I'm currently writing about the scramble of Africa and the causes for it. I came over an article on about.com
It mentions reports about Muslim and local slave trade as a reason for the scramble. I find it hard to believe that this was one of reasons worth mentioning.
What I can understand is that Britain would halt the slave trade in their colonies, but nothing more since it wasn't that much of a lucrative trading option anymore. Did the western nations even do anything about the trade outside of their colonies, or was it only articles in the local newspaper?
I think I found the answer to this, but it's mostly a theory.
The slave trade didn't do more to colonizing than painting a picture about how wonderful it would be if the western powers took control the land and abolished slave trade. It was mostly a white washing of the intents they had when they started taking land.
What the end of slave trade, especially in Britain didm was to send patrols they used to enforce the end of slave trade in the mid passage and at the west coast thus gaining more control over the atlantic and the west african coast.
Can anyone confirm or deny this?