THE TRANS-ATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE

Imperialism: A policy of extending a nation's power and influence through colonisation or use of military force.Decolonisation: The act of changing political status from a dependent colony to an independent nation.Globalisation: The process of international integration arising from the interchange of worldviews, products, ideas and other aspects of culture.Internationalism: A movement that advocates a greater economic and political cooperation among nations for the theoretical benefit of all.Liberalism: Classical liberalism is a philosophy committed to the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, and assembly.Nationalism: A belief, creed or political ideology that involves an individual identifying with, or becoming attached to, one's nation.Pan-nationalism: A form of nationalism distinguished by being associated with a claimed national territory, which does not correspond to existing political boundaries. It often defines the nation as a "cluster" of supposedly related ethnic or cultural groups.Pan-Africanism - African unity to strengthen resistance Racism: Consists of both prejudice and discrimination based in social perceptions of biological differences between peoples.

Africa Pre-Trade

Egypt was the first of many great African civilisation African kingdoms were developed pre-European civilisation, operating successful trading schemes such as gold, wood and ivoryThey were majorly of Islam faith (Muslim) and had a rich and diverse cultureThey were intellectual and developedSlavery existed in Africa pre-trade. However, it was a form of punishment (for criminals, prisons of war, debt and as a source of payment). In some cases, these slaves could work towards freedom.Differences of Pre-Trade and Trans-Atlantic

Pre-Trade Trans-Atlantic

Largely sent to Middle-EastLikely to be immersed into Muslim societiesNumerically small – approx. 1000 per yearChildren of slaves did not become slaves. They were free to immerse into societySlaves largely female performing domestic activities (cooking, servings); boys trained for the military and girls in haremConditions weren’t dire

Largely sent to South America and CaribbeanSegregated from society9-12 million per year (400, 000 to USA)Enslaved to fuel economy. Rival kings would enslave nearby groups for profitChildren automatically became slaves and were not immersed into societyLargely male performing agricultural, hard labour (farming, plantation work)Conditions harsh and dire

Origins/Beginnings of the Trade

The Portuguese discovered wind that allowed them to return relatively easily back to PortugalAfrican locals accepted the Portuguese settlings their forts on their territories because they were traded goods. There, the Portuguese took malice of the slave trade in Africa and began to participate.As a result, Portugal became extremely wealthy. Surrounding European nations began to take notice of this and involved themselves in the trade as well.

This meant Britain felt compelled to join because they saw Southern Europe as competition and a threat (wealth = power). If Southern Europe had too much of an upper hand on Britain, they would increase power in wars and would therefore become a real threat.Disease on a large scale, as well as violence, meant South America had large spaces of vacancy. These were converted into plantations and therefore, South America became a hub for slavery.

Arrival of European Traders

During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, European traders started to get involved in the Slave Trade. European traders had previously been interested in African nations and kingdoms, such as Ghana and Mali, due to their sophisticated trading networks. Traders then wanted to trade in human beings.They took enslaved people from western Africa to Europe and the Americas. At first this was on quite a small scale but the Slave Trade grew during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, as European countries conquered many of the Caribbean islands and much of North and South America.Europeans who settled in the Americas were lured by the idea of owning their own land and were reluctant to work for others. Convicts from Britain were sent to work on the plantations but there were never enough so, to satisfy the tremendous demand for labour, planters purchased slaves.They wanted the enslaved people to work in mines and on tobacco plantations in South America and on sugar plantations in the West Indies. Millions of Africans were enslaved and forced across the Atlantic, to labour in plantations in the Caribbean and America. Slavery changed when Europeans became involved, as it led to generation after generation of peoples being taken from their homelands and enslaved forever. A chattel slave is an enslaved person who is owned forever and whose children and children's children are automatically enslaved. Chattel slaves are individuals treated as complete, property to be bought and sold. Chattel slavery was supported and made legal by European governments and monarchs. This type of enslavement was practised in European colonies from the sixteenth century onwards.Europeans wanted lots of slaves, so people were captured to be made slaves.Enslaved Africans were transported huge distances to work. They had no chance of returning home.Children whose parents were enslaved became slaves as well.

Economic Benefit for Africa

The only economic benefit the slave trade contributed to Africa was that it provided coastal kingdoms with economic benefits – slave traders/merchants traded goods to buy slaves. People payed anywhere between 200 and 1000 for slaves worth a lot more.

