|
Matthew
Seligmann's well-researched study of the development of Germany's
South African policy in the 1890s is both an in-depth investigation
of the motivations behind that policy, and a contribution to the
broader debate on German expansionism in the late nineteenth century.
Based on the author's doctoral dissertation, the account draws
on a large number of German and British archival sources. It distinguishes
between official, public and commercial interests in southern Africa,
as well as analysing in detail the nature and course of Germany's
South African policy in the 1890s. Germany's involvement in South
Africa has received considerable attention from historians, but
they have tended to ignore the early years of Germany's involvement
in South Africa. Seligmann's account addresses this gap by investigating
the origins of Germany's policy before 1896, as well as the abandonment
of Germany's South African interests by the end of the 1890s.
Any historian of Imperial Germany's political
and diplomatic history faces a difficult challenge in trying to
identify and understand the motives behind German policies in the
Wilhelmine period, and Germany's colonial policy is no exception.
As Paul Rohrbach observed in 1912, 'the main reason why our position
sometimes makes an uncertain, even unpleasant impression when seen
from outside Germany lies in the difficulty of presenting any easily
comprehensible, as it were tangible, aim for the policies demanded
by German ideas' (p.5). This was the difficulty Seligmann faced
in trying to unravel the aims and motivations behind Germany's
policy in southern Africa from 1893 until the time of Germany's
disengagement in the region in 1898. This policy developed in three
distinct stages up to the Boer War. Following a period of initial
complete disinterest, a policy inherited from Bismarck, German
colonial aspirations led to 'active interventionism' in the region,
which was finally reduced to 'a quest for advantageous disengagement'
(p.137), leading the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs,
Baron von Richthofen, to declare generously in 1898: 'We are letting
England have South Africa' (p.1).
Contemporaries considered the question of colonies,
and of acquiring a German colonial empire, a necessity, as is emphasized
by Bernhard von Bülow who maintained that 'the question is not
whether we want to colonize or not, but that we must colonize whether
we want to or not' (p.12). In view of Germany's relatively 'belated'
arrival on the scene of colonial expansion, such a perceived need
for colonies would necessarily lead to conflict with Germany's
main rivals. In South Africa, that rival was, of course, Britain.
Given the nature of German decision-making in
Imperial Germany, which was erratic and dependent on the whimsical
concerns of personalities in positions of power, the question of
motives behind German foreign policy has been a vexing one. Historians
of Imperial Germany often face a difficult challenge in trying
to establish the motives behind German policies, and Seligmann
takes issue with several attempts at explaining the reason for
Germany's emergence on the colonial stage as a rival to Britain
in 1893/4. He dismisses the view that Germany's interest in the
Transvaal was designed to effect a change in the international
balance of power, an argument advanced, for example, by Erich Brandenburg
and William Langer. In other words, Germany's interest in the South
Africa was merely a means to demonstrate to Britain that her policy
of 'splendid isolation' had to end, and that, rather than facing
Germany as an enemy, Britain should seek closer relations with
her, preferably by joining the Triple Alliance on Germany's terms
(p.60). Although Seligmann proves that this was not the actual
motivation behind German policy, he demonstrates that it nonetheless
came close to succeeding at times. The British High Commissioner
in South Africa noted on the day of the Kruger telegram: 'The difficulty
coming at the present moment is very unfortunate as it is generally
feared that the United States intends to go to war with us and
that they will have the support of Russia and France. That is bad
enough, but to have Germany likewise against us, would reduce us
to having to fight for our very existence' (p.61). However, as
Seligmann points out, such testimony is no proof of German intention,
and he considers the evidence available from German sources to
be unconvincing. According to Seligmann, the events surrounding
the sending of the Kruger Telegram, for example, prove that Germany,
or at least the Kaiser, did not consider German South Africa policy
as a means towards the achievement of an alliance with Britain.
In his first impulsive reaction, Wilhelm II apparently wanted to
send troops, rather than a telegram, an action that would not have
led to an Anglo-German alliance, but to war. The sending of the
telegram likewise was an action 'that could not, in all plausibility,
have been aimed at securing the allegiance of Britain' (p.63).
Seligmann presents convincing arguments against this theory, although
it might have been worth mentioning that a similar twisted 'logic'
of wanting to intimidate Britain into an alliance with Germany
seems to have been a motive behind the Tirpitz Plan.
