It's probably an over simplification. I would imagine that there were a lot more deals than that, with money, political influence, trade, etc. Land in Africa was fucking precious, so the country giving up it's land wouldn't just go "eh what the fuck, the king of Italy said so, so I guess you guys can have it".
@@hugolafhugolaf The tragedy is that you are injecting your own racial bias about Muslims into this discussion. Such malice serves only to add to the animosity toward Muslims which only creates further conflict. In addition to that just look at the history. GB had been colonizing countries around the world for hundreds of years. Hence many residents of many Muslim countries that Britain absorbed would emmigrate to the UK in search of better opportunity. And Muslims in fact served in both world wars. They are not going away so why not make an effort to accept their presence in the UK and elsewhere??
@@carboncrafter793 That charge of a lack of general assimilation usually ignores the racist and marginalizing that Muslims often experience from xenophobic people who are ignorant of what Muslims are actually like as people. The Irish were mistreated in early America, as were American Indians, Asians, blacks and so on up right today by people who are prejudging Muslims without even knowing them as people. That has more to do with a minority not assimilating then anything else. Americans and peoples in other countries create a self-fulfilling prophecy because of their animosity toward the "other"!!
UK and Belgium: Draw a line for us King of Italy: Ok I drew the line you wanted UK and Belgium: so much... *H E A R T* was put into this, amazing. We'll use it.
I live in Croatia and Trieste is the closest Italian city. I go there 5-10 times a year and it is one of the most beautiful cityies I have ever been to.
Good to know. I love Northern Italy, so that's on my short list for my next vacation. Since I want to visit Croatia too, that will give me the perfect excuse!
Worth mentioning that the Caprivi strip didn't even give Germany access to the east coast of Africa because Victoria Falls is just up the river and so their boats wouldn't have been able to go past it
The Appendix does serve a purpose. It stores good bacteria so if you lose everything in the colon (diarrhea) the appendix can secrete the good stuff back into your system.
When you, a Black man, have to give up your land to the Belgians because an Italian king decided that the borders look good and Belgium and England agreed with him somewhere in Europe. *Visible Confusion*
@@hugolafhugolaf That is an extreme over simplification and just like your comment about Muslims in GB in another comment is a reflection of your racial bias. Understanding is almost always enhanced by knowledge. Many countries were created by European colonial powers with no regard to the different tribal enities therein. The DRC Demacratic Republic of Congo is such an example. Forcing tribes into one country that have no mutual goals or language can create conflict. Add to that the centuries of slave trade and having their natural resources stolen from them and getting zero compensation in return. And then people like you respond with a judgmental attitude while giving no indication that you have any idea of the history. Get the picture??
@@hugolafhugolaf It's really not that simple. Foreign meddling is what has fucked them over big time. In a hypothetical timeline where colonialism never happened, Africa might have eventually see a "Alexander the Great" that unified large areas of the continent... or it would've looked like that ethnic map with literally thousands of tiny countries. Europe benefited from it's geography, leading to technological and social progress (albeit slow) over time. Africa was divided from this thanks to the Sahara, leaving them to their own devices. There was far less spread of ideas and cultures tended to be in a far more primitive state. A state European powers took advantage of.
@Adam Marcinkowski Looks like you are caught up in your own racial bias calling the black people "weak" for not protecting their homeland from invaders. Study history for a while because you sound extremely misinformed!!
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 I checked the history, turns out the Europeans showed up with sticks and stones and took all of the rifles and steam engines away from the Wakandans...I mean Africans
@Adam Marcinkowski I bet you're the same type of person who complains about muslim immigrants. I guess your country is just weak for allowing them to "take over" as the far-right in europe claim
The Caprivi Strip is actually more useless than this video suggests. Shortly after Namibia secured this land, which they wanted so they can access the Indian Ocean through the Zambezi River, they learned of this little obstacle called Victoria Falls! The river was actually unnavigable, and the Germans really fucked up!
They wanted to access the Indian Ocean to link up with their colony there of present day Tanzania. They also traded the island of Zanzibar for the Caprivi, with the British.
4:12 when I realised he was being sarcastic I couldn't stop laughing. The Italian King was like "yeah.. think Belgium would like that swamp, I'ma have to give it to Belgium, sorry UK..."