Stats, Numbers and Dates

Mid 15th – Mid 19th Century (i.e. 1450 – 1850)2m2 per individual (baracoons)Approximately 11 million went to America in total – 400, 000 per year9 – 12 million exploited per yearThe peak of the trade was 18th century (approx.6 million slaves exploited)Main destination were:Brazil (40%)Caribbean (35%)North America (5%)Spanish America (15%)Islands on African Coast (2%)

Other (3%)1789, William Wilberforce presents abolitions bill to House of Commons – doesn’t pass1792, 519 petitions named into Parliament, House of commons vote in favour, House of Lord reject1807, Abolition Bill passed (only prohibited trade, not slavery as a whole). Also this same year, Britain and USA abolished trade (not slavery)1761, slavery abolished in mainland Portugal1807, US abolished slavery completely1834, Emancipation Act passed in Britain1838, British colonies abolished slavery completely 1888, Brazil abolished slavery (they were late to benefit from the Industrial Revolution). In 1851, Brazil abolished slave trading completely

The Emancipation Act of 1834

Allowed for slaves to be free. However, they were required to endure 6 years of unpaid labour for their former owner. This was to placate plantation owners (make less angry’hostile) and used as a compromise.The Emancipation Act (1834) was passed because of endless abolition movements and a considerable amount of revolts.Because the Act essentially continued slave labour, abolitionists still pushed for freedom. This was achieved in 1838, when British colonies completely abolished slavery.

St Dominguez (modern Haiti)Slaves drove the French off of the islandProved their intelligence and powerDisproved ideology that Africans were inferior/animals/incapable

Movements taking place allowed for change. 1750 – 1780: The Industrial Revolution meant that the need for intensive labour was reduced because there were more machines and factories readily available. This also initiated an increase in education and printing; thus, information (i.e. horrors of trade) was spread quicker and more efficiently.Treatment of workers sparked formation of unions which challenged authorities

Barracoons

Pens 17m2, 2m2 per individual10 – 15% diedContained 150 – 800 slavesCosts included goods, voyage costs, commissions, wages and cargo

The Middle Passage

- The period between the points of embarkation to debarkation.Central voyage of triangular tradeThe Middle Passage refers to the part of the trade where Africans, densely packed onto ships, were transported across the Atlantic to the West Indies.  The voyage took three to four months and, during this time, the enslaved people mostly lay chained in rows on the floor of the hold or on shelves that ran around the inside of the ships' hulls.

The shelves were under a metre high and often the enslaved Africans could not sit up. There could be up to more than six hundred enslaved people on each ship. Captives from different nations were mixed together, so it was more difficult for them to talk and plan rebellions. Women and children were held separately.In reality, it was a system that brutalized both the sailors and the enslaved people. The captain had total authority over those aboard the ship and was answerable to nobody. Captives usually outnumbered the crew by ten to one, so they were flogged or put in thumbscrews if there was any sign of rebellion. Despite this, resistance was common.The European crews made sure that the captives were fed and forced them to exercise. On all ships, the death toll was high. Between 1680 and 1688, 23 out of every 100 people taken aboard the ships of the Royal African Company died in transit. When disease began to spread, the dying were sometimes thrown overboard. In November 1781, around 470 slaves were crammed aboard the slave ship Zong. During the voyage to Jamaica, many got sick. Seven crew and sixty Africans died. Captain Luke Collingwood ordered the sick enslaved Africans, 133 in total, thrown overboard (one survived). When the Zong arrived back in England, its owners claimed for the value of the slaves from their insurers. They argued that they had little water and the sick Africans posed a threat to the remaining cargo and crew. In 1783, the owners won their case. This case did much to show the horrors of the trade and sway public opinion against it.The death toll amongst sailors was also appallingly high (20%). Sometimes the crew would be harshly treated on purpose during the ‘middle passage'. Fewer hands were required on the third leg and wages could be saved if the sailors jumped ship in the West Indies. It was not uncommon to see injured sailors living rough in the Caribbean and North American ports.A law (The Dolben Act) was passed in 1788, which fixed the number of enslaved people in proportion to the ship's size but conditions were still appalling. Research by Wadstrom (published in 1794) calculated that a man was given a space of 6 feet by 1 foot 4 inches; a woman 5 feet by 1 foot 4 inches and girls 4 feet 6 inches by 1 foot.In his speech, made to the House of Commons in 1789, William Wilberforce quoted evidence showing that not less than 12½ percent of enslaved people perished in the passage and another 4½ percent died on shore, before the day of sale. He also described the conditions on the ships for the enslaved people.

