Informal Empire? An Exploration in the History of Anglo-Argentine Relations, 1810–1914

Abstract

Introduction: the genesis of ‘informal empire’In 1953 John Gallagher and Ronald Robinson published an article entitled ‘The Imperialism of Free Trade’, which has since become a landmark in the study of nineteenth-century British imperialism. Seeking to overturn long-cherished notions of a mid-Victorian ‘indifference’ and a late-Victorian ‘enthusiasm’ for empire, it proposed a basic continuity of policy whereby British industrialisation caused an ever-extending and intensifying development of overseas regions for both strategic and economic purposes. Hence the suggestion of a working definition of imperialism as ‘the sufficient political function of this process of integrating new regions into the expanding economy’. In switching the focus of a definition of imperialism from the way in which Britain was able to assert her superiority over weaker, subordinate nations to the impetus and motivation behind such expansion, traditional conceptions of empire were suddenly shattered. Indeed, as Robinson and Gallagher maintained, ‘The conventional interpretation of the nineteenth century empire continues to rest on the study of formal empire alone, which is rather like judging the size and character of icebergs solely from the parts above the water-line’.2The whole framework of reference for a study of British imperialism was being recast, the revised assumption being that the empire of formal dominion, which can loosely be defined as control through annexation and constitutional subordination, is not comprehensible in isolation. Rather, the assertion of British paramountcy, which for Robinson and Gallagher lies close to the very heart of imperialism, was achieved by informal means if possible, or by formal annexation when this was deemed necessary.

Sovereignty and Debt in Nineteenth-Century Latin America

“…The historical narrative shows that since the 1880s, Baring tried to acquire the formal monopoly over the federal government's issues in London (and Europe) and to grant the loans issued by Baring a prior claim over the revenues stemming from the customs duties (Ferns, 1992). Baring failed to impose such conditions over Argentina's government, partly due to competition from other banks in Britain, France, and Germany, as argued by (Thompson, 1992). However, this picture changed due to a currency crisis in Argentina in 1885, and the resulting need for fresh funds on behalf of the government.…”

The nineteenth century liberal tradition and the English School historical narrative

“…. but equal freedom and commerce for all” (Go, 2011: 113, quoting from Platt, 1968); he arranged for precisely this in a free trade treaty with Argentina in 1825 that remained in place for over 100 years (Thompson, 1992). Perhaps, more famous are the later Manchester School political economist/activists such as Richard Cobden and John Bright, thought of as radical in their class-based critique of British politics (Cain, 1979; Parry, 1993).…”

“…Most take the contingent position, that “some strands of liberal thought” are more imperialist than others (Bell, 2016: 21). But this raises the question of what counts as imperialism and how to incorporate the distinction between formal and informal imperialism (Gallagher and Robinson, 1953; MacDonagh, 1962; Thompson, 1992). This article fleshes out an historical era of the rejectionist position and the parameters of the contingent one.…”

Sovereign Inequalities and Hierarchy in Anarchy: American Power and International Society

“…Argentina successfully resisted attempts to impose financial controls. And both countries obtained substantial economic benefits (Thompson, 1992). Using 'empire' to encompass all peripheral states that comply with, or even simply share, core state economic preferences and policies, at best, leaves us with the problem of developing another language by which to distinguish, say, Argentina and Portugal from Singapore, Uganda and India, or GATT from Japan's Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.…”