Did you know that a micro state exists in Australia? It is a territory under the influence of the Great Emu Empire. During the First Emu War the Emu army took the territory and proclaimed it as a part of Emuland. Little did the Australians know the Second Emu War was coming, and they were unprepared. Emus attacked the weak spot, which turned out to be under their control. So they just expanded Emuland's territory. That territory is now known as "Sydney". The more you know.
It was bought way back when Russia was an Empire, not the USSR, the actual Russian empire in the 1800s. Specifically bought in 1867. But your a tid bit correct, Alaska became a state in 1959.
When Yugoslavia still existed, my uncle was on vacation in Istria and tried wind surfing, but because there was a big wind and he was not very experienced, the wind took him to Italy, where was forbidden to travel. Fortunately, he somehow got back, but it's a funny story
@@-SPECIALISTDELTA- because in that time people in my country couldn't travel like now, only to specific countries and with a permision, Italy was one of the countries people couldnt visit
That area is actually three different panhandles spiraling into one another. There also seem to be quite a lot of enclaves in the area. Quite the mess.
Not only that but the arid deserts, being geographically isolated, and scarce resources can't help. I wish the best of luck to the Zambian people in preserving their democracy
@@thingonometry-1460 Especially when it's easier to blame someone else for your own failings. If it hadn't been for the "colonial" powers arrival Africans would still be living in the stone age.
I've seen that on Google maps. All I can wonder is who thought that was a good idea? Was it planned to be like that by Britain or was it established afterwards?
@Albert D lybian Italian colonie ended in 1943 under Mussolini, cause:allied invasion Ethiopian Italian colonie (de facto) ended in 1941 under Mussolini His "parallel war" caused this not the decolonization
The border between Baarle nassau and baatle hertog is one of the weirdest borders in the world it's a part of the border between the netherlands and belgium
in 1198 part of Baarle was presented by the hertog (duke) of Brabant to what ended up being the Nassau family, which is now the royal family of the Netherlands. The bit that the duke kept is still part of Belgium. It is basically left this way because it causes little trouble. Both nations have a good relationship and very open borders. It's good for tourism, and well, it's a laff! So why change it? For more info and a map see wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baarle
Great video. Namibia meets Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Botswana via the Caprivi Strip at Kazungula Ferry - the only place in the world where 4 countries meet (technically, a quadripoint).
The Gambia has one of the most delightfully-strange country shapes in the world and I love it. It almost looks as though it's _all_ panhandle. It is the answer to the question "What if we made our country completely along a narrow strip around one river?" .. and then named the country after said river!
In general, beyond what you mention, the Caprivi Strip was an attempt by Germany to begin to prevent a north to south British presence in Africa that linked Cairo to the Cape (this was a definite consideration for this panhandle beyond the river access to eastern Africa, which inevitably was discovered not to provide access to the Indian Ocean due to the blockage of Victoria Falls).
What about the little Russia spot? You know, the one between Lithuania and Poland with that use to be Prussian city. It's not a panhandle, but why haven't Liet or Pol taken it?
Presumably because neither want it badly enough to go up against Russia. Plus it's mostly full of Russians. So they probably wouldn't be happy being part of a different country. Deporting them en masse would be a massive human rights violation (ok, so that's what the Russians did to the former inhabitants, but two wrongs don't make a right).
"why haven't Liet or Pol taken it?" Because it's Russia. End of story. Doesn't matter if it's disconnected from the rest of Russia. Countries don't (or shouldn't) invade others these days. The area is called Kaliningrad Oblast. In the early 20th century, it was German, and it was called East Prussia. It was connected to the rest of Germany, because Germany at that time also possessed what's now the north coast of Poland. After Germany lost WWI, Poland gained some land along the Baltic Sea Coast, and East Prussia became disconnected from the rest of Germany. After Germany lost WWII, Poland gained more land from Germany. The USSR gained land from Germany as well. Poland and the USSR split East Prussia between them. Within the USSR, the Soviet portion of East Prussia became known as Kaliningrad Oblast. Rather than assign it to Lithuania, the Soviet authorities assigned it to Russia, even though it was disconnected from the rest of Russia. And the rest is history. When the USSR broke apart, Kaliningrad remained a part of independent Russia. The residents [nowadays] are Russians, and have no interest in joining Lithuania. Nor Poland. But as I already said, Poland got half of the old East Prussia anyways. You can look up the history of something if you're curious.
because we won that territory during WWII from Germany we didn't give to Lithuania or polandbecause Kaliningrad is an ethnicRussian not Lithuanian or Polish spot Polish and Lithuanian are written in the Latin script so it will mean literally redemarcating everything
"Russian history or one millennium of hard and not so hard fuck-ups" - really, that's literally what i learned in my course of russian history in the school and university.
