Map of Africa If Never Colonized or Only Europeans Are Foreigners and Colonizers

Swedish artist Nikolaj Cyon has made a popular map which purports to show Africa today as if it were "never colonized".  The map is making waves on the internet and was even noticed by the Washington Post.

Why are the most beautiful maps maps of lies? Click to enlarge.

The map looks pretty but much like the Native American nations name map, it is a map of lies.  Ignoring the fact it uses the European model of nation-states instead of African tribal zones or empires, my big problem is what is considered colonization.

Northern Africa is shown to be divided amongst Islamic states with Arabic names.  I am sure the native Copts, Berbers, and Africans of European descent such as the Roman African Christian community would certainly state the Arabs conquered and colonized the region.  Sicily and Spain were certainly more in a Mediterranean and European realm vice African before the Arabs came.  Also, Cabo Verde (Cape Verde) was uninhabited before Europeans arrived.  Finally, a Swahili realm shown on the map would not exist without the presence of Arabs, which in part resulted in Oman's colonization of Africa.

Much like claiming all Americans are descendants of immigrants except for American Indians, this map advances and lie myth.  For some reason colonization and empire only exists in a European sense.  It is assumed everyone else lived in a magical no-place where wars are minimal and the cultural landscape does not change.  This legacy of racism reduces none Europeans to an innocent, Eden-like race.  It is time for geographers and the public to grow up.

Poor Geography Still Remains in Afghanistan and Kills Americans

I remember a day in early January 2011 when I was reviewing maps of Highway 1 as I prepared to join a mission in eastern Afghanistan.  The most detailed map available to our unit had a village marked as "Moscowkhel" ("Moscowvillage" in English).  I remarked how the digital map had a village labelled after the Russian capital.  I was told by the highest ranking enlisted man on the mission that all our "detailed" maps of Afghanistan were from the 1980s.  It also turned out that the detailed maps were not so detailed.  Another mission had us go to Musakhel  (Mosesvillage).  However, the village turned out to be three villages and one of them was a Taliban outpost.  Lucky for us the Taliban were not in a fighting mood and decided to lie low.

Elsewhere local surveys are poorly done and rarely, if ever, updated or fact checked.  Despite being in the country for ten years there are gaps in information sharing and cartographic knowledge.

Diplomat Anne Smedinghoff, three army soldiers, and a contractor were planning on donating supplies to a school outside of their base.  They walked 200 yards (182 meters) to the building their map said was a school only to find out it was an agricultural office.  On their walk back to base they were killed by a bomb.

People die in war.  That is why war is so horrible.  However, sometimes the deaths are avoidable.  Failure to update maps and fact check put peoples' lives are risks and sometimes people die because of these mistakes.  They die because planners do not consider how investing in geographical knowledge beyond imagery can save lives.

United Nations Fixes Their Pakistan Maps

I pointed out earlier how the United Nations was showing all of Kashmir as part of Pakistan on OCHA maps.  Now, after pointing out the problem directly to OCHA, the problem has been fixed.  Kashmir is shown as neither part of Pakistan or India.  This matches the style OCHA was using for India maps.

United Nations Maps Show Kashmir as Part of Pakistan

Update:  After contacting the United Nations they have fixed their map production standards

Politics makes cartography hard.  Any disputed land becomes the focal point of angry rants, complaints of biases, threats, and much more.  I have great sympathy for map makers who have to deal with such difficulties.  Most of the time, displaying lines of control appeases people except for the radicals.  Cartographers usually create a note saying something along the lines of "final status undetermined" in these cases.

However, sometimes map designers bring trouble on themselves by being inconsistent.  Disclaimers do not work if the map favors one side more than the other beyond lines of control.  Such is the case with the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) and their maps showing, in part, the disputed territory of Kashmir.

Normally when it comes to Kashmir third parties show the line of control as the border while making a text or graphical statement showing that the border is not internationally agreed upon like the CIA World Factbook does below:

The UN OCHA, however, map of Pakistan shows all of Kashmir as part of Pakistan though there is a dotted line and disclaimer text.

One would then expect an OCHA map of India to show all of Kashmir as part of India while having a dotted line and disclaimer text.  However, all of Kashmir is shown as undefined.

The graphics imply that Pakistan has legitimate claims to all of Kashmir while India has none.  It equates India's claim to Kashmir to the international stance of ethnic Armenian control of Nagorno-Karabakh or Syria's claim to Hatay.

I contacted OCHA concerning the mapping inconsistency.  I recognized there was disclaimer text but pointed out how the maps showed two competing narratives.  Below is OHCA's offical response:

Thanks for your message!

Really appreciate you noticing this and passing the message on. I understand the field office is going to re-submit the map with the disclaimer we usually add for cases like this and the correct cartographic representation as per our internal style guide.

