Pre-Colonial Balance Of Power:A Neoclassical Analysis Of Balancing Behavior In East Africa (1870-1890)

Researchers,historians and political science scholars have long studied and written of the great rivalry between the Kingdoms of Buganda and Bunyoro Kitara the two great kingdoms of East Africa.The keen academic interest in the two African kingdoms was kindled by the early writings of world famous European explorer Sir John Hanning Speke in his ’Journal of the Discovery of the Source of the Nile’ that was widely published in Europe.In his travels to ascertain the source of the River Nile Speke stumbled upon the sophisticated Kingdom of Buganda and its arch rival Bunyoro.In an era when the popular belief was that Africa was made up of disorganized uncivilized tribes,the idea of sophisticated kingdoms with efficient bureaucracies,standing armies,and developed economies within a larger state system was intriguing.1 Speke’s account ushered the historical and political curiosity surrounding the study of East Africa’s interlacustrine kingdoms.Ultimately this interest brought an influx of British explorers,Christian missionaries,merchants and eventually colonial administrators.From these early historians,explorers and indeed modern African historians we learn that after the fragmentation of the great Kitara Empire of central Africa,the emerging smaller kingdoms went through a phrase of consolidation forming a state system known as the interlacustrine Bantu state system.The state system was made up of five Kingdoms mainly Ankole,Busoga,Buganda,Bunyoro and Toro.These were the states that Speke first encountered on his travels.After the successful consolidation of the said Kingdoms,a power struggled occurred as the powerful feudal Bunyoro kingdom ambitiously tried to re-establish the old dominion of the Bachewezi-Kitara Empire.These hegemonic aspirations by Bunyoro set in motion events that would alter and shape the equilibrium of state order in an insular east and central Africa.Amongst international relations scholars,balance of power now and then examined systemic and individual state behavior in relation to the constantly changing power capabilities of other states.In spite the numerous conceptualizations of BOP discussed hereinafter some minimum basic assumptions permeate the concept.For most scholars and researchers,there is agreement that when states in independent state systems or society are faced with significant threats,those states seek a balance of power.Historically this balance or equilibrium was achieved through power emulation,alliance formation and the building up of inner state capacities.Usually,international relations theories seek to explain these mechanisms bringing meaning and understanding to why states adopt certain strategies and how they balance.According to defensive and offensive neorealist theories of international relations and the neoclassical realist approach to foreign policy,there is an agreement for instance that BOP happens in anarchic systems where states are interested in maximizing their long-term survival.To ensure this survival,it is acknowledged amongst these scholars that states work independently or collectively with the aim of deterring dangerous concentrations of power(hegemony).These schools of thought hypothesize that balancing is achieved by building internal capabilities,building external alliances or through the emulation power generating practices of prospective hegemon(Wohlforth2007).For the most part,this characterization of balance of power has dominated the theoretical discourse of BOP.At a glance from a theoretical perspective,balancing behavior seems evident in contemporary international relations and in quite a number of pre-modern state relationships.As a matter of fact,some scholars have posited that balance of power is a ’law of nature’.Bridging the Disciplinary GapIn spite this and other ubiquitous understandings,balance of power theories continue to heavily rely on the European experience and related case studies begging the question why?The ’inclusiveness’ and strides made in international relations and foreign policy scholarship amplifies this glaring discrepancy.Certainly,critics have pointed out that balance of power was perhaps not as universal as implied by the law of nature sentiment.Due to the insufficiency of non-European case examples some have out rightly rejected the theory;for advocates,this anomaly has been rationalized and attributed to a wide variety of related reasons.Scholars such as Randall Schweller(2006)have argued that at the very least,Balance of Power was an underspecified theory.In this rationalization,Schweller demonstrated that BOP was actually an explanatory theory of state behavior as opposed to a normative-prescriptive theory.1 However,in this research,we assume this in addition to the far much simpler explanation for the Eurocentric bias of balance of power.This paper is inclined to the view that the traditional approach to BOP may be attributed to the larger character of international relations(IR)study and other social sciences.In spite the tremendous growth of the social sciences and international relations in the past one hundred years,the European predisposition is still very much apparent.Consistent with George Gheverghese,Joseph Vasu,Reddy Mary,and Searle-Chatterjee(1990),eurocentrism has in the last hundred years permeated in varying degrees almost all social science disciplines.This bias according to the scholars grew out of the historical progression of western colonial and economic dominance that in turn,provided an ideological rationalization for its continuation.Supported by western academia this bias has helped to maintain the political and intellectual superiority of the Anglo-European world.In international relations this has inadvertently manifested itself in the obsession with great powers politics and relations,creating a deficiency of international relations scholarship with a keen interest in researching and paying attention to the international periphery2.Notwithstanding this or the actual reason,it is within this context of a glaring omission of the periphery and more so specifically the lack of African case studies on the subject that this dissertation is undertaken.Given the possibility that balance of power is a law of nature or an underspecified theory;and having recognized that