settlers
The settlers were committed to maintain connections with France, which gave them advantages
Tunisia
Here the main nationalist group was New Destour led by Habib Bourghiba
He launched a guerrilla campaign and was later imprisoned
The guerrilla movement became more and more left wing
The French released Bourghiba (which was a moderate) thinking that it was easier to maintain influence with him, because he was a moderate
In March 1956 Tunisia became fully independent under Bourghiba’s leadership
Morocco
The pathway was quite similar with Tunisia’s
There was a nationalist party called Istiqlal (Independence) and King Mohamed was deposed
This caused guerrilla war and violent demonstrations
Because of the expense of the anti guerrilla war and of the pressure, the French gave way for the nationalists
Morocco became independent in 1956
Algeria
Here, the settler factor had the most consequences, over a million French settlers
They controlled about 1/3 of the fertile land in Algeria, taken from the natives
They used the land for wine production, which created less food production
There was an active but peaceful nationalist led by Hadj
After WW2 the natives could not take any official decisions
France did not dare to give independence to Algeria because they thought that it will turn out like in other colonies
Towards 1954, encouraged by Indo China, the National Liberation Front was built (FLN)
They made a guerrilla war but the French sent troops and defeated them
The war had important effects on France
they knew that FLN still had massive support and that Algeria never could be secure
the opinion in France varied, some people thought that the struggle was hopeless and some the opposite. France seemed on the verge of civil war
the French army, after disputes with Indo China, wanted to restore reputation and were unwilling to surrender. They even planned a military coup against those that wished to surrender
· the war caused the downfall of the fourth government
· suspecting that Algeria’s destiny would be equal to Tunisia’s, some army officials organized demonstrations and demanded that General de Gaulle should become a leading figure
· they were convinced that he would never give independence to Algeria
· the government resigned, because of the pressure
· the government called on de Gaulle to become a Prime Minister
· he had a condition: if he could draw up a new constitution he would accept to become Prime Minister
· he changed the constitution that involved that the President would be more powerful, and later 58 he came President, he held the position until 69
· when de Gaulle showed signs of negotiations with FLN the ones that did not wish to give independence to Algeria became mad, this is not how they expected him
· Led by Salan they built up OAS (secret army) 61, which began a terrorist campaign blowing up buildings and murdering people both in Africa and France
· They even attempted to assassinate de Gaulle and seized power in Algeria
· This was going too far for the French population
· When de Gaulle appeared on TV in uniform and denounced the OAS, the rebellion ended
· Ben Bella was released from prison (since 56) and was agreed that Algeria would become independent 1962and Ben Bella was elected president the same year
· Almost 80 000 left the country and the government regained the control of the land
4) The rest of the French empire
The French possessions in Africa south of Sahara were
1 .French West Africa consisting of 8 colonies: Dahomey, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Sudan and Upper Volta
2. French Equatorial Africa consisting of four colonies: Chad, Gabon, Middle Congo, and Shan
3. A 3rd group consisted Cameroon, Togo and Madagaskar
The French after 50 did not allow any more independence privileges for the colonies, they decided to clamp down all nationalist movements
But the French were forced by events in Indo China and by the fact that Britain was preparing to give independence to the Gold Coast and Nigeria. The French were forced to change their policies
In 56 12 colonies in West Africa were each given a self government for internal affairs, but they continued to press for full independence
When de Gaulle came to power in 58 he proposed a new plan hoping to maintain as much control as possible :
1. the 12 colonies would continue to have a self government each with own parliament for own affairs
2. they would all be members of a new union the French Community and France would take important decisions about taxation and foreign affairs
3. all members would receive economic aid
4. there would be a referendum in each colony to decide whether the plan should be accepted or not
5. colonies which opted for full independence could have it, but they would receive no aid from France for weed
· Guinea gained full independence and no aid for weed
· All of the colonies became independent 60
· This independence was neo colonialism, all states became independent but France still influenced their economic and foreign policies and any independent action was almost out of question
21.6 Holland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal and Italy
All these wanted to continue with the colonies because they were not as wealthy as France and Britain and did not have money for neo colonialism
a) Holland
Before WW2 Holland had a huge empire in the East Indies (Sumatra, Java Celebes, West Irian) and 2/3 of Borneo. They also owned some land in West Indies and Surinam on the mainland of South America
It was in the valuable East Indies that the first challenge came to Dutch control even before the war
The Dutch operated in a quite similar way as French in Algeria, they grew crops and did very little for the natives and living standards
Nationalist groups protested but were arrested 30’s
When the Japanese invaded in 42 they released these groups and allowed them to protest and promising them that they would gain independence when the war ended
After the war Sukarno declared the area independent but the Dutch sent troops. Nevertheless the Dutch were long away from a victory
Reasons for their decision were:
1. the expanse of the campaign was crimpling for a small country like Holland to sustain
2. outright victory seemed long away
3. they were under strong pressure from the UN
4. USA and Australia were also against because they wanted to influence the country after Holland’s downfall
5. the Dutch hoped that by making concessions they would be able to preserve the link between Holland and Indonesia to maintain influence
· Holland agreed to recognize independence of the Unites States of Indonesia 49 with Sukarno as president, but not including West Iran
· Sukarno agreed to a Netherlands Indonesia Union but after a while demanded Holland to hand over West Irian
· They started to expel Europeans and to take over Dutch owned properties
· Holland gave way and West Irian became part of Indonesia 63.
· 65 Sukarno was overthrown in a right wing military coup because he was under too much influence in China and the Indonesian communist party
· USA was involved in the coup and welcomed Sukarno’s successor General Suharto
· He introduced The New Order, a purge of communism where at least half million people died
· Of other Dutch possessions Suranim was also allowed to become independent republic 75, the West Indian islands were treated as a part of Holland, though allowed some control over their internal affairs
b) Belgium
· Belgian Congo and Ruanda Urundi ended in chaos civil war and violence
· The Belgians thought that the best way to preserve control was to:
1. denying the Africans any advanced education, this would prevent them coming in contact with nationalists
2. using tribal rivalries to their advantage by playing off different tribes against each other
· despite these techniques nationalist ideas began to arise
1. Belgian Congo
· The Belgians were surprised when an uprising occurred which were against the living standards and unemployment in the country. This spread soon trough the whole country
· the Belgians suddenly changed their policy and announced that Congo will become independent in 6 month
· This was devastating for the country because there was no educated person and employees in the country. This means that there were no educated doctors, teachers etc.
· Why could the British take such a decision?
1. There were afraid of more blood spilling in the country and the Belgians wanted to protect the citizens living there
2. they did not want to face the expense of anti guerrilla war
3. they were sure that because of the lack of education in the country the Belgian influence could be preserved
2. Ruanda Urundi
· it was given independence in 62 and divided into 2 states Rwanda and Burundi
· neither of the states were properly prepared, this caused violence and war after the victory against the Belgians
c) Spain
Spain owned areas in Africa the largest in Spanish Sahara
General Franco (39-75) did not show interest about the colonies
When nationalist movements developed he did not resist long in the case of Spanish Morocco 56 (independent)
Spanish Sahara
Here Franco resisted longer because of the resources of phosphate in the area
Only after his death Spain gave independence to Spanish Sahara
Instead of being independent and ruled by its nationalist party the Spanish decided to divide it between its two neighbouring states, Morocco and Mauritania
Mohamed Abdelazia declared the Democratic Arab Republic of Sahara 76, which was recognized by Algeria, Libya, the communist states and India
· Algeria and Libya decided to withdraw making it easier for Sahara to struggle on against Morocco
· The fact that Sahara had been officially recognized by the USSR was enough to arise American suspicious
· When it seemed that the Moroccans too were prepared to negotiate, the new American president, Reagan, encouraged them to continue to fight, stepping up aid to Morocco
· The war dragged on through the 80, and a new country became a victim of super power self interest
· In 90 UN organized a referendum should be held so that the people of Sahara could chose whether to be independent or no, but progress towards organizing this was very slow
c) Portugal
The main Portuguese possessions were in Africa: Angola, Mozambique, and the Portuguese Guinea
The right wing Portuguese government ignored the nationalist movements and after 45 their colonies seemed quiet
They were mainly agricultural there were few industrial workers and the black population was almost entirely illiterate
Though the nationalist groups were formed in the 3 colonies, they remained insignificant
Several factors changed the situation
by 1960 the natives were encouraged by other African countries that gained independence
fighting broke out in Angola 61 where Aghostino’s was the main nationalist movement. Violence soon spread to Guinea where Cabral led the resistance and to Mozambique where the Frelimo guerrillas were organized by Mondlane
the nationalists, who had strong connections with Marx received economic and military aid from the communist bloc
the Portuguese army found it impossible to suppress (hold back, delay) the guerrillas. The party by 73 was spending 40% of its budget fighting 2 colonial wars simultaneously
· still the Portuguese refused to abandon the colonies
· public opinion and many army officers were sick of the wars and in 74 overthrew Salazar government
· all the colonies gained independence, Guinea took the name of Guinea Bissau 74, Mozambique and Angola 74
Angola
South African troops invaded now Angola, in support of the UNITA, while General Mobutu of Zaire, with American backing launched another invasion in support of FNLA
The Americans did not want the local Marxist party MPLA to influence the country. MPLA gained help from Cuba and USSR
The communist aid helped them do defeat both invasions and in 76 Neto became new president
The South Africans also interfered in Mozambique in order to eliminate Frelimo government. This put the country in a critical situation
East Timor
It was half of the small island in the East Indies
East Timor’s nationalist movement Fretilin won the war against the ruling group which wanted to remain united with Portugal
The USA denounced the country as Marxist and supplied Indonesia with military aid to attack East Timor
The UN did not take any decisions because these two were two small areas. The Indonesians created about 100 000 victims
d) Italy
It was officially decided (47) that Italy should lose all its colonies because they supported Hitler
Ethiopia was handed back to the rule of Emperor Selassie who was in exile when the Italian took over 35
Libya was given independence under King Idris (51)
Eritrea was made part of Ethiopia 52 but it was to a large measure of slef governing within a federal system
Italian Somaliland was merged with the British Somaliland to form the independent state of Somalia (60)
Idris became unpopular with his people, they thought that he was too pro West. He was overthrown in 69 by a socialist revolutionary movement which nationalized the oil industry and began to modernize the country
Selassie became unpopular with his peoples because he made no attempt to modernize Ethiopia and did little to improve the living standards of his people. He also cancelled Eritrea’s rights of self governing, this led to war. He was overthrown in 74
Both in Libya and Ethiopia new leaders arose which gained aid from the USSR
Verdict on decolonization
The decolonization was not a pleasure and had no happy ending
There were some gains for the people that could now decide the internal problems
There were new problems that they faced: Neo Colonialism meant that Western European countries and the USA still exerted a great deal of control over the new states, which continued to need the markets and the investment that the west people could provide
Many states, especially in Africa, had been badly prepared or not at all for independence. They left the natives uneducated and in poverty
In most cases, the Western powers controlled their economy. When some of the new states inclined signs of connection with the communist bloc, the capitalists cut off the aid
All the Third World states faced the problem of poverty. They were economically underdeveloped and often their economy fell apart.
onsdag 6 februari 2008
17 China 1900- 1949, lowe notes
17 China 1900- 1949
Summary of events
China had had a long history of national unity and since the mid seventeenth century has been ruled by Manchu or Ching dynasty
During the 1840 the country moved into a period of foreign interference, civil war and disintegration, which lasted until 1949
In 1911 the last emperor was overthrown and a republic proclaimed
The period between 1916 to 1928 is known as the Warlord Era, a chaos period when many generals took power in different areas
A party called Kuomintang (KMT) that were nationalists was trying to govern China and control the generals that were busy fighting each other, the KMT leader was Dr Sun Yat-sen and after his death (25’), general Chiang Kai Shek.
