FBU involvement in Africa
 

We have talked a lot of the French army in Europe, Quebec... but the FBU is facing a major problem under the Twilight war. It might still produce electricity, it is very likely to have a fair capability when it comes to industrial production but it faces a major supply problem.

It probably has oil for the armed forces (the use of oil should be forbidden to the civilians) exploiting limited domestic oil fields and probably stll getting oil from Camerroon/Gabon. Coal shouldn't be a problem has many closed mines will reopen. This should be true for Iron and Bauxite.

However, raw materials such as copper would be in very short supply.

As a result, I would expect the French army tro be very heavily involved in Africa to secure what access it already has (Senegal, Côte d'Ivoire, Cameroon/Gabon) but also to put its hand on ressources in countries such as Nigeria (gas and oil) and Zaire/RDC (copper and minerals).

Link must be built with South Africa and a full collaboration can be developped between both countries because of ressources in South Africa but also because access to Cape Town might be vital to maintain control over La Reunion and New Caledonia.

Tunisia has been discussed already and I still think that it might join the Union.

Morocco might be collaborating with France as well and recent events open perpectives toward Libya.

Just a number of ideas

Just having a quick look at some of the areas you've suggested...Katanga Province of the Democratic Republic of Congo looks interesting...according to wiki it has supplies of copper, cobalt, tin, radium, diamonds, and uranium, although extraction might be a problem - looks like you're many hundreds of kilometres from any seaports.

If French troops are in Gabon and Cameroon there's probably a fair chance they may be in Equatorial Guinea as well - substantial oil reserves were discovered there in 1996 IRL (assuming it didn't get nuked of course).

Libya is mentioned in Mediterranean Cruise...I think it may have been nuked, but can't be certain.

I have French "advisors" in Kenya. I also have the French trading enough AFVs to the U.S. (for the 173rd BCT's light armored battalion which, along with the rest of the BCT, is deployed to Kenya) for a share of the fuel produced by the refineries around Mombasa. Frank Frey came up with the concept and I just added the details. He was cool with it. :cool:

sounds interesting, what do you have the light armored battalion equipped with? AMX-10RC?

I like the AMX-10RC but I went a different route*. Here's the pertinent section from my write-up. A much more complete write up can be found here: http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.p...ion+proud+lion

(The 173rd BCT lost its organic vehicles [mostly HUMVEEs, FAVs, and a few LAV75A2 Ridgways] when a Soviet [or Italian] submarine sank the ship transporting them to Kenya.)

*The reason that I didn't choose the more powerful AMX-10RC is that there it currently has only 3 users (including France), none of them in Sub-Saharan Africa. The ERC 90 F4, on the other hand, has 4 African users so it seemed a more likely option.

I would imagine the French would have seize the oil rigs in the Gulf of St Lawrence and ones off Nova Scotia to help its fuel problems.

They do that and they're starting an international incident nobody wants, even if they are basically "friends" with Quebec.
Definitely NOT an option to go seizing another countries property, especially when it's a loooong way from your own borders.

I agree with your choice except that there were only 3 African users for the ERC-90 (Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon and Tchad/Nigeria is a recent addition, post-2000). Moreover, models might not be F4 but F1 and you could have some ERC-20 "Kriss" with them. The VAB could be the six wheeled versions but there are three more possibilities for the APC: Panhard VCR, the APC version of the ACMAT VLRA and the VBRG. By the way, I would add the VLRA to the list in 4 and 6 wheeled versions.

Surplus AML-90 could be sent as well.

Too far, too hard and too risky (as Leg pointed out)

You are right but it is already the world's main copper extraction area and all the needed equipment is already there. They'll have no problem to find the needed engineers, technicians and even workers as most had been Belgian and French. Location is indeed an issue but shouldn't be that much of a problem under T2K. The French need to secure the lane to the sea and I have no doubt that they would conduct genocides on the population trying to oppose them. The wealth of these deposits largely justifies it. Moreover, the copper is already exported (and has been for a long time) and, therefore, you'll find there all the needed transport infrastructures.

Mobutu who had been supported by US (until the 1990's) since the beginning might pose a serious threat but his army was incompetent at best.

