By Oladejo Oluwatoyin Lateefat & Oyeniyi Promise Adekunle
It has often been emphasized by scholars that Africans fought on behalf of the British during the first and second world wars and they are patriotic and the British campaign was successful. However, there is need to emphasize the historical fact that African soldiers, particularly Nigerian soldiers, fought only to further entrench the authority of the Colonial overlords over the territory in which they control. These soldiers believed that fighting for the colonialists would grant them favour, fame, status, perhaps authority over and above their African counterpart, only for many of them to find out that their zealous participation in the wars did not grant them the social status that they dreamt of. Eventually they wallowed in poverty as ex-servicemen throughout much of the 1940s and 1950s. Their dreams only entrenched further colonial authority. Although, it is in mainstream literature that these soldiers served to inspire nationalism through their realisation that the white man was also physically vulnerable, this however did not inspire the incoming African leadership to give preference to these ex soldiers.
Colonialism is both a practice and a worldview. As a practice, it involves the domination of a society by settlers from a different society. As a worldview, colonialism is a truly global geopolitical, economic, and cultural doctrine that is rooted in the worldwide expansion of West European capitalism that survived until well after the collapse of most colonial empires.
Historically, colonies in the strict sense of settlements had existed long before the advent of global capitalism; the English word colony is derived from the ancient Latin term colonia, denoting an outpost or settlement. However, colonialism as a principle of imperial statecraft and an effective strategy of capitalist expansion that involved sustained appropriation of the resources of other societies, indeed regions, of the world for the benefit of the colonizing society, backed by an elaborate ideological justificatory apparatus, is a modern, West European invention par excellence, emerging from the 15th century onward. Colonialism involved a combination of several processes, recurring with remarkable consistency across various instances. Some of these were as follows: in later phases of colonialism, warfare using colonial populations from one colony in armed incursion against other (potential) colonies.
At the beginning of the modern colonial period such troops were predominantly Europeans from the home army of the country concerned, but locally raised “native” troops were soon recruited. The latter normally served in separate units, at first under their own leaders, later under European officers. The sepoys of the East India Company were an early example. By the mid-18th century, these troops were beginning to be directly recruited by the Company, allowing more systematic provisioning, drill and tactics, forming the presidency armies. During the Indian Rebellion of 1857, or “Sepoy Mutiny”, many of the sepoys rebelled against the Company, leading to the end of Company rule in India. After the British government took direct control of British India in 1858, the sepoys formed the regiments of the Indian Army, some of which survive to the present day in the national armies of Pakistan and India
In the larger colonial possessions the garrison was likely to comprise both locally recruited and white troops. The latter might be from the home or metropolitan army, from settlers doing their military service or occasionally from mercenaries recruited outside the territories of the colonial power concerned. In Burma, the British recruited primarily from the Hill dwelling minorities such as the Karens, Kachin and Chin while preventing the plain dwelling majority of Bamar, Rakhine and Mon people from joining the colonial military service; this was due to the perception that they were unsympathetic towards the colonial government.
Many colonial powers sought to recruit minority peoples, such as the Ambonese in the Netherlands East Indies (NEI), to counterbalance majority populations seen as potentially rebellious, such as the Javanese. Such minority groups, and those with records of loyalty in revolt, were often designated as ‘martial races’; their supposedly superior martial qualities propagandized, and their communities rewarded with special status. The colonial power might however face a dilemma: when military developments made numbers a priority, it had to either trust the majority and so risk loss of control, or alternatively rely on minorities combined with large numbers of expensive European or other non-local troops. The French Army of the Levant provided an example of the latter option. Raised to garrison Syria and Lebanon from 1920 to 1943, this force of about 10,000 men (in 1938) was predominantly recruited from Alawite, Druze, Kurdish and Circassian minorities, augmented by North African, Senegalese and French Foreign Legion units.
The British Army rotated large numbers of its regular troops through India and other overseas possessions, augmenting the local colonial forces. However it is notable that British forces in Nigeria and other West African territories were under normal circumstances nearly all locally recruited, except for officers, some non-commissioned officers and a few specialists. Changes in colonial ruler usually meant the continuation of local recruitment – often from the same sources.
