2
$\begingroup$

Could a semi-isolated country island about 3,000,000 square miles and 1000 miles south of India avoid becoming a colony and develop into a rich and strong modern state today? They have about the same technology level as the Ottoman empire. Guns, cannons, shipbuilding skills, and a population of about 100 million.

$\endgroup$

closed as too broad by Cyn, StephenG, 011358 smell, user535733, elemtilas Jul 7 at 0:58

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ so Australia then. $\endgroup$ – John Jul 6 at 14:01
  • $\begingroup$ Welcome! How many people live on the island? Which level is their technology? Why are using imperial units for the surface and SI units for the distance? Who is attempting colonization? Which technology do they have? Please provide these additional info. Then take a look at the help center and take the tour to better know our community. $\endgroup$ – L.Dutch Jul 6 at 14:09
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ 3 million square miles is 7.7 million square kilometers. For comparison, the European Union (complete with the United Kingdom) has an area of 4.4 million square kilometeres. That's not an island, that's a continent. And a continent with a civilization level which only allows for one trading expedition per year won't be able to resist colonization or, more likely, outright conquest. Plus not sure what "able to resist colonization" even means. There were Italian colonies in Wallachia; Transylvania still has Germans, and one of them is president of Romania; there are Albanians in Italy; etc. $\endgroup$ – AlexP Jul 6 at 14:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Welcome. You're asking two 3 different questions. Your title asks if a large semi-isolated population could keep up with Eurasia in tech. But the body of the posts asks 1) can the island avoid becoming a colony and 2) if it can develop into a rich and strong modern state. It is possible for a country to be all of those things, none of those things, or any 1 or 2 of those things. So pick one. $\endgroup$ – Cyn Jul 6 at 15:44
  • $\begingroup$ A colony of what ? Of a huge empire with a massive hi-tech army and airforce or of a similar sized similarly populated, similarly teched nation ? How badly does the colonizer want it ? There's no end of variables here and you have even outlined the top points. $\endgroup$ – StephenG Jul 6 at 15:47
3
$\begingroup$

Consider Japan during the Age of Exploration. This example suggests that the key was not geographic isolation but a strong government that could and did reject contact.

In Medieval times, there were even more countries which managed to resist colonization. An interesting question here is if the spread of Christianity and Islam would be colonization. Consider Persia.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Colonization by definition implies the existence of colonists. The spread of the French ideas about the separation of legislative, judicial and executive powers does not mean that France sent colonists to Japan or Argentina. $\endgroup$ – AlexP Jul 6 at 14:30
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexP: I don't think so. Consider India as a British colony. British people went there as administrators, soldiers, & technicians. They might spend a few years there, or an entire career, but they would eventually return "Home". Few if any went there with the intention of settling there permanently. $\endgroup$ – jamesqf Jul 6 at 17:37
  • $\begingroup$ @jamesqf: "Few if any went there with the intention of settling there permanently": which makes it not a colony. India was one of the states of the British Empire, with a rather complicated relationship with the United Kingdom. The two countries were in personal union (the king/queen of England being emperor/empress of India), and India functioned more or less as an overly large protectorate. India had its own international personality (e.g., it was one of the founding states of the League of Nations), was fully integrated in the politics and globalized economy of the B.E. and so on. $\endgroup$ – AlexP Jul 6 at 17:53
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexP: But you seem to be using your own definition of colony, not the one used by all the people to whom British India is a prime example of colonialism - and the places where the British did go to settle, like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, generally aren't. $\endgroup$ – jamesqf Jul 7 at 18:34
  • $\begingroup$ @jamesqf: Colonialismcolonization. Colonialism is the policy of a nation seeking to extend or retain its authority over other people or territories, generally with the aim of economic dominance. Colonization refers strictly to migration, for example, to settler colonies in America or Australia. (Both from Wikipedia.) Both the original question and this answer refer to colonization. $\endgroup$ – AlexP Jul 7 at 20:49

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.