The Chinese Party was founded in 21’ and at first cooperated with KMT in their struggle against warlords.
After a while KMT seized more and more power and finally they thought they can do the job without the help of the CCP and tried to destroy them.
The leader of CCP escaped the KMT force and fled to build another military base in northern China.
After the WW 2 and the Japanese defeat the CCP and the KMT were still fighting. KMT was supported by democratic USA, but finally in 49’ the communists gained power and Chiang Kai Shek fled to Taiwan
Mao led China until his death in 76’.
17. 1 Revolution and the warlord era
a) background to the revolution of 1911
· China lived isolated and peacefully until the mid eighteen hundreds, when the Europeans came and wanted to take advantage of Chinese trading possibilities.
· Firstly, the British wanted to take profit of the Chinese and then even other European nations did the same thing
· 1894-5 China was defeated in war against Japan and forced to hand over territory. A Chinese uprising against foreign influence, but was defeated by an international army and forced them to pay massive compensation for damage done to foreign property in China.
· In the beginning of the 20th century, many Chinese traveled and were educated abroad, they returned with radial and revolutionary ideas. One of them was Dr Sun, who wanted a democratic state modeled on the USA.
b) the 1911 Revolution
the government tried to respond to the new radical ideas by introducing reforms, promising democracy and setting up elected provincial assemblies
This encouraged the provinces to distance themselves even more from the central government. The revolution began among soldiers in Wuchang in October 1911 and most provinces quickly declared themselves independent of Beijing
The government which ruled behind emperor Pu Yi (5 years old) appealed to a retired general Yuan. Yuan made an agreement with the revolutionaries. This included the end of Pu’s dynasty and that he would become president. With the support of the army, Yuan ruled as a military dictator from 1912 till 1915. He did one mistake, and that was to proclaim himself emperor. Because of this, he lost support of the army, which forced him to abdicate.
c) The Warlord Era (1916-28)
Yuan seemed to be the last person that seemed capable of maintaining unity in China
The country was now disintegrated into hundreds of warlords, each ruling a part with the help of his private army.
Two important things developed:
1) A huge student demonstration began in 1919 in Beijing that protested against the warlords, the traditional Chinese Culture and against Japanese right of taking over Chinese provinces
2) The KMT or nationalist party grew stronger and succeeded to bring the warlords under control
17.2 The KMT, Dr Sun and Chiang Kai Shek
a) The Kuomintang
· The party formed in 1912 under Dr Sun, which hoped for a united China
· Dr Sun lived abroad until 1911 (revolution )
· He wanted to create a modern, united, democratic state
· After the revolution, he set up a government in southern China; he was prepared to cooperate with the communists. During this time he built his own army as well.
· The party had three principles:
1. Nationalism- to rid China of foreign influence and build China into a strong and united power. Abroad China’s power should be built as well.
2. Democracy- China should not be ruled by warlords, but by the people themselves, after they had been educated to equip them for democratic self-government.
3. Land reform- Sun announced a long term policy of democratic reform and distribution of land to the peasants
· Sun gained enormous respect as an intellectual statesman and revolutionary leader, but when he died little progress towards the 3 principles has been made, mainly because he was not himself a general.
b) Chiang Kai Shek
He became leader after Sun’s death
Communist China supported KMT with the hope that they will be friendly towards USSR.
Sheck spent university years in Russia studying the organization of the communist party
Despite of the Russian contacts he was not a communist; in fact he was more right wing than Sun and soon became anti-communist. After becoming party leader he removed all the left wingers, but he continued the KMT alliance with the communists
In 1926 he and CCP set on the Northern March in order to destroy all landlords of central and northern China. Much of the support occurred because the communists promised land.
In 27 Chiang decided that the communists were becoming too powerful in areas where communists were strong, landlords were attacked and land seized
KMT expelled all the communists from their party and launched the purification movement, that killed about 250 000 people, the communists were checked out, the warlords were under control and Chiang was the military and political leader of China
The KMT proved to be a great disappointment for the majority of Chinese, also because he did not achieve the other two principles of the party
17.3 Mao Zedong and the communists
a) Mao and the CCP
· CCP has been officially founded in 21, they consisted mostly of intellectuals and had very little military strength , which explains why it was willing to work with the KMT
· Mao changed the party’s strategy. They would concentrate on winning mass support rather than trying to capture industrial towns where communists have already failed because of the strength of the KMT
· In 1931 Mao was elected as a chairman of the Central Executive Committee and from the on he gradually consolidated his position as the real leader of Chinese communism
· Mao and his supported concentrated on survival as Chiang carried out extermination campaigns against them between 30-34.
· Mao decided that the only way of survival is to break through Chiang’s lines and set up another military base somewhere else
· In October 24 almost 100 000 communists set out on the remarkable march which was to become part of the Chinese legend, the long march. They covered about 6000 miles in 368 days and 20 000 survivors organized a new base
· During the next 10 years the communists continued to gain support, while Chiang and the KMT lost popularity
b) Why did Mao and the communists gain support
1. The Inefficiency and corruption of the KMT government
· They had little to offer in their reform, spent too much time looking after the interests of industrialists, bankers and landowners and made no effective attempts to obtain mass support. This gave Mao the opportunity to gain support
2. There was little improvement in factory conditions
· The laws were not applied, and bribery of inspectors occurred. Chiang did not want to offend his industrial supporters
3. There was no improvement in peasant poverty
· During the 30’s famine was spread in rural areas, but there was plenty of rice in the cities and there were high taxes and forced labor
· The communist land reform was more attractive: they seized the estates of the landlords and distributed it to the peasants and they made sure that every peasant had some land. This policy won support of the smaller landlords and the peasant’s.
4. The KMT put up no effective resistance to the Japanese
· This was a crucial factor
· The Japanese occupied Manchuria and were preparing to take over other provinces in China
· Chiang seemed to think it was more important to destroy the communists rather than to resist the Japanese. He moved into south to attack Mao (36’)
· Chiang was captured by his own troops and told to fresh up relations with CCP and build a national front against the Japanese
· The new alliance brought advantages for the CCP:
a) The exterminations ceased and CCP was secured in in base in Senshi
b) When Japan attacked China 37, KMT retreated westwards, which left the communist in the south undefeated, and leading a guerilla campaign against the Japanese. This made the CCP heroes and gained them much support , by 45’ they had very much support in China
17.4 The communist victory, 1949
a) Victory for the communists was still not inevitable
· When the Japanese were defeated in 45 the KMT and the CCP were became locked in the final struggle for power.
· The US backed KMT and the USSR backed CCP, capturing Manchuria and allowing only CCP inside Manchuria
· In 48 the increasing communist armies were large enough to abandon their guerilla campaign and challenge Chiang’s armies directly
· As soon as they came under this pressure, and after the communists took over Beijing, Chiang and what remained of his forces fled to Taiwan
b) There ere several reason for the CCP triumph
CCP
· The communists continued to win popular support by their restrained land policy, which varied according to the needs of particular areas
· The CCP took the landlords estates and gave them to the peasants, which was a honest and fair affair.
· CCP took advantage of the weaknesses of the KMT
· The communist generals prepared their armies carefully and were more competent tactically then the KMT armies
KMT
· On the other hand, KMT administration was inefficient and corrupt, much of the American aid came into the pockets of the officials
· They caused even inflation through printing much money, which caused hardship for the masses and ruined many of the middle classes loot
· This armies were poorly paid
· Chiang terrorized the local population into submission, something that made him enemies
· Chiang made some tactical blunders
Summary of events
China had had a long history of national unity and since the mid seventeenth century has been ruled by Manchu or Ching dynasty
During the 1840 the country moved into a period of foreign interference, civil war and disintegration, which lasted until 1949
In 1911 the last emperor was overthrown and a republic proclaimed
The period between 1916 to 1928 is known as the Warlord Era, a chaos period when many generals took power in different areas
A party called Kuomintang (KMT) that were nationalists was trying to govern China and control the generals that were busy fighting each other, the KMT leader was Dr Sun Yat-sen and after his death (25’), general Chiang Kai Shek.
The Chinese Party was founded in 21’ and at first cooperated with KMT in their struggle against warlords.
After a while KMT seized more and more power and finally they thought they can do the job without the help of the CCP and tried to destroy them.
The leader of CCP escaped the KMT force and fled to build another military base in northern China.
After the WW 2 and the Japanese defeat the CCP and the KMT were still fighting. KMT was supported by democratic USA, but finally in 49’ the communists gained power and Chiang Kai Shek fled to Taiwan
Mao led China until his death in 76’.
17. 1 Revolution and the warlord era
a) background to the revolution of 1911
· China lived isolated and peacefully until the mid eighteen hundreds, when the Europeans came and wanted to take advantage of Chinese trading possibilities.
· Firstly, the British wanted to take profit of the Chinese and then even other European nations did the same thing
· 1894-5 China was defeated in war against Japan and forced to hand over territory. A Chinese uprising against foreign influence, but was defeated by an international army and forced them to pay massive compensation for damage done to foreign property in China.