Anyway, I just asked my cousin. If he answers my email, you'll know how the minerals are bought to the coasts. He has been working as an engineer in Kolwezi (as did his father) and his wife is from Katanga.

Thanks for the info and the suggestions. I like the idea of adding a couple of ERC-20 Kriss to the mix (if I go with the ERC-90). The AML-90 is also a good choice. IIRC, the main reason I didn't go with that is that it looked like production ended well before the Twilight War.

I must admit that I chose the VAB because I really like the way that it looks, especially the four-wheeled version. In my opinion, the Panhard VCR has got to be one of the ugliest wheeled APCs in the world.

As I was envisioning it, the VBLs would do reconaissance and possibly AT duty (armed with TOW IIs), the VALs would act as standard APCs and possibly mortar carriers, and the ERC-90s would provide direct fire support for the whole bunch.

I also envisioned a few trucks as being part of the shipment (but I kind of gave up on researching exactly which models).

On a side note, it would be an interesting, somewhat ironic, coincidence if the U.S. operated ERC-90s, since the Mexican army would presumably be using their own ERC-90s against U.S. forces in the American southwest.

In fact, several hundreds had just been phased out by the French the last being taken out of service in the mid-1990's. Moreover, if production had ended for France, the production lines were maintained for exports until 2002 when the production definitely ceased. By the 1990's production is rated "as required".

Outsdide of the ACMAT VLRA, trucks could be Berliet GB 8KT, Marmon-Simca and Hotchkiss Jeep. Still the VLRA is my favored choice because the vehicle is fun, because it has been engineered for Africa in the first place and because it can be used as a platform for various type of use (including anti-air and command).

Here is a link with numerous views of the VLRA. Also search for the UN African HMMWV, it is interesting and perfectly relevant to T2K.

http://www.google.fr/search?um=1&hl=...&aqi=&aql=&oq=

Sorry, I probably didn't make myself clear there...when I said extraction, I was really meaning the part about getting the minerals from the mine to the coast.

Hopefully your cousin will be able to shed some light on how that's currently done...I for one would certainly be interested.

(As an aside, I now can't get the line about Belgians in the Congo from Billy Joel's We Didn't Start The Fire out of my head...:))

I totally agree, the VAB is perhaps one of the better looking wheeled APC's out there, and I like how you have a commonality of parts for the vehicles by and large. Nice thing about the VAB, is it seems to have a variant for about every possible use, so it could fill the majority of roles needed.

And you reminded me that I still had to watch the belgian movie "Lumumba" (really excellent but I don't know if there is any english copy somewhere)

My cousin answered quite quickly. Here is a translation of what he wrote:

The minerals are exploited by two means. Part of it (Cu and Co) is processed on the spot in various locations (Kolwezi, Kipushi, Fungurume...). This is done in electrical oven. Then, the metal (undergoing only partial refinement) is shaped into ingot and brought by truck to the two main harbor : Durban (South Africa) and Dar Es Salaam (Tanzania).

Interesting when it comes to the relations between the FBU and the USA. Then, help might be given to US troops in Kenya not because of oil but to secure access to he harbor. Also interesting for the relations with South Africa.

Another part of the mineral (for exemple, Uranium) is brought as such still using trucks. The mineral is, then, put in "Big Bags" and sent to either the ports or to conditioning factories in South Africa.

As a resumé: always by truck (60 tons double carrier trucks), in ingots (partial refinement) or Big Bags (non-refined).

Most of it get out of Katanga through Kasumbalesa on the border with Zambia (96 km south of Lubumbashi).

Might not be the French in Katanga but the South Africans

I could have asked him some times ago but until very recently he was working in the south of Algeria extracting oil (in what they call a life base) and was out of reach. He just quit his job because he considered to have had enough with revolutions and uprisings. Fair enough when you consider that he had been several times in the RDC (Kolwezi...), Chad (When France and the CIA had a small issue with an obscure Colonel Khadaffy), Haute-Volta (the day prior to it being renamed Burkina Faso), Haiti (at the time of Baby Doc fall)...

My uncle and aunt lived in 35 African countries and went through 32 wars and revolutions. Each time they arrived somewhere we used to bet on how long the regime would last. Now, they have been residing in France for two years :D:p.