Mortality and the Middle Passage

17.5% died on the Middle PassageRevolts on 1 in 10 voyages11, 000, 000 arrived alive to plantation. The amount that were taken from Africa and died is impossible to denounce because they died in various places (i.e. at baracoons, plantations, walking to and from place, on board the ship).It is estimated that between 1 and 9 million diedSlaves accounted for 75% of Africa’s exports in 18th century 25% of slaves ran away (during the Middle Passage)The Enlightenment dated from 1650 – 1780. It was a period of social change in which there was a focus on individual rights. People began to stand up for personal liberty rather than follow authorities (i.e. rebellion against conformity).During this time, abolitionists were shining light on horrors of slavery (on board vessels, in barracoons) shifted societies mindset. People began to reject slavery, rather than prioritise its economic benefit.

The Triangular Trade

STAGE 1

Slave ships from Britain left ports like London, Liverpool and Bristol for West Africa carrying goods such as cloth, guns, ironware and drink that had been made in Britain.Later, on the West African coast, these goods would be traded for men, women and children who had been captured by slave traders or bought from African chiefs. STAGE 2African dealers kidnapped people from villages up to hundreds of miles inland. One of these people was Quobna Ottabah Cugoano who described in the autobiography how the slavers attacked with pistols and threatened to kill those who did not obey. They marched the captives to the coast where they would be traded for goods. The prisoners would be forced to march long distances, as Major Galan describes, with their hands tied behind their backs and their necks connected by wooden yokes.On the African coast, European traders bought enslaved peoples from travelling African dealers or nearby African chiefs. Families were separated.The traders held the enslaved Africans until a ship appeared, and then sold them to a European or African captain. It often took a long time for a captain to fill his ship. He rarely filled his ship in one spot. Instead he would spend three to four months sailing along the coast, looking for the fittest and cheapest slaves.Ships would sail up and down the coast filling their holds with enslaved Africans. On the brutal ‘Middle Passage', enslaved Africans were densely packed onto ships that would carry them to the West Indies.There were many cases of violent resistance by Africans against slave ships and their crews. These included attacks from the shore by  ‘free' Africans against ships or longboats and many cases of shipboard revolt by slaves. STAGE 3In the West Indies enslaved Africans would be sold to the highest bidder at slave auctions.Once they had been bought, enslaved Africans worked for nothing on plantations.They belonged to the plantation owner, like any other possession, and had no rights at all. The enslaved Africans were often punished very harshly.Enslaved Africans resisted against their enslavement in many ways, from revolution to silent, personal resistance. Some refused to be enslaved and took their own lives. Sometimes pregnant women preferred abortion to bringing a child into slavery.On the plantations, many enslaved Africans tried to slow down the pace of work by pretending to be ill, causing fires or ‘accidentally' breaking tools. Whenever possible, enslaved Africans ran away. Some escaped to South America, England or North America. Also there were hundreds of slave revolts.Two thirds of the enslaved Africans, taken to the Americas, ended up on sugar plantations. Sugar was used to sweeten another crop harvested by enslaved Africans in the West Indies - coffee.With the money made from the sale of enslaved Africans, goods such as sugar, coffee and tobacco were bought and carried back to Britain for sale. The ships were loaded with produce from the plantations for the voyage home.

Treatment of AfricansControlled by owners

Few rightsRare freedomGenerationalExploitedSeparated from familiesObjectifiedTreacherous, strenuous labourOften work lead to deathOften branded with tattoo/boiling iron in case they fled, they could be easily sent back to their ownerSold based upon age, gender and capabilityThumb screws used as form of tortureKept in small spaces at many stages

Resistance

Could potentially lead to loss of limbs or being beaten to deathFought back by retaining culture (naming children African names, making traditional goods)Faking illness“Breaking” toolsRunning away Planning ship revoltsAttacking owners/sailorsTaking own lives

Justifications of the Trade

What were the arguments of the pro-slavery lobby?The pro-slavery lobby put forward a number of arguments to defend the trade and show how important it was to Britain:The trade was necessary to the success and wealth of Britain. The merchants and planters warned that abolition would mean ruin for Britain, as the whole economy would collapse. This argument was put forward many times, for example, in 1749, when a pamphlet was written outlining these arguments.If Britain did not engage in the trade then others would. If Britain ceased to trade in slaves with Africa, our commercial rivals, the French and the Dutch, would soon fill the gap and the Africans would be in a much worse situation. This was an argument used in a speech to parliament in 1777.Africa was already involved in slavery. They stated that Africans enslaved each other. Indeed, Britain was engaged in a moral trade because they were helping people, captured in African wars, who may otherwise be executed.  Taking Africans from their homeland actually benefited them.  They argued that African societies and cultures were unskilled, uneducated and savage. For example, Michael Renwick Sergeant, a merchant from Liverpool claimed: ‘We ought to consider whether the negroes in a well regulated plantation, under the protection of a kind master, do not enjoy as great, nay, even greater advantages than when under their own despotic governments'. In his publication 'The history of the British West Indies'(published 1819), Mr Edwards also uses this argument when he describes a woman who said she preferred Jamaica to Guinea as people were not killed there. Here the extract.The enslaved people were unfit for other work. Many people were very prejudiced in their beliefs. Many ordinary people in Britain were uneducated and travelled little further than their own village, making it easier for those involved in the trade to influence public opinion.The enslaved people were not ill-treated unless rebellious. Conditions on the slave ships were acceptable.  Several of those involved in the trade, merchants, ships' captains and plantation owners, provided evidence to parliament regarding this. One example is the report of Mr. Norris to the privy council in 1789.

