Observations on empire

Recent debate over the death rate during the 1950s Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya has touched a raw nerve on the British right. To those who argue that the British empire was benevolent, colonial violence and atrocities are an embarrassment. There is contemporary resonance, too, as British forces are sucked into internecine conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Does it still matter, half a century on? I think it does, but it is also important to try to get the facts right. The suggestion by the American historian Caroline Elkins, that the figure for Africans killed by the British might be as high as 300,000, has provoked a backlash of denial. Her calculations are demonstrably wrong and her error has given scope to those who would deny other findings in her recent book, Imperial Reckoning. We cannot know the exact figure, but we can establish the parameters: demographic analysis indicates that for the critical period, between late 1952 and 1956, the war accounted for between 20,000 and 30,000 African dead.

So, no genocide, but what does a figure of 30,000 dead - three times the official estimate at the time - make us feel about our imperial past? Given that the vast majority of these casualties were civilians, there are many questions we should wish to ask.

The British campaign in Kenya was littered with atrocities. The revelations broadcast in BBC Radio 4's Document programme on 10 July gave just one example of the murder of African civilians by British forces. Many similar events are recounted in my book Histories of the Hanged.

The fight against the Mau Mau was a shameful episode in which a British colony became a police state where the entire apparatus of government was mobilised against the population. While it would be foolish to compare this to Stalin's Russia or Hitler's Germany - though some commentators at the time saw similarities - we should wish to know how this could have happened under British rule.

Why do those who wish to defend the memory of the empire latch on to exaggerated claims while ignoring substantive evidence of wholesale state complicity in acts of barbarism? How many atrocities does it take to prick the conscience of those who would defend Britain's empire?

Compiling league tables of atrocity is pointless. One atrocity is one too many. And while the British were no more atrocious as imperialists than anyone else, they were no better either. It is time we set aside British amnesia and squared up to the realities of our empire.

"Histories of the Hanged" is published by Orion (£10.99)

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website