Which part of Africa are the Cubans involved in? I can't remember what is said in Gateway to the Spanish Main... :confused:
This could throw a bit of a spanner in the works....

Cubans were in Angola.

IRL, Castro sent Cuban troops to Angola to assist the Angolans against UNITA and the South Africans. They left in 1991.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba_in_Angola

In T2k, looks like they are still there in 2000. I can't remember the exact wording but the Cubans stranded on Grenada were the misfits of the Cuban forces in Angola.

In fact, Cubans started to withdraw ih 1989 and only a few were left by 1991. Their presence would depend on your timeline and, no matter what, they will be on the leave. As soon as the war Started and La Havana got rid of Soviet Troops, Moscow had ceased to support them in Africa.

Whatever, isolated Cubans will not weight much in face of a fully supplied South African Army and its allies.

Thanks Mo, that's interesting...so from the looks of things you'd need to make sure you had some sort of power source in place for the electric ovens.

Both sea ports are on the east coast of Africa so that would present some challenges I think, particularly if we assume that the Suez Canal is no longer passable...any ships coming out of East Africa and headed for France would have to go the long way around. Durban is a long haul and I suppose is governed by what has happened in South Africa, which is something that has come up on these boards a few times before. Dar is closer so would (presumably) mean shorter journey times to the port (thinking here that the riskiest part of the venture would be the road trip from the mine to the coast). As you say though, interesting as to how a French presence in Tanzania might affect relations with the US (and others). Zanzibar might be an interesting setting.

Also, I don't think it's been mentioned in this thread, but we know from the RDF Sourcebook that there's a significant French presence in Djibouti.

Interesting info...thanks

Are you think Nuke? or more conventional means, I mean the the Soviets want to destory to prevent the US from using it, or keep in their hands for there own use gate way to more oil in middle east

But I think in pactical terms the canal would be a mess litter with wrecks from Israel and Egypt fighting around it, or the Soviets could block it by sinking a ships in canal

Here is a link to interesting information about power supply to Kolwezi

http://www.abb.fr/industries/ap/db00...90032bfea.aspx

One step further toward a needed collaboration between France and SAR.

Durban would be interesting and the Suez Canal wouldn't be an issue. Shipping would have to go from Durban to Bordeaux with eventual stops at Cape Town, Libreville, Abidjan and Dakar.

As NATO seem to be ones that would benefit most from a link between the Med and the Arabian Gulf (and by extension the Persian Gulf) I was thinking a Soviet nuke, but other options are equally possible.

Yep, that does seem like a logical route if the Suez Canal is blocked, taking in potential FBU allies in West Africa. That said, I'm still not convinced about the stability of South Africa, especially in a V1 timeline that has a continued Cold War and (possibly) an apartheid Government remaining in power. It might be different in V2 with Mandela as President, etc. Maybe I've just read Larry Bond's Vortex too often...

I can see a ground burst nuke being the quickest and most effective way to block the canal. Perhaps one at each end just to be sure...
Sinking ships in the channel would work, but it's slow to do and could be prevented by effective naval patrols. And there's bound to be plenty of naval assets tasked with preventing it being blocked in any way (scuttled shipping, mines, etc). Logically, a nuke seems to be the best option.

The nuke probably wouldn't be targeted at the canal itself either - more effective to land/place it a hundred metres or so to the side and let the blast throw earth and rubble into the channel. Perhaps the Soviets could get a few local fanatics to do the job - drive a nuke in a van to the bank and hit the switch...

As Leg I use to detonate two bombs.
However, could the canal still be used even if it had survive almost intact is a good question.
Then, what kind of ship will be able to travel through it?

I have not found any clear element but I just found this website (very interesting from what I read in French):
http://suezcanal.bibalex.org/Present...Home/home.aspx

As I read one of the document (from 1953) it quickly became obvious that the canal need quite some level of care and that raise many questions. With the Twilight war the ability to exploit it correctly would probably have disappeared and even if the canal still existed, most ship might not be able to sail through it anymore.

Something to think about (a question to ask also about the Panama canal which, I think, is even more complex).