Slavery was accepted in the bible. The pro-slavery supporters used the bible to suggest that the Slave Trade was tolerated and approved of by God in the days of Abraham. In a book by an unknown author - The Negro and the Free Born Briton compared; or a vindication of the African slave trade 1790 - the author argued that slavery was lawful from a religious, political and commercial view.

What were Arguments of the anti-slavery lobby?The anti-slavery society countered the claims of the pro-slavery lobby by providing evidence to disprove the arguments:  There were alternatives to the trade. Much of the evidence that Thomas Clarkson collected during his travels illustrated  the potential for practical alternatives. The seeds, minerals and crafts that he carried in 'the Clarkson box' were used to demonstrate this.If something is wrong, it is wrong whether others do it or not. The anti-slavery supporters argued that just because other countries engaged in the trade this did not provide a valid reason for Britain to also participate, even if it was profitable. This argument was used by Baron Grenville in his speech to the House of Lords when he said, "...Can there be a question that the character of the country ought to be cleared from the stain impressed by the guilt of such traffic,..."   The argument was also cleverly countered in William Cowper's Poem 'A Pity for Poor Africans'.The slavery that existed in Africa was very different from the Transatlantic Slave Trade.  Those enslaved in Africa were usually prisoners of war or victims of political or judicial punishment. The enslaved people could keep their name and identity and slavery did not extend to future generations.  The African people were in no way inferior and should be treated as equals. The Quaker teacher, Anthony Benezet, was always horrified at the suggestion that the Africans were in anyway inferior. His claimed his experiences, gained during 20 years teaching black pupils, proved this was not the case. However, it was the books and speeches of African writers of the time, such as Olaudah Equiano, that had the greatest impact in dispelling such misconceptions. Even some of those involved in the slave trade were willing to admit that raciest views were wrong, as illustrated by the writings of Captain Thomas PhilipsThe trade was damaging to Africa. William Wilberforce summed this up in his speech of 1789: "...Does anyone suppose a slave trade would help their civilization? Is it not plain, that she must suffer from it?  .... Does not everyone see that a slave trade, carried on around her coasts, must carry violence and desolation to her very center?... Does the king of Barbess want brandy? He has only to send his troops in the night time, to burn and desolate a village; the captives will serve as commodities that may be bartered with the British trader."The Africans suffered greatly from being removed from their homeland.  They collected evidence to show that many resisted or preferred death to transportation. Many more died on the voyage to the Caribbean. Conditions on the ships were terrible, as illustrated and the speech made by William Wilberforce to parliament in 1789 and by testimony from people like ship's doctor James Ramsay. The replacement rate statistics also showed the appallingly low life expectancy of slaves on the plantations (7-9 years on some large plantations).It was morally wrong and, as a Christian country, Britain should not be involved. The anti-slavery society also used the bible to back up their arguments. They pointed to biblical text like Luke 16:13: "No man can serve two masters”. In answer to the claims of the pro-slavery lobby, Granville Sharp, for example, wrote in his pamphlet 'The just limitation of slavery in the Laws of God': "...If we carefully examine the scriptures we shall find that slavery and oppression were ever abominable in the sight of God..."

The Pope (head of Christian Church) claimed Christianity to be the superior religion and ordered all of Muslim faith to convert. Africa was very much populated by Muslims, this, people thought they were doing the right thing by converting slaves to Christianity and this became a widespread justification (saving their souls)

In continuation, the slave life was largely considered better than a free life as it allowed access to heaven, rather than eternal hellIt was profitable and good for economyAfricans were willing to sell other Africans

The Europeans had just and unjust justifications of enslavement:

Just UnjustInfidels (non-Christians) captured in “just” waysCommitted serious crimeSold themselves or by parents as a result of poverty or to pay debt

KidnappingDeceptionEnslaving free people to substitute those who flee“Men of loose morals” raiding expeditions.