· In the beginning of the 20th century, many Chinese traveled and were educated abroad, they returned with radial and revolutionary ideas. One of them was Dr Sun, who wanted a democratic state modeled on the USA.
b) the 1911 Revolution
the government tried to respond to the new radical ideas by introducing reforms, promising democracy and setting up elected provincial assemblies
This encouraged the provinces to distance themselves even more from the central government. The revolution began among soldiers in Wuchang in October 1911 and most provinces quickly declared themselves independent of Beijing
The government which ruled behind emperor Pu Yi (5 years old) appealed to a retired general Yuan. Yuan made an agreement with the revolutionaries. This included the end of Pu’s dynasty and that he would become president. With the support of the army, Yuan ruled as a military dictator from 1912 till 1915. He did one mistake, and that was to proclaim himself emperor. Because of this, he lost support of the army, which forced him to abdicate.
c) The Warlord Era (1916-28)
Yuan seemed to be the last person that seemed capable of maintaining unity in China
The country was now disintegrated into hundreds of warlords, each ruling a part with the help of his private army.
Two important things developed:
1) A huge student demonstration began in 1919 in Beijing that protested against the warlords, the traditional Chinese Culture and against Japanese right of taking over Chinese provinces
2) The KMT or nationalist party grew stronger and succeeded to bring the warlords under control
17.2 The KMT, Dr Sun and Chiang Kai Shek
a) The Kuomintang
· The party formed in 1912 under Dr Sun, which hoped for a united China
· Dr Sun lived abroad until 1911 (revolution )
· He wanted to create a modern, united, democratic state
· After the revolution, he set up a government in southern China; he was prepared to cooperate with the communists. During this time he built his own army as well.
· The party had three principles:
1. Nationalism- to rid China of foreign influence and build China into a strong and united power. Abroad China’s power should be built as well.
2. Democracy- China should not be ruled by warlords, but by the people themselves, after they had been educated to equip them for democratic self-government.
3. Land reform- Sun announced a long term policy of democratic reform and distribution of land to the peasants
· Sun gained enormous respect as an intellectual statesman and revolutionary leader, but when he died little progress towards the 3 principles has been made, mainly because he was not himself a general.
b) Chiang Kai Shek
He became leader after Sun’s death
Communist China supported KMT with the hope that they will be friendly towards USSR.
Sheck spent university years in Russia studying the organization of the communist party
Despite of the Russian contacts he was not a communist; in fact he was more right wing than Sun and soon became anti-communist. After becoming party leader he removed all the left wingers, but he continued the KMT alliance with the communists
In 1926 he and CCP set on the Northern March in order to destroy all landlords of central and northern China. Much of the support occurred because the communists promised land.
In 27 Chiang decided that the communists were becoming too powerful in areas where communists were strong, landlords were attacked and land seized
KMT expelled all the communists from their party and launched the purification movement, that killed about 250 000 people, the communists were checked out, the warlords were under control and Chiang was the military and political leader of China
The KMT proved to be a great disappointment for the majority of Chinese, also because he did not achieve the other two principles of the party
17.3 Mao Zedong and the communists
a) Mao and the CCP
· CCP has been officially founded in 21, they consisted mostly of intellectuals and had very little military strength , which explains why it was willing to work with the KMT
· Mao changed the party’s strategy. They would concentrate on winning mass support rather than trying to capture industrial towns where communists have already failed because of the strength of the KMT
· In 1931 Mao was elected as a chairman of the Central Executive Committee and from the on he gradually consolidated his position as the real leader of Chinese communism
· Mao and his supported concentrated on survival as Chiang carried out extermination campaigns against them between 30-34.
· Mao decided that the only way of survival is to break through Chiang’s lines and set up another military base somewhere else
· In October 24 almost 100 000 communists set out on the remarkable march which was to become part of the Chinese legend, the long march. They covered about 6000 miles in 368 days and 20 000 survivors organized a new base
· During the next 10 years the communists continued to gain support, while Chiang and the KMT lost popularity
b) Why did Mao and the communists gain support
1. The Inefficiency and corruption of the KMT government
· They had little to offer in their reform, spent too much time looking after the interests of industrialists, bankers and landowners and made no effective attempts to obtain mass support. This gave Mao the opportunity to gain support
2. There was little improvement in factory conditions
· The laws were not applied, and bribery of inspectors occurred. Chiang did not want to offend his industrial supporters
3. There was no improvement in peasant poverty
· During the 30’s famine was spread in rural areas, but there was plenty of rice in the cities and there were high taxes and forced labor
· The communist land reform was more attractive: they seized the estates of the landlords and distributed it to the peasants and they made sure that every peasant had some land. This policy won support of the smaller landlords and the peasant’s.
4. The KMT put up no effective resistance to the Japanese
· This was a crucial factor
· The Japanese occupied Manchuria and were preparing to take over other provinces in China
· Chiang seemed to think it was more important to destroy the communists rather than to resist the Japanese. He moved into south to attack Mao (36’)
· Chiang was captured by his own troops and told to fresh up relations with CCP and build a national front against the Japanese
· The new alliance brought advantages for the CCP:
a) The exterminations ceased and CCP was secured in in base in Senshi
b) When Japan attacked China 37, KMT retreated westwards, which left the communist in the south undefeated, and leading a guerilla campaign against the Japanese. This made the CCP heroes and gained them much support , by 45’ they had very much support in China
17.4 The communist victory, 1949
a) Victory for the communists was still not inevitable
· When the Japanese were defeated in 45 the KMT and the CCP were became locked in the final struggle for power.
· The US backed KMT and the USSR backed CCP, capturing Manchuria and allowing only CCP inside Manchuria
· In 48 the increasing communist armies were large enough to abandon their guerilla campaign and challenge Chiang’s armies directly
· As soon as they came under this pressure, and after the communists took over Beijing, Chiang and what remained of his forces fled to Taiwan
b) There ere several reason for the CCP triumph
CCP
· The communists continued to win popular support by their restrained land policy, which varied according to the needs of particular areas
· The CCP took the landlords estates and gave them to the peasants, which was a honest and fair affair.
· CCP took advantage of the weaknesses of the KMT
· The communist generals prepared their armies carefully and were more competent tactically then the KMT armies
KMT
· On the other hand, KMT administration was inefficient and corrupt, much of the American aid came into the pockets of the officials
· They caused even inflation through printing much money, which caused hardship for the masses and ruined many of the middle classes loot
· This armies were poorly paid
· Chiang terrorized the local population into submission, something that made him enemies
· Chiang made some tactical blunders
11 Conflict in the Middle East, lowe notes, i love history and bob marley
11 Conflict in the Middle East
Summary of events
The area of Middle East has been one of the world’s most troubled regions, especially since 45
The Middle East contains the following states: Egypt, the Sudan, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Turkey, the Yemen republics, the United Arab Emirates, Israel and Oman
Most of the states except Turkey and Iran are peopled by Arabs. Iran contains though a big number of Arabs.
The Middle East contains also the small state of Israel, set up by the UN in 48
The creation of Israel, an area that belonged to Palestine, outraged Arab opinion throughout the world (other Arab states outside the Middle East are: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya)
The Arabs especially blamed the British because they were more sympathetic to the Jews than the Arabs.
The Arab states blamed US the most because they supported the idea of a Jewish state very strongly
The Arab states refused to recognize Israel as a state and vowed to destroy it
Although there were 4 short wars between Israel and the Arab states (48-49; 56; 67; 73), Arab attacks failed and Israel survived
Two other ideas got mixed up with the anti Israel struggle:
1. The desire of some Arabs to achieve political and economical unity among the Arab states
2. The desire of many Arabs to put an end for the foreign intervention in their countries. The Middle East attracted a lot of attention from both Western and Communist powers because of its strategic position and rich oil resources
· In this case you must use source criticism. The British thought Colonel Nasser was some kind of Hitler while most Arabs thought he was a hero, the symbol of unity and freedom.
11.1 Arab unity and interference from the outside world
a) Arabs have several things in common
1. They all speak the Arab language
2. they’ re all Muslims
3. they all wanted to destroy Israel, so that Palestine could gain back their country
4. many Arabs wanted to form a sort of political and economic union
· several attempts were made to increase unity among the arab states
1. The Arab League (45) included Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. Membership later expanded to 20 states 1980. However, it achieved very little politically and was constant hampered by internal squabbles.
2. in the mid 50 the Arab Unity received a boost with the energetic leadership of Colonel Gamal Nasser of Egypt who gained lots of prestige after the Suez Crisis. In 58 Syria joined Egypt to form the United Arab Republic with Naseer as President. This only lasted until 61, when Syria withdrew because Nasser wanted to dominate the union
3. After Nasser’s death in 70, his successor President Sadat organized a loose union between Egypt, Syria and Libya, known as the Federation of Arabs Republics, but it never amounted much
In spite of the things that they had in common, the Arab states disagreed over certain things:
Jordan and Saudi Arabia were ruled and still are by conservative families who were often criticized for being too pro British by the governments of Egypt and Syria, which were pro Arab nationalists as well as socialist
The other Arab states fell out Egypt in 79 because Egypt signed a separate peace treaty with Israel. This caused Egypt to be expelled from the Arab league
b) Interference in the Middle East by other countries
This happened because of several factors:
1.
Britain and France have been involved in the Middle East for a long time
Britain ruled Egypt since 1882 until 1922 when the country was given self independence with own king. Nevertheless, the British remained in Egypt and still controlled the population
After the decline of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France were given several countries in the Middle East to prepare them for independence. This process was called for “mandates”.
Although Britain gave independence to Iraq 32 and Jordan 46, both remained pro British
France gave independence to Syria and Lebanon 45 but hoped to maintain influence in the areas
2.
The Middle East held a very important strategic position in the world. It acted as a sort of crossroad between the Western nations, the communist bloc and the Third World countries
3
The Middle East once produced 1/3 of the world’s oil.
4.
The lack of unity in the Middle East encouraged other countries to intervene
Most Arab states had nationalist governments which bitterly resented (disliked) Western influence. One by one, ever government which was thought pro western was replaced. This meant being free to act independently of both East and West
Egypt
· At the end of WW2 British troops stayed on in in the canal zone of Egypt (the area around the Suez Canal)
· This would maintain British control over the canal, in which over half of the shares were owned by the British and French
· In 52 some Egyptian army officers overthrew Farouk, the king of Egypt because he was not firm enough with the British
· The officers gained power themselves and by 54 Colonel Gamal Nasser became President and his policy led to the Suez War of 56
· This brought complete humiliation for Britain and end of British influence in Egypt
2. Jordan
King Abdullah had been given his throne by the British in 46
He was assassinated in 51 by nationalists who disliked British influence
His successor, King Hussein ended the treaty which allowed British troops to use bases in Jordan and then all British troops withdrew 57
3. Iraq
King Faisal and his Prime Minister Said were pro British. In 55 they signed an agreement with Turkey THE BAGHDAD PACT to set up a joint defense and economic policy
Pakistan, Iran and Britain also joined. Britain promising to help Iraq if she was attacked
The British humiliation in Iraq encouraged the anti British movement in Iraq to act
The King was murdered and Iraq became a republic
The new government was sympathetic to Egypt and withdrew from the PACT.