Colonial troops may comprise local forces drawn from settlers in colonies where these were numerous.
The advantages of locally-recruited troops in colonial warfare were several. They had familiarity with local terrain, language and culture. They were likely to be immune from disease in areas such as the West Indies and West Africa, which were notoriously bad for European troops until the early 20th century. “Native” troops were usually recruited from tribal or other groups that had long-established martial traditions. It was not uncommon for colonial armies to favour the races that had shown the fiercest opposition to the initial conquest of a given territory (examples being the Sikhs of India and the Rif tribesmen of Morocco). Colonial units could be employed in campaigns or conditions in which the use of conscripts from metropolitan regiments would be politically unpopular. Also, the use of local troops often made the actual colonization more palatable for the locals. Colonial troops could be used to garrison or subdue other territories than those in which they were recruited to avoid problems of conflict.
Colonial troops were usually more lightly equipped than their metropolitan counterparts, which were usually given priority in issuing new weaponry. That arose primarily from the predominant roles of light infantry or cavalry of colonial forces, which were designed for low intensity warfare against poorly-armed opponents in difficult country. Until the Second World War, artillery or mechanised units rarely had indigenous troops although the Italian colonial army maintained a number of Eritrean, Somali and Libyan mule artillery batteries, and there were locally-recruited mountain batteries in the Indian Army. The relative lack of up-to-date weaponry and training put colonial troops at an initial disadvantage when they faced modern opponents such as the German or Japanese armies of the Second World War.
Even earlier, the African and Indian troops that had been sent to France in 1914 encountered
a climate, diet and general conditions of service greatly different from those with which they were familiar.
The selective recruitment of particular ethnic groups for service in the colonial military was frequently influenced by the perception of their military abilities and loyalty towards the colonial regime. On occasion, these restrictions were overturned due to a lack of manpower, especially during and in the run-up to the Second World War. The overturning of such restrictions, could, however, lead to increased opposition to the colonial regime.
Colonial troops sometimes served as symbols or icons of Imperial power. Representative detachments of Indian and other Empire forces came to London to parade as part of coronation or other major celebrations during the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Until at least the 1930s, British Indian and French, Italian and Spanish North African regiments were notable for their picturesque uniforms which incorporated indigenous features such as colourful turbans, cloaks and sashes. Such features were an aid to voluntary recruiting as well as ensuring a high-profile for the overseas territories represented.
The end of the colonial empires saw mixed outcomes for colonial troops. Where the transition was a relatively peaceful one the existing colonial units were likely to form the basis of the new national armies. Where there had been extended conflict those locally recruited troops who had remained loyal to their former colonial rulers might find themselves regarded as collaborators and subject to reprisals after independence. As a British colony, Nigeria entered the war on the side of the Allies. Nigeria was a key country in the African theatre of war, serving as a critical part of the Allied strategy in Africa. In addition to Nigeria’s importance as a staging point in Africa, several Nigerian infantry regiments were raised to serve the British Empire in campaigns in Africa and Asia. Throughout the war,45,000 Nigerian soldiers served in the British Armed Forces in Africa and southeast Asia. Nigerian regiments formed the majority of the 81st and 82nd West African Divisions of the British Army.
Nigerian soldiers fought in most notably Burma and India. During the war, none of the commanding officers of the Nigerian corps were from Nigeria, continuing pre-war policies. These were instead selected from around the British Commonwealth. The first Nigerian officers were selected towards the war’s end. Nigeria’s involvement in the Second World War helped fuel the struggle for independence from colonial rule. This was in part because participation of Africans in these wars exposed them to ideas of self-determination and independent rule.