Abolition

Why did it take so long? Although there was always resistance from the enslaved people themselves, amongst the British population at first, it was only a few lone voices that spoke against the trade. The Transatlantic Slave Trade was very profitable for Britain. It provided work, wealth and consumer goods. The early abolitionists were mainly motivated by religious beliefs. Many were Quakers who, as religious dissenters, were seen as on the fringe of society and even as dangerous fanatics, because of their belief in equality. They were banned from public office and had little direct influence.

What events contributed to its formation?The status of people who were enslaved in the West Indies and then travelled to Britain with the people who had enslaved them, raised questions over the legality of slavery in England and whether these people could be removed from the country against their will.The British defeat in the war in North America, in 1783, saw many people return to Britain, often with former slaves, making more people in Britain aware of the issues. The presence of this community of black people in England helped kick start the abolition movement. External events, such as the Zong case in 1783 (where 133 sick slaves were thrown overboard, their 'owners' then claiming for the loss from their insurers), caused outrage and raised public awareness. Thomas Clarkson became the backbone and researcher for the cause and Clarkson, amongst others, encouraged the Evangelical William Wilberforce to be the movement's voice in Parliament. They were further supported by a number of African campaigners who had set up their own association to fight slavery, the 'Sons of Africa' group.

Key Abolitionists

John Newton – Abolitionist and former slave trader (1725 – 1807)Gustavas Vassa – Former slave and abolitionist Thomas Clarkson – Member of society for the abolition of the slave trade. Collected samples of African handcrafts

Their influenceNewton, a white man himself, allowed for the greater society to take into deep consideration what he was saying, thus, contributing to the societal push for abolitionGustavas, an African man of high intellectual ability, disproved common ideology that Africans were inferior, stupid and animals

The artifacts that Clarkson collected had similar influence to Gustavas. The collection of crafts he publicised shed light on African capability, disproving ideologies and showing that there were other, more moral manners of trading with Africans

More on John and Gustavas

John produced anti-slavery hymns (Amazing Grace)In 1787, he wrote a tact supporting abolition: “Thoughts upon the African Slave Trade”He was close to death upon legislation for the trade abolitionGustavas’ merchant converted him to Christianity and taught him literary skillHe bought his own freedom which was very rareTravelled the world and settled in London where he wrote “Interesting Narrative of Gustavas Vassa, the African” which gained attention worldwide

Perspective of the Times

Africans were uncivilised and inferior (supported by Charles Darwin’s theory which was popular at the time)Africans were supplied with food and clothesEuropeans looked down on other countries with different operational mechanisms (no matter how effective they were), they were less technologically advancedAfricans believed Europeans wanted to eat them

THE DECOLONISATION OF INDOCHINA

Concepts

Nationalism: Belief/political ideology that involves an individual identifying with/becoming attached to ones nationSelf Determination: Nations rights to govern itselfColonisation: Colonisation is the forming of a settlement or colony by a group of people who seek to take control of territories or countries. It usually involves large-scale immigration of people to a 'new' location and the expansion of their civilisation and culture into this area.Imperialism: A policy of extending a country's power and influence through colonization, use of military force, or other means. The French occupation was waged from 1945-54:

Indochina was colonized by the French in the 1850's it consisted of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.The French created three administrative regions: Tonkin, Annam and Cochinchina. This undermined national unity in Vietnam especially as the Cochinchinese could hold French citizenship.French culture dominated the education and legal systems. French educated men took control of villages as decision makers.The main resources of Indo-China were: coal, rice, rubber, tin, zinc and 25 million to work on farms and in factories.The mistreatment, and lack of opportunity for the Vietnamese people led to rising nationalism and war ('45-'54)Two main streams of nationalism emerged: a democratic nationalism under Phan Boi Chau (which failed) and the communist nationalist model under Ho Chin Minh. The ICP (Indochinese Communist

Party) was founded in 1930. At the same time the Great Depression caused a worldwide collapse in demand for product 5 such as rubber led to famine in Vietnam.During WWII (1939-1945) the occupied Vichy government gave its ally Japan permission to use Vietnamese resources. Hi Chi Minh's Viet Minh began guerrilla tactics against the Japanese. After WWII, the Japanese left and the French re-occupied Vietnam. This led to 8 years of war and suffering.

