iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Michael Buerk

GET UPDATES FROM Michael Buerk
 

The Mau Mau Were Vile, but So Was the British Response to Them

Posted: 20/07/2012 00:00

It's one of the great ironies of history that the last line of defence for the greatest empire the world has ever known proved to be the Patagonian Toothfish. It's an ugly and endangered denizen of the South Atlantic that the British government relied on, in vain as it turned out, to protect our imperial reputation.

Faced with the prospect of being sued over atrocities said to have been committed in the last days of Empire, the Foreign Office turned to an obscure judgement over fishing licences around the island of South Georgia, to try to prove that responsibility for the acts of colonial governments passed to the new government at independence, rather than staying with the former Imperial power. It was shameful and the judge rightly threw it out.

So, three frail and elderly Kenyans appeared this week in the High Court, with Britain's colonial reputation on trial.

They claim to have been tortured - one says he was castrated - during the campaign against the Mau Mau rebellion in the 1950s.

The Mau Mau, it must be said, were vile. After swearing to magical oaths, they butchered children, they tortured, mutilated and murdered - mostly Africans - who would not join their movement. The Kenyan government now calls them heroes, and has a national day in October to honour them, which is a despicable re-writing of history.

But the British response to the uprising was also brutal, driven by the atavistic fears of the settlers in the so-called White Highlands, commonly regarded as the most snobbish and racist in the Empire.

Tens of thousands of Kenyans were sent to detention camps where many were subjected to torture and extreme violence. Much of this seems to have been covered up. The (Kenyan) Attorney General at the time minuted: "If we're going to sin, we must sin quietly".

Even now, the Foreign Office is trying to stop the case, arguing it happened so long ago there isn't the evidence, or surviving witnesses, for a fair trial.

Unfortunately for them, truckloads of official documents from that era have recently been uncovered. (They had been secretly stored in a government-owned manor house near Milton Keynes.)

Historians who've seen some of them say they detail systematic abuses that seem to have been known, and tacitly approved, at the highest level in London.

As a child of empire, and a long-time foreign correspondent in Africa, my first instinct is to say - hang on a minute...this is a continent where two million people have been murdered by their own governments since Independence. A continent where colonialism, for all the faults we see so clearly now, was often a brief interval of peace and efficient government, between long periods of cruel and incompetent dictatorship. Where many Africans are still actually worse off than their parents and grandparents who lived under British rule. Kenya, in particular, is one of the most corrupt countries on earth with more to worry about than a 60-year-old dirty war against murderous terrorists.

But this is moral relativism of the worst kind. We can't lecture others about human rights and try to escape responsibility for our abuse of them. It's wrong to be so ashamed of our imperial past. But it would be worse to deny justice to its innocent victims.

You can find more of my content at: The Fifth Column

 

Follow Michael Buerk on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TheFifthColumn

FOLLOW WORLD
It's one of the great ironies of history that the last line of defence for the greatest empire the world has ever known proved to be the Patagonian Toothfish. It's an ugly and endangered denizen of th...
It's one of the great ironies of history that the last line of defence for the greatest empire the world has ever known proved to be the Patagonian Toothfish. It's an ugly and endangered denizen of th...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 62
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gerald Bowman
12:09 AM on 07/25/2012
What a piece of revisionist history trash. The Mau Mau were vile but the vicious, murderous Brits were kinda passively bad? That is historically inaccurate nonsense. At least pretend not to be completely biased in favor of, as you do idiotically refer to "our empire".
photo
LMPE
I connect the most dissimilar things
12:07 AM on 07/22/2012
"The Kitchen Toto" dealt with this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kitchen_Toto
photo
LMPE
I connect the most dissimilar things
12:05 AM on 07/22/2012
The 1987 movie "The Kitchen Toto" dealt with this. It goes to show how much colonialism screwed up the whole world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kitchen_Toto
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bi-partizan
citizen with integrity
03:27 PM on 07/21/2012
Very well said.....But one more thing is missing..Why MAU MAU's were established...againts who? Then British public will see a crack in their histories evil side as well..Will it change anything? Yeah it may possibly...
01:20 PM on 07/21/2012
What ignorant verbiage. So the rapes, and murders committed by queens thugs are all in order then?
01:16 PM on 07/21/2012
Well said! Notice also how what they actually did is never explicitly mentioned. And how what the Mau Mau did is so easily told and re-told. Shoddy journalism or neocolonialism?
02:52 AM on 07/21/2012
I recall when they were about to hang Jomo Kenyatta as an arch terrorist during the uprising against British Colonial rule and there is little doubt atrocities were committed by both protaganists. Whether it is legally and morally right to to impose a Statute of Limitations to such matters is arguable and one no doubt the government will seek to defend in the belief that many more will follow not only from other Kenyan claimants but from other Colonial territories where we had difficulty in facing up to combative independence movements and calls to relinquish controls. I guess such litigation would be vastly unending and do considerable reputational damage to Britain and the Monarchy by implication.
02:06 AM on 07/21/2012
Colonialism brought these tribes into modernization.
jhNY
Mercy.
06:45 PM on 07/20/2012
Sad that the empire whereon once the sun never set, when sunlight is directed on some if its history, awful things come to light.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AlwaysCanadian
Lifelong Pacifist
03:16 PM on 07/20/2012
Most of us have been born and grown up in a time where welfare, unemployment etc are so prevalent that we have no idea how bad things were before. People living in colonies were supposed to buy whatever their colonial masters made, and pay whatever taxes their overlords imposed. Just an example of colonialism at its best: India under the British Raj: British Calico, totally unsuitable for the stiflingly hot indian climate was not being brought by those pesky indians, who much prefered their own cool white cotton instead. The British simply chopped off the thumbs of all cotton weavers. With no livelihood, they starved, taking their wives and children with them. Remember- no welfare, no safety net for these unfortunates, no TV cameras, no foreign aid, no help. The local economy, based on their cotton, took a nosedive, with no one having any money for buying anything. Some accounts state that as many as 30 million people starved in Bengal province alone. bodies were piled high in streets. Just because some fat mill owners in Liverpool wanted to increase their profits...
03:32 PM on 07/20/2012
Canadian wrote:
"Some accounts state that as many as 30 million people starved in Bengal province alone. bodies were piled high in streets. Just because some fat mill owners in Liverpool wanted to increase their profits...""

