HIS 313 Podcast.wav.The Mobilization of Colonial Subject in the World Wars

Millions of colonial subjects from Asia, Africa, and Southeast Asia were mobilized during World War I and II to fight and support European empires. The British Indian Army was one of the largest colonial forces, with over 1.3 million soldiers deployed. These soldiers believed they were fighting for freedom and independence, but returned home to find little had changed. Colonial subjects also worked in factories and on plantations to support the war efforts, facing exploitation and brutal conditions. The podcast explores how colonial powers mobilized soldiers and laborers, the racial hierarchies they faced, and how these experiences inspired anti-colonial movements. Promises of rewards, cultural nationalist manipulation, propaganda, and coercion were used to convince subjects to mobilize. Once deployed, they endured discrimination and dangerous assignments. Hello, hello, hello. Welcome to my podcast. My name is Doreen Tamara Robano. I am coming to you from Agnes Scott Powich and this is my final project for Dr. Blythe's History 313 titled Europe in the World Wars. Again, thank you for being here and why don't we get into it. When we think of World War I and World War II, we often picture soldiers of Europe and America, the Western forces, fighting on the battlefields of France, Germany, and even the Pacific. But behind these iconic images lie a lesser known story. In fact, there are many, many, many, many stories that are just waiting to be uncovered about those wars. However, in this podcast, we are going to be talking about the mobilization of colonial subjects because Europeans weren't the only ones just fighting these wars alone. Millions of men and women from colonial nations across Asia, Africa, and Southeast Asia were mobilized to fight, work, and sustain empires that ruled over them. One good example is the British Indian Army. This is one of the largest colonial forces in history. During World War I alone, over 1.3 million Indian soldiers were deployed to fight on battlefields from the trenches of Europe to the deserts of the Middle East. According to the BBC article titled, The Indian Army on the Western Front, many of these soldiers believed that they were fighting for something greater, such as freedom, equality, or even independence for their own nation. But when they returned home, they found little has changed and India was still under colonial rule and freedom was something that remained out of reach. And it wasn't just soldiers, laborers across the colonies, men and women were made to support the war efforts. Whether it was producing rubber in Vietnam, working in factories, or building railways and roads, their contributions were indispensable. Yet, these efforts often came at an extraordinary cost, which was exploitation, coercion, and brutal working conditions. Now, this podcast isn't going to be about just talking about how bad Europeans were in the in the 20th century, or in the 19th century. No, we are going to be talking about these untold stories. Millions of colonial subjects whose labors and sacrifices fueled European war machines, but were systematically undervalued, underpaid, and erased from history. It's a story of contradiction. How could nations that spoke loudly about freedom and democracy justify the oppression of those who fought for them? And more importantly, how did these experiences inspire movements that later dismantled colonial rule? So, we are going to be exploring three key aspects of this history. First, we're going to discuss how colonial powers mobilized soldiers and laborers from their colonies in the first place. Next, we're going to be examining the racial hierarchies that shaped their wartime experiences, from segregation to unequal pay. Finally, we'll look at how these experiences fueled anti-colonial movements after the war, which reshaped the modern world. So, let's begin by looking at how these empires drew in their colonies. Now, just to reiterate, when these great European powers went to war, they didn't go alone. They leaned on their empires for support and resources, which essentially made these colonies the engines that kept their war machines running, and it was at the expense of the lives and people from these colonies. Now, let's go back and talk about the British Empire, which relied on India as one of their largest sources of manpower. They deployed over 1.3 million soldiers, and according to a BBC report titled, The Indian Army on the Western Front, these soldiers played a crucial role in many, many important battles, and they often endured brutal conditions and heavy casualties. Punjab, in particular, contributed to a significant portion of the army. The article, The Role of Punjab in World War I, explains how recruiters targeted this region because of its long-standing martial traditions, but this meant the entire village were to be stripped of their able-bodied men. For many families, this meant that survival was going to be even harder than before. Now, if you are like me, you might be wondering right now, how in the world did these colonial powers convince their subjects to mobilize and fly, sail, or even march across the world for a cause that they don't understand, that they were never a part of, and that they probably don't even care for. Well, we're about to get into that, so sit tight. So, the first reason is promises of rewards. Colonial powers often gain loyalty by offering tangible rewards like financial compensation, land grants, or improvement of social status. For example, in British India, soldiers were promised pensions, land for their families, and recognition for their service. Many Indian soldiers, especially from places like Punjab, joined the army in hopes of getting property and achieving upward mobility. So, recruiters targeted villages that relied on traditional structures. They had leaders encourage enlistment, and they often emphasized how serving the British Empire would bring honor to their community. However, we already know that these promises are empty and they were rarely