Ho Chi Minh

Ho Chi Minh was the leader of the North Vietnamese when war with America broke out. Ho Chi Minh was born in 1890 into a relatively well-off family in relative terms to other families in Indo-China. His father, Nguyen Sinh Huy, was a teacher. However, Nguyen refused to learn French. The ruling French government required this.  He lost any chance of teaching in schools run by the French in Vietnam and he was forced into travelling around Vietnam offering peasants his services. An educated man, Nguyen would write letters for the poor and provide the most basic of medical care. He did not receive much money from this work and it brought him into contact with the very poor of Vietnam’s society. The poor in Vietnam lived a life in stark contrast to the French elite who governed Vietnam as part of the French Empire. Nguyen became a nationalist who questioned the right of the French to control Vietnam. He brought up his children to think the same. By the time he was a teenager, Ho Chi Minh shared his father’s views – that Vietnam had a right to govern itself free of colonial rule. Ho’s sister worked for the French army. This was not in direct disobedience to her father. She used her position to steal weapons that would be required in any future nationalist struggle against the French. She was caught and sentenced to life imprisonment.Despite having strong nationalist views, Ho Chi Minh attended a French school. Both Ho and his father believed that knowledge of the French language, while an affront to their nationalistic principals, would serve a purpose when the struggle against the French began.For a short time after his education had ended, Ho became a teacher. After this he became a sailor and travelled to many places in and around the Far East. He soon realised that other regions in the Far East were also under French colonial control. These areas also had one other thing in common – the abject poverty of many within the population.In 1918 Ho lived in Paris. During the talks that led to the Treaty of Versailles, Ho tried to convince the American delegation to speak out for the cause of the Indo-Chinese people but he was not successful. While in Paris, Ho converted to communism after spending his time reading the works of Karl Marx. Ho became one of the founder members of the French Communist Party – founded in December 1920. In 1924, he visited Russia and while in Moscow he wrote to a friend that all communists were duty bound to return to their country of origin. They had to “make contact with the masses to awaken, organise, unite and train them, and lead them to fight for freedom and independence.”However, Ho could not return to Vietnam without risking arrest by the French authorities. Ho therefore decided to live in China, near to the Vietnam border. Here he helped to organise the ‘Vietnam Revolutionary League’ – a group made up of other exiled Vietnamese nationalists living in exile.French authority in Vietnam was swept aside by the Japanese in World War Two. Ho Chi Minh used this as an opportunity to free Vietnam from French rule. Along with others, Ho created the Viet Minh. The Viet Minh were not prepared for Vietnam to be freed from French rule – only to see this replaced by brutal Japanese rule. The Viet Minh took part in guerrilla warfare against the Japanese. Vo Nguyen Giap controlled the military side of the Viet Minh. Supplied by the Soviet Union and, after Pearl Harbour, the Americans, the Viet Minh learned a great deal about guerrilla warfare.In September 1945, Ho Chi Minh announced the creation of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. However, France wanted to re-establish control over Vietnam. France refused to recognise Ho’s

republic and both sides quickly engaged in fighting in 1946. Despite the experiences learned during World War Two, the Viet Minh found the fighting hard as the French were better equipped and the supplies that had come from both the USSR and USA had dried up. The Vietminh were helped when Mao Zedong’s Communist Party was victorious in China. Giap could now train his soldiers in the safety of China before they crossed into Vietnam to engage the French. Wounded Viet Minh soldiers could also be better treated in China.Ho was the accepted leader of the Viet Minh and when the French suggested terms to end the fighting, it was Ho who persuaded other leaders in the Viet Minh that the French could not be trusted. The Battle of Dien Bien Phu (1954) led to France pulling out of Vietnam.The victory was a huge boost for Ho and did a great deal to cement the reputation of Giap as a very effective military leader. At Geneva, it was decided to divide Vietnam at the 17th Parallel with the North governed by Ho Chi Minh and the South by Ngo Dinh Diem. Some members of the Viet Minh did not accept that Vietnam should be divided and it was left to Ho to persuade then that the division was only a temporary one. He, like them, wanted a united Vietnam but in 1954 it was prudent, according to Ho, to go along with the division. Ho Chi Minh had few doubts that the people of Vietnam wanted a communist government – even the American President at the time, Eisenhower, believed that 80% of the Vietnamese population were behind Ho Chi Minh. Ho did declare, however, that he had authority over the whole state and he encouraged the Vietminh resistance movement in the south. From 1963, Ho ordered that the Viet Minh should be supplied with arms by the north via the Ho Chi Minh trail. In 1965, Ho sent in regular North Vietnamese troops to help the Viet Minh when the US sent her military in.Ho’s authority in the north was never challenged. He maintained control of the north and the North Vietnamese remained loyal despite the American bombing campaign, which resulted in vast numbers of bombs being dropped on the North. It could be argued that the bombing made the people even more fiercely loyal to Ho. While North Vietnam was supplied by Mao Zedong’s China it did not follow that he was in awe of the Chinese leader. In fact, Ho was less than enamored with some of Mao’s ideas.Ho Chi Minh died in 1969. When Saigon fell in 1975, the city was renamed Ho Chi Minh City in his honor. 