Nigeria’s entry was first marked by a verbal agreement to join the Allied Forces in declaration of war against Germany. Nigeria accepted the British invitation to join the war almost unanimously. Influential Nigerian political leaders such as Nnamdi Azikiwe and Herbert Macaulay, hitherto critics of British colonial rule, reversed gear and appealed to all Nigerians to support the war effort. Within days of the declaration, the Nigerian War Relief Fund (NWRF) was established, a volunteer fundraising movement designed to increase local support for Britain. Initially, the war had significant popular support in Nigeria. While many soldiers signed up willingly, there were instances of conscription of Nigerian men, some as young as 16.In response to critical manpower shortages following the invasion of Europe by Axis Powers, Britain and France began to look to their colonies for supplies of able-bodied fighting men. These men included combatants, military labourers and specialist units, and from 1942 onward, their role transformed from a defensive role in defending their empire in Africa, to an offensive role in repelling Japanese forces in the far eastern parts of the British Empire. The Home Office was aware that by sending colonial soldiers to Europe it would risk exposing them to radical political ideas which could eventually destabilize British rule in Africa, and African forces were therefore sent more commonly to South-East Asia.
The first Nigerian units to see combat in the Second World War served in the British
campaigns in East Africa. In 1940, the 1st (West Africa) Brigade was the first Nigerian unit to be deployed against the Axis Powers in Kenya. A total of 9,000 West African soldiers fought alongside regiments from the Gold Coast (present day Ghana), and the other British colonial possessions in West Africa. At this stage in the war, Nigeria’s troop contributions were relatively small, and would not grow until the conclusion of the African campaigns of the war.
Throughout the East African Campaigns, the Nigerian forces were organised at battalion level, and no whole divisions were created from Nigerian soldiers. Despite this, British officers reported being impressed with the capabilities of the Nigerian soldiers, of which their participation in the capture of Mogadishu and the rapid advance towards Dehegabur can be highlighted .For many Nigerian citizens, the invasion of Ethiopia at the outbreak of WWII was a wake-up
call to the Axis threat. Therefore, as early as 1935, Nigerian efforts on the home front were concentrated on raising funds to support the war effort in Ethiopia.
Burma
After the success of the Allied campaigns in Africa, and with increasing need for soldiers to be deployed elsewhere, British command decided to form two divisions to fight in south-east Asia. The 81st Division was formed from West African brigades, then deployed in 1943. In1944, the 82nd (West Africa) Division was formed, then sailed to British Ceylon (present day Sri Lanka) from the east coast of Africa. They then moved to Burma and took part in the third Arakan campaign in December 1944.
The Allied forces in Burma faced a more experienced and entrenched Japanese Imperial force. Despite this, through use of aerial re-supply and effective use of the jungle terrain, the Allied forces were able to push the Japanese out of Burma. The jungle terrain forced theA llied forces to adopt new tactics and logistical strategies, a task which the Nigerian forces
excelled at. The two West African divisions uniquely used non-combatant soldiers as porters, auxiliaries, head-carrying supplies and ammunition. While British units used traditional resupply methods, the African porters enabled the West African divisions’ greater mobility than even the famed Chindit units native to Burma. The British units used their air-superiority to great effect throughout the campaign, with the RAF flying resupply missions which enabled the Allied forces to effectively fight in the jungles.
The 81st Division was initially deployed deep into the front, where it faced intense fighting for nearly a year before being relieved by the 82nd Division. By January 1945, the 82nd Division had reached Apuakwa on the Kaladan River, where they had been ordered to meet up with the 81st Division. From here the 81st Division was initially intended to return to India for rest and refit, and the 82nd Division was to take up the 81st Division’s role of engaging Japanese elements.
The largest engagement of the campaign fought by Nigerian forces was the Battle of
Myohaung, a swiftly executed operation to seize the town of Myohaung. Both Nigerian
divisions were deployed to encircle the city, with the 81st Division due to return to India after the town’s capture. After some fierce fighting on the outskirts of the city, the Japanese forces evacuated the city upon realizing they had been surrounded. The recapture of Myohaung was strategically important as the city lay on major supply routes for Japan. Actions of the Allied combatants ultimately forced a Japanese evacuation of the Mayu peninsula, capturing areas which had been held by Japan for nearly four years. British troops continued to advance along the Mayu peninsula until the Japanese conceded the area entirely. The involvement of Nigerian forces was critical for this campaign.
