Definition of Citizenship and Theoretical Citizenship in Colonial Framework Barbalet argues that citizenship Africa “defines those who are, and who are not, An Overview of British and members of a common society.”1 This infers French Repertoires. that citizenship is an exclusive concept. Waters further argues, “It allows one to Mark Sizwebanzi Mngomezulu participate in a community while enjoying certain rights and obligations.”2 ne of the leading characteristics of To be a citizen of a country entails an the British and French colonial individual’s recognition by the relevant Oexperience in Africa in the 20th authorities, as such. The status extends certain century—a period often referred to as late protections over the person granted colonialism—was the systematic imposition citizenship; be it social, political and economic of colonizing interests on the territory, and protections. In exchange for that, the citizen the institutionalized separation of master and must abide by the rules of the constituted colonial subject. This meant that the majority authority—the state3. The sharp distinction of of native Africans, under the auspices of the who belongs, also entails defining those who British and French empires, did not enjoy the do not belong to a particular state and these same rights to citizenship as European-born “outsiders may be defined and identified or African-born whites. This resulted in a informally through the use of tacit and form of bifurcated citizenship that confined internalized classification schemes” and also the majority of the population to second-class formally through specific documentation, as is citizenship. However, between the two the case in modern states4. empires, there are important differences of This understanding of citizenship has citizenship conceptualization that ultimately its genesis in Western Europe. It rose led to diverging local experiences between concomitantly, with the overarching theory of British and French Africa. popular sovereignty in the 17th Century— This paper aims to understand why challenging the unchecked rule of monarchs the French and British empires applied the and emperors, and advocating for the concept of citizenship differently in their African colonies. Scholars often argue that 1 Jack Barbalet (1988) cited in Ndegwa, S. most Africans were denied citizenship in the “Citizenship and Ethnicity. An Examination of French and British colonies for economic, Two Transition Movements in Kenyan Politics,” political and social reasons. This reasoning is American Political Science Review 91.3 (1997), 599. insufficient because the experiences within 2 each empire are different. I argue instead, that Waters (1989), 160, as cited in Stephen historical experience led to distinct ways of Ndegwa, “Citizenship and Ethnicity. An Examination of Two Transition Movements in understanding and deciding who was, or was Kenyan Politics,” 599. not a citizen—producing a unique result in 3 Crawford Young, “Nation, Ethnicity, and British and French African colonies. Chief Citizenship: Dilemmas of Democracy and Civil among these historical experiences was the Order in Africa,” in Making Nations, Creating French revolution of 1789 that purported to Strangers: States and Citizenship in Africa, ed. equalize the rights of people before the law, P. Nugent, et al. (Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2007). and the lack of an experience of similar 4 pretensions in Britain. This and other Roger Brubaker, Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany (Boston: Harvard experiences had wider ramifications than University Press, 1992), 30. could have been anticipated. JPI: Fall 2015 Issue 4 inclusion of common people in decision- unique historical trajectory, from which they making. Burbank and Cooper assert that there are selected. It is through this framework—a was never a clean break between the rule of framework that privileges historical empires, and the ushering in of nation-states grounding— that the question of citizenship and popular sovereignty, with the latter’s in the former colonies of France and Britain attendant principles of citizenship being becomes clear. extended to the vast majority of people. Nation-states and popular sovereignty were COLONIALISM IN AFRICA competing ideas in a world that was ruled by Historians often describe European empires.5 colonization of the African continent in the These novel ideas brought to the fore late 19th and early 20th centuries as a “scramble certain questions. One of which, as Burbank for Africa”. Ushered in by the Berlin and Cooper note, was: “Would citizenship be Conference, a meeting in which ‘national’—focused on a people who representatives of western powers gathered in represented themselves as a single linguistic, Berlin to determine the colonial future of cultural, and territorial community—or would Africa, this era of colonialism was marked by it be “imperial,” embracing diverse peoples competition among the industrializing west who constituted the population of a state?”6 for land and resources. To accomplish their Such a question was important in colonial goal, western colonizers employed a regime of Africa, as the French and British empires tried domination over indigenous people. to assert their authority over vast expanses of Cooper7 cautions against assuming land on the continent. colonialism in Africa as the natural