This marked the end of Britain’s attempt to play a major role in Arab affairs
4. Iran
In Iran important changes took place
Iran was the only Middle East state which had a frontier with the USSR
In 45 the Russians tried to set up a communist government in northern Iran where the communism had great influence
The ruler Reza Pahlevi resisted the Russians and signed a defense treaty with the USA 50
The Americans considered the situation as part of the Cold War and supplied Reza with military and economic aid
Nevertheless there was a strong nationalist movement in Iran which resented all foreign influence. This soon began to turn against Britain and the USA
This was because Britain held a majority of the shares in the Anglo Iranian Oil Company. It was felt that the British took too much of the profits
In 51 the Premier of Iran Dr Mussadiq nationalized the company
Most of the world, encouraged by Britain boycotted Iran’s oil and Mussadiq was forced to resign
In 54 they compromised; Britain gained 40% of the shares and Iran now took 50% of the profits
This was not enough for the left and devout Muslims. They resented the Shah’s close ties with the USA which they considered to be an immoral influence in the country. They also suspected that a big amount of the country’s GNI was going to private fortune
In 79 the Shah was forced t leave the country and an Islamic republic was set up under a religious leader, the Ayatollah (high priest) Khomeini. Like Nasser, he wanted his country to be non aligned
11.2 The creation of Israel and the Arab –Israeli war 48-49
a) Why did the creation of the state Israel lead to war
1.
· everything started almost 2000 years ago, when the Jews were driven out from their country by the Romans
· until the end of the 19th century though, there were never enough Jews to make the Arabs, who now looked on their Palestine as their homeland
2.
In 1887 the Jews that lived in Europe founded the World Zionist Organization in Basel. They believed that the Jews who already suffered persecution in Russia, France and Germany should gain an own refugee. This would be in their old homeland
3.
Britain became involved in 1917 when they supported the Jewish idea of a Jewish state
After 1919 when Palestine became a British mandate, large numbers of Jews began to arrive in Palestine and the Arabs protested a lot
They wanted an independent Palestine for the Arabs and the end of Jewish immigration of Jews
The British explained that the Jews had no will of occupying the whole state of Palestine and claimed that these two could share the same state without being an obstacle for each other
4.
Nazi persecution of Jews in Germany caused a lot of refugees and by 40 half of the Palestine population was Jewish
In 37 the British Peel Commission proposed a dividing Palestine into two different states, but the Arabs rejected the idea
In 39, the British tried again offering an independent Arab state within 10 years, but this time the Jews rejected the idea
5.
WW2 caused even more pressure. Because of Hitler’s persecutions several millions Jews wanted to have somewhere to go. The USA pressed Britain to allow 100 000 Jews into Palestine, but the British refused, not wanting to offend the Arabs.
6.
The Jews after Hitler decided to fight for an own homeland. They blew up the British headquarters, in order to convince the British to alter policies. The British responded by turning back ships that were coming full of Jews to Palestine
7.
The British unable to cope with the problem, also because of the consequences of WW2 gave the problem in the hand of the UN.
The UN voted 47 for a divided Palestine
48 Britain withdrew from the problem and let the UN to find the proper solutions
In 48 Ben Gurion declared independence of the new state of Israel, and withdrew all her troops
Israel was already fighting with Palestine and other countries such as Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon, immediately attacked Israel
b) Who was to blame for the tragedy?
· Some people blamed Britain for taking such an immature decision. It was claimed that the British troops could have stayed until the partition of Palestine became peacefully. The Jews accused Britain for being pro Arab and for reducing the immigration in the country and the Arabs accused the British for being pro Jews
· The British blamed the Americans. They said that the USA which reduced the Jewish immigration to the US to 0. They accused the Americans also for rejecting the Morison Plan which would have set up Arab and Jewish provinces under British supervision. It was also the Americans that pushed for the idea of a divided Palestine
· Some historians defend the British. They claim that the British tried to be as fare as possible and trough their withdrawal, they would force the US and the UN to react. Britain did not have resources to keep on fighting neither.
c) The war and its outcome
Most people expected the Jews to loose. But not only that the Jews defeated the Arabs, they also gained more territory than UN gained them.
The Jews desperate war lead to victory and to a huge amount of victims
A huge amount of the Arabs, being afraid of the Jews fled to neighboring countries, where they had to live in miserable conditions
The USA, France and Britain guaranteed the borders of Israel but Palestine promised that the ceasefire was only interim
The Arabs claimed that they would not recognize the legality of Israel and warned that this was only the first attempt of gaining control and destroy Israel
11.3 The Suez War 1956
a) Who was to blame for the war
It is possible to blame different countries depending on the views
The Arabs blamed the Israelis who actually began their hostilities against Egypt
The communist bloc and many Arab states blamed Britain and France accusing them of imperialist tactics (trying to keep control in the Middle East against the Arab wish) by attacking Egypt. They accused the Americans of encouraging Britain to attack
The British, French and Jews blamed Colonel Nasser for being anti Western
Some British historians agree that Britain overreacted by using force
1- Nasser was pro Arab unity and anti Israel, so everything he did irritated the British, Americans or French
· He organized guerrilla fighters that would go inside Israel and sabotage and murder
· In 36 the British signed an agreement with Egypt which would allow them to keep troops at Suez. When it expired in 56 the British wanted it to be renewed, but Nasser refused
· He helped other anti western conflicts
· He signed an arms deal with the communist bloc 55 which give the Egyptian military Russian aid and training
2. The Americans were very hostile to this decision. They knew that Egypt had become a part of the Cold War and treated Egypt like USSR. USA cancelled the grant of 46 million dollars towards the building of a dam. Trough this decision, they wanted the Egyptians to abandon the Russian aid
3. Nasser nationalized the canal and the shares which were mainly British and French. Through the nationalization he wanted to supply the dam. He promised compensation to the shareholders
4. The British believed that Nasser wanted to build an united Arabia under Egyptian control and communist influence, which could cut off all Europe’s oils supplies. The British actually ignored the fact that Nasser had offered them compensation and had promised that their all ships (except Israel) would be allowed to use the canal
5. UK, France and Israel planned a coup. They would attack Egypt simultaneously, the first two with the pretext of defending interest. They would occupy the canal and topple Nasser from power.
6. there was actually a plan that could avoid the war, but the British and French rejected that possibility
b) The war
Israel attacked and captured the Sinai Peninsula and the French and British soon arrived too.
The Americans did not support the attack because they did not want any more problems with the Arabs
The Russians and Americans decided to end this war. They appeal an UN decision
The UN moved in and the invaders accepted to withdraw
c) The outcome of the war
· This was a triumph for Nasser and humiliation for Britain, France and Israel
· For the ordinary Arab people Nasser became a hero and the nationalism increased
· The Egyptians blocked the canal, the Arabs reduced oil supplies to western Europe and American aid was replaced by Russian
· The British action lost the Iraqi support, the pro British Iraqi president was murdered and exchanged by an anti British leader 58’-
· The Algerians were encouraged in their struggle for independence from France which they achieved in 62.
· The war for Israel was not a disaster because it stopped the fedayeen raids (the sabotage forces) and destroyed a huge amount of Egyptian equipment. This gave the Jews a breathing space in which to consolidate
11.4 The Six Day War of 1967
The Arab states still wanted to destroy Israel. In 67 they joined together again and wanted to destroy Israel. The lead was taken by Iraq, Syria and Egypt
a) The Build Up To War
In Iraq a new government came to power in 63 which was influenced by the ideas of the Ba’ath party in neighboring Syria. The Ba’ath believed in Arab independence and unity and was left wing in outlook, wanting social reform and better treatment for ordinary people. They were prepared to collaborate with Egypt and to wipe Israel off the map!
In Syria political upheavals brought the Ba’ath to power 66. they began also a bombard of Israel
In Egypt colonel Nasser was very popular, his socialist policies were very successful. They included the limiting size of farms and redistributing surplus land to the peasants, he attempted to industrialize the country; he built factories, and cared a lot about the Dam project that would supply a huge part of the country with water and electricity. Since everything went well at home, he decided to start a new attack on the Jews.
The Russians encouraged Egypt and Syria and continued with their anti Jew propaganda. Their aim was to increase their influence in the Middle East
Syria, Jordan and Lebanon also sent troops while Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Algeria joined them
The Israelis decided that it’s the best to attack first, rather then be defeated. They devastated most of the Egyptian Air Force on the ground. Israeli troops moved fast capturing the Gaza Strip and the whole of Sinai from Egypt, the rest of Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan and the Golan Heights from Syria. The Arabs had no choice but to accept a UN ceasefire and everything was over in less then a week. The reason for the Jewish successes were:
The slow Arab troop build up which gave the Israelis plenty of warning
Israeli superiority in the air
Inadequate Arab preparations and communications
b) Results of the war.
For Israel it was a great success: they actually gained more territory, but also a new problem occurred. What should they make with the Arabs in the captured areas?
It was a humiliation for the Arab states and especially for Nasser that now realized that he needs foreign aid in order to win against the Jews. The Russians did not sent aid, and in order to restore relations with the Arab states, the Russians now supplied them with modern weapons. The next arab attempt to destroy Israel came in 73 with the Yom Kippur War
11.5 The Yom Kippur War of 1973
a) Events leading up to the war
· The Palestine Liberation Organization under Yasser Arafat contained a more extreme group called the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. This smaller group considered that too little action was going on, so they hi-jacked airliners and flew 3 of them to Jordan where they blew them up. All this to show the world the injustice to the Arabs in Palestine. This was embarrassing for King Hussein of Jordan, who now favored a negotiated peace and in sept. 70 expelled all PLO members based in Jordan. This terrorist attack went on and some Jews were killed under 72’s Munich’s Olympics
· Before PLO terrorism turned world opinion against them, Sadat the president of Egypt since Nasser’s death in 70, was becoming increasingly convinced of the need for a negotiated peace settlement with Israel. He tried to gain the American support but they refused to get involved
· Sadat, together with Syria, decided to attack Israel again, hoping that this would force the Americans to react as mediator (middleman). The Egyptians had modern army and were feeling confident
b) The war began on 6 October 1973
Egyptian and Syrian forces attacked on the feast of Yom Kippur, a Jewish religious festival, hoping to catch the Israelis off guard.
After some early Arab successes, the Israelis using mainly American weapons were able to turn the tables.
The Jews were undefeatable; they even hung on to the territory which they gained in 67 and even crossed the Suez Canal into Egypt.