Home Front
In preparation for the outbreak of a world war, the colonial government secretly developed several schemes to retain foreign exchange and ensure the supply of commodities necessary
for a war effort. In 1939, as part of the plans the Nigerian colonial administration set up the Nigeria Supply Board to regulate trade and manage production. That year a series of “defense regulations” were instituted, granting vast power to the board and other administrates to control the distribution of imports and foodstuffs. In the early stages of the war, British commanders and colonial officials had not anticipated that Africa would be heavily involved in the conflict. After the rapid success of Germany’s Blitzkrieg in Europe, the British government declared that winning the war would require a supreme effort from every person in the empire. Part of this effort would include increasing production of wartime commodities, meanwhile drastically reducing social spending, development, and imports of goods deemed non-essential. Additionally, direct taxes were increased on the population, a measure which would result in country-wide strikes in 1945 and 1947 against the continued enforcement of wartime legislation. Throughout the war, Nigerian attitudes towards colonial rule grew steadily more negative as the demands of the Nigerian War Relief Fund became harder to meet. The Home Office strongly encouraged and incentivised Nigerian miners and farmers to increase their output of raw materials. In particular, heavy demand was placed on rubber and coal.
Nigerian women played a critical role in collecting the harvests of Nigeria’s two largest crop exports: cocoa and palm oil. Farmers were forced to produce these cash crops instead of food for the duration of the war due to economic difficulties. At the outbreak of war, the colonial government prohibited exports of cocoa and palm oil to Germany in order to deprive them of critical wartime goods. The government became the sole purchaser of all of Nigeria’s cash crops, and lowered prices to cope with wartime demands. As a result, continuation of
cocoa farming became highly difficult for small rural farmers, many of whom abandoned their farms due to sustained years of producing at a loss.
As in many places throughout WWII, Nigeria experienced an acute shortage of food from the years 19391945. Rationing was introduced and lasted as late as 1948 in some parts of the country. In order to procure basic items like salt, flour, butter or tinned milk a ration card was required. In addition to rationing, the government put restrictions on the movement of food within the country, for example: banning the movement of rice between Abeokuta and Lagos.
Smugglers attempting to transport rice into Lagos were either fined or put on criminal trial for subverting the war effort.
Media was used to propagate support for the war throughout the country. Radio broadcasts were relayed throughout the country, broadcasting programming from the BBC and local broadcasters. Newspapers like The Yoruba News brought information of the progression of the war in the Yoruba language as well as English. In both of these cases, the media was produced primarily in English, with Yoruba publications emerging later in the war. The aims of these outlets was fundraising for the Nigeria War Relief Fund.
Nigerian soldiers returning home after the war received little official congratulations for their involvement in the war. Upon successful completion of the Allied objectives in Burma, Nigerian troops were not included in the victory speech by commanding officer General William Slim.
Upon their return to Nigeria, a general frustration with the colonial administration and a renewed sense of national pride contributed significantly to the pushes for independence in post-war Nigeria. Throughout the war, Nigerians had fought under European officers, and it was not until four years after the war’s conclusion that the first Nigerian officer was commissioned, in 1949.
Combined with the tensions which had emerged on the home-front throughout the war, Nigeria pushed significantly for the principles of self-determination following the war. Like many nations following the end of WWII, wartime experiences inspired the population to campaign for independence. The Nigerian Civil War of 1966 was fought and organised by many veterans of the Second World War. The general strike of 1945 has been credited as one of the defining moments in Nigerian history. The strike was orchestrated by trade unionists across the country and included delegates from the farming, railway, mining, manufacturing and teaching unions.
A soldier’s life in the 1700’s was very difficult. Since making a living during this period was difficult for most people, many young men chose to enter the army anyway. This was true for the American Colonial Militia, the British and the French Armies. Because the focus of our study is the groups and individuals in and around Albany during the period of the mid 1700’s, this section will focus on the Colonial Militia with some attention paid to the British Army.
Much of the British regular army was recruited from the lowest social classes. The men who enlisted were often petty criminals, beggars, labourers, or farmers. During times of war, British recruiting sergeants scoured the country offering up to 20 guineas to new recruits. (This was at a time when some people made as little as guineas a year). Most British soldiers joined for life and some would even take their families with them if there were an open spot on the muster role. Ultimately, it was the decision of the commanding officer of the regiment whether private soldiers could take their families with them to war. The “Brown Bess”, a flintlock musket, was the main weapon of the British army and colonial Militias from the 1730’s until the end of the American Revolution. They were used in fortified places where their long barrels and long range gave their user a considerable advantage.