Seligmann also dismisses a second attempt at
explaining German policy, advanced, for example, by Ronald Robinson
and John Gallagher. According to this interpretation, Germany never
had genuine interests in the Transvaal, and merely wanted to exploit
the situation to gain concessions from Britain in other parts of
the world (p.63). Instead , Seligmann favours a third interpretation
to explain Germany's interest in the region. He argues that the
Reich had serious economic and colonial ambitions in South Africa
(p.65). Imperial Germany possessed extensive economic interests
in the region, which had become a major outlet for German industry,
and German businesses had established themselves in the Republic,
with branches of Krupps, Siemens and Halske, and the Deutsche and
Dresdner banks, to name but a few. An appendix of trade statistics
confirms the claim that Germany did indeed have considerable commercial
interests in the region, which increased almost six-fold between
1892 and 1896, while exports to the Transvaal and the Cape Colony
increased ten-fold and two-fold respectively (p.146). 'In short,
German commercial activity in the Transvaal was both substantial
and lucrative, either of which attributes could have served to
attract the attention of the Reich authorities' (p.66). In addition
to such economic interests, Seligmann emphasizes the colonial interests
which gave credence to German policy in South Africa. The Transvaal's
strategic position in the middle of southern Africa gave it the
potential of becoming an important link in the establishment of
a transcontinental German South Africa. Moreover, the Boers were
regarded as 'Teutonic'. Under Dutch rule, the region was seen as
a place for possible emigration for Germans. The problem, as Seligmann
emphasizes, with identifying such areas of German concern and interest,
is that it is 'by no means the same as demonstrating that these
particular interests motivated the conduct of policy.' The difficulty
for the historian, once again, is to penetrate the complicated
decision-making system that existed in Imperial Germany. As Seligmann
explains, 'it was, after all, in the nature of the German political
system that the Reich administration, while sensitive to the various
outside pressures that could be applied by public opinion, business
considerations and campaign groups, was nonetheless not under any
constitutional obligation to act upon such stimuli, a circumstance
which ensured that it very often chose not to do so' (p.67).
Whatever Germany's motives were at different
times towards the region, they cannot be understood without an
appreciation of Kaiser Wilhelm II's role, as Seligmann demonstrates
in his analysis of the creation and despatch of the infamous Kruger
Telegram. Far from having been out of the ordinary, it was only
the culmination of support from Germany for the Transvaal, although
perhaps it its bluntest form. Seligmann places it in its proper
context, having been in keeping with German policy to date, which
had aimed 'to establish as a fact the idea that the Transvaal was,
in its own right, a sovereign state' (p.78). Altruism, naturally,
was not the motivating factor behind this policy. Rather, Seligmann
concludes 'that if the Reich government strove to establish the
freedom of the Transvaal from British influence then it did so,
not for the benefit of the Boers, but for reasons that fulfilled
requirements of its own devising' (p.78).
The telegram is usually regarded as one of the
Kaiser's great blunders, and seen as the point when the Anglo-German
antagonism became firmly established. Popular reactions in Britain
to the telegram led to an upsurge of anti-German feelings and,
with hindsight at least, the rift between the two states seemed
to be becoming increasingly unbridgeable. As Seligmann shows, the
Kaiser's role in this particular blunder was less decisive than
is usually assumed. The person responsible for proposing the congratulatory
telegram to President Kruger in January 1898 was not the Kaiser,
but Adolf Marschall von Bieberstein of the Foreign Office, the
man behind much of Germany's South African policy. Marschall also
drafted the text and ensured that its contents presented a direct
challenge to Britain (p.90). Perhaps it is not surprising, then,
that contemporary evidence of the Kaiser's pivotal role in the
despatch of the telegram stems from Marschall as well as Bernhard
von Bülow's memoirs, a source that Seligmann quite rightly describes
as 'intentionally malicious or self-serving' (p.92). The Kaiser
certainly denied afterwards that he had been in favour of the telegram,
not only in his (unreliable) memoirs, but also according to contemporary
sources, as Seligmann is able to demonstrate. Contemporary observers
blamed Marschall and the Auswärtiges Amt and, given that Marschall
championed Germany's southern African policy during his time in
office, he has to be regarded as one of the key decision-makers
responsible for directing and shaping Germany's policy. Marschall
provided 'a bridge between Caprivi's continental outlook and Bülow's
world policy', and his time in office was 'an important transitional
stage' in Germany's quest for Weltmacht (pp.141/2). By the
time Bülow, Tirpitz and Miquel ascended to positions of influence,
Germany disengaged from South Africa and turned to the even more
ill fated Weltpolitik. Whatever Wilhelm's role in the Kruger
Telegram episode, Germany's Weltpolitik was a reflection of the
Kaiser's ambitions, and the provocative foreign policy of Marschall
and his successors relied on his approval.
In analysing the different influences behind
Germany's South African policy, and in examining the developing
conflict in the region as well as Germany's subsequent withdrawal,
this book makes an important contribution to our understanding
of German foreign and colonial policy at the end of the nineteenth
century. In addition, this scholarly investigation is essential
reading for anyone studying the conflict between imperial powers
in South Africa, and the genesis and development of the antagonism
between Germany and Great Britain in particular.
June 2000
|