fulfilled. So, just imagine, you are a farmer in Punjab, struggling to feed your family. A recruiter comes up to you and tells you that by joining the British Indian Army, your family will be receiving money or land in return for your service. What choice do you have? That sounds like a good deal, obviously, but when you go fight and then you come back, you see that nothing has changed. How do you feel? Well, we haven't gotten there yet. Let's go to the next reason. So, the next reason is cultural nationalist manipulation. Colonial powers framed military service as a moral obligation or a form of patriotism. In French West Africa, recruitment campaigns emphasized that the idea of African subjects were helping the French motherland. I know. Wow. And they were told that they were fighting for freedom and democracy. Furthermore, the Senegalese tirailleurs, excuse me, I'm not good with French, but tirailleurs means a skirmisher. Anywho, they were frequently told that they were valued as sons of France, and this was an idea that was repeated in propaganda posters and speeches. Historian Mark Mitchell in Tirailleurs Sénégalaises, published in 1982, it's in French, it explains how France leaned heavily on racialized patriotism to treat Africans as loyal and brave warriors who could defend France. However, again, we already know that these promises were hollow as Senegalese received inferior treatment, low pay, and few rights after their services. So yeah. So again, let me put you in perspective. Imagine being told that you are not just fighting for France, but you're fighting for bravery, and your bravery will be celebrated and your sacrifices will secure a place in history. Yet you endure the horrors of war, you're treated as a second-class citizen, often dehumanized, and you are excluded from the very freedoms you fought for. Next, on the topic of propaganda and ideology, that's the third reason. Propaganda was a powerful tool to justify mobilization. Colonial propaganda often appealed to subjects' sense of duty or loyalty using posters, speeches, and even stage ceremonies to instill pride in serving the empire. For example, in Vietnam, French propaganda glorified Vietnamese laborers and soldiers as heroes defending civilization. However, these same individuals were forced into brutal labor conditions on plantations or shipped to France to fight under harsh treatment. So, if the other three reasons didn't convince you enough to go mobilize and fight for your colonial voters, the fourth reason might work because of coercion and forced recruitment. In many cases, colonial powers resorted to outright coercion. Forced recruitment was common in French West Africa, where local chiefs were pressured to supply quotas of men for military. If they refused, they faced severe penalties. Similarly, in Belgian Congo, tens of thousands were forced into labor camps to produce rubber and build infrastructure for war. Historian Madame Hochschild in King Leopold's Ghost, one of my favorite books by the way, describes how forced extractions of resources contained into World War I, with Congolese workers being subjected to violence and other horrific conditions and treatment. Now, picture this, a French official arrives in your village demanding that you or your son join their army. The local chief has no choice but to comply fearing retribution, and you're taken away with no time to say goodbye, no chance to refuse, and no idea where you are going or if you'll ever return. Now, we're going to get into what actually happened to these mobilized and deployed people once they arrived at the battlefield. So, upon arrival, to whatever destination the deployed people are supposed to be at, um, the, whether it's the battlefield for the soldiers or the work sites for the laborers, they endured heavy injustices. So, and despite that, their contributions, they were treated as second-class participants in the wars, and they often experienced discrimination and were given dangerous assignments. And all of this was rooted in racial hierarchies that reinforced the idea of European supremacy. Now, let's circle back and delve deeper into the Congolese casugases, which are African soldiers recruited by the French. According to Marc Michel's article, these men were portrayed in propaganda as brave, loyal defenders of the French Republic. However, their real experiences painted a much darker picture. They were often given the most dangerous assignments, like spearheading, which led to disproportionately high casualty rates. And while French soldiers were receiving better equipment and rations, Senegalese soldiers were often sent into combat with inadequate care. And then, next, there's the matter of pay. Senegalese soldiers were paid significantly less than their French counterparts, even though they faced the same and greater dangers. According to Michel, many soldiers fought for years without seeing any of their financial rewards that they were promised. Even after the war, pensions were often reduced or delayed, which was a reminder that their sacrifices were valued far less than those of their European comrades. Now, let's circle back to the British Indian Army, who faced similar inequities. According to the BBC report, Indian soldiers were segregated from British troops, and they were subjected to harsher conditions. For example, while British officers dined in the heated quarters, Indian soldiers were left in the cold, and they were left to eat inferior rations. Their loyalty was praised in speeches, but in practice, they were rarely allowed to raise beyond the ranks of junior officers, no matter how skilled and how brave they were. Now, on to the laborers, because the soldiers weren't just the only ones facing discrimination. Forced laborers, particularly in Southwest Asia, Southeast Asia, excuse me, were treated with little regard to the humanity. For example, Vietnamese laborers worked on rubber plantations under French colonial rule. They were subjected to 12-hour days, often under the threat of violence. Now, try to imagine what it must have looked like. You've been told to leave your