Like British Army recruits, many members of the Colonial Militia came from the lower social classes, though others came from middle income families. Surviving muster rolls show that about sixty per cent of the Pennsylvania recruits were labourers. The remaining forty per cent were either artisans or skilled workers. These militia men had worked in the cloth, wood, or leather trades. While most of the artisans were cloth workers, some worked as coopers and carpenters. Those who enlisted from other parts of the colonies had almost the exact opposite percentage of labourers versus artisans. Many of these colonial soldiers came from property owning families. These were not men who saw the army as a way to make a living. In fact, they did not need a
military income to survive. So why did they enlist? There were the usual reasons: excitement, a chance to prove themselves, and patriotism. In addition, a common reason for the enlistment of young men from landed families was to earn money to purchase land. It was land, which made a man independent from his family.
A colonial soldier usually served eight months in the militia. He was not paid until his enlistment was over, at which time he received all the money that was due to him. If he had saved his enlistment bonus, he would now have enough money to purchase between thirty and one hundred and fifty acres, more than enough for independence.
The Recruitment of Colonial Troops in Africa and Asia and their Deployment in Europe during the First World War
The impact of the First World War on the colonies was profound and many-sided.
A conflict that began in the Balkans turned into a general European war in July and August 1914, and then took on extra-European dimensions, particularly as some of the belligerent states ranked as the most important colonial powers globally.
After the outbreak of the war, there was immediate fighting in several parts of the world as Great Britain, France, Belgium and Japan as well as the British dominions Australia, New Zealand and South Africa attacked the German colonies in Africa, Asia and the Pacific. Most of these territories were conquered by the Entente powers within a short time. Already in October and November 1914, Japanese troops occupied the German Islands in Micronesia and captured the city of Tsingtau, where about 5000 Germans were made prisoners of war. Between August and November 1914 troops from Australia and New Zealand conquered Samoa, New Guinea
and the Bismarck Archipelago, all of them German possessions.
The German colonies in Africa were defended by so-called Schutztruppen, made up of German officers and African soldiers. While British and French troops overwhelmed Togo in August 1914, the fighting in Cameroon lasted until January 1916.
German South West Africa was attacked by South Africa on behalf of the Entente powers. This caused problems in South Africa itself, however, for about 11,500 Anglophobe Boer soldiers rebelled, some of them openly joining the German side. The South African war between the British empire and the Boers had only ended 12 years before, and many Boers had preserved their anti-British feelings. Once this rebellion was crushed, the Germans were left defenceless, for 50,000 South African soldiers faced only 5,000 men in the German colonial forces. When South African troops entered the capital city Windhuk in May 1915, they did not meet any resistance. The most important colonial theatre was German East Africa, where fighting lasted until the end of the war. German forces here were under the command of Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck and consisted of only about 7,500 men, most of them Africans. British troops, on the other hand, comprised about 160,000 soldiers and one million carriers. All the same, they were not able to defeat the Germans for more four years, for Lettow-Vorbecksoon turned to a guerrilla strategy and escaped again and again. Furthermore, he also attacked Belgian and Portuguese colonial troops. Only in November 1918, after about 10,000 British soldiers and 100,000 carriers had died, did Lettow-Vorbeck surrender. The fighting in East Africa had a catastrophic economic as well as ecological impact. The economies of German East Africa and of bordering British colonies were deeply damaged by both sides on-going use of forced recruitment. Famines and epidemics spread and lasted beyond the wars end.
Furthermore, migrations caused by the war led to a spread of the tsetse fly, which in turn explains the prevalence of sleeping sickness in East Africa in the following decades.
