Sweden's colonial presence in Africa was limited, with its most notable claim being the short-lived colony of Saint Barthélemy, which was not located on the African mainland but was a Caribbean island. In Africa, Sweden had minor trading posts in places like today's Ghana during the 17th century, but these were not full colonies. Overall, Sweden did not establish significant colonial control over any African countries.
Britain, it colonised most of the African countries
Most certainly not. It's a country, right between Sweden and Russia.
There was only one country that was never colonized: Ethiopia. Every other colony in Africa (including Liberia) was colonized at one point or another. As a result, there is no name given to this collection of one country.
Norway and Sweden are two separate, sovereign countries that happen to be neighbors in the region known as Scandinavia.
Switzerland and Sweden are different countries with different languages. Switzerland is below Germany and north of Italy. Sweden is next to Norway and Finland. Sweden has a royal family. Switzerland has never had a royalty.
Almost all the African countries were colonized by European nations. Liberia and Ethiopia were the only countries that were not colonized.
Ghana nigeria zimbabwe sierra leone
Britain, it colonised most of the African countries
lckvmeslkfs
Russia was one.
Yes
Africa is a continent containing many different countries. These countries were colonised by many other countries, including France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, as well as England, so the answer to this question depends on which African country is involved,
about year 1500 - 1950
No Asian, South American, North American, or Oceanic nation had African Colonies. Countries such as Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, Netherlands, or Luxembourg didn't have colonies.
Sweden is a country. There are no other countries in Sweden.
Most certainly not. It's a country, right between Sweden and Russia.
The country Oman colonized by Portuguese and Persian.