At a high-level United Nations consultative conference in Ghana earlier this month, African and Caribbean countries called on nations that profited from the transatlantic slave trade to issue a formal apology and pay reparations to the descendants of enslaved people, or at least to the countries from which the victims originated. The demand follows a UN General Assembly resolution in March that declared transatlantic slavery “the gravest crime against humanity” and urged member states to contribute to a reparations fund. The resolution passed with 143 votes in favor, but three countries—the United States, Israel, and Argentina—voted against it. Notably, 52 nations abstained, including all 27 European Union member states and the United Kingdom.
Why Did the UK Abstain?
The UK’s abstention was particularly striking given its historical role in ending the slave trade. While British merchants were enthusiastic participants in the 1700s, the British government led the abolition movement in the 1800s. The explanation came from James Kariuki, Chargé d’Affaires at the UK Mission to the United Nations, who is of African descent. He stated, “No single set of atrocities should be regarded as more or less significant than another.” This cryptic remark hints at a broader truth: the transatlantic slave trade was fueled by African collaborators who sold captives to European slavers.
According to historians, every African transported on westbound ships was sold by local African princes, merchants, or soldiers. The slave trade was already entrenched in West Africa before European arrival; up to one-third of the population of what is now Senegal were domestic slaves, and a thriving trade sent slaves north across the Sahara to Muslim countries. On the east coast, an even larger trade existed for nearly a thousand years, with up to 17 million Black Africans sold to Arab traders—compared to 10–12 million in the transatlantic trade over 350 years.
The Complexity of Reparations
The call for reparations faces practical and moral hurdles. As Dyer notes, “The past is a different country, and they do things differently there.” Trying to compensate victims of long-past injustices is complicated because both perpetrators and victims are long gone. Moreover, the involvement of African intermediaries in the slave trade raises questions about who should pay and who should receive reparations. The UN resolution’s lack of support from major European powers and the US reflects these complexities.
Despite the abstentions, the movement for reparations continues to gain traction in some quarters. Caribbean nations have formed a reparations commission, and some British and American universities have begun to address their historical ties to slavery. However, the path to widespread reparations remains uncertain, as the debate over historical accountability and contemporary justice continues.
