Some European countries have had a significant influence over a large part of the globe. Many countries in the Americas, Africa, and Asia remained colonies for decades. However, eventually these countries managed to obtain freedom and overthrow the rule of European monarchs and leaders. Interestingly, the United States can be seen as a country that has had and still has an immense influence on the global political and economic agendas, but it was once a colony of the British Empire. African and Asian countries were under the rule of such countries as Britain, France, Belgium, Germany, Spain, and Portugal, which warred with each other to obtain control over colonies (Strayer 922). Apart from a similar enemy (European invaders), it is possible to draw a number of parallels between the struggle for independence of the “new nations” in the two Americas in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and that of African and Asian nations in the twentieth century.
One of the major similarities within the struggle for independence of the mentioned regions might be their determination to define their nations and states after the period of European rule. For example, Ethiopia became a symbol of the struggle for independence in Africa after its victory over Italian forces in 1896 (Strayer 928). Although the Italians’ attempts to establish their rule in Ethiopia continued until the middle of the twentieth century, the country managed to protect its independence. One of the effective strategies its citizens used was their determination to define their state. The monarch of this country, Menelik II, managed to prove that Ethiopia was a state, with its nation, its army, its culture, and its state institutions. Likewise, Latin American states understood that their statehood was a key to their independence. For example, Simón Bolívar, a renowned Latin American political leader, stressed that nations of Latin America had “a common origin, a common language, similar customs, and one religion,” but were still different, due to “dissimilar characteristics” (Bolívar 815). Those people understood that their nations had to develop independently, but could collaborate effectively.
Another similarity was these countries’ focus on the development of their economies. People understood that political and economic independence could be regarded as two facets of their struggle. Therefore, they tried to develop economic relations with other countries (their neighbors and developed European countries). For example, Simón Bolívar understood the importance of trade between countries in South America (Strayer 815). Clearly, countries with developed economies could have the necessary resources (e.g., well-equipped army) to stand for their independence. African nations also tried to arrange trade relations with different states, including European countries. For example, the Ethiopian ruler managed to have commercial links with European countries, even Italy that had tried to make the state its colony.
Finally, the struggle for independence was associated with revolutionary movement in American and African (and Asian) countries. Revolution often involves changing the political and social structure of the country. In the regions in question, the struggle for independence often took the form of revolution. Thus, Bolívar argued that it was crucial to change the political order and overthrow the rule of dictators who pursued the interests of European states (Strayer 815). Other leaders who worked for the independence of Latin America also stressed the importance of changing a social and political order that was based on the power of a few who were focused on the interests of empires (“Modern History Sourcebook” par. 2). Importantly, people wanted to establish democracies to ensure a country that was governed fairly, and the interests of people pursued. Likewise, African leaders also tried to gain political rights (“French in West Africa” par. 14). This struggle often resulted in revolutions against oppressive rule.
It is important to add that the countries were very different, in terms of geography, economy, nature, resources, cultures, and so on. One of the difficulties was associated with slavery. People in the Americas fought for the rights of slaves, or tried to justify slavery (Strayer 816). At the same time, people in Africa fought for the termination of the slave trade, as this region was the major source of slaves.
In conclusion, it is possible to note that the struggle for independence of American states in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was similar to that of African and Asian countries in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The major parallels that can be drawn are associated with the establishment of statehood in former colonies, striving for economic independence and development, and revolutionary movement. These similarities are especially remarkable, when taking into account the fact that the countries were quite different in terms of their geographic locations, resources available, cultures, and religions practices. The way the institution of slavery was treated in the Americas and African countries also differed significantly. However, it is clear that the struggle for independence from empires involved certain universal elements that brought success. People managed to establish their nations and bring them to the global political and economic arenas. Of course, these countries may be still quite dependent on the economic assistance of developed countries, but they manage to enjoy their political, economic, and cultural independence.
Works Cited
Bolívar, Simón. “The Jamaica Letter.” Ways of the World, Combined Volume: A Global History with Sources. Ed. Robert W. Strayer. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. 814-815. Print.
Modern History Sourcebook: F. Hassaurek: How to Conduct a Latin-American Revolution, 1865. 1998. Web.
French in West Africa. n.d. Web.
Strayer, Robert W. Ways of the World, Combined Volume: A Global History with Sources. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. Print.