The UN decided to intervene. They proposed a ceasefire that both sides accepted
c) The outcome of the war
The end of the war gave the people some hope of peace
Egyptian and Israeli leaders came together (not in the same room) in Geneva
The Israelis agreed to withdraw their troops from Suez, if the Egyptians would open the canal (closed since 67), but not to Israeli ships
The Arab oil producing states tried to bring pressure to bear on the USA and to Western European states that were friendly to Israel, by reducing oil supplies
This caused serious oil shortages, especially in Europe
Because of the oil need, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries began to raise oil prices substantially. This contributed to inflation and caused energy crisis in the world’s industrial nations
11.6 Camp David and the Egyptian –Israeli peace 78-79
a) Why did the 2 sides begin to talk to each other?
· President Sadat understood that Israel could not be defeated by force, and it was foolish to keep on spending resources on war. In spite of all dangers, he decided to go to Israel and talk to Knesset (Jewish parliament)
· Israel suffered economic problems, partly because of their defense and world repression
· The US pressed them to improve relations with at least some of the Arabs and the Jewish Prime Minister Menahem Begin, visited Egypt the following month
· President Carter of USA played a vital role in setting up formal negotiations between the 2 sides at Camp David, near Washington which began in September 78.
b) The Peace Treaty and its aftermath
With Carter acting as intermediary, the main points made were:
The state of war which had existed between Egypt and Israel since 48 was now ended
Israel promised to withdraw its troops from Sinai
Israeli ships could use the Suez canal
This treaty was condemned by PLO
World opinion began to move against Israel and to accept that the PLO had a good case
But when the USA tried to bring the PLO and Israel together, the Israelis would not cooperate
This treaty caused the death of Sadat of Egypt; he was killed by a Muslim because he was considered as a traitor. His successor Mubarak announced that he will continue the Camp David agreement
During the 80’s the conflict was reduced for a while because of the Iran-Iraq war which took plenty of attention. Then the Muslims in camps protested also against the brutal Jewish behavior
11.7 Peace between Israel and the PLO
The elections of a less aggressive government in Israel (labor) 92 raised the hopes for better relations with the Palestinians. Prime Minister Rabin and Foreign Minister Peres both believed in negotiation. Arafat, the PLO leader responded and talks opened. But there was so much mutual suspicion
· Nevertheless both sides preserved and by 96 remarkable changes took place
a) The peace of September 93
This was the most important, it was agreed that:
Israel formally recognized the PLO
The PLO should recognize Israel’s right to exist and to give up terrorism
Israeli troops would withdraw from parts of the Gaza strip and West Bank.
· Extremists on both sides opposed this agreement
· People were still against each other, but they had the courage to take the first step
b) Self Rule for the Palestinians (September 95 )
· Israel agreed to withdraw its troops from most of the West Bank. This would end Israeli control of the areas which they held since 1967
· All Palestinian prisoners held by Israel would be released in 3 phases
· The extremist’s of the country claimed that their leaders were guilty of shameful surrender
· Tragically Rabin was murdered and Peres became the Prime Minister
· The murder caused a disgust against the extremists and the agreement was put into operation
· In 96 King Hussein of Jordan paid a public visit to Israel, for the first time
· Arafat became the new president, which was expected to hold office until 99 when it was hoped a permanent peace agreement would have been reached
· The situation changed dramatically in 96, when 4 suicide bombings carried out by militant Palestinian groups, Hamas, claimed 63 lives
11.8 Conflict in the Lebanon
· Lebanon was made a French mandate at the end of WW1 and became fully independent in 45
· It soon became a prosperous country, making money from banking and from serving as an important passage for the exports of Syria, Jordan and Iraq
· However in 74 civil war broke out, it ended soon but chaos and disorder continued through the 80’s
a) What caused civil war to break out in 75?
Religious differences
· There were 4 main Christian groups were: Maronites (wealthiest and most conservative), Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Armenians.
Muslim: Shia (the largest group, mainly poor working class), Sunni (smaller group, wealthier and more political influence), Druze (small peasant groups)
· There was a long history of hatred between Maronites and Druzes
· The president was always a Maronite, the prime minister a Sunni, the speaker s Shia and the army chief always a Druze
The presence of Palestinian refuges from Israel
· This complicated the situation even more. They were always fighting and the Christians in the country thought they were a bad influence.
· By 75 the PLO had its headquarters in Lebanon, and this meant that Syria, the chief supporter of the PLO, was constantly interfering in Lebanon’s affairs
A dispute between Muslims and Christians over fishing rights (75)
· This upset the delicate balance
· It began when the Muslims in the country joined the Palestinian Muslims and faced the Christians in the country
· Soon a full scale civil war developed: the Maronites saw it as a chance to expel the Palestinians who had formed an alliance with the Druze , long time enemies of Maronites
· The both sides accused and blamed each other
· For a time it looked that the Muslims would win, but then the Jews warned to attack Lebanon. Syria, did not want this to happen. So Syria, sent troops to avoid a Jewish attack and to control PLO troops. Now Syria was in charge of the country. Arafat had to agree to withdraw his stupid troops
b) Chaos continued
· It took over 10 years before peace started to arise
· In the south fighting started between Palestines and Christians, the Jews helped us with troops
· A small semi independent Christian state of Free Lebanon was established
· By 82 there were 7000 UN troops in the area and was a constant struggle of peace
· In 82, in a reprisal for a Palestinian attack on Israel, Israeli troops invaded Lebanon and penetrated so far as Beirut
· For the time the Gemayels supported by the Jews were in control of Beirut
· During this period Palestinians were expelled from Beirut and PLO got divided
· The Jews withdrew, the hardliners were not welcomed where they went and a multi national force was set up to maintain the peace
· However, a spate of attacks and suicide bombings forced them to withdraw
· In 84 an alliance of Shia and Druze backed by Syria drove President Gemayel out of the country
At the end of 1986 the situation was extremely complex
Shiite Amal militia backed by Syria alarmed at the new renewed strength of the PLO which seemed likely to set up a state within a state, were surrounded the refugee camps hoping to starve the to death into surrender
At the same time an alliance of Druze and communists was trying to drive Amal out of West Beirut. Several European and American hostages were seized
With the country seeming to be in state of total disintegration, President Assad of Syria, sent troops and tanks into West Beirut 87.
c) Peace at last
In 90 important changes were introduced in the country’s constitution, giving the Muslims fairer representation.
The government gradually restored its authority over more and more of the country and managed to get most of the militia armies disbanded
11.9 The Iran-Iraq War 80-88
The Middle East got even more confused when Iraq invaded Iran
a) Iraq’s motives
· President Hussein was afraid of militant Islam spreading across the border into Iraq from Iran. Iran had become an Islamic republic in 79 under the leadership of Ayatollah
· Iran’s government wanted to be ruled by God.
· The population of Iraq was mainly Sunni muslims but there was a large Shia minority.
· Saddam whose government was non religious, was afraid that the Shia’s might rise against him and he had some of the leaders executed by 80
· The Iraqis claimed that the Iranian province of Khuzestan should rightfully belong to them. This was an area peopled largely by Arabs and Saddam hoped that they would support Iraq
·
Summary of events
The area of Middle East has been one of the world’s most troubled regions, especially since 45
The Middle East contains the following states: Egypt, the Sudan, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Turkey, the Yemen republics, the United Arab Emirates, Israel and Oman
Most of the states except Turkey and Iran are peopled by Arabs. Iran contains though a big number of Arabs.
The Middle East contains also the small state of Israel, set up by the UN in 48
The creation of Israel, an area that belonged to Palestine, outraged Arab opinion throughout the world (other Arab states outside the Middle East are: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya)
The Arabs especially blamed the British because they were more sympathetic to the Jews than the Arabs.
The Arab states blamed US the most because they supported the idea of a Jewish state very strongly
The Arab states refused to recognize Israel as a state and vowed to destroy it
Although there were 4 short wars between Israel and the Arab states (48-49; 56; 67; 73), Arab attacks failed and Israel survived
Two other ideas got mixed up with the anti Israel struggle:
1. The desire of some Arabs to achieve political and economical unity among the Arab states
2. The desire of many Arabs to put an end for the foreign intervention in their countries. The Middle East attracted a lot of attention from both Western and Communist powers because of its strategic position and rich oil resources
· In this case you must use source criticism. The British thought Colonel Nasser was some kind of Hitler while most Arabs thought he was a hero, the symbol of unity and freedom.
11.1 Arab unity and interference from the outside world
a) Arabs have several things in common
1. They all speak the Arab language
2. they’ re all Muslims
3. they all wanted to destroy Israel, so that Palestine could gain back their country
4. many Arabs wanted to form a sort of political and economic union
· several attempts were made to increase unity among the arab states
1. The Arab League (45) included Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. Membership later expanded to 20 states 1980. However, it achieved very little politically and was constant hampered by internal squabbles.
2. in the mid 50 the Arab Unity received a boost with the energetic leadership of Colonel Gamal Nasser of Egypt who gained lots of prestige after the Suez Crisis. In 58 Syria joined Egypt to form the United Arab Republic with Naseer as President. This only lasted until 61, when Syria withdrew because Nasser wanted to dominate the union
3. After Nasser’s death in 70, his successor President Sadat organized a loose union between Egypt, Syria and Libya, known as the Federation of Arabs Republics, but it never amounted much
In spite of the things that they had in common, the Arab states disagreed over certain things:
Jordan and Saudi Arabia were ruled and still are by conservative families who were often criticized for being too pro British by the governments of Egypt and Syria, which were pro Arab nationalists as well as socialist
The other Arab states fell out Egypt in 79 because Egypt signed a separate peace treaty with Israel. This caused Egypt to be expelled from the Arab league
b) Interference in the Middle East by other countries
This happened because of several factors:
1.
Britain and France have been involved in the Middle East for a long time
Britain ruled Egypt since 1882 until 1922 when the country was given self independence with own king. Nevertheless, the British remained in Egypt and still controlled the population
After the decline of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France were given several countries in the Middle East to prepare them for independence. This process was called for “mandates”.
Although Britain gave independence to Iraq 32 and Jordan 46, both remained pro British
France gave independence to Syria and Lebanon 45 but hoped to maintain influence in the areas
2.
The Middle East held a very important strategic position in the world. It acted as a sort of crossroad between the Western nations, the communist bloc and the Third World countries
3
The Middle East once produced 1/3 of the world’s oil.
4.
