War to the war on terror, which fyi is available for purchase outside of this room today. She is also the author of cold war and the colonization in guinea. In 2007, mobilizing the 19461958. Masses. The author of peasants, 19391958. Traders, and wives. And decoding corporate camouflage, published in the committee. In her next book is foreign 1980. Intervention in africa after the cold war, sovereignty, and responsibility in the war on terror. This book will be published right Ohio University press. Todays talk is based on the last book, and is entitled, foreign intervention in africa during the cold war. The struggle for the global south. Thank you very much for the kind introduction. Thank you for coming. I had a list of organizations that i was also going to think thank. But he has done that for me. I will proceed to the talk. As eric indicated, my talk is primarily based on my on information and topics covered in my 2013 book. I do have a case study taken from my cold war and decolonization in guinea. I want to start by looking at the collapse of colonialism and how the periods of decolonization in the cold war overlapped one another, and the impact that foreign intervention had on africa during that period. Not looking at the whole continent, but a couple interesting case studies. Colonialism and africa collapsed after world war ii. By the mid1960s, most had achieved their independence. The. The period of decolonization coincided with the end of the cold war. Which was characterized by political competition, economic rival tree rivalry and friction between the United States and the soviet union, and their respective allies. The United States which hoped to replace the imperial powers wavered between the major colonial powers, all members of the nato alliance, and modern african nationalists whome washington hoped to court to keep radical nationalism and communism at bay. During this period, african nationalists were not paused on a global chessboard, but were were not ponds on a global chest toward, but were historical agents in their own right. They courted outside powers and limited their seville ability to impose solutions optimal their ability to impose solutions optimal to them alone. Washington broke ranks when the former imperial powers by discounting the legitimacy threatened to bring about a major conflagration. France resisted american agendas happened. France resisted american encroachment on its african sphere of influence. Just as the United States sometimes disagreed with its allies for the best strategy to pursue decolonization in the cold war, so to in the American Government. Highlevel officials in the administration considered Anticolonial Movement to be the product of external communist version. Sub version. Within the kennedy, johnson, and carter administration, minority voices stress the responsibility to national concerns and to the future. Even these officials opposed political movements that the United States could not control. The maintenance of Good Relationship with european allies and the containment of radicalism remained powermad. In the end, even liberal democratic organizations backed away from any action that might threaten the fundamental objective. The nixonford, the nixon, ford, and reagan administrations they considered radical considered radical nationalisto movements to be soviet proxies. Because the balance of forces changes over time, the United States has pursued contradictory african policies. On the one hand, has an early proponent of decolonization, the Us Government the u. S. Government reportedly championed democratization. Factions within the government have sympathized with the concerns of white settlers, and at times their voices were dominant. There was often a misunderstanding of nationalist movements. Radical nationalism was frequent reviewed as communism or as an equal threat to western movement. Fear of communism, real or imagined, led the u. S. Government to support many unsavory dictatorships. Though they were prowestern and anticommunist, they did not promote freedom and democracy. The southern area, home to a significant portion of white settlers, conflicting rather than proposed colonialism and white minority rule. The three case studies that follow ask for the tensions that emerged from the dual missions of decolonization and the cold war and illuminate the activities of northern industrialized powers in the global south. The first case focuses on an Uneasy Alliance among western plow powers as they confronted the eastern block in africa. Zeroing in on the suez crisis in egypt, one response was driven by conflicting colonial and cold war concerns. The second case explores the attempted to manage decolonization in the context of the cold war, reluctantly offering reforms to salvage what was left. It focuses on french response to guinea, which a loan among french territories, resisted the offer of a partnership and struck out on its own. The third regards problems within the western government. Kennedy in the United States as it responded to the cold war crisis. It examines tensions with in the government and their congressional allies and sought either to accommodate portugal as it waged african colonial wars or to distance themselves from it seeking alliance with modern nationalists. The first case explores tensions within the western alliance, zeroing in on egypt during the suez crisis. In 1956. Of the contested territories undergoing decolonization, those in north africa and the middle east were closest geographically to europe and the soviet union. They were strategic because of their location and their wealth and oil, in which britain and the United States had considerable investment. In egypt