step that History was to determine some of the Western Europe had to take toward Africa. answers to these questions. Writing on the He argues that there were competing ideas of salience of history in politics Marx, in the how empires should extend their rule in Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, explains colonies. Colonialism became a favored “Men make their own history, but they do not option because it had support from well- make it as they please; they do not make it connected individuals in the metropolis. under self-selected circumstances, but under Powerful entities in the metropolis, such as circumstances existing already, given and private companies, saw virgin territory as a transmitted from the past. The tradition of all bastion of natural resources to be extracted dead generations weighs like a nightmare on and an abundance of cheap labor for the brains of the living.” This highlights that production. every nation calls upon a collective memory to For Mamdani, colonialism in Africa determine rules and norms. was concerned about the “native question”; The methods that colonial powers that is, “how can a tiny and foreign minority used in Africa to subdue populations were not rule over an indigenous majority?”8 Both new. They had been used previously, and in a empires looked into their repertoires for sense part of the repertoire of each empire, as suitable strategies of domination. At the core Burbank and Cooper note. But the of both became the de-humanization of the idiosyncrasies of British and French methods can each be traced back to a complex yet 7 Frederick Cooper, Africa since 1940: The Past of the Present (United Kingdom: Cambridge 5 Jane Burbank and Frederick Cooper, Empires University Press, 2002). in World History: Power and the Politics of 8 Mahmood Mamdani, Citizen and Subject. Difference (New Jersey: Princeton University Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of Late Press, 2010). Colonialism (New Jersey: Princeton University 6 Ibid., 220. Press, 1996), 16. JPI: Fall 2015 Issue 5 African including the institutionalization of the rising voices of educated Africans negative racial stereotypes. criticizing the colonial system and its Cooper states that: institutionalization of citizenship based on skin-color. In their demand for equal rights, Colonial empires differed from other forms particularly in French Africa, native Africans of domination by their efforts to reproduce in the colonies would pull from ideas initially social and cultural difference. At some level, planted in each empire’s past, and seeking to conquest implied incorporation: the loser avoid past mistakes, imperial powers pursued had to be taught who the boss was and different appeasement techniques. behave accordingly. But colonial conquest emphasized that the conquered remain distinct; he or she might try to learn and CITIZENSHIP IN FRANCOPHONE master the ways of the conqueror but would AFRICA: ASSIMILATION never quite get there9. The French revolution of 1789 was a watershed in the French empire because the Here we see that order—as conceived by the assembly passed the Declaration of the Rights colonial power—was an important principle of Man and Citizen. This declaration “stressed in the colonies. And the distinction by skin equality before the law and representative color and ethnicity played a great role in both government.”12 French and British colonialism. However, it was unclear how far Both empires saw the goal of citizenship as equality of men, and by extension citizenship, the preservation of the status quo balance of should extend to colonial holdings, and the power that placed white European races on criteria that would be used to determine who top of the social order. As the case study qualified and who was not. The arguments section will show, native Africans were later ranged from theories of how citizenship did included, begrudgingly, as citizens—in a not apply to Africans and Asians, while others piecemeal strategy. The British, and to a took a more inclusive stance, arguing that greater extent the French, would eventually colonization was an indefensible practice13. open the door for Western-educated Africans, Several years later, the revolution in but still a majority of uneducated Africans the French colony, St. Domingue (now Haiti), would remain excluded from legal citizenship complicated matters for the empire when status10. black slave-owners toppled the French Events beginning after World War I colonial structure and gained independence and through World War II changed the under the reasoning that “citizenship…should course of history. After the first war—having not be restricted by color.”14 The events in St. gallantly participated in the war on the side of Domingue resulted in “the 1795 constitution the allied forces—many African soldiers in France the colonies an ‘integral part’ of returned to Africa believing they had earned France. France became, for a time, an empire the right to become citizens. They began to of citizens.”15 Pandora’s Box had been demand the social, economic and political opened. benefits of citizens, the majority of whom, at the time, were white11. Paralleling this were