A late joiner to the discussion but wanted to get my two cents in. I would think that the US might want to keep the French out of Kenya at all costs. Been starting my own module there similar to what Raellus is doing but where the US got its shipment of vehicles thru to there and thus didnt need any help from France.

The refinery at Mombasa is most likely being used to make refined products for the RDF - and all the US doesnt need is the French having a say in who gets the refined products.

And the Kenyans may see how other areas in Africa are falling under French domination and not like the return of a colonial power to their country (especially as they were never a French colony to begin with).

I think the French may get a much better welcome in West Africa than they will in the East with the exception of Dijbouti which was their colony at one time. (as detailed in the RDF module)

It seems likely that the whole continent might have been hit by EMP. The West African oil infrastructure is an obvious target for both/either side. To my knowledge, there hasn't been an African strike list published. However, the Soviets would have a keen interest in denying African minerals and petroleum to the West. It's hard to know how badly South Africa got hit, but it's highly unlikely that the Soviets would be willing to forget decades of frustration at the hands of the South Africans. The West, in return, would hit Soviet clients as payback. A handful of nukes, coupled with the disruption of EMP, would upend the already tenuous social contract in many parts of Subsaharan Africa.

Plant tongue firmly in cheek...

Hey Web, Now who's advocating a Mad Max environment?
Yeah nuke it all!

Remove tongue from cheek.

Seriously wouldn't both side want to be a little bit cautious about how many
nukes get thrown around? Both the US and Soviets, heck even Europe, know
for certain they're going to get nuked somewhere and after that they're going to need intact friends to help them out. I can't think of a better way to destroy international relations than to drop a nuke on someone. Also cannon states the main two beligerants inched their way towards nuclear warfare in order to avoid the dreaded MAD massive exchange. As such I guess I'm a proponent of the less damaged approach, atleast to the not strickly involved in the war areas, such as Africa, South America, and Australia. Even Portugal and Spain get off lightly in my T2k environment.

I dont see the African continent being hit by EMP at all, or at least very minorily. Outside of major existing Soviet bases there really wasnt much to hit in Africa.

For instance look at the Mombasa refinery - compared to US facilities and whats in the Middle East its a minor facility. You would have to be very very far down the list of targets before you ever hit that.

And also one other clue - Frank Frey in his notes basically said the refinery is operational - its why the US is there in the first place. You arent going to waste a para brigade and the infrastructure to support it, let alone a small naval task force to guard a non-operational or barely operational refinery.

Large parts of Africa are already halfway to Mad Max as it is. A handful of nukes is all it takes to upend the applecart. The v1 chronology tells us that both sides are willing to nuke targets in neutral countries to deny the enemy access to resources.

As for the balance of nuking, let’s remember that we’re talking the USSR here. Once they take a few hits, the surviving leadership is going to be thinking about the future. The chances for the Soviet Union to emerge in a favorable position are diminished by every other player who enters the recovery period in a better condition than the USSR. This is why the Soviets hit France, although France probably gets an even lighter treatment than the US. The Soviets will have very little to lose by giving Western allies in Africa a taste of the nuclear fire, since the Africans can’t retaliate. If the West reads the code, then they strike Soviet clients in the region. Very little skin off the Soviets’ nose. At the very least, the Soviets would want to render African electronics and power generation as inert as much of the Soviet system. The number of attacks on African cities, bases, and infrastructure might be very small. Pretoria, Johannesburg, Cape Town, the Nigerian oil shipping facilities… it doesn’t take a lot to take the pro-Western Africans out of the equation. Perhaps a few tacnukes are used against specific South African bases and the bases of any other pro-Western African nation with the resources to be a problem. Again, a handful will do the job.

Having Africans “taken out of the equation” doesn’t mean the place is completely wrecked. There’s plenty of room for things exactly like the operation in Kenya. But in many places, the ability of government to control the hinterlands was pretty weak already. Many of the African nations will fragment into much more organic states. Oil and electricity will become even scarcer throughout the continent. Civil war and civil disorder, which lurked just beneath the surface in many locations, will become pandemic. Of course, there will be islands of peace and relative prosperity. However, clients of both sides and the neutrals will become completely wrapped up in their own very local concerns.