African Entrepreneurship Records 2

Chapter 794 British Parliament
With the surrender of the last resistance army in Mozambique, the South African War began to draw to a close, and East Africa turned its guns and began to attack the Cape Colony with all its might.

The changes in the situation in South Africa have completely triggered an uproar in the UK, and Prime Minister Cecil is facing increasing pressure.

Cecil, full name "Robert Arthur Talbot Gascoigne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury".

After Gladstone, a "moderate", he was another prime minister who was extremely hostile to East Africa, and his diplomatic policies and methods were more extreme than Gladstone.

For example, the political strategy for Ireland during the Gladstone period mainly advocated "autonomy". However, after Cecil came to power in 1886, it turned into "forced suppression". Almost all British wars in the late 19th century were initiated by him. plan.

For example, the Second Boer War in the previous life suppressed civil uprisings in the Far Eastern Empire, promoted British colonial activities in Southeast Asia, Africa, etc.

He pushed for the annexation of Uganda, Kenya, and Rhodesia to the colonial territory of the British Empire, so the origin of the "enmity" between East Africa and him can be seen from his policy proposals in previous lives.

During the Gladstone period, although Gladstone also "chased and intercepted" East Africa, it was not to the point of wielding swords and guns, and mainly focused on economic sanctions.

Even if he took action, it was through Portugal as an agent and he did not take action personally. Therefore, with Cecil as a foil, Gladstone actually became a "moderate" for East Africa. This has to be said to be a great irony. .

……

"Africa is the last piece of paradise that has not been completely divided. It is an important territory for the British national destiny in the next hundred years. If we do not seize the opportunity and allow East Africa to dominate Africa, it will be disastrous for our country. But after Egypt, Cape Town, British Somalia... we all face threats from the Germans."

Cecil tried to explain to Parliament the threat from East Africa, which was a fact and whose presence had seriously undermined the British Empire's progress during the colonial era.

Cecil's political views have also been supported by a large number of parliamentarians, especially groups with tangible interests in South Africa.

London.

"Prime Minister Cecil is absolutely right. Our country has important interests in South Africa. Cape Town itself has extremely important strategic value and is an important part of the British Empire's global strategic security. At the same time, we also have considerable economic interests in South Africa. The existence, especially the mineral resources in Kimberley and other places, can bring a lot of benefits to the government every year. Therefore, our country must not give up its important political and economic interests in South Africa. At the same time, to maintain peace and stability in South Africa, the evil black Xing must be eliminated. Root Kingdom,” one councilor said in support of Cecil.

Before the war in Mozambique ended, the British Government Parliament in London was still having a heated debate about the war in South Africa, and was discussing whether to increase support for Earl Roberts.

Of course, many people don't buy this reckless man's remarks.

The conservative Sir Hertha stood up and asked: "The current situation is that we are completely at a disadvantage in the war in South Africa, and our two allies, the Boers, have been completely driven to the south bank of the Orange River by East Africa, and the Portuguese Angola was also captured by East Africa, and only Mozambique is still struggling to survive, and this is still with our help.”

"Even the colony of Natal fell a few days ago. This is a huge humiliation unique in the history of the British Empire. Even in 1812, when the United States of America attacked the Canadian colonies, we have never suffered such humiliation." "It's just me. Personally, this is very painful, but we also need to think, is it worth it?”

Before Sir Herta finished speaking, someone interrupted: "Sir Herta, do you mean that we should surrender to an African country that has just been established and does not even have a history!"

Sir Hertha said without changing his face: "Of course not. I only interpret my views on the South African war from the perspective of national interests. Also, interrupting someone's speech is not what a qualified gentleman should do, so please let me speak. That’s it, let’s all judge again.”

After setting the tone, Herta reorganized his thoughts and said: "As far as I know, from before the war started to now, the coalition has mobilized a total of more than 700,000 troops, and our country alone has mobilized nearly 400,000 troops to South Africa, including nearly 400,000 troops. Two hundred thousand native troops fought against the East Africans in Cape Town, Natal and Mozambique, as well as more than two hundred thousand Indians."

"The Kingdom of Portugal has also tried its best to cooperate with the empire's strategy and organized more than 300,000 troops in Angola and Mozambique. But how many results have we achieved since the South African War?"

There was silence in the parliament. Both sides invested more than one million troops in the South African War alone, which was rare in the world. It could even be said to be the largest war except for the Eurasian continent and the American Civil War.

Moreover, this war is a modern war. The weapons and equipment of both sides are at the forefront of the world, and the pressure on the United Kingdom has been unprecedented since the beginning of the war.

Sir Hertha continued: "Since the beginning of the war, we have spent 80 million pounds, far exceeding the total amount of our war funds in other regions, but our income is zero, or even negative, and we want to change Disadvantages of the South African War: How many more soldiers will we have to recruit and how much will it cost?”

When the economic accounts were calculated, everyone was shocked. Eighty million pounds was an astronomical figure in this era, and this figure would continue to rise as the war continued. Even the calm old British gentleman was sitting on the We can’t stand it any longer and we must stop the Prime Minister’s “crazy” ideas.

In the second Boer War in history, Britain spent 220 million pounds in war funds, because the Boer War lasted for two and a half years, while the South African War was less than a year ago. At the same time, large-scale fighting broke out between the two sides. Due to the naval battle and the pound itself, there was only a "mere" 80 million.

However, 80 million is enough to give the British government a headache, because there is another important difference between the South African War and the Boer War, that is, the South African War was a passive war, while the Boer War was an active war.

In the previous life, Britain launched the Second Boer War because of South Africa's rich gold mines. Naturally, it was fully motivated. The South African War was to suppress East Africa, an African power. From the beginning, Britain benefited from this war in the second place. Bit, all in all, thankless.

"Your Excellency Prime Minister, it is time to end this purposeless war. Our contempt and arrogance towards East Africa have cost the UK a heavy price. If the war continues, we will only lose more."

"Yes, East Africa's political map on the African continent has been difficult to change. There is no need for the empire to continue to bleed for a meaningless war."

The pessimism about the South African War in Parliament began to spread. The heavy burden of the war, the tenacious resistance in East Africa, and the defeat of the British army. Various factors made more centrists realize that the South African War was harmful to the British Empire and had no benefit at all, so they got out of the South African War in time. It should be the empire's only choice.

(End of this chapter)