As you are probably aware OCHA refers to the UN-wide cartographic standards for mapping, with regard to disputed borders and other political issues. We have clearly established wording that we use for maps that depict the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir:

The designations employed and the presentation of material on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The dotted line represents approximately the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir agreed upon by India and Pakistan. The final status of Jammu and Kashmir has not yet been agreed upon by the parties. Hope this helps, all the best,

This is all well and good with having a text disclaimer but it does not explain the inconsistency with the mapping.  Whether this is just bad cartography or someone in the mapping shop has a political bias I do not know.  However, the UN, intentionally or unintentionally, is favoring Pakistan more than its official stance through its maps.

Nicaragua invades Costa Rica, Acts Like a Jerk, then Blames Google Maps

Going around the geography blogosphere including sites like Geography@About.com, the Map Room, and Basement Geographer is the story of a brief invasion of Costa Rica by Nicaragua.  This was not a harmless "Switzerland invades Liechtenstein" story as Nicaraguan forces took down a Costa Rican flag and took sediment from a river and dumped it onto Costa Rican soil.  The troops then returned to Nicaragua.  However, a diplomatic row has begun with Costa Rica's president urging calm and vowing "justice" will be done.

What makes this story of interest to the geography blogosphere is that the commander of the Nicaraguan troops blamed his actions on Google Maps and it misplacing the border.

Border comparison in the location where Nicaragua invaded Costa Rica.  Google has it wrong while Bing has it right.  Image from: Search Engine Land.

Google in turn is blaming the error on receiving bad map data from the United States State Department.  The State Department has not released any statement as of the early morning of November 6, 2010.  Meanwhile Google says it is working with the State Department to fix the border.

Such a shame I warned about bad maps being more than simple mistakes but things that could negatively impact diplomatic and military operations.

However, the Nicaraguans are not in the clear.  Their own geographic organization recognizes the disputed area as part of Costa Rica.

Costaricangauzette sent me this map with the red circle showing Nicaragua knows the area of action is Costa Rican.

So what happened?  The fact that the Nicaraguans quickly blamed Google Maps implies they probably did plan the mission with Google Maps and not their own.  I suspect that the Nicaraguans wanted to flex some muscle and thought Google's error showed that they area was disputed and gave them an excuse to be jerks (seriously, do Central Americans militaries need to concern themselves with anything but counter-narcotic and counter-insurgency operations?).

Is it also possible that they thought Google Maps was correct and innocently failed to do any further research?  Yes.  In Iraq I was shown a presentation by an Iraqi geographer who used Google Maps and Microsoft Paint to make his maps.  Sometimes it is amateur hour for those who have the guns.

Map and Data on Stimulus Waste

Related posts:  Stimulus Map of the United States and Fake Stimulus Jobs Map

The federal spending watchdog group Public Notice has created a map entitled "Spending Fail Map" for their Bankrupting America website.  The map displays projects which Public Notice fells is wasteful and not part of the "shovel-ready projects" which were promoted as the main purpose of the stimulus.  Projects listed included refrigerators for public-owned fish sperm and BlackBerry smart phones for smokers.  Public Notice also has a related PDF describing if the stimulus has had any effect in said states.

The map's application is modeled on Web 2.0.  It uses Facebook-like features including an "unlike" feature, buttons to share or contact Congress concerning projects, and the name "Spending Fail Map" borrows internet slang.

The map itself is poorly designed.  Each state has at least one "wasteful" project but the main view only shows one project in a select handful of states.  The main view gives the impression that there are not that many "wasteful" projects, something contrary to the maps intended message.

Bad Maps: RT Recognizes Georgia's Territorial Integrity

Today we introduce a new feature entitled Bad Maps. Bad Maps are posts which will discuss how map mistakes change a message the map maker or map maker's supporters try to convey either in the map or elsewhere.

State-Owned Russian press become lazy with proofing their base maps and accidentally recognized Georgia's territorial integrity when it comes to Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

During the wake of the 2008 Russia-Georgia War the Russian Federation recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent countries. Getting other countries to do so has been difficult for Russia, though. Nicaragua quickly joined in by recognizing the de facto republics but since then only Venezuela has followed suit. In December 2009, Nauru recognized Abkhazia in exchange for aid from Russia yet it is still unclear if they extended the same honor to South Ossetia.

There has been an international effort by Russia to get geographers and neogeographers to recognize the independence of the two breakaway regions. The Commission of Geographical Names and other official Russian government agencies make maps showing the breakaway republics as independent. But in the private-world the Russians have had so-so luck. The online mapping site Yandex has South Ossetia and Abkhazia but the other major Russian online mapping site Kosmosnimki does not.

Here is where the bad map comes in. RT, previously known as Russia Today, is a state-run news agency that broadcasts in English throughout the world. As a branch of the Russian government one would expect it to follow government guidelines including the recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

But human error at RT trumps its stated efforts elsewhere recognizing Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Most of the time maps are not made by geographers or properly-trained cartographers but instead graphic artists who can make something pretty but have no clue what they are drawing. Such is the case with RT which uses a base map that shows Abkahzia and South Ossetia as part of Georgia. The image, top, is taken from a segment on arts and crafts in the Vologda region of Russia. While the Georgian-part of the map has nothing to do with the story it does show that the map editing process has not gone under the scrutiny one expects from the Kremlin.