Final answer:
Indigenous chiefs in the Congo signed Stanley's "treaties" often due to coercion, the promise of provisions, or to prevent forceful removal or military actions. The intense pressure and the need to secure a future for their people often left them with no choice but to comply.
Step-by-step explanation:
Indigenous chiefs in the Congo signed treaties with Henry Morton Stanley, who was representing King Leopold II of Belgium, under complex circumstances. These treaties were often signed due to coercion, duress, or the lure of modest payments in the form of provisions, rather than cash. Chiefs were pressured into signings to ensure self-preservation and avoid the risk of forceful removal or violent confrontation.
The example of treaties signed with Michigan tribes between 1795-1864, where chiefs represented their communities under extreme pressure, illustrates the tough choices indigenous leaders faced. They needed to secure a land base for their people and the future generations amidst threats of military force. In some instances, like in the Belgian Congo, where the colonial acquisition was a private enterprise of Leopold II, masqueraded as a humanitarian mission to end slavery, the signing of treaties was done under false pretenses or misconceptions about the Europeans' intentions.
Brutal consequences of resisting were exemplified in other African contexts, as seen with the Khoisan and Captain Paul Voulet's march through French Sudan.