The Impact of French Colonization in Vietnam

Share cropping for peasants meant they had to hand over 40% of their crop to the French landlordsRaised taxes on opium, alcohol and saltBoa Dai - the Emperor behaved badly i.e. international playboy which alienated the peasants and communistsCorruption in the police force, judicial and administrative armsBrutal suppression of the people by French soldiers Exploitation of Vietnam's natural resources The effect:AngerGrowing nationalism Turning to communist nations for help due to the failure at Versailles and the Geneva Convention to assist the Vietnamese  Famine: widespread food instability

French War 1945-54

The French colonisation of Vietnam lasted 60 years7th May 1954 – fall of French at Dien Bien Phu

Ho Chi Minh founded the ICP (Indochinese Communist Party), 1930After France reoccupied Indochina, negotiations were proposed, yet ignored by the French, thus beginning the Indochinese WarVo Nguyen Giup: Military commander of the VietminhTo every French soldier that died, 10 Vietminh soldiers died

The Geneva Peace Agreement

The Geneva Convention was doomed to failure from the beginning. The different representative groups were openly hostile:The Vietminh had defeated France at Dien Bien Phu the day before the Convention The USA and USSR were in a state of "Cold" War and manipulating the situation for their own political endsThe USA representative refused to even shake hands with the Communist Chinese leaderThe Vietminh refused to acknowledge the Bao Dai government from the SouthA decision was made to temporarily divide Vietnam at the 17th parallel with a promise if an election in 1956 to reunify the country. Ho Chi Minh must have felt confident that the election would be a landslide victory for his communist party. It wasn't to happen.

The Battle of Dien Bien Phu - Essay

Explain the significance of the Battle of Dien Bien Phu to the Vietminh. The Battle of Dien Bien Phu (DBP) between the French and Vietnam’s own communist guerillas – the Vietminh – lasted from 1945 to 1954. As the French war effort steadily deteriorated, decision in the establishment of a giant French air-base in Dien Bien Phu, allowed the supply of goods and soldiers to the French-colonized north of Vietnam. With the Vietminh’s strategic victory, the supplies were put to a halt. These events gave the Vietminh leverage at the Geneva Accords and the result empowered a newfound international, political power and a sense of national pride. The French defeat signified a catalyst of change for the people of Vietnam, with Ho Chi Minh as their political messiah and signalled the end of French influence in Indochina. The Battle of DBP saw the cessation of France’s exploitation of Vietnam and their resources. As a result of faults in French decision-making, the French began an operation to insert and support the soldiers at Dien Bien Phu , deep in the hills of northwestern Vietnam. Its purpose was to cut off Viet Minh supply lines into neighboring Laos, a French ally, and tactically draw the Viet Minh into a major confrontation that would cripple them. The Viet Minh, however, under General Giap, surrounded and besieged the French, who knew of the weapons but were unaware of the vast amounts of the Viet Minh's heavy artillery being brought in and of their ability to move these weapons through difficult terrain up the rear slopes of the mountains surrounding the French positions. This positioning of the artillery made it nearly impervious to counteract. By losing the battle the French had to revaluate their position, signifying the end of French dominance in Vietnam. The fall of Dien Bien Phu emphasized to anti-Communist nations that communism was a threat to the free world and that democracy needed to be preserved. The communist nations believed that the victory at Dien Bien Phu showed the emergence of communism and the power that it was and would be capable of possessing. This was of discussion at the Geneva Accord only a day after the Vietminh's defeat against France.A decision was made to temporarily divide Vietnam at the 17th parallel with a promise of an election in 1956 to reunify the country. With adoption of the communist model under Ho Chi Minh's rule and leadership in the North, the South was left with a democratic approach. A two-year buffer allowed for

widespread movement across the country. Although segregated by belief, Vietnam was finally it's own country. The Vietnamese victory proved that with diligence and a strong leader a small country could gain independence from a western nation. This battle raised Vietnamese national pride. It proved to many that Ho Chi Minh was a great political leader that would lead the Vietnamese to a bright new future.  As a direct result Ho gained more followers and strength as a leader, which perpetuated his cause as a communist.  After this battle the French did not want to fight any more and slowly started pulling out their military. The Vietminh’s strategic victory lead to leverage at the Geneva Accords and the result empowered a newfound international, political power and a sense of national pride. The French defeat signified a catalyst of change for the people of Vietnam, with Ho Chi Minh as their great political leader - signifying the end of French influence in Indochina.