12 Burbank and Cooper, Empires in World 9 Cooper, Africa since 1940: The Past of the History: Power and the Politics of Difference, Present. 224. 10 Mamdani, Citizen and Subject. Contemporary 13 Burbank and Cooper, Empires in World Africa and the Legacy of Late Colonialism. History: Power and the Politics of Difference. 11 Cooper, Africa since 1940: The Past of the 14 Ibid., 226. Present. 15 Ibid., 227. JPI: Fall 2015 Issue 6 Such events in the history of France French empire, whose emphasis had increased influenced its colonial policy in Africa in the over the years succeeding the Haitian early to mid-twentieth century, especially Revolution, had influence on the thinking and when Africans began to demand their rights strategizing of African natives in the colonies. as citizens in the empire. They invoked the Thus even though colonial rule was highly Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, exploitative of natives, they still chose to be arguing they should be recognized as part of the empire. In addition, the colonies’ citizens—their voices bolstered by other politics were intimately tied with that of critics of colonial rule. France, as has been mentioned before that The French empire found itself in a African deputies sat in the French legislature. conundrum because it desperately needed its This was unique because, as it will be colonies at this time to rejuvenate its economy observed in the British case, citizenship that had been devastated by the wars, debates were territorially bound and rule was especially World War II. To maintain control, more indirect. Indeed, Cooper contends that France appeased native African populations it is historical experience that shaped the by offering them legal citizenship that was actions of the players at the time.18 devoid of any rights that European French Elkins argues, “France hoped to citizens enjoyed. As Young says, “the restore its international prestige and resist assimilative elements in French…colonial subordination to an emerging Anglo- ideologies extended nominal citizenship to all, American alliance through closer integration but not its full substance.”16 The essence of with its colonies.”19 Its colonies presented the the strategy was appeasement instead of chance to counterbalance the ever-growing recognition of Africans as citizens. However, economic power of the British especially in this did not mean that Africans would not world affairs. This further explains the take such an advantage and use it to its fullest nominal citizenship that France extended to potential. residents of its African colonies: appeasement By the 1940s, there were already for the sake of buffering British power. African deputies representing the colonies in Moves toward greater assimilation were the French legislature. Most notable among reflected in the French constitution of 1946, them, was Leopold Senghor of Senegal, who which “proclaimed that inhabitants of all of was instrumental in the abolishment of these entities would now have ‘qualities’ of “forced labor and separate administrative French citizens.”20 AS Elkins writes, “The justice.”17 One idiosyncrasy of the French assimilationist principles upon which it (the conception of citizenship is that the Africans French empire) was originally established”21 agitated for inclusion as citizens in the French reaffirmed France as one with its colonies empire, as opposed to charting a path abroad. Yet, notwithstanding a constitution independent of the metropole. Political realities and perceived economic gains played 18 Cooper, Africa since 1940: The Past of the a major role in such a course of action. The Present. idea of African colonies as provinces of one 19 Caroline Elkins, “Race, Citizenship, and Governance: Settler Tyranny and the End of Empire,” in Settler Colonialism in the Twentieth 16 Young, “Nation, Ethnicity, and Citizenship: Century: Projects, Practices, Legacies, ed. C. Dilemmas of Democracy and Civil Order in Elkins, and S Pedersen (Kentucky: Routledge, Africa,” 254. 2012), 211. 17 Frederick Cooper, “Restructuring Empire in 20 Cooper, “Restructuring Empire in British and British and French Africa,” Past and Present, 10, French Africa,” 200. Supplement 6 (2011), 200. 21 Elkins, “Race, Citizenship, and Governance: Settler Tyranny and the End of Empire,” 211. JPI: Fall 2015 Issue 7 extending citizenship to virtually all peoples of who are citizens at the time. Most of the time, the French empire, there was ambiguity as to the latter resist such efforts. the full extent of the law and its practicality.”22 Again, we come to see how the SUBJECTS OF THE BRITISH MONARCH: French revolution and the early years after it INDIRECT RULE led to a series of events that profoundly The foremost difference between the impacted France’s rule of its African colonies British Empire’s conception of citizenship as well into the mid-20th Century. Burbank and applied to their African colonies and that of Cooper capture the effects by emphasizing the French, was that Britain never considered that: “In 1946, an African political leader, granting citizenship to native Africans within elected to serve in the French legislature in its colonies25. Instead there was a preference Paris, Leopold Senghor, invoked the moment for indirect rule—the strategy of ruling 150 years earlier when France recognized the through chiefs. The British did not invent this citizenship of black slaves. He was trying to strategy—having been employed by other return to the promise of revolutionary France empires in the past.26 and make all subjects in the colonies into