NATO Forces in Africa during the Twilight War (v1.0)

[Raellus]

I do apologize if I missed a pertinent thread in the archive (I checked- I promise!) but I'd like to know more about the canonical set up for NATO forces in Africa.

I've heard snippets here and there- the 173rd Airborne Brigade in Kenya (?), an unpublished module pertaining to same- and I'm really curious.

What do you know about this topic? Are there published materials regarding NATO forces in Africa? Any help you could give would be greatly appreciated.

[Raellus]

OK, so I found this in the archive and it's a good start.

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=2099

But...

I would still like to know what the 173rd ABCT is doing in Kenya in the first place. Anyone?

[shrike6]

If I remember right, the reason they are in Kenya, Mombasa in particular, is that they are securing one of the last remaining oil refineries in the region.

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by Raellus

OK, so I found this in the archive and it's a good start.

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=2099

But...

I would still like to know what the 173rd ABCT is doing in Kenya in the first place. Anyone?

Supposedly it was to protect a refinery I believe.

[shrike6]

Originally Posted by Raellus

What do you know about this topic? Are there published materials regarding NATO forces in Africa? Any help you could give would be greatly appreciated.

The only real published materials, by published I'm assuming you mean canon, is in the NATO Vehicle Guide 2nd edition which gives a listing of French Forces in Africa.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by shrike6

If I remember right, the reason they are in Kenya, Mombasa in particular, is that they are securing one of the last remaining oil refineries in the region.

Thanks. Any idea where the oil would be coming from? AFAICT, Kenya has no known oil deposits.

Also, when in the v1.0 timeline does the 173rd get deployed to Kenya?

[shrike6]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Thanks. Any idea where the oil would be coming from? AFAICT, Kenya