The lack of unity in the Middle East encouraged other countries to intervene
Most Arab states had nationalist governments which bitterly resented (disliked) Western influence. One by one, ever government which was thought pro western was replaced. This meant being free to act independently of both East and West
Egypt
· At the end of WW2 British troops stayed on in in the canal zone of Egypt (the area around the Suez Canal)
· This would maintain British control over the canal, in which over half of the shares were owned by the British and French
· In 52 some Egyptian army officers overthrew Farouk, the king of Egypt because he was not firm enough with the British
· The officers gained power themselves and by 54 Colonel Gamal Nasser became President and his policy led to the Suez War of 56
· This brought complete humiliation for Britain and end of British influence in Egypt
2. Jordan
King Abdullah had been given his throne by the British in 46
He was assassinated in 51 by nationalists who disliked British influence
His successor, King Hussein ended the treaty which allowed British troops to use bases in Jordan and then all British troops withdrew 57
3. Iraq
King Faisal and his Prime Minister Said were pro British. In 55 they signed an agreement with Turkey THE BAGHDAD PACT to set up a joint defense and economic policy
Pakistan, Iran and Britain also joined. Britain promising to help Iraq if she was attacked
The British humiliation in Iraq encouraged the anti British movement in Iraq to act
The King was murdered and Iraq became a republic
The new government was sympathetic to Egypt and withdrew from the PACT.
This marked the end of Britain’s attempt to play a major role in Arab affairs
4. Iran
In Iran important changes took place
Iran was the only Middle East state which had a frontier with the USSR
In 45 the Russians tried to set up a communist government in northern Iran where the communism had great influence
The ruler Reza Pahlevi resisted the Russians and signed a defense treaty with the USA 50
The Americans considered the situation as part of the Cold War and supplied Reza with military and economic aid
Nevertheless there was a strong nationalist movement in Iran which resented all foreign influence. This soon began to turn against Britain and the USA
This was because Britain held a majority of the shares in the Anglo Iranian Oil Company. It was felt that the British took too much of the profits
In 51 the Premier of Iran Dr Mussadiq nationalized the company
Most of the world, encouraged by Britain boycotted Iran’s oil and Mussadiq was forced to resign
In 54 they compromised; Britain gained 40% of the shares and Iran now took 50% of the profits
This was not enough for the left and devout Muslims. They resented the Shah’s close ties with the USA which they considered to be an immoral influence in the country. They also suspected that a big amount of the country’s GNI was going to private fortune
In 79 the Shah was forced t leave the country and an Islamic republic was set up under a religious leader, the Ayatollah (high priest) Khomeini. Like Nasser, he wanted his country to be non aligned
11.2 The creation of Israel and the Arab –Israeli war 48-49
a) Why did the creation of the state Israel lead to war
1.
· everything started almost 2000 years ago, when the Jews were driven out from their country by the Romans
· until the end of the 19th century though, there were never enough Jews to make the Arabs, who now looked on their Palestine as their homeland
2.
In 1887 the Jews that lived in Europe founded the World Zionist Organization in Basel. They believed that the Jews who already suffered persecution in Russia, France and Germany should gain an own refugee. This would be in their old homeland
3.
Britain became involved in 1917 when they supported the Jewish idea of a Jewish state
After 1919 when Palestine became a British mandate, large numbers of Jews began to arrive in Palestine and the Arabs protested a lot
They wanted an independent Palestine for the Arabs and the end of Jewish immigration of Jews
The British explained that the Jews had no will of occupying the whole state of Palestine and claimed that these two could share the same state without being an obstacle for each other
4.
Nazi persecution of Jews in Germany caused a lot of refugees and by 40 half of the Palestine population was Jewish
In 37 the British Peel Commission proposed a dividing Palestine into two different states, but the Arabs rejected the idea
In 39, the British tried again offering an independent Arab state within 10 years, but this time the Jews rejected the idea
5.
WW2 caused even more pressure. Because of Hitler’s persecutions several millions Jews wanted to have somewhere to go. The USA pressed Britain to allow 100 000 Jews into Palestine, but the British refused, not wanting to offend the Arabs.
6.
The Jews after Hitler decided to fight for an own homeland. They blew up the British headquarters, in order to convince the British to alter policies. The British responded by turning back ships that were coming full of Jews to Palestine
7.
The British unable to cope with the problem, also because of the consequences of WW2 gave the problem in the hand of the UN.
The UN voted 47 for a divided Palestine
48 Britain withdrew from the problem and let the UN to find the proper solutions
In 48 Ben Gurion declared independence of the new state of Israel, and withdrew all her troops
Israel was already fighting with Palestine and other countries such as Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon, immediately attacked Israel
b) Who was to blame for the tragedy?
· Some people blamed Britain for taking such an immature decision. It was claimed that the British troops could have stayed until the partition of Palestine became peacefully. The Jews accused Britain for being pro Arab and for reducing the immigration in the country and the Arabs accused the British for being pro Jews
· The British blamed the Americans. They said that the USA which reduced the Jewish immigration to the US to 0. They accused the Americans also for rejecting the Morison Plan which would have set up Arab and Jewish provinces under British supervision. It was also the Americans that pushed for the idea of a divided Palestine
· Some historians defend the British. They claim that the British tried to be as fare as possible and trough their withdrawal, they would force the US and the UN to react. Britain did not have resources to keep on fighting neither.
c) The war and its outcome
Most people expected the Jews to loose. But not only that the Jews defeated the Arabs, they also gained more territory than UN gained them.
The Jews desperate war lead to victory and to a huge amount of victims
A huge amount of the Arabs, being afraid of the Jews fled to neighboring countries, where they had to live in miserable conditions
The USA, France and Britain guaranteed the borders of Israel but Palestine promised that the ceasefire was only interim
The Arabs claimed that they would not recognize the legality of Israel and warned that this was only the first attempt of gaining control and destroy Israel
11.3 The Suez War 1956
a) Who was to blame for the war
It is possible to blame different countries depending on the views
The Arabs blamed the Israelis who actually began their hostilities against Egypt
The communist bloc and many Arab states blamed Britain and France accusing them of imperialist tactics (trying to keep control in the Middle East against the Arab wish) by attacking Egypt. They accused the Americans of encouraging Britain to attack
The British, French and Jews blamed Colonel Nasser for being anti Western
Some British historians agree that Britain overreacted by using force
1- Nasser was pro Arab unity and anti Israel, so everything he did irritated the British, Americans or French
· He organized guerrilla fighters that would go inside Israel and sabotage and murder
· In 36 the British signed an agreement with Egypt which would allow them to keep troops at Suez. When it expired in 56 the British wanted it to be renewed, but Nasser refused
· He helped other anti western conflicts
· He signed an arms deal with the communist bloc 55 which give the Egyptian military Russian aid and training
2. The Americans were very hostile to this decision. They knew that Egypt had become a part of the Cold War and treated Egypt like USSR. USA cancelled the grant of 46 million dollars towards the building of a dam. Trough this decision, they wanted the Egyptians to abandon the Russian aid
3. Nasser nationalized the canal and the shares which were mainly British and French. Through the nationalization he wanted to supply the dam. He promised compensation to the shareholders
4. The British believed that Nasser wanted to build an united Arabia under Egyptian control and communist influence, which could cut off all Europe’s oils supplies. The British actually ignored the fact that Nasser had offered them compensation and had promised that their all ships (except Israel) would be allowed to use the canal
5. UK, France and Israel planned a coup. They would attack Egypt simultaneously, the first two with the pretext of defending interest. They would occupy the canal and topple Nasser from power.
6. there was actually a plan that could avoid the war, but the British and French rejected that possibility
b) The war
Israel attacked and captured the Sinai Peninsula and the French and British soon arrived too.
The Americans did not support the attack because they did not want any more problems with the Arabs
The Russians and Americans decided to end this war. They appeal an UN decision
The UN moved in and the invaders accepted to withdraw
c) The outcome of the war
· This was a triumph for Nasser and humiliation for Britain, France and Israel
· For the ordinary Arab people Nasser became a hero and the nationalism increased
· The Egyptians blocked the canal, the Arabs reduced oil supplies to western Europe and American aid was replaced by Russian
· The British action lost the Iraqi support, the pro British Iraqi president was murdered and exchanged by an anti British leader 58’-
· The Algerians were encouraged in their struggle for independence from France which they achieved in 62.
· The war for Israel was not a disaster because it stopped the fedayeen raids (the sabotage forces) and destroyed a huge amount of Egyptian equipment. This gave the Jews a breathing space in which to consolidate
11.4 The Six Day War of 1967
The Arab states still wanted to destroy Israel. In 67 they joined together again and wanted to destroy Israel. The lead was taken by Iraq, Syria and Egypt
a) The Build Up To War
In Iraq a new government came to power in 63 which was influenced by the ideas of the Ba’ath party in neighboring Syria. The Ba’ath believed in Arab independence and unity and was left wing in outlook, wanting social reform and better treatment for ordinary people. They were prepared to collaborate with Egypt and to wipe Israel off the map!
In Syria political upheavals brought the Ba’ath to power 66. they began also a bombard of Israel
In Egypt colonel Nasser was very popular, his socialist policies were very successful. They included the limiting size of farms and redistributing surplus land to the peasants, he attempted to industrialize the country; he built factories, and cared a lot about the Dam project that would supply a huge part of the country with water and electricity. Since everything went well at home, he decided to start a new attack on the Jews.
The Russians encouraged Egypt and Syria and continued with their anti Jew propaganda. Their aim was to increase their influence in the Middle East
Syria, Jordan and Lebanon also sent troops while Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Algeria joined them
The Israelis decided that it’s the best to attack first, rather then be defeated. They devastated most of the Egyptian Air Force on the ground. Israeli troops moved fast capturing the Gaza Strip and the whole of Sinai from Egypt, the rest of Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan and the Golan Heights from Syria. The Arabs had no choice but to accept a UN ceasefire and everything was over in less then a week. The reason for the Jewish successes were:
The slow Arab troop build up which gave the Israelis plenty of warning
Israeli superiority in the air
Inadequate Arab preparations and communications
b) Results of the war.
For Israel it was a great success: they actually gained more territory, but also a new problem occurred. What should they make with the Arabs in the captured areas?
It was a humiliation for the Arab states and especially for Nasser that now realized that he needs foreign aid in order to win against the Jews. The Russians did not sent aid, and in order to restore relations with the Arab states, the Russians now supplied them with modern weapons. The next arab attempt to destroy Israel came in 73 with the Yom Kippur War
11.5 The Yom Kippur War of 1973
a) Events leading up to the war
· The Palestine Liberation Organization under Yasser Arafat contained a more extreme group called the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. This smaller group considered that too little action was going on, so they hi-jacked airliners and flew 3 of them to Jordan where they blew them up. All this to show the world the injustice to the Arabs in Palestine. This was embarrassing for King Hussein of Jordan, who now favored a negotiated peace and in sept. 70 expelled all PLO members based in Jordan. This terrorist attack went on and some Jews were killed under 72’s Munich’s Olympics
· Before PLO terrorism turned world opinion against them, Sadat the president of Egypt since Nasser’s death in 70, was becoming increasingly convinced of the need for a negotiated peace settlement with Israel. He tried to gain the American support but they refused to get involved
· Sadat, together with Syria, decided to attack Israel again, hoping that this would force the Americans to react as mediator (middleman). The Egyptians had modern army and were feeling confident
b) The war began on 6 October 1973
Egyptian and Syrian forces attacked on the feast of Yom Kippur, a Jewish religious festival, hoping to catch the Israelis off guard.