Taken from wikipedia:
The Bengal famine of 1943 (Bengali: পঞ্চাশের মন্বন্তর) struck the Bengal province of pre-partition India. Estimates are that between 1.5 and 4 million people died of starvation, malnutrition and disease..The proximate cause of the famine was a reduction in supply, with some increase in demand. The winter 1942 ‘aman’ rice crop which was already expected to be poor or indifferent was hit by a cyclone and three tidal waves in October. 450 square miles were swept by tidal waves, 400 square miles affected by floods and 3200 square miles damaged by wind and torrential rain. Reserve stocks in the hands of cultivators, consumers and dealers were destroyed. This killed 14,500 people and 190,000 cattle. A fungus hit the weakened crop and this was reported to have had an even greater effect on yield than the cyclone.It was argued that the normal carry over stocks did not exist in Bengal because 1941 was a short year and people started eating the December 1941 crop as soon as it was harvested (as they certainly did when the December 1943 crop was harvested). As a result, the good December 1941 crop did not mean the normal surplus stocks were carried over into 1943.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:57 PM on 07/20/2012
Bobby, you're talking about different famines so it should be no surprise that the numbers don't agree..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AlwaysCanadian
Lifelong Pacifist
06:19 PM on 07/20/2012
I see that, in the interests of brevity I truncated my post too much and my point was completely obfuscated. The facts and figures I stated are those that rumour circulated amongst the Indian population at that time, and still circulate today amongst the people. No internet, no mass media at that time, remember, no way for people to verify the actual figures

... on a side note, even today, people tend to believe the worst sort of rumours without bothering to check the facts....

anyway, my point was that, based on the rumours they believed true, the Indian population struck back at their hated rulers in any way they could. Same probably with the Mau Mau and every other conquered peoples.

Bottom line is, the Mau Mau and others of their ilk were in Kenya or their own native land, while the colonizers were not. The blame for any horrors therefore lies squarely on the outside occupiers. ( who after all, came for their own benefit, not some altruistic reason to help the "natives")
02:54 PM on 07/20/2012
My father served in the British Army from mid 1940 - mid 1960s. Active in Vietnam, Korea, Burma, Malayan Emergency, Mau Mau Uprising, Suez (twice), and the Indonesia-Malaysia Conflict.

During that time was witness to thousands of the most horrific things in was possible for one human to inflict on another. Yes the British were sometimes brutal also when dealing with the aftermath. It's called War!

These are different times, what was done was because it was necessary for it to be done. Those same brutal acts are still being performed today, only the conquering forces are supposed to wear kid gloves when dealing with the perpetrators. Hardly true justice!
02:15 PM on 07/20/2012
What is it with liberal apologists and the revision of History:
The Mau mau were victims , but their victims was simply a side note.
You know how Dresden was a war crime but the London Blitz wasn't
How the Armenian genocide wasn't but the much much lesser death toll since the birth of Israel is.
Only the other day some bloke on the Guardian wrote about how Srebrenica was all the fault of the British.

Gee, I don't mind you lot hating what you see in the mirror, but I draw the bloody line at you folks making me pay for things that happened before my parents came to live in the UK.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AlwaysCanadian
Lifelong Pacifist
06:25 PM on 07/20/2012
The Mau Mau were directly a result of Britishers moving into other peoples lands.

And, please don;t take this the wrong way, but I sure would like to know just how those "liberal apologists" are making you pay. Just curious...
07:30 PM on 07/20/2012
In 2002 the British human rights lawyer fought a case against the British army where ammunition left behind at ranges in Kenya had maimed tribesmen and won.

It later transpired that the ammunition had actually been left behind by the Kenyan army and not the British. Which is why when the same person brought a case up against the British army for so called rapes committed against Kenyan women rather than paying out (As is the army way) they checked each and every case and guess what not one penny was paid out when it transpired Day was telling lies.
07:33 PM on 07/20/2012
No it wasn't, it was an attempt to steal something you haven't worked for. Africans with guns are notorious for stealing what they haven't earned and they always blame the white or brown man.

White people born in Africa are Africans, Just like the thousand's of Indians born in Africa but kicked out by the blacks for being richer than they.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maoticamison
01:58 PM on 07/20/2012
"Excuse me...I'm robbing you but I fail to see why you can't just be civilized about it..."
01:20 PM on 07/20/2012
I read some relevant comment long ago about historical records which went something like this:-

'The life of a historical writer isn't easy. If they tell the truth, they provoke men. If they write what is false, they offend The Almighty'.

On reflection, our school history books merely recorded the butchery of men by their fellow men. Well, that's how it seems to me now at the extremity of old age when I read these old & tattered books - which I'm still loathe to dump.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Sorab Shroff
01:02 PM on 07/20/2012
I love your columns, Mr. Buerk.