little or no research has been done on non-European cases,the intention of this dissertation is to populate this space by providing an early African balance of power case study that further enriches learning in both international history and international relations3.This paper examines two pre-colonial African states and their individual balancing behavior.A neoclassical realist approach to balance of power theory is systematically used to explain the success and failures of balancing experienced by the two polar powers over a period of twenty years.The role and implication more notably of elite cohesion and fragmentation in impacting or amplifying balancing behavior are explored.A variety of historical accounts are corroborated and synthesized to address the primary question;how can balance deficiencies and successes observed in both Buganda and Bunyoro between 1870 and 1890 be explained?This dissertation argues that between 1870 and 1890 Elite cohesion and fragmentation impacted the balancing behavior of Buganda and Bunyoro in dissimilar ways.It posits that religious differences and suspicions amongst Buganda’s chiefs weakened the administrative capacity of the state and which in turn impacted the state’s ability to withstand external aggression.On the other hand,the research also intends to show that an end to elite fragmentation partly due to reforms in the political and administrative structure of Bunyoro following vicious power struggle amongst its elites vastly improved the ability of the state to withstand external aggression,also improving its power extraction capacity and thus ability to fend off aggressors.This study seeks to reinforce the neoclassical realist argument on balance of power that posits "systemic pressures are filtered through intervening domestic variables to produce foreign policy behavior".The dissertation seeks to largely establish that under-balancing and balancing periods observed in the two states after initial successful balancing and under balancing periods were as a result of domestic and other internal constraints within the states.In addition,the dissertation touches on regime vulnerability and two other variables as additive factors also evident as intervening variables.This research provides a first in-depth study of balance of power and its practice in pre-colonial Africa.Chapter one of the research thesis offers a comprehensive introduction and background of the research subject.The chapter explores the significance of the research and outlines the objectives of the paper.It details the primary and secondary research questions to be tackled and lays out the hypothesis of the paper.Cases and case study selection is discussed as well as the theoretical and conceptual framework applied in undertaking this research.In this first chapter the prerequisite requirements of state and state system for balancing is established.The chapter also includes a literature review,data collection methods and the limitations of the research and a thesis structure.Chapter two primarily provides an overview of Buganda and Bunyoro looking at the origins of the two states.However,this section also examines three other states that make up the interlacustrine state system of East and Central Africa.The chapter also briefly examines the political,administrative and cultural structures of all five states covering trade,war and diplomacy within the region.The chapter concludes with an examination of the relationship between Bunyoro and Buganda the two polar powers.Chapter three of this dissertation examines the historical development of balancing providing a broad spectrum of its usage.The preamble first delves into the conceptualization of BOP and the definitions of the term and its usage.This section then explores the evolution of European balance from Thucydides to the European State System and onwards to the period before the First World War.It also examines the balance of power in pre-colonial Asia probing the role of arbitration and protection,tributary trade and imperial recognition as balancing tools used in outlying regions away from mainland China.It then probes the various theoretical approaches to the topic giving a synopsis of systemic theories and finally balance of power from a neoclassical approach.The chapter additionally examines Randall Schweller’ s discourse on under balancing and the political constraints of balance of power that forms the basis of this dissertation.This chapter also examinesChapter four of the dissertation explores two specific case studies focusing on the regimes in Buganda and Bunyoro.This section focuses on the domestic politics of the two states during the reigns of King Muteesa Ⅰ and King Mwanga Ⅱ(Buganda)and Kabalega(Bunyoro)between 1870 and 1890.The segment examines the arrival of Islam and then Christianity in Buganda,the relationship between Christianity and Islam and the political role played by religion at the Buganda court leading to elite fragmentation.The second case study presented in this chapter explores the Bunyoro civil war and the rise of Kabalega,the consolidation of Bunyoro and the reforms instituted creating elite cohesion.Chapter five of the paper offers a comprehensive analysis of the collated information on the regimes studied.A neoclassical realist approach is then used to extrapolate state behavior.It assesses the responsibility of and the degree to which persistent internal divisions and religious differences influenced state behavior leading to Buganda’s inability to withstand external aggression and Bunyoro’s ability to fend off aggression and expand its territory.Chapter six concludes the dissertation.It highlights the main findings of the research.This chapter confirms the hypothesis that;the extent to which central government leadership is fragmented by persistent internal division,bureaucratic and religious interest ultimately affects the state’s ability to balance.The dissertation shows that the domestic structural makeup and internal politics of a state ultimately have an impact on its ability to balance rivals.Additionally the dissertation highlights the importance of taking into account the fact that states have different power extraction capacities,emphasizing that a states extraction capacity depends on its administrative capability that allows it to mobilize material power and in turn national power.