However, the colonies (or some of them) were not only theatres of war, but they were also integrated into the European powers domestic war economies. They supplied goods and some of them also made financial contributions. India, for instance, contributed £146 million to the British war costs between 1914 and 1920 and supplied products such as cotton, jute, paper and wool. In the French possessions in North Africa, the process of integration into France’s war economy led to far-ranging administrative and economic reforms. Increasing demand for foodstuff at first improved the economic situation of North Africa’s agriculture. In the years 1917 and 1918, however, harvests in Algeria and Tunisia were very bad, which caused famines. Furthermore, hitherto imported industrial goods were replaced by home-made ones, which promoted the development of a North African industry. However, no sustainable industrialisation process took place. After the end of the war, imports from France would destroy these nascent industries in North Africa.
French West Africa mainly provided palm oil, palm kernel and peanuts. However, its integration into the French war economy was chaotic rather than planned. The French colonial and military administration could not decide whether this area should be used primarily as a base for economic exploitation or whether the focus should be laid on the recruitment of soldiers.
In addition to the fighting in the colonies and the increased economic exploitation of native peoples for the war effort in Europe, the First World War also witnessed migration from the colonial world to Europe on an unprecedented scale. Among the temporary migrants from the colonies and semi-colonial regions to Europe were both war workers and soldiers. About 215,000 civilian war workers from South Africa (31,200), the West Indies (8,000), Mauritius (1,000) and the Fiji Islands (100) as well as from China (92,000) and Egypt (82,000) came to work behind the British front, whilst France recruited about 220,000 workers from outside Europe, coming from Algeria (75,900), Indochina (49,000), Morocco (35,000), Tunisia (18,500) and Madagascar (5,500) as well as from China (36,700).
The massive presence of extra European male war workers led to problems in France. French workers often saw these colonial migrants as rivals for jobs as well as for women, and there were numerous attacks on them, especially towards the end of the war. French trade unions were on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, they stressed internationalism and rejected all forms of racism. On the other hand, they were aware that the colonial workers were often misused as strike breakers. The French government, for its part, pursued a policy of strict segregation between colonial workers and French civilians and would send the former home as soon as possible after the end of the war.
Even more significant in terms of both numbers and public attention was the temporary migration of colonial soldiers to Europe. The Entente powers deployed about 650,000 colonial soldiers on European battlefields. White European settlers from the colonies and dominions, who provided large contingents as well, are not included in this figure. The Central Powers, on the other hand, were not able to deploy any colonial troops in Europe. Britain, altogether, mobilised about 1.5 million Indian soldiers during the war, of which about 90,000 were killed. Some 150,000 Indian soldiers were deployed in Europe from September 1914 on. The over whelming majority of Indian troops, however, fought in Mesopotamia against the Ottoman Empire. On the other hand, Britain did not deploy any African troops on European battlefields, although there was a group of officers and politicians with a colonial background lobbying to do so.
Winston Churchill, for instance, claimed in a House of Commons speech in May1916 that not only 1012 Indian divisions but also African units should be trained for deployment in Europe. Plenty of British African troops, however, fought in the Middle East and in Africa itself. Some battalions of the black British West Indies Regiment were deployed in France, but only in ancillary functions, not combatants. Officially, this policy was justified with reference to logistical problems, but racism probably played a role as well, for after the United States had joined the war, the British army also rejected the training of African-American soldiers, who were eventually incorporated into the French army.
Unlike Britain, the French deployed large numbers of African troops in Europe, including 172,800 soldiers from Algeria, 134,300 from West Africa, 60,000 from Tunisia, 37,300 from Morocco, 34,400 from Madagascar and 2100 from the Somali Coast. Another colonial contingent of about 44,000 men came from Indochina.16 Italy, who joined the Entente side in spring 1915, tried to deploy African colonial troops in Europe as well. In August 1915, some 2,700 soldiers from Libya were shipped to Sicily. However, they did not enter the front line, because many soldiers died from pneumonia immediately after their arrival, and so, the Libyans, who were designated for Alpine warfare, were shipped home again after a short time. In the African theatres of war, however, Italy deployed plenty of Eritrean, Libyan and Somali soldiers.
My contribution shall focus on three aspects of this transcontinental military migration between1914 and 1918. In the first instance, I will analyse colonial recruitment policies and the responses they met by the colonised. Secondly, I shall consider the colonial employment on European battle fields, including two issues often discussed by contemporaries: whether
colonial troops were misused as cannon fodder and whether they fought particularly cruelly. And finally, the cultural impact of military migration, especially mutual perception of Europeans and colonial soldiers, will be analysed.