I heard that one of India's borders with another country is quite screwed up. There's a section of India inside of a section of the other country inside of a section of India inside of a section of the other country... It's confusing as hell.
Situations like this also exist within countries, for a very long time England had numerous exclaves and enclaves between the various counties. They don't exist any longer as an act of parliament made it so that enclaves were part of the enclosing county but they were there for historic reasons for centuries in some cases.
All of India's borders are screwed up. The British drew a line in the 19th century between around the entire dominion called the Durand Line that made no logical sense. The result is a bunch of border conflicts and disputed regions between China and India on one hand, and Pakistan and Afghanistan on the other. And then add the partition borders drawn in 1947-48 that left Kashmir cleaved in two, and other myriad disputes between Pakistan and India.
Yes , those enclave and exclave of various degree exist once , but all dispute resolve in last year , and by this every country give up there exclave to other nation , now the border is almost smooth .
+Peter Gray , All British line are logical in there sense , Durand Line did't draw in betn the dominion , but establish as border of British India and Afghanistan ,it still exist in betn Afg and Pak by the logic that historically and geographically , peak of mountain ridges are the border of India , the disputed line betn India-China also due to this concept. And the Issue of Kashmir is different, it's border messed up because Pakistan invade that area , and king of that state wait for several days to ask for Indian help , result in occupation of a large territory of that state , India retrieve many land back , but ultimately cease fire line establish in 49, which somehow still same .
Shiharan Majumder But my point is that those borders never settled existing disputes, and continue to feed tensions between neighboring countries. China refused to accept the Durand Line, leading to the 1962 border war, and continued territory disputes. And the Line divided Pushtuns between Afghanistan and Pakistan, helping to feed the Taliban insurgency.
I agree. Just thinking of all the genocides and wars currently going on because that map is so colourful brings a tear to my eye. So beautiful and diverse :')
Now I am wondering about Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Croatia seems to "hog" the coastline while Bosnia and Herzegovina does not get much, except for ~20 km that seperates Dalmatia from the rest of Croatia.
That's correct. I believe the Bosnian coastline was due to the southern Orthodox state, Ragusa or Montenegro, wanted to keep away from Austria, due to fear of Austrian invasion. Hence, they let the Ottomans get a short strip of land so they themselves didn't have a land border with Austria anymore... In modern times, Bosnia retained this little strip of coastline.
Real story goes like this. Back in renaissance time Republic of Venice, and Republic of Ragusa ( modern day Dubrovnik) were two competing merchant republics. Venice had stronger military, controlled modern day Croatian provinces of Dalmatia and Istria and was for centuries constant threat to Ragusa. To ease that threat, Ragusa made a deal with Ottomans in 1718. Ragusa ceded 20 km wide Neum Strip to Ottomans to divide Ragusa from Venice and Ottomans granted independence of Ragusa and rights to conduct trade in their lands, mainly in Eyalet of Bosnia. BTW Republic of Ragusa was catholic state, and so was Venice. As for shape of Croatia. Back in the days Croatia had "normal" borders as part of modern day Bosnia was part of it. Bosnia was small duchy between Croatia and Serbia. Modern day shape is result of Ottomans military advances into Croatian lands. They penetrated in the middle of Croatia and their advances were finally stopped after the Long War. The land that Ottomans conquered is assigned to province Elayet of Bosnia and since then border is more or less stayed the same.
🇳🇦: I have the super panhandle case 🇪🇷: I have the longest Pan handle 🇦🇫: I have the panhandle That didnt exist sorta 🇽🇰: I have a small panhandle 🇨🇱: *im just a random panhandle* 🇳🇵: *my flag has a panhandle* 🇨🇾: me almost have panhandle
Very nicely researched, Joseph. I wasn't all that interested in history at school, but I did find this video interesting. When you see Earth from space, you realise that were all sharing a very fragile planet. It's sad that a lot of wars are fought over borders.
5:29 Last year I drove through Zambia and went over Zambezi river on that tiny opening from Zambia to Botswana. Then driving 10km through Game Park in Botswana and over a river to Namibia . Then driving through this Caprivi strip to get to the coast. Very strange border indeed!
