Neocolonialism: Debating Independence

Did independence end colonial domination, or only change its form? In 1965 Kwame Nkrumah published 'Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism', arguing that new states remained controlled through economic dependence, foreign corporations, aid and military ties. Dependency theorists, such as Andre Gunder Frank and the Guyanese historian Walter Rodney in 'How Europe Underdeveloped Africa' (1972), argued that the global economy kept former colonies as suppliers of cheap raw materials.

Supporters of this view point to evidence such as commodity dependence, foreign military bases, the CFA franc and conditions attached to loans. Critics respond that the concept can explain too much, overlook the choices of post-independence leaders, and struggle to account for former colonies, such as Singapore or Botswana, that grew rapidly. Many historians take a middle position, recognizing both external constraints and domestic agency.

Evaluating the debate requires asking what evidence would show dependence, and how much freedom new governments actually had.