in the middle east, radical nationalists challenge the oppressive regimes that remained in power largely due to american support. Egypt have figured prominently, where participants voiced their opposition to all forms of racism, colonialism, and imperialism. They pledged support for a sive terry movements emancipatory movements in the southern hemisphere. In the years that followed, participants formed the core of intergovernmental nonalliance movement, whose members refute to take sides in the cold war. The suez crisis in egypt example feisty inherent conflicting exemplifies the tensions inherent in Conflicting Missions between the former colonial powers and the emerging superpower. An alliance emerged when france and britain joined by israel behaved as imperial powers, where is the United States saw accommodations with egyptian nationalists to forestall soviet encroachment. Built during the colonial era, the suez canal was controlled by the suez canal company, which was dominated by french and british investors. It was considered vital to those countrys french and economic interests, particularly oil. In july, military ranking officers led by colonel of the lesser colonel abdal naser led the movement. A broadbased Popular Movement including leftists, radical nationalists, and islamic groups demanded the withdrawal of 85,000 british troops from the suez canal zone, and transfer the canal to egyptian control. In the months following the coup, naser asked the United States for help. In pressuring britain to leave. Distrustful of nasser, the Eisenhower Administration was unwilling to jeopardize its relationship to the britons and refused to provide military assistance, even after israel using french equipment attacked bases in the gaza strip. I dont know how well you can see this from back there, but this is a photograph of some of the participants in the conference from 1955. Pictured along with the chinese representative and the liberian and ethiopian representative. Next, these are the Founding Fathers of the nonaligned movement, nehru, ghana, egypt, indonesia, and yugoslavia. Naser was right in there in the thick of things in the 1960s. In the 1950s and early 1960s. Meanwhile, at the conference in april, 1955, naser helped formulate the philosophy of neutralism and nonalignment. That was embraced by the african continent. Convinced that nonalignment was really a facade of reorientation toward the east, the United States rebuffed those associated with the movement. While many were courted, hoping to undermine western imperialism, soviet officials remained ambivalent about the egyptian leader. Nasser was staunchly anticommunist and considered egyptian communists to be rivals for power and influence. Even as he negotiated an arms deal with the soviet union and jew, nasser arrested key members in nasser arrested key june, 1955, members of the egyptian communist party. His primary objective was the eradication of british imperialism from the middle east. Nasser had hoped to avoid reliance on the soviet union by obtaining influence from the United States. In an attempt to balance the superpowers, he asked the United States to assist in a dam project, which was designed to increase the amount of arable land for cultivation and industrialization. When egypt recognize the communist peoples public of china, in lieu of the taiwanbased republic of china, congress barred the use of funds for the dam. In response nasser asserted that the canal revenues from the suez canal would henceforth be used to finance the dam. Here is a picture of nasser being cheered by a crowd in cairo after the nationalization of the suez canal. Despite fear of nassers growing influence, the western powers were divided in the response. Britain and france responded as oldstyle imperialist powers and were determined to overthrow him. The initiated plans of a military attack and were supported by israel with its own regional concerns. The United States and contrast saw the conflict as one rooted in the cold war. The refusal of western powers to embark on decolonization played into soviet hands. Moreover, any threat to egypt would strain relations with arab countries and to jeopardize american access to oil. As long as egypt agreed to pay for the suez canal, and to permit international navigation, washington claimed that it had the right to nationalize the company. The United States refused to join its allies in military action against egypt. They declined a plot to assassinate nasser. Here is a picture of Oil Installations burning as british troops advanced during the anglofrench invasion. I have taken these pictures from my book. If you have the book, if you want to go to the library and read the book, you have the pictures. In late october, israel used planes and tanks to attack egypt. Under enormous pressure from asian and african countries, washington broke from its allies and introduced a you and Security Council resolution a un Security Council resolution. Moscow supported the american resolution, while britain and france vetoed it and bombed installations and invaded by air and sea. Condemned by that he went General Assembly by the un General Assembly, britain, france, and israel were eventually forced to withdraw. The denouement was successful for nasser. His prestige among arab nations and nonaligned countries grew enormously. The next case study focuses on form and repression in the french empire, specifically focused on the case of guinea. I am told that i can use this . Here is guinea. Within french west africa, done here is french equatorial africa. Most of the french empire also controlled madagascar and djibouti, which are not on this map. France was faced with multiple demands to