Unjust Pay for African WWII Soldiers
By Darius Spearman (africanelements)
Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.
African Soldiers’ Unfair Treatment
African soldiers who bravely served in the British Army during World War II faced significant discrimination in their pay. They received much less than their white comrades. For example, Kenyan veteran Eusebio Mbiuki, who fought in the King’s African Rifles during the tough Burma campaign, found his war gratuity was far lower than that of white ex-servicemen (thenational.scot). He expressed deep disappointment, stating, “they should have known how much we had helped them, we were abandoned, just like that.”
Further evidence of this disparity comes from British archives. A document revealed that African soldiers were paid as much as three times less than white British soldiers (thenational.scot). This was a clear instance of racial discrimination. Labour MPs have called for an inquiry into this issue, highlighting the ongoing concern about this historical injustice (thenational.scot).
Understanding War Gratuity
A war gratuity is a payment given to soldiers when they are demobilized or discharged from service (tandfonline.com). It is often a lump sum payment. In colonial armies, such as those in Kenya, pay scales were deliberately structured to maintain racial hierarchies (tandfonline.com). This meant African soldiers received significantly lower pay and fewer benefits compared to their white counterparts.
The creation of roles like “effendis” for African soldiers, which seemed similar to Governor’s Commissioned Officers, was a way to avoid true equality (tandfonline.com). This practice lowered their prestige and maintained racial distinctions in pay and status. The colonial army structure was designed to uphold these racial hierarchies (tandfonline.com).
What is a War Gratuity?
A war gratuity is a one‑time payment to service members when they are demobilized or discharged. It recognizes time served and helps their transition back to civilian life.
When it’s paid
Typically at demobilization or discharge, as a lump‑sum benefit.
Who may qualify
Service members who completed active duty and are formally released.
What it reflects
Length of service and pay grade often influence the amount granted.
Promises and Expectations
African soldiers expected fair treatment and rewards for their service. This included pensions and gratuity pay. These expectations were based on promises made during wartime (globalhistory.org.uk). Many African soldiers received education from the British Army during the war. This experience opened their eyes to the world beyond Africa. Consequently, they no longer wished to be suppressed by pre-war colonial society (globalhistory.org.uk).
Many “askaris,” a term commonly used for African soldiers in colonial armies, expected the British Army to support them after the war (globalhistory.org.uk). They saw the army as a “source of patronage.” Returning soldiers argued that wartime propaganda had promised them pensions and gratuity pay (globalhistory.org.uk). Liaison officers even warned officials in Kenya that African soldiers expected land grants or similar rewards for their service (globalhistory.org.uk).
The King’s African Rifles
The King’s African Rifles (KAR) was a British colonial regiment. It was primarily made up of African soldiers, though led by British officers (cambridge.org). This regiment played a crucial role in British military operations in East Africa. The KAR was involved in wartime recruiting practices and post-World War II demobilization in colonial Kenya (cambridge.org).
The experiences of soldiers like Eusebio Mbiuki, who served in the KAR, highlight the systemic discrimination they faced. Despite their bravery and contributions, their service was undervalued compared to their white counterparts. This disparity was not accidental; it was built into the colonial military structure itself.
Comparative Pay Disparity (WWII)
African soldiers were paid roughly one‑third of the wage of White British soldiers.
Systemic Discrimination
The denial of equitable benefits to Black World War II veterans was a widespread issue. This problem was not limited to the British Empire. It also affected the United States. In New Jersey, for example, Black World War II veterans were denied homeownership opportunities through the GI Bill (njisj.org). This denial was a part of the state’s Jim Crow segregation.
Jim Crow segregation refers to state and local laws. These laws were enacted in the Southern and some border states of the United States from the late 19th to the mid-20th centuries. They enforced racial segregation and discrimination against African Americans (trace.tennessee.edu). Black veterans, despite their service, faced significant restrictions and discrimination in accessing benefits like the GI Bill (intrepidmuseum.org). The colonial army’s structure was designed to maintain racial hierarchies, which inherently led to unequal treatment and opportunities (tandfonline.com).
The Fight for Redress
There is no specific information in the provided data about an official British government response to the pay discrimination claims for African veterans. However, there is evidence that the UK government has avoided addressing other colonial-era abuses. For instance, Kenyans are taking the UK government to the European Court of Human Rights over forced land evictions during the colonial era (capitalfm.co.ke). This legal action highlights the UK government’s perceived avoidance of redress for victims of colonial abuses (capitalfm.co.ke).
The provided information does not explicitly detail any reparations, compensations, or formal apologies made to African veterans post-war for pay discrimination. However, the ongoing legal efforts by Kenyans to seek redress for colonial-era abuses suggest a lack of prior compensation. These efforts indicate a continuing struggle for justice for those affected by colonial policies (capitalfm.co.ke).
Current Status of Redress for Colonial Abuses
Legal Action
Active CaseKenyans are pursuing legal action against the UK government in the European Court of Human Rights for colonial‑era abuses.
Government Response
Alleged Non‑RedressThe UK government is accused of avoiding all possible avenues of redress for victims of colonial abuses.
Long-Term Impact
While the provided information does not directly detail the social and economic impact of discriminatory pay and lack of benefits on African veterans, the context suggests significant negative consequences. The racial hierarchies in the colonial army and the struggles of Black veterans in the US to access benefits point to a broader pattern. The denial of full benefits would have limited educational and economic opportunities for these veterans. This would have perpetuated cycles of poverty and inequality within their communities (intrepidmuseum.org).
The colonial army’s structure was explicitly designed to maintain racial hierarchies and prevent equality for African soldiers (tandfonline.com). This institutionalized discrimination meant that even after serving bravely, African veterans were denied the full recognition and support they deserved. The long-term effects of such systemic injustice continue to resonate within the communities of these veterans.
Unanswered Questions Remain
Many questions about the recompense for African soldiers in World War II remain unanswered. The exact scale of African participation in the British Army during WWII is not fully detailed in the provided information. While the King’s African Rifles was composed mainly of African soldiers, specific quantitative data on overall numbers or proportions is not available (cambridge.org).
Furthermore, a comparative perspective on discriminatory practices between different colonial troops, such as African and Caribbean soldiers, is missing. The focus remains primarily on the experiences of African soldiers within the context of the King’s African Rifles and broader colonial policies in Kenya. Understanding these comparisons could provide a more complete picture of the widespread discrimination faced by non-white soldiers in the British Empire.
Policies of Discrimination
The colonial military structure itself was designed to maintain racial hierarchies. This inherently justified and institutionalized pay disparities (tandfonline.com). While specific legal or policy frameworks are not detailed, the intent to prevent equality for African soldiers is clear. The primary concerns of planners were how British soldiers would react to African officers and a desire to sustain colonial racial hierarchies (tandfonline.com).
The recruitment and demobilization practices in colonial Kenya were part of this broader wartime and post-war context (cambridge.org). The system was set up to ensure that African soldiers, despite their sacrifices, would not achieve true equality or receive the same benefits as their white counterparts. This systemic discrimination had profound and lasting effects on their lives and communities.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Darius Spearman has been a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College since 2007. He is the author of several books, including Between The Color Lines: A History of African Americans on the California Frontier Through 1890. You can visit Darius online at africanelements.org.