home, promised that your work will serve a greater good, but instead, you find yourself starving on a labor camp or freezing in a trench surrounded by people who see you less than human. These racial hierarchies not only devalued their sacrifices, but it dehumanized them. This unequal treatment wasn't just accidental. However, it was a reflection on the racial ideologies that underpinned colonial rule. By maintaining these hierarchies during the war, colonial powers reinforced the idea that their subjects were inferior, expendable tools rather than equals. But this injustice didn't go unnoticed by men and women who lived it. Many colonial subjects began to see the hypocrisy of fighting for freedom and democracy while being denied those very freedoms themselves. Now, as we get deeper into the conversation in the next segment, we will see how these experiences fueled and planted the seed for many, many, many anti-colonialist movements across the colonies. When the war ended and colonial subjects returned to their homes, many were left scarred physically and emotionally. They risked everything believing that their sacrifices would earn them recognition, or equality, or glory, or even freedom. But instead, they were left broken and met with broken promises and same-expressive systems they fought to protect. One example of these broken promises was the experiences of Indian soldiers in the British Indian Army during World War II. Many Indian veterans came home expecting all of their promises, perhaps even a step forward in independence. Instead, they found their homeland tightly controlled by the British. This sense of betrayal kind of fueled discontent and there came the rise of support of leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi who used post-war frustrations to intensify support for India's independence movement. Gandhi's non-violent civil disobedient campaign founded a lot of new support among veterans, many of whom fought under the British flag and many of whom returned home to economic hardship. Now, similar patterns were unfolding in Africa as well. African veterans of the Senegalese Jiraya had fought for France in both wars. Many of them were believing the rhetoric that they would receive citizenship and equality. According to Mark Mitchell, he explains how these promises were also systematically broken. After World War II, pensions for African soldiers were slashed compared to those of their French counterparts and many were excluded from the very rights that they also fought to defend. This treatment radicalized many of the veterans and inspired anti-colonial leaders like Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana and Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya. Both of these men understood how the exploitation of African soldiers and laborers during the wars exposed the hypocrisy of the European colonial rule. Nkrumah of Ghana in particular emphasized the independence of the African people was not just to reclaim territory but it was about reclaiming dignity after decades of dehumanization. Now, eventually these movements bore fruits. In decades following World War II, many African nations from Ghana to Nigeria gained independence. These wars may have been fought to preserve European empires but their aftermath showed the cracks in their empire's foundations. Now, based off of everything we've talked about through this research, it is clear that the experiences of colonial subjects during the wars did more than just sustain war efforts. They also reshaped the global order. The contradiction of fighting for democracy while denying it to millions of colonial subjects couldn't hold forever. The sacrifices of these people paired with later disillusionment kind of influenced and heavily moved a lot to start a lot of significant independence movements in the 20th century. Now, while we wrap up this podcast, let's take a moment to reflect on what these stories uncovered for us today. First, let's remember how colonial powers mobilized the millions of soldiers and laborers from their empires into their wars and how these men and women were just essential and the backbone for their war efforts. They supplied manpower and resources and labor that kept the European armies moving. However, these colonial subjects were met with exploitation and denial of rights and unequal treatment and just overall just brutal treatment and dehumanization. Finally, this sparked a lot of anti-colonial movements. We can discuss the aftermath. For example, many colonial subjects at the end of fighting this marked not just liberation but also disillusionment. They returned home broken and back to oppression and many veterans and laborers just had enough and they had leaders to speak for them and they joined many causes that resulted in freedom. When we think about freedom and democracy today, it is important to recognize the sacrifices of these colonial subjects. These people's stories are too often overlooked in our history. They fought for ideals that were denied to them and in doing so, they exposed how hypocritical the Western world is and their struggles remind us that the fight for freedom isn't universal until it's shared by all. So, what did I take away from this research? Well, it was a reminder that true freedom requires the acknowledgement of the contributions of those who are marginalized or perhaps it is the realization that justice often comes at high cost and it's the responsibility of future generations to carry on that struggle moving forward. Well, thank you for listening and providing me with this opportunity to do this research. It has shed light on a subject that I myself was unaware of, a piece of history that would have never been shed light in my life if I were not, you know, doing this research. So, I just wanted to express my gratitude and hopefully in the future, I will be offered the opportunity to expand more on this because there was a lot left to learn. However, until next time, I'll just be questioning and learning more and I will be honoring the voices of those who came before me, before us. Thank you.