I'm from South Africa and the thing that absolutely confuses me is the tiny country of Lesotho. Which is surrounded by the rest of South Africa but isn't part of South Africa. Tl:dr Lesotho is a tiny country inside another bigger country.
well before battlefield 1 there was Victoria 2 so i did actually know about the Austro Hungarian empire. o and i cant forget about the great youtube channel the great war
People in the eastern world would say the same thing about the western world not knowing about the kingdoms and empires from the east besides china, japan, and the mongols.
DZR3WIND I get your point. But AH was at the very heart of WWI. I mean it was the country that started it all. In that way it should be common knowledge. But WWI is usually overshadowed by WWII.
sad that i'm one of the few who knew about it without any games or channels though i really like the great war channel (i mean it's not a bad thing you know it from somewere else but you should learn it in history class or something like that)
False: the appendix is vital to our immune system and acts as a storehouse to revive the gut bacteria after a catastrophic infection which empties the intestines of necessary beneficial bacteria. People that have their appendices - like their tonsils - removed are more likely to have chronic illness and cancer than people who still have theirs.
*@sesamesushi,* 1. The Teaching Methods Are Way Better! 2. The Teacher Teaches In an Interesting Way!! 3. You Don't Have To Cram The Things!!! 4. You Can Learn While You're Relaxing/In Sleeping Position, Where As In School You Have To Be Very Attentive!!!! 5. Because There's NoOne To Disturb You, While You're Learning, Where As There Are Your ClassMates In School To Disturb You!!!!! 6. Because You're Learning In Your Home!!!!!! 7. Same Goes With Me!!!!!!!
The East/West Pakistan thing is not because of "colonialism" - well not British, anyway. It's because of the Muslim invasion of India. Otherwise it would all just be India.
Hindu rulers have conquered non-hindu regions before muslims even came close to india. It's not like muslims were the first to ever subjugate another people. Though if you're saying that Pakistan and Bangladesh should be part of india, i agree.
Waleed Assad I had to write a report on muslim invaders and their conquest for my university. So it's best if you do your own research about the points mentioned in your comment. From points A & B, I can see that you have no understanding of the subject. (Past history) From the last paragraph, no understanding of present history.
The Oklahoma panhandle came about starting when in 1845 Texas was admitted to the Union as a slave state and it's borders were subsequently re-arranged by Congress under the Compromise of 1850. Part of what the Compromise did was outlaw slavery north of the 36'30 Parallel cutting into much of Texas' panhandle. The panhandle's area north of the 36'30 Parallel was ceded to Congress and named "Public Land Strip" and commonly referred to as "No Man's Land", setting its southern border with Texas. The Compromise also created New Mexico Territory starting west of the the 103rd meridian, thus setting the western boundary of the strip, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 set the southern border of Kansas Territory as the 37th parallel, thus creating the northern boundary of No Man's Land. Finally in 1890 No Man's Land was assigned by Congress as part of Oklahoma Territory under the Organic Act of 1890. In 1907 Oklahoma became a State with the merging of Oklahoma Territory with Indian Territory and that's the end of it.
Jafninetyfour Texas didn't want to give up its slaves so they agreed to have a part of their top cut off. It was added to a territory that is now Oklahoma.
Why the Hell did I get an image in my head of someone holding Oklahoma by the Panhandle and beating the shit out of a random country with it? And why did it make me laugh?
They have a lot of enclaves and 2nd order enclaves between as well as the demarcations that run through the street to ensure where the boundaries are between the two countries.
The U.S. Canadian border has a library where you can walk in on America and leave in Canada. There's also quite a few states with neighborhoods laying directly on borderlines.
Namibia's Panhandle is not a panhandle. It's a slot machine arm! And what about Oklahoma's panhandle! It's the only panhandle that looks like a panhandle! What's Oklahoma? Chopped liver? And if a place has a panhandle, why isn't the rest of the place called the pan? The voices in my head are telling me to move along........
Oklahoma could be a country depending on how you define "country." It is a "state" and most countries are governed by a "state." Is the E.U. a country? It has multiple governments, or "states," under it's rule. I'll save this question for linguistics.
+Nikolas Powell It really depends on how you view the USA. Is it a unified country with 50 semi-autonomous provinces, or is it like a modern version of the Holy Roman Empire where 50 states all answer to a higher power whether they want to or not?
