WHA Annual Meeting: Korea 2026

This book emerges from two key questions: Did imperialism “end” at the moment of decolonisation or did it merely adapt to changing circumstances? And why has ethnonationalism become so powerful in so many post-colonial states? To answer these questions and to untangle the association between them, this work examines British imperialism in late colonial Burma and finds that the imperialists attempted to protect their strategic and economic interests by supporting ethnonationalism. It argues that, as the rise of a powerful Burmese nationalist movement in the 1930s and 1940s made it increasingly clear that formal colonialism in Burma would eventually end, British colonial officials in London and on-the-spot formed a tacit preference for Burmese ethnonationalists in order to combat the more revolutionary trends within Burmese politics. The relationship between imperialists and ethnonationalists may at first seem paradoxical: ethnonationalists, by definition, demand political independence. But formal rule was often the least of British imperialists’ concerns, a “burden” even. The far more important end was the preservation of the foothold of British capital and geo-strategic operations in the long term.
The work makes two key interventions into academic literature. First, for studies of imperialism, it bridges the gap between works on colonial “divide-and-rule” policies and works on neo-colonial “Containment” policies during the Cold War. It provides a key case study for how imperialists – and authoritarian states in general – utilise ethnonationalist politics as a force of passive revolution, providing the aesthetics of revolution while preventing real transformation. Second, for studies of Myanmar, it identifies the origins of the racial regime that scapegoats Indians and Muslims as foreign invaders and exploiters. The present-day Rohingya genocide is a result of the persistence of this racial regime. Ultimately, this book presents a symbiotic relationship between imperialism, capitalism, and ethnonationalism.

The WHA Annual Meeting asks, “how can we write, teach, and think about world history in a moment characterized both by global entanglement and anti-globalist politics?” This roundtable is envisioned as a chance to bring together secondary and college-level educators who come from training in various regions and specializations to reflect on how we teach world history today. The goal for this roundtable is to prioritize conversation, pedagogical exchange, and practical insight on the shared challenges instructors at both the secondary and undergraduate levels face in an increasingly politicized classroom. We will explore how the current social, political, and economic environment of the U.S. is influencing our teaching of world history, as well as how we negotiate our own political/ideological position in the classroom. Responding directly to the conference theme, “Closed Borders and Global Connections: Being Global after Globalization,” participants will examine how anti-globalist rhetoric, culture-war politics, post-truth narratives fueled by social media/AI, and ideological polarization are shaping classroom dynamics, curricular design, and student engagement. By bridging secondary and higher education perspectives, this roundtable aims to produce practical insights for navigating politicized classrooms while sustaining the intellectual integrity and global scope of world history.