Recruitment of colonial troops in India followed the traditional pattern of the theory of martial races. The British army only recruited from the small number of castes it considered martial, which effectively eliminated most of the Indian population from the manpower pool. Furthermore, Indian troops were segregated by caste into companies and battalions. As such,
replacements could not be assigned where needed but had to go to units restricted to their caste. Whereas the British colonial troops consisted exclusively of volunteers, the French recruitment policy in North and West Africa was a mixed one, including the enlistment of volunteers as well as conscription
On balance, the deployment of colonial troops in Europe proved to be a dramatic experience for all contemporaries. Forced recruitment in the colonies met several forms of resistance, including even armed rebellions. Deployment in Europe would then change many Africans and Asians perceptions of their colonial masters and of Europeans in general. Europeans, on the other hand, whilst preserving racist stereotypes, became aware of the precariousness of their global dominance. However, the impact of colonial troops deployment in Europe in the First World War on the colonial system is still debated. In particular, the colonial veterans digestion of their European experience was far from uniform.
The idea of martial qualities became an established orthodoxy among most European army officer serving in Africa. Recruits for the colonial armies were also medically examined and only those of certain height (ideally 5ft 8inches) physique and standard of health were accepted. During war period medical standards were lowered. The age of 18 for recruits laid down in 1942 was rarely observed. For instance Isaac Fadoyebo who served in the British Royal West African Frontier Force was barely 16years old when he joined the army at Abeokuta in 1942. Mohammed known as African Banana was just 16 when he was pressed in to joining the British military services in northern Nigeria. He claimed he had his identity from his recruiting officer. Kwame Asante, 17years old joined the army in Gold Coast in 1942, he claimed he was accepted when he was 13 years old.
Note: not all recruitment between voluntarily also recruitment between 1942 and 1945 was contrary to the norms as they selected ethnic groups (northern Nigerian particularly) whom the British described as war like
The majority of Africa’s armed forces and police came into existence as part of the coercive apparatus. In the colonial period, most of the office were European, at independence, when Africanization polices were put into operation, many Africans who were not really qualified to become offices were put into operations. Many Africans who were not really qualified to become officers received commissions because of the lack of suitable candidates. A large number were men who held educational positions in the army and were drawn from among the educated petty bourgeoisie these and other older officer at present serving in Africa’s armies were trained by colonialists or in military colleges of the west and are therefore oriented towards western norms and ideas
They have been taught to obey orders without questions and have become tools for the colonialist. This is a fundamental requirement of the ordinary soldiers in most British colonial army, this becomes very dangerous when the colonizer gives orders which serves the interest of only a small privilege section of society. In this the ordinary soldiers is after all only a worker or in uniform acting against the interests of his own class
The colonial army therefore had these characteristics:
They intend suppression of agitation which led to killings and torture of people (operation open fire)
They intended that there was law and order and that their colonial subject obeyed the order of the queen. Also, to avoid case of treason in the colonies
Furthermore, to punish offenders to inculcate fear which led to the establishment of prisons
More over, it was also founded to put the nationalist into check for example Nnamdi Azikwe, Herbert Macaulay, women in eastern region from 1925 and 1930 at Opobo present Ikot Abasi in Akwaibom, there were women skulls at the bank of Opobo river
During the Aba women revolt of 1929, women were injured and were killed; in the mid-summer protest championed by Madame Olufumilayo Ransom Kuti, she was arrested
Therefore, the Colonial Army served the British state.
To make the population civil so that they’ll obey the administrator. To keep protest as low as possible,. To enforce the subject of African people to kings that were puppets of the British colonial government e.g DOSUMU OF LAGOS, There was no longer resistance to British colonial authorities, and as there were a little but less activities of the British military this led to the creation of police which continued to ensure the security of multinational cooperation,to implement British colonial interest at the high levels (the governor general of northern and southern protectorates, Lord Lugard, retired from India before coming to Nigeria ). Essentially colonialism was military rule, after the war the soldiers who served were called the ex-servicemen