Americans really have to get their superiority complex in check. Not everything is about u. Why would individual states be covered? This is about countries. If u must bring something up, then at least make it Alaska, which has a panhandle and an interesting history behind it.
I've been to Mufulira in Zambia which is quite close to the pan handle with DR Congo. They mostly speak Bemba there so you don't feel anyway close to Congo. At least I didn't until my lady friend at the time, who was from Mufulira, pointed out that a couple of men we passed one evening had a different accent and suggested they might have been from Congo. When you have no knowledge of African languages you don't notice accents if you don't understand what they're saying. At least I didn't notice anyway. Just a random fact I felt like sharing.
The Luba and the Bemba straddle the Congo, Zambia and Malawi borders. They can move around these countries without anybody knowing which particular country they belong to.
+Mosco Monster I mean you've got to remember, every country was made 'artificially' at one point. There's a video on RU-vid that just shows how the British Isles looked throughout history and what country's were upon it - and it basically comes down to, someone has a lot of power, the power expands, extends over time - cultures mix, merge and suddenly it becomes easier to take over each other. For reference on just how 'artificial' country's and borders are - many country's before the industrial era didn't all speak the same language, France had multiple languages and cultures for example. It was only when everyone started living closer together did people start to adapt a lot quicker. The most well-known example to date is the fact that the UK currently still has Whales within its borders - and if you've heard the Welsh language it's nothing like English. Yet there it is - and it's fine with being part of the UK and function just fine within it. The fact is, country's and people adapt, and surprisingly quickly - it only takes a couple of generations to get used to such things. After all, people need to communicate to prosper - so they tend to learn the language that's spoken by the most people - which is why most of the UK speaks English, even though places like Scotland spoke something completely different originally. Eventually country's like those shown here, weird borders or not, just adapt, they find a language in common and old cultures will bend and adapt to the majority. So yeah, it appears weird to us now and right now the statistics look weird - but give it 50 years and assuming the borders don't change, the language and cultures there will have.
graveeking Yeah, that's true. Every country was once an arbitrary collection of people and land that was only linked by the people they had to pay their taxes to. But you have to agree with me that things don't adapt as quickly as you are suggesting, I mean, Europe had fights and wars for years that could be linked to border claims and ethnic claims. I live in Brazil, a country were more than 100 languages are spoken. In the past, there were more than two equally spoken languages, from native to european languages, but as time went by, the european language of Portugal became the general mean of communication. It happened , but wasn't quick. It took the country 400 years at least, and in the mean time, countless wars were fought, with ethnic justifications, even when the country was already a free country.
Nice video, but just a small correction. British India was divided into two countries based on religious grounds, yes, but India (the Hindu-majority portion od British India) chose to be secular. So, it's not a Hindu country.
Majority is Authority. Everyone Knows India is a Hindu Country which is evident from their culture,traditions and festivals whether it is Secular or Not. It doesn't really matter. Minorities and their culture and traditions are undermined by the Majority Might of Hindu Bharat.
The Sarstoon River separating Belize from Guatemala is a very interesting border and is even currently awaiting a trial at the International Criminal Court (ICJ). As a Belizean, I am in for it being settled in favour of Belize but all the same, it is very interesting. Maybe you should make a video about it!
So why don't all the African leaders get together now and redraw the borders along historical ethnic and linguistic lines? Wouldn't that reduce conflict in the continent as a whole and make it easier for governments to govern their regions more effectively?
Kush MasterB Can you imagine how that would go? Countries fighting over which ethnic and linguistic groups belong to them and where the lines should be drawn. Basically exactly what we have already.
im Namibian. and i don't think that would be a good idea. in terms of Namibia, we don't really have any problems with our borders. or any that i know off. after the countries were split most of the ethnic groups settled in the countries anyways. if african leaders were to say my ethnic group actually originates and belongs to Zambia for example then would that mean i would have relocate me and my family there? also as countries we already make the most of our natural resources, whether it be a waterfall or minerals. if other countries were to "claim" a certain strip, that would bring a lot of conflict
+ Kush Master Funny you should mention that, from the 1950s onward when the African states where gradually getting their independence it was one of the first questions the newly formed organisation of African Unity (OAU) pondered, but eventually they decided that it was too much of a mess and that creating a precedent for states to shift their borders or split off and become new countries would make the continent too unstable, so the African nations unilaterally decided that the old borders would stay, which has mostly remained the case until today