Vietnamese Nationalism

Rose and grew due to oppression and exploitation from FrenchAt first, oppositions only came from those of higher social class (royals, high-ranking Mandarins) who wanted to restore traditional Vietnamese structureAfter WWI, Vietnamese veterans fought back ideals of communism and democracy, inspiring nationalistic groupsHo Chi Minh and the Vietminh boosted national pride and therefore boosted nationalism

Decolonisation

The impact of French imperialism on IndochinaThe rise of Vietnamese nationalism and war against the FrenchThe growth of Vietnamese nationalism/communismThe defeat of FranceDecolonisation refers to the dismantlement of colonialism. It can be understood politically (attaining independence, autonomous home rule, union with the metropole or another state) or culturally (removal of negative colonial effects.) The concept of decolonisation is closely connected to self-determination, a principle in international law that nations have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no external compulsion or external interference.Decolonisation is an historical process that is rarely achieved through a single historical act, but rather progresses through one or more stages of emancipation. It often involves riots, oppression, wars of independence and revolution. The struggle for independence in Vietnam led to a bitter war against the French from 1945-54.

Indochina after the French

Nationalism is the main consequence that came out of the Vietnamese victory against the French. There was a growing confidence amongst the Vietnamese people after the defeat of the French at Dien Bien Phu as this small Asian nation had taken on the might of the Western world and had defeated them. The French had been certain of victory when the first Indochina War had begun. They had the backing of the United States of America, who had helped fund the French efforts to defeat the

Vietnamese. The fear of communism and a belief that the democratic system of government was God’s will, lead many Western nations to the belief they could not be defeated.The victory encouraged the Vietminh to continue fighting for what they believed was their right, which was to rule their own country and to shake off imperialism.  There was a new impetus to their belief and confidence in their abilities and recruitment numbers increased dramatically. This victory also gave the Vietnamese a bargaining position going into the Geneva Peace Conference. To add to their confidence they realised that their defeat was made all the sweeter by the fact the French had a well-equipped and well-trained military force, in comparison to the Vietnamese, whose fighting force consisted of workers and peasants, with some military trained leaders. In essence, it was a group of people desperate to govern themselves and run their own country against a country who had a tradition of taking what they wanted when they wanted it. The French believed that Indochina was theirs by right, whereas the Vietnamese were nationalistic and wanted their country free of foreign intervention. The odds were stacked on the side of the French with their equipment and technology; however, the Vietnamese had sheer numbers and a determination that could not be matched.The third aspect that must be considered is the effect it had on the community of communist countries. The Soviets and Chinese had helped to fund and arm the Vietnamese communists, under the rule of Ho Chi Minh. The success at Dien Bien Phu was seen as a battle against the democratic, capitalist nations of the West, the sworn enemies of Marxism. This was a political ideology victory, not just a military one. Fourthly, it was not only the Vietnamese who benefitted by this victory. Laos also gained their independence when the French withdrew. Cambodia had already achieved independence on the 9 November, 1953. With the victory at Dien Bien Phu all of Indochina was liberated from imperialistic rule.Another consequence was the effect it had on US Foreign policy. They adopted a policy of containment, that is, the need to stop the spread of communism. The US already feared the growing power of the USSR and the spread of communism ideology coming from the Soviets. China had already fallen and so had North Korea. The fear was that if one country fell to communism then more would follow very quickly. This was known as the ‘domino theory’. The US was concerned for their sphere of influence and the loss of it to this rival ideology. Therefore, they had to ‘contain’ communism and Vietnam seem to be the best place for the stand-off.

General Timeline

France colonised Indochina in the last 19th century, causing widespread anguish amongst localsFrance left to fight in WWI. Japan went to Indochina to retain occupation. This was because of the Vichy Government. France and Germany had agreements in Vichy France. Germany was in an alliance with Japan and therefore Japan went to Indochina to administerJapan withdrew troops in September, 1945. This is when Ho Chi Minh took his opportunity to declare the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. France ignored this declaration and returned to Indochina, reoccupying the area. (Negotiations between France and Vietnam didn’t work out)Upon this, Ho Chi Minh declared war (1945)War waged on until the Battle of Dien Bien Phu (1954). France was defeated (7th May)Geneva Conference 8th May 1954: Ho Chi Minh and Vietnam received bargaining power

 Political, social, economic and military developments within North and South Vietnam