implement reforms in its vast african and asian empires. The United States pressed for change to gain economic advantage and to thwart communist influence. Colonized peoples who had sustained the world war ii effort demanded a greater voice in the management of their own affairs in this aftermath. Having long justified empire as part of a great civilizing mission, france was determined to convince the world of the worthiness of its stewardship. In the veriest francophone territories, military veterans, trade unionists, and members of Political Parties responded to incremental colonial reforms by demanding equal rights for all french citizens, whether in europe or the overseas territories. After 1956, french subjects became citizens. The rights and privileges of citizens in the metropole became their new yardstick. In an effort to demonstrate the success of reformed imperialism and to justify the continuation of empire, france began to invest heavily in Economic Development after world war ii. By the mid1950s, these expenditures were taking their toll on the national budget. Some critics argue that the cost of empire far outweighed the benefits. Paris was determined to transfer local control and responsibility for paying the new spec system elected african government. In 1956, which were expected a new Legal Framework lent itself to overseas territories which were expected to shoulder a greater share of the burden of Economic Development and to bare the brunt of political discontent. All of those military members, trade unions, and Political Parties agitating for equal pay and benefits, now the local governments have to deal with them. With the commencement of armed forces in algeria, and other conflict elsewhere, forced france to reconsider its options. In 1958, Charles De Gaulle spearheaded the enactment of a new constitution to address the crisis. French territories were offered two choices. Accept the constitution the provided junior partnership in a french community, or reject the constitution in favor of immediate independence. In an empirewide referendum, only guinea chose independence. Here is a map of guinea. I will show you a few slides photographed from the Referendum Campaign. I dont think people in the back can see, but there is a motorcade. Motorcyclists in the front and a convertible with Charles De Gaulle standing and apparently the National Leader sitting by his side. The streets are lined with the rda, a Political Party that had branches and most of the territories of french west and equatorial africa, and spearheaded the no vote rejecting partnership in guinea. In other territories, the usually supported the yes vote. When de gaulle saw this welcome, he thought things were going his way. He had no idea this was just african hospitality. These are slides taken in senegal. It says vote no, advocating the no vote. There were many people who advocated a no vote, but they lost senegal. There were members of different Political Parties, no the rda. Here is graffiti in a store window advocating the yes vote, which ultimately carried in senegal, and finally a woman voting in the referendum, also in senegal. Universal suffrage was fully implemented in 1966, so women did have the right to vote. You might ask why i dont have slides of guinea if the Referendum Campaign was a vigorous. It was. When guinea voted no and france left, they burned the archives. There are few photographs left. I was able to get documents for my research from senegal, the headquarters of french west africa, and Police Reports and that sort of thing had been sent and carbon copied to senegal. Most of what was in guinea was destroyed, so i was unable to find photographs. This was the nationalist leader, the head of the rda in guinea. You get the sense that he was a charismatic person. He was quite speaker, and he could really rally the crowds. He was a radical nationalist, he was close to the congo and ghana. As i said earlier, the u. S. Often confuse radical nationalism with communism. He was perceived to be a threat, in part because of his charisma. In part, because of what he had to say. Back to the referendum. For guinea, the consequences of the no vote were devastating as france retaliated politically and economically, and the new countrys efforts to establish the country as a coequal partnership were rebuffed. French teachers and other social services were withdrawn and capital was transferred to other territories. Commercial transactions and credits were suspended, and cargo ships bound for guinea wort rerouted to other west african territories. Immediately following the referendum, the french suspended all economic ties to guinea, and cooperative endeavors. Suspending bank credits, Development Assistance and cooperative endeavors. There was a dam left partially built, for instance. Technical services and equipment were sabotaged. French personnel were ordered to leave the territory and destroy what they left behind. Telephone wires were cut. Cranes at the port disappeared. Military camps were stripped of their equipment and hospitals of their medicine. Large sums of money were transferred out of the country. The bank of france transferred guineas old country, will panic wered currency and they peppering the country with counterfeit bills. It was designed to create panic, political unrest, and civil on political discontentment, and civil unrest. In 1958, paris refused to recognize the new nation and instructed its allies to do also. As a result, britain, with germany, and the United States delayed recognition. In making an example of guina, which had refused junior partnership in the french community, paris hoped to demonstrate the nations inability to assume the responsibility of