“The Berlin West Africa Conference had little impact on the partition of Africa.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?

The question requires that candidates consider the merits or otherwise of the statement that the Berlin West Africa Conference had little impact on the partition of Africa. Candidates may agree with the statement by arguing that the partition was already well underway in many parts of the continent prior to Bismarck’s decision to hold a conference in 1884. They may argue that the conference focused mainly on relatively minor issues such as territorial and commercial disputes between Leopold and other powers in the Congo basin, and these rivalries had little to do with the deeper causes of the partition. Candidates may disagree with the statement by referring to Bismarck’s use of the conference as a means of promoting and legitimizing Germany’s claims to colonies in Africa. This elicited a response from the other powers, who rushed to exclude Germany from other parts of the continent. Candidates may also refer to the agreements reached in Berlin regarding the need for effective occupation and argue that this may have precipitated a “second scramble”. Candidates’ opinions or conclusions will be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.

This was another popular question. The difficulty was that candidates tended to go with generic descriptions of the Conference and did not focus on the specific demand. This required an analysis of the impact of the Conference on partition and required some specific knowledge and an analytical approach that many candidates did not produce.