Mamdani argues that indirect rule was citizens, with the same rights as those of not a benevolent process of respecting the 23 European France.” Here, the values customs of African ethnic groups, or letting elucidated in the Declaration of the Rights of them develop in their own way either. The Man and Citizen were recalled and repurposed African was seen as a “tribesperson” subject to advocate for the rights of French-Africans. to “customary law.” Such a process of Of course, granting citizenship to separate administration for Africans black subjects en masse had social effectively meant that they had separate rights implications that threatened the stability of from Europeans, and existed in a different the empire at the time, which is why the society from that of the British. colonial authorities were circumspect in their One important reason for this policies. This was seen in the extension of fundamental difference in the techniques nominal citizenship to native Africans and employed by the French colonial rule was that especially those in the cities. Increasing the Britain never experienced a revolution that number of citizens implied the extension of claimed to equalize the rights of people before welfare programs to an unsustainable number the law. The only revolution that comes close of people. There was also the problem of is the Glorious Revolution of 1688, but this whether “citizens of European or African was mainly a tussle between Parliament and France could quickly set aside habits and the monarchy concerning who was to wield expectations of privilege and authority, of more power. Hence, the British historical discrimination and denigration, built up in narrative did not have universal natures of 24 decades of colonial rule.” Citizenship entails freedom on which native Africans could base an ‘us-them’ dichotomy, and extending it to a case for demanding citizenship. This is not groups that had been historically to argue that ideas of the Enlightenment disadvantaged, threatens the privilege of those period in the 20th Century—popular sovereignty, equality, amongst others—did not affect the British Empire, but that it 22 Cooper, “Restructuring Empire in British and French Africa,” 201. 23 Burbank and Cooper, Empires in World History: Power and the Politics of Difference, 25 Cooper, Africa since 1940: The Past of the 229. Present. 24 Cooper, “Restructuring Empire in British and 26 Burbank and Cooper, Empires in World French Africa,” 201. History: Power and the Politics of Difference. JPI: Fall 2015 Issue 8 rationalized such arguments differently, and in almost naturally inaccessible to the native. turn translated into unique colonial strategies. Whereas in the French empire, an African The notion of citizenship in British could, with education and consumption of colonies is captured by Cooper, when he French culture, become a French citizen, the mentions that the, “ruling fiction was ‘self- British had no such thing. government’: each territory would follow its Like their French counterparts, the own path; there would be no representation British also faced the real problem of trying to of Africans in the London parliament.”27 The retain its empire because of its economic authorities channeled African political activity importance. As Cooper states: “attempts to in territorially bounded institutions, thus get educated Africans to focus their ambitions avoiding any calls for citizenship equality of on local government quickly failed. The focus natives and white people, since territories was not London…but the center of each were “independent.” territory.” The result was that ambition for The fact that the British never equality by most African leaders followed the considered Africans in the colonies to be avenue opened by the master: “political citizens of Britain did not snuff out debates parties in colony after colony demanded full for equality and citizenship. Rather, it participation in each territory’s legislative and channeled them differently, especially after executive institutions,” without demanding to World War I through World War II. sit in London. 29 The British, unlike the French, never After having served in the European envisioned a possibility of Africans becoming wars—World War I and World War II—most citizens even nominally—let alone citizens returnee Africans of British colonies flocked with equal footing to the European settlers in to urban centers and began lives that the colonies, or those in the metropole. depended to a larger extent on Western Mazrui disparages the British in these words: goods. Their bad experience in the cities, “I hope it is only a coincidence that the stemming from repressive colonial policies, Anglo-Saxons….have been the worst fueled their demands for a better life30. Also, offenders among the Westerners in the newly-formed educated class saw the institutionalized racism. The Anglo-Saxons contradictions of the colonial state—that it were the architects of lynching and Jim oppressed Africans in their native land and Crow.”28 The importance of racial thought in extracted its resources—and sought to the mind of the colonial administrator was a challenge that. great barrier. Instead of an incorporation of The aforementioned can help us Africans as citizens in the empire, the British understand the different policies of both the suggested a possibility of self-government in French and the British. Assimilation, at the its separate colonies, in the future. To this basic level, means acceptance—a capitulation end Cooper argues that, “the Nationalities Act to inclusiveness. On the other hand, indirect of 1948 created something of an echo of what rule evokes aloofness, a preference for the French were doing—a second tier separation among peoples. And that is what Commonwealth citizenship, derivative of the the British did. British culture was seen as primary citizenship of the Dominions, but