After some early Arab successes, the Israelis using mainly American weapons were able to turn the tables.
The Jews were undefeatable; they even hung on to the territory which they gained in 67 and even crossed the Suez Canal into Egypt.
The UN decided to intervene. They proposed a ceasefire that both sides accepted
c) The outcome of the war
The end of the war gave the people some hope of peace
Egyptian and Israeli leaders came together (not in the same room) in Geneva
The Israelis agreed to withdraw their troops from Suez, if the Egyptians would open the canal (closed since 67), but not to Israeli ships
The Arab oil producing states tried to bring pressure to bear on the USA and to Western European states that were friendly to Israel, by reducing oil supplies
This caused serious oil shortages, especially in Europe
Because of the oil need, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries began to raise oil prices substantially. This contributed to inflation and caused energy crisis in the world’s industrial nations
11.6 Camp David and the Egyptian –Israeli peace 78-79
a) Why did the 2 sides begin to talk to each other?
· President Sadat understood that Israel could not be defeated by force, and it was foolish to keep on spending resources on war. In spite of all dangers, he decided to go to Israel and talk to Knesset (Jewish parliament)
· Israel suffered economic problems, partly because of their defense and world repression
· The US pressed them to improve relations with at least some of the Arabs and the Jewish Prime Minister Menahem Begin, visited Egypt the following month
· President Carter of USA played a vital role in setting up formal negotiations between the 2 sides at Camp David, near Washington which began in September 78.
b) The Peace Treaty and its aftermath
With Carter acting as intermediary, the main points made were:
The state of war which had existed between Egypt and Israel since 48 was now ended
Israel promised to withdraw its troops from Sinai
Israeli ships could use the Suez canal
This treaty was condemned by PLO
World opinion began to move against Israel and to accept that the PLO had a good case
But when the USA tried to bring the PLO and Israel together, the Israelis would not cooperate
This treaty caused the death of Sadat of Egypt; he was killed by a Muslim because he was considered as a traitor. His successor Mubarak announced that he will continue the Camp David agreement
During the 80’s the conflict was reduced for a while because of the Iran-Iraq war which took plenty of attention. Then the Muslims in camps protested also against the brutal Jewish behavior
11.7 Peace between Israel and the PLO
The elections of a less aggressive government in Israel (labor) 92 raised the hopes for better relations with the Palestinians. Prime Minister Rabin and Foreign Minister Peres both believed in negotiation. Arafat, the PLO leader responded and talks opened. But there was so much mutual suspicion
· Nevertheless both sides preserved and by 96 remarkable changes took place
a) The peace of September 93
This was the most important, it was agreed that:
Israel formally recognized the PLO
The PLO should recognize Israel’s right to exist and to give up terrorism
Israeli troops would withdraw from parts of the Gaza strip and West Bank.
· Extremists on both sides opposed this agreement
· People were still against each other, but they had the courage to take the first step
b) Self Rule for the Palestinians (September 95 )
· Israel agreed to withdraw its troops from most of the West Bank. This would end Israeli control of the areas which they held since 1967
· All Palestinian prisoners held by Israel would be released in 3 phases
· The extremist’s of the country claimed that their leaders were guilty of shameful surrender
· Tragically Rabin was murdered and Peres became the Prime Minister
· The murder caused a disgust against the extremists and the agreement was put into operation
· In 96 King Hussein of Jordan paid a public visit to Israel, for the first time
· Arafat became the new president, which was expected to hold office until 99 when it was hoped a permanent peace agreement would have been reached
· The situation changed dramatically in 96, when 4 suicide bombings carried out by militant Palestinian groups, Hamas, claimed 63 lives
11.8 Conflict in the Lebanon
· Lebanon was made a French mandate at the end of WW1 and became fully independent in 45
· It soon became a prosperous country, making money from banking and from serving as an important passage for the exports of Syria, Jordan and Iraq
· However in 74 civil war broke out, it ended soon but chaos and disorder continued through the 80’s
a) What caused civil war to break out in 75?
Religious differences
· There were 4 main Christian groups were: Maronites (wealthiest and most conservative), Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Armenians.
Muslim: Shia (the largest group, mainly poor working class), Sunni (smaller group, wealthier and more political influence), Druze (small peasant groups)
· There was a long history of hatred between Maronites and Druzes
· The president was always a Maronite, the prime minister a Sunni, the speaker s Shia and the army chief always a Druze
The presence of Palestinian refuges from Israel
· This complicated the situation even more. They were always fighting and the Christians in the country thought they were a bad influence.
· By 75 the PLO had its headquarters in Lebanon, and this meant that Syria, the chief supporter of the PLO, was constantly interfering in Lebanon’s affairs
A dispute between Muslims and Christians over fishing rights (75)
· This upset the delicate balance
· It began when the Muslims in the country joined the Palestinian Muslims and faced the Christians in the country
· Soon a full scale civil war developed: the Maronites saw it as a chance to expel the Palestinians who had formed an alliance with the Druze , long time enemies of Maronites
· The both sides accused and blamed each other
· For a time it looked that the Muslims would win, but then the Jews warned to attack Lebanon. Syria, did not want this to happen. So Syria, sent troops to avoid a Jewish attack and to control PLO troops. Now Syria was in charge of the country. Arafat had to agree to withdraw his stupid troops
b) Chaos continued
· It took over 10 years before peace started to arise
· In the south fighting started between Palestines and Christians, the Jews helped us with troops
· A small semi independent Christian state of Free Lebanon was established
· By 82 there were 7000 UN troops in the area and was a constant struggle of peace
· In 82, in a reprisal for a Palestinian attack on Israel, Israeli troops invaded Lebanon and penetrated so far as Beirut
· For the time the Gemayels supported by the Jews were in control of Beirut
· During this period Palestinians were expelled from Beirut and PLO got divided
· The Jews withdrew, the hardliners were not welcomed where they went and a multi national force was set up to maintain the peace
· However, a spate of attacks and suicide bombings forced them to withdraw
· In 84 an alliance of Shia and Druze backed by Syria drove President Gemayel out of the country
At the end of 1986 the situation was extremely complex
Shiite Amal militia backed by Syria alarmed at the new renewed strength of the PLO which seemed likely to set up a state within a state, were surrounded the refugee camps hoping to starve the to death into surrender
At the same time an alliance of Druze and communists was trying to drive Amal out of West Beirut. Several European and American hostages were seized
With the country seeming to be in state of total disintegration, President Assad of Syria, sent troops and tanks into West Beirut 87.
c) Peace at last
In 90 important changes were introduced in the country’s constitution, giving the Muslims fairer representation.
The government gradually restored its authority over more and more of the country and managed to get most of the militia armies disbanded
11.9 The Iran-Iraq War 80-88
The Middle East got even more confused when Iraq invaded Iran
a) Iraq’s motives
· President Hussein was afraid of militant Islam spreading across the border into Iraq from Iran. Iran had become an Islamic republic in 79 under the leadership of Ayatollah
· Iran’s government wanted to be ruled by God.
· The population of Iraq was mainly Sunni muslims but there was a large Shia minority.
· Saddam whose government was non religious, was afraid that the Shia’s might rise against him and he had some of the leaders executed by 80
· The Iraqis claimed that the Iranian province of Khuzestan should rightfully belong to them. This was an area peopled largely by Arabs and Saddam hoped that they would support Iraq
·
What role did Cuba play in the development of the Cold War?
What role did Cuba play in the development of the Cold War?
The cold war can be related sometimes as an indirect conflict where the two superpowers, USA and USSR (or Russia) attacked each other with propaganda, economic measures, general policy of non co-operation and gathering as many allies as possible. This period between 45’ and 90’ started because of several factors. One of them is the differences of principles between USA and USSR, respectively capitalism and communism. These two countries tried to expand their ideologies as much as possible and in the same time, to withstand the other side’s system as much and often as possible. A good example that shows that this theory might be true is the situation in Cuba, which is one of the most famous indirect conflicts of the Cold War. I will now look closer to this example and try to answer: what role did Cuba play in the development of the Cold War? According to my opinion, it played a both negative and a positive role.
After about 40 years under US influence, which may have caused negative results in Cuba (as the huge American control of Cuba’s economy), one kind of Cuban dislike against the Americans, was born. This happened simultaneously as the Cold War began something that fit the Russian’s pattern of expansion. Some new conflicts between the new nationalist leader Castro and the USA turn Castro into socialist, improved relations with USSR and broke off remained relations with the US. This situation was important because, to a certain extent, it played a big part of the development of the CW.
During the beginning of the superpower’s arms race, USSR placed nuclear missiles in Cuba, something that may have put several American major cities in real danger, caused a global temporal shock and bring the situation quite near a nuclear war. In this case, the nuclear war would have caused major consequences in humanity. This critical situation helped the world to understand how easy a nuclear war could start, something that may have caused some caution in the behavior of the power’s leaders. This may have affected the Cold War in later years.
Another factor and result of this situation was the signing of the Nuclear Ban Test Treaty (63’), which meant that the tests on nuclear weapons will only occur underground. This has not only affected the Cold War and the period after in a positive way, but also caused, to a certain extent, some kind of caution and restriction in the attitudes of the power’s leaders. Another example that shows this may be the creation of The Hot Line (63’), which was due to allow consultations between US and USSR.
According to mine and other’s opinion the role played by Cuba and this situation in the CW was negative as well.
To some extent, it increased the creation of even more dangerous and more effective weapons, as the MIRVs, which could be programmed to hit different targets, from own areas. This might have created temptations in the both countries to win a nuclear war by striking first or destroying all the weapons of the other side. This negative feeling, according to me, was to some extent, slowed down by the Cuban Missiles Crises, when the both powers understood the great consequences of a possible nuclear war.
As you see, the role of Cuba in the CW was considerable but also the role of the CW on Cuba cannot be forgotten. It made the Cuban system depended by USSR. As a result, by 91’ when USSR split up, Cuba lost its most powerful supporter and became extremely isolated.
