Southeast Asia

There were several reasons that Europeans were interested in controlling what are traditionally considered Islamic Lands. Most of those reasons exist irrespective of Islam and have more to do with the political and social climate in Europe during the Imperialist Period in Europe.

The following reasons detail the reasons for European conquests in both Islamic and non-Islamic countries in Asia and Africa:

Resources: There were an incredible variety of resources produced around the world that fed into the European industrial machine. Indonesia and Malaysia had rubber trees, India has a great number of spices, the Afghanistan is known for poppy and opiates, etc. The European powers wanted to gain access to these resources to power their industrial rise.

Strategic Territory: Numerous colonies had specific strategic locations, such as Egypt with the current Suez Canal, Morocco with the Straits of Gibraltar, India because of its massive spice production and outlets to the Indian Ocean. Indochina was close to the unconquerable Qing Empire. Many colonies were chosen specifically based on where they were and how effectively defense could be maintained by holding those positions.

Christian Evangelism: Many Europeans believed quite strongly at the time that their technological success was correlated with their belief in Christianity. In their view, non-Christians like the Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. were hindered by the mentalities present in their religions from being technologically astute. In order to "help" these people to becomes more modern and more worldly, it was "necessary" to teach them the proper way to believe so that they too could succeed. Sometimes this evangelism was benign. At other times, it erupted in full-scale conflict, such as the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857.

White Man's Burden: Europeans were fascinated with the philosophy of J.S. Mills Jr. and Rudyard Kipling who believed that there was really only one track to humanity and each person was on this track to ultimate advancement. As Europeans were further along this track, it was "incumbent" on them as act of generosity to help those who were not as technologically or "culturally" advanced. There were campaigns across Africa, Asia, and Australia to "Europeanize the Natives" so that they would be "able" to progress properly.

On account of the White Man's Burden philosophy, numerous technologies were brought to Africa and Asia with the explicit purpose of teaching the indigenous people how to use such devices (and therefore modernize them).

Labor and Military Augmentation: The colonies, especially in Asia, had very high populations relative to European countries. This allowed them to add large numbers to their labor force and to create new military divisions from this large population.

Appearance of Power: European Leaders ascribed power and dominance to those countries who were able to amass a large number of colonies, especially if they were in coveted or strategic locations.

It is worth noting that Europeans sowed discord between many different ethnic groups which had previous co-existed without problems or with minimal problems in order to more effectively govern. However, as the impetus for this was effective governance (as opposed to seeding discord) it is not a reason why Europeans were interested in controlling those territories.

The following reasons detail the reasons for European conquests specifically in the Islamic lands in Asia and Africa:

Proximity: Islamic Lands were typically closer to Europe than non-Islamic Lands. Spain was interested in Morocco and France was interested in Algeria for exactly these reasons. The Middle East had heavy interaction with Europe prior to colonization relative to Central Africa or Southeast Asia and therefore, more Europeans were aware of the societies and places there.

"Barbarism": This is sort of the corollary to the Christian Evangelism and the White Man's Burden. Muslims were seen as barbaric, backwards, and outmoded. They were seen to be ruling in unconscionable ways according to ridiculous principles. This "barbarity" needed to be set aright and fixed for the benefit of those people.

While Dell considers S.Asian market similar to that of US and Europe, HP considers this vital market as a separate entity and hence is targeting it differently.

Dell follows principle of ethnocentrism while HP is following Polycentrism. Ultimate gainer is HP, as it has left Dell far behind in S.Asian market especially India.


SR

but as computer (desktop/laptop) buyers in Indian subcontinent are becoming more knowledgeable they are knowledgeable the customized product delivery of dell. so dell is increasing faster.

SA