The New Imperialism of the second half of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century differed from the style of imperialism that came before it in a few noticeable ways. Most significantly, in the earlier period of imperialism and overseas colonization, the European powers focused a lot of their efforts on establishing trading posts and ruling through proxy control of the local powers. The New Imperialism model was focused a lot more heavily on using military force to establish direct control over other territories. Although a lot of this New Imperialism was focused on the African continent, it was also practiced in Asia and South America. Religion played a deeply important role in both periods of European imperialism.

Having once been a part of the Ottoman Empire, Libya was colonized by the Italians in the 1910s. The Italians would also forcibly occupy Ethiopia before their failures in the Second World War cost them their African colonies.

The Belgian King Leopold II wanted Belgium to be a major imperial power like many other European nations and so carved out for himself a personal fiefdom in Central Africa. The Belgian Congo was several times larger than Belgium itself and ruled under the personal control of Leopold until his manifest crimes caught up to him. The Congo provided extremely lucrative quantities of rubber as well as many other raw resources; however, it was administered with profound cruelty and apathy towards the safety and health of the local population. Some modern estimates put the number of people who died during Belgian control of the Belgian Congo in the tens of millions.

The Sepoy Mutiny occurred in 1857 when Hindu and Muslim troops in the army of the British East India Company revolted against their imperial masters. The causes are often debated, but popular history tends to blame British disregard for Hindu and Muslim religious customs. The Mutiny was suppressed and led to the end of the British East India Company’s control over the Indian subcontinent to be replaced by direct control of the British government. This period of Indian history is known as the British Raj.

All of these countries came under the control of European imperialism in the nineteenth century except for Japan, which was able to maintain its independence. Japan even famously defeated the Russians in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. China was divided into spheres of European influence; India was under the direct control of the British government; and Vietnam and Laos were controlled by the French as part of the colony of French Indochina.

The defeat of the Spanish in the Spanish-American War (1899-1902) led to the independence of Cuba and the United States taking control over most of the remaining remnants of the once mighty Spanish Empire. The Americans took direct administration of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines.

All of the figures named were leaders during World War II, but of them only Winston Churchill came to power AFTER the war had started. Neville Chamberlain was the Prime Minister of Britain until 1940, at which point Churchill took over.

The British East India Company, chartered in 1600 by Queen Elizabeth, succeeded in infiltrating the Indian political and economic systems and achieved a great degree of control over the region by the late 18th century.

Actual wars were infrequent during the Belle Epoque, Europe’s “golden age” from 1871 to 1914, during which Germany was the rising power on the continent while Britain and France tended to their vast overseas possessions. Rigid alliances, however, proliferated during this era and helped lead to World War I. Organized labor gained in strength and political potency despite opposition from the industrial elite. The commercial middle class or bourgeoisie did reign supreme politically, while inequality was heightened.

Livingstone rescued Stanley before the Berlin Conference. Ethiopia and Liberia were the only free African states at the start of World War I in 1914. The Fashoda Incident of 1898 in Sudan forced a reconciliation between Britain and France, so the Berlin conference did not permanently eliminate disputes. Belgium’s parliament, not an international convention, deprived Leopold II of his personal kingdom in the Congo. The conference did require notification of signatories during the formation of a new protectorate.