27 Cooper, Africa since 1940: The Past of the Present, 49. 28 Ali Mazrui, “Who are the Africans?” in Who is 29 Cooper, “Restructuring Empire in British and an African? Identity, Citizenship and the Making French Africa,” 202. of Africa-Nation, ed. J. Adibe (London: Adonis & 30 Cooper, Africa since 1940: The Past of the Abbey, 2009), 32. Present. JPI: Fall 2015 Issue 9 applied to colonies as well.”31 This only especially in the period preceding allowed British Africans to gain access to independence. British Isles—a far cry from recognition among citizens. Africans could be considered CONCLUSION as citizens in the British Isles but not in In the late 19th and early 20th Century, Britain itself—an obvious hostility towards Britain and France were among the Western native Africans in the metropolis. European nations that decided, without any In contrast to developments in the input from representatives of the continent French empire around the same time, “in itself, to divide Africa into colonies in support British Africa…the theme of equality of self-interested goals of industrialization and surfaced, although without the same appeal to power. While France and Britain share a empire-wide citizenship and its norm of common Western European identity, the equivalence…in French Africa.”32 historical narratives that came into effect Such attempts by both colonial authorities to when each nation devised and employed its shape citizenship and the reaction of the colonial strategy in Africa were quite different. subjects often degenerated into a violent And while scholars often combine the process. This was more the case in settler colonial experiences of British and French colonies—colonies where Europeans were African colonies in their analysis, this is encouraged to settle in great numbers—where insufficient as there are major differences African populations were condemned into between them. reserves. For example, the Mau Mau rebellion This paper has shown how historical in Kenya in the around 1957 to 1960 was a experience impacted the unfolding of events reaction to the increasing brutality of white relating to calls for equality in the colonies by colonial settlers, as the Kikuyu people called Africans, and relating to citizenship in for better treatment and rights33. particular. In part, this proves the Cooper opines that “repression may interconnectedness of historical experience. have well reflected the self-perceived Also, the empires used tools which they saw openness to political reform: that some fit for that particular time, although they Africans rejected the political inclusion and could not control how events would unfold, economic development that was being offered once they had chosen their policies. The them now struck officials as an affront, not policy of assimilation pursued by the French the backward inclinations inherent in the had a lasting effect on citizenship conception nature of the African.”34 Because of the power in its African colonies, so much so that native to set agenda for reform, the colonists Africans saw their rights as intrinsically perceived a rejection of that agenda as connected with France itself. A shift towards ungratefulness on the part of those over more territorially bounded units in French whom they ruled. Therefore persistence on an Africa arises in the late 1950s, influenced to a agenda unsanctioned by the colonial masters certain extent by the reconfiguration of the led to the repression of native Africans, Third World, which was breaking away politically from Western powers and forming new states. On the other hand, the policy of

31 indirect rule pursued by the British channeled Cooper, “Restructuring Empire in British and citizenship rights to more territorially French Africa,” 202. 32 Ibid., 205. bounded units, and it could be said that this 33 Elkins, “Race, Citizenship, and Governance: was the model that inspired the form of Settler Tyranny and the End of Empire.” statehood that now prevails in Africa. 34 Cooper, “Restructuring Empire in British and French Africa,” 203. JPI: Fall 2015 Issue 10 Lastly, this paper has drawn fairly broad strokes of citizenship in colonial Africa—a heuristic contribution at best. Thus it suffices to add that there are numerous potential avenues for further research in this topic. For one, this essay has hardly made mention of the variation—if any—of citizenship understanding within countries of colonized by the same power, and implication on state formation processes. Also, it has not examined the dynamics between the colonizer and the colonized in shaping citizenship, and the subsequent states. These omissions are largely a product of the essay’s scope. Thus it behooves other scholars of Africa to delve into the particularities in order to understand deeper the impact of past understandings of citizenship on the present.

JPI: Fall 2015 Issue 11