Indirect rule
The term indirect rule or indirect rule refers in the narrower sense to a certain type of European colonial policy in the 19th and 20th centuries, as it was particularly typical of the British Empire , but was also practiced by other colonial powers, such as the German Rich .
In a broader sense, indirect rule denotes all methods of rule in which the exercise of power occurs through local and traditional structures of rule. In almost all British colonies , the local power structures were included in the colonial administration (exceptions are, for example, the Caribbean states and Burma).
The opposite term to indirect rule is direct rule : for the French colonies in Africa, for example, it is typical that almost all traditional rule structures have been smashed and replaced by French institutions. This policy was tied to the idea that the bourgeois revolutionary concept of civilization is universal and indivisible and should therefore also apply in the colonies . Only in a few exceptional cases was this concept to be understood as equating the colonized population with French citizens in the mother country.
In the British domain, the system of indirect rule was not used in the so-called crown colonies . As an example from the last few decades, the term direct rule can be found as the official designation of the way Northern Ireland is governed by a Northern Ireland minister who reports directly to London.
background
After a territory has been conquered, it is often very time-consuming or expensive to replace the existing power and administrative structures. If one does not want to largely forego control of the hinterland , as for example the Phoenicians or Portugal , it is necessary to incorporate this into the conquered territory. Leaving the existing structures and using them not only creates trust among the population of the conquered area, the established structures are often also better adapted to local requirements and conditions. At the same time, the integration of the local structures also allows the power-political game with them, so that the control can under certain circumstances be more radical than with direct rule - the colonial power can even manage to act as a lawyer and mediator in disputes among the local elites and thus theirs Gradually increase the scope for power politics. The Roman Empire offers a historically significant example of this approach, particularly in its eastern and southern regions.
Contrary to its claim, the indirect rule was always associated with significant interventions in the ruled society. In no case was the affected area able to develop independently under indirect rule:
- The conditions in the "indirectly" controlled area were "frozen", democratic developments z. B. were not planned, because these threatened the model of rule. The respective traditional ruler had, with the British or other colonial rulers, a power behind him that allowed him to prevent any unpleasant development in his domain. The “export” of European social conflicts and oppositional ideologies to the colonies was also effectively prevented.
- In many cases it was only a matter of the European interpretation of a situation existing at a certain point in time.
- On the one hand, this was particularly true in areas in which (largely) acephalous societies existed that did not have the differentiated structures of rule that corresponded to the ideas of the colonial rulers. Here the “traditional authorities” under British rule were often consciously or unconsciously created by them.
- In other areas, the existing rulership or economic structures were interpreted in a folk or racial manner and thus contradictions were constructed. T. received well beyond the actual colonial era. For example, German colonial policy in Africa relied on the principle of indirect rule and legitimized the social structures used for its own political intentions through a race theory ( Hamite theory ), which in each area provided for a certain people of alleged Hamite descent as the master people (e.g. the Maasai , Swahili and Tutsi in German East Africa , the Ovambo and "Hottentots" ( Khoi Khoi ) in German South West Africa , the Duala in Cameroon and the Ewe in Togoland ). With the loss of the German colonies after the First World War , parts of this policy were continued (e.g. by Belgium in Rwanda ).
Theoretical shaping
A systematic theory of indirect rule was developed by the British Frederick Lugard, 1st Baron Lugard at the beginning of the 20th century. From 1914 he had the opportunity to apply his theories in his capacity as governor general to the northern areas of what is now Nigeria and to subject them to a practical test. After he resigned from office, he summarized his findings into a theory of indirect rule and published it in 1922 in the book The Dual Mandate in Tropical Africa . This work became the handbook of British colonial officials throughout the Empire.
literature
- Hettne, Bjùrn: The political economy of indirect rule. Mysore 1881-1947. London 1978.
- Michael Crowder: Indirect Rule: French and British Style . In: Africa. Journal of the International African Institute, Vol. 34, No. 3rd July 1964, 197-205.
- HF Morris: A History of the Adoption of Codes of Criminal Law and Procedure in British Colonial Africa, 1876-1935 . In: Journal of African Law, Vol. 18, No. 1, Criminal Law and Criminology, 1974, 6-23.
- Lorena Rizzo: The Elephant Shooting - Inconsistencies of Colonial Law and Indirect Rule in Kaoko (north-western Namibia) in the 1920s and 1930s . In: The Journal of African History, Vol. 48, No. July 2, 2007, 245-266.