As a conclusion, Cuba’s role in the development of the CW was considerable. It had both positive and negative results. If we look for example at the Cuban Missiles Crisis, we can notice that it caused the both sides to think that each of them achieved something and understood how easy a nuclear war could begin. This may have produced, to some extent, some relaxations in tensions but increased and speeded up the production of even more effective nuclear weapons.
Key points of the essay
Introduction
A short explanation of the CW, it ideas and purpose and why Cuba can be counted as a part of it
Should include the essay question (to have something to reconnect the facts with) and possible hypothesis
Body
Why and how did Cuba enter the CW and its effects? Reconnect to the essay question
Pro
Include the Cuban Missiles Crises, its effects on the relaxations of the tensions. Reconnect!
Include the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, The Hot Line and their effects on the possible relaxations of tensions.
Anti
Argue about why it may have increased the production on nuclear weapons. Reconnect!
The extent to which Cuba itself got affected by the Cold War.
Conclusion
Explain to what extent Cuba was both a negative and positive experience in the CW. Reconnect to the essay question as well.
The cold war can be related sometimes as an indirect conflict where the two superpowers, USA and USSR (or Russia) attacked each other with propaganda, economic measures, general policy of non co-operation and gathering as many allies as possible. This period between 45’ and 90’ started because of several factors. One of them is the differences of principles between USA and USSR, respectively capitalism and communism. These two countries tried to expand their ideologies as much as possible and in the same time, to withstand the other side’s system as much and often as possible. A good example that shows that this theory might be true is the situation in Cuba, which is one of the most famous indirect conflicts of the Cold War. I will now look closer to this example and try to answer: what role did Cuba play in the development of the Cold War? According to my opinion, it played a both negative and a positive role.
After about 40 years under US influence, which may have caused negative results in Cuba (as the huge American control of Cuba’s economy), one kind of Cuban dislike against the Americans, was born. This happened simultaneously as the Cold War began something that fit the Russian’s pattern of expansion. Some new conflicts between the new nationalist leader Castro and the USA turn Castro into socialist, improved relations with USSR and broke off remained relations with the US. This situation was important because, to a certain extent, it played a big part of the development of the CW.
During the beginning of the superpower’s arms race, USSR placed nuclear missiles in Cuba, something that may have put several American major cities in real danger, caused a global temporal shock and bring the situation quite near a nuclear war. In this case, the nuclear war would have caused major consequences in humanity. This critical situation helped the world to understand how easy a nuclear war could start, something that may have caused some caution in the behavior of the power’s leaders. This may have affected the Cold War in later years.
Another factor and result of this situation was the signing of the Nuclear Ban Test Treaty (63’), which meant that the tests on nuclear weapons will only occur underground. This has not only affected the Cold War and the period after in a positive way, but also caused, to a certain extent, some kind of caution and restriction in the attitudes of the power’s leaders. Another example that shows this may be the creation of The Hot Line (63’), which was due to allow consultations between US and USSR.
According to mine and other’s opinion the role played by Cuba and this situation in the CW was negative as well.
To some extent, it increased the creation of even more dangerous and more effective weapons, as the MIRVs, which could be programmed to hit different targets, from own areas. This might have created temptations in the both countries to win a nuclear war by striking first or destroying all the weapons of the other side. This negative feeling, according to me, was to some extent, slowed down by the Cuban Missiles Crises, when the both powers understood the great consequences of a possible nuclear war.
As you see, the role of Cuba in the CW was considerable but also the role of the CW on Cuba cannot be forgotten. It made the Cuban system depended by USSR. As a result, by 91’ when USSR split up, Cuba lost its most powerful supporter and became extremely isolated.
As a conclusion, Cuba’s role in the development of the CW was considerable. It had both positive and negative results. If we look for example at the Cuban Missiles Crisis, we can notice that it caused the both sides to think that each of them achieved something and understood how easy a nuclear war could begin. This may have produced, to some extent, some relaxations in tensions but increased and speeded up the production of even more effective nuclear weapons.
Key points of the essay
Introduction
A short explanation of the CW, it ideas and purpose and why Cuba can be counted as a part of it
Should include the essay question (to have something to reconnect the facts with) and possible hypothesis
Body
Why and how did Cuba enter the CW and its effects? Reconnect to the essay question
Pro
Include the Cuban Missiles Crises, its effects on the relaxations of the tensions. Reconnect!
Include the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, The Hot Line and their effects on the possible relaxations of tensions.
Anti
Argue about why it may have increased the production on nuclear weapons. Reconnect!
The extent to which Cuba itself got affected by the Cold War.
Conclusion
Explain to what extent Cuba was both a negative and positive experience in the CW. Reconnect to the essay question as well.
Lab Report: Enzyme Activity
Lab Report: Enzyme Activity
Introduction
Background
Chemical reaction in general can be accelerated in a number of ways. Two important ways are by an increase in temperature up to the optimum and by the use of catalysts. A catalyst is a substance that increases the rate of a reaction without being used up itself. Enzymes are protein molecules that function as catalysts and speed up reactions in living organisms without the need to raise the temperature of the reaction
Enzymes are usually specific for particular reactions and work best when conditions such as pH, temperature and ion concentration are most suitable. If these conditions are inappropriate for that enzyme, the reactions will proceed at a slower rate or not at all.
Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is a very reactive chemical that is formed as a by-product in cellular reactions. It is highly toxic and must be removed or it will disrupt chemical reactions in the cell. An enzyme, catalase, which is found in most tissue from living organisms, breaks the substrate (H2O2) down into two harmless substances, water and oxygen, according to this equation:
2H2O2 à 2H2O + O2
In this experiment liver will be used as a source of catalase.
The oxygen is given off as a gas and, if detergent is added to the substrate, foam is formed.
The volume of the foam produced in a given time can be used as a measure of the enzyme activity.
Aim
Our aim in this experiment is to use this reaction to investigate how substrate concentration may influence the rate of the above reaction.
Equipment
Materials required
Solutions of hydrogen peroxide (at 16%, 8%, 4% and 2%)
detergent
stop watch or clock
1 x 5 ml measuring cylinder
Sharp knife or razor blade
forceps
fresh liver
1x 100 ml measuring cylinder
2 x teat pipettes
distilled water
Experiment
Method
1. We cut 5 cubes of liver each approximately 1cm3
2. We then used the small measuring cylinder and teat pipette to measure 4 ml of 2% hydrogen peroxide with to drops of detergent into a 100 ml measuring cylinder and swirled it for it to mix.
3. Using the forceps we took one cube of liver and placed it in the measuring cylinder. After 30 seconds, we recorded the volume the foam reached in the cylinder and recorded our data in a table seen below.
4. After that we repeated this procedure with the other 3 solutions of hydrogen peroxide and did the same thing with distilled water. We also made sure we rinsed our glassware carefully between procedures.
5. Then we obtained results from five other groups and entered them in the table below.
The independent variable during this experiment was the substrate concentration which we used. The dependent variable was the amount of foam formed.
Results:
| | Foam/ +- 1ml | ||||
| Group nr. Sub. Con. % | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 2 | 16 | 22 | 16 | 20 | 14 |
| 4 | 23 | 30 | 35 | 35 | 24 |
| 8 | 50 | 70 | 77 | 40 | 60 |
| 16 | 105 | 35 | 130 | 80 | 130 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Graph A. The dynamic change of enzyme activity as a result of increased substrate concentration in different groups:
*I was in group nr 3
Graph B. The dynamic change of enzyme activity as a result of increased substrate concentration using the average of all groups:
Calculations of average:
For the substrate concentration of 0% (H2O) = 0+0+0+0+0 = 0
For the substrate concentration of 2% H2O2 = 16+22+16+20+14/5 = 17.6
For the substrate concentration of 4% H2O2 = 23+30+35+35+24/5 = 29.4
For the substrate concentration of 8% H2O2 = 50+70+77+40+60/5 = 59.6
For the substrate concentration of 16% H2O2 = 105+35+130+80+130/5 = 96
*All the results above are given in ml.
Conclusion and Evaluation
Our aim in this experiment has been to investigate how substrate concentration affects the activity of certain enzymes, in this case, catalase. From the results of our experiment, graph A and graph B, we can see clearly that the activity of the reaction taken place increases as we add a more concentrated substrate, H2O2. When we add water as a substrate, containing no H2O2, no reaction is taken place at all. From this we can draw the conclusion that the more concentrated the substrate is, the more reaction will take place with the help of the enzyme catalase, producing more water and oxygen (foam).
If we compare our results to the IB-study guide, we can observe that the curve of our graph is quite inaccurate. On the next page is an example of a more correct graph displaying the enzyme activity of increasingly concentrated substrates:
Here we can observe that the difference between our results and this example of a correct graph can be summed up into two main points:
· The rate of reaction increases drastically initially, because of the rapid increase of substrate concentration more reaction takes place and more active sites are being occupied.
· At one point at the latter part of the graph all the active sites in the enzymes are occupied. This makes it impossible for an increase of reactions as no more substrate concentration can be broken down without additional enzymes.
The problems and difficulties which caused this inaccuracy in our results might have been caused by several reasons, but the three most obvious limitations of this lab can be summed up in three points:
· The liver was supposed to be cut into pieces of the size of one cubic centimeter each and it is extremely difficult if not impossible to do this manually. Different parts of the liver can also contain different amounts of catalase which again makes this highly inaccurate.
· Secondly, the amount of detergent needed being referred to as “two drops” makes the lab even more imprecise. Two drops is not a static volume and is therefore not a precise way of describing an amount of any substance. The amount of detergent increases the amount of foam that is produced so it is very vital during this experiment and has a large effect on the result.
· Finally, the volume of the foam, which has a critical impact on the result, is very imprecise. The density of the foam can differ, and thus the volume, which gives us an incorrect appreciation of the reactions taken place.
There are several things we could do to improve this experiment to gain a more accurate result. The catalase can be measured more accurately if the substance is purified in a chemical form, the amount of detergent could have been given with a more exact volume of measurement and finally the reactions taken place could have been measured in a different way than by measuring the amount of foam produced.
Summary
During this lab we have investigated how substrate concentration affects the activity of enzymes, in this case catalase. We did this by creating a reaction of the breaking down of a substrate and then recording how much the volume of the product of the reaction differed between different concentrations of the substrate. The result we got gave us a clear picture of how increased substrate concentration created a dynamic change of the reactions taking place. The result was however very imprecise for several reasons but the one thing which we could still conclude from our results was that the dynamic change that takes place in amounts of reaction when a different substrate concentration is added. When we compared this to our literary source we could further conclude that the enzyme activity or the rate of reactions which take place, increase until a certain point when all active sites of the enzymes are occupied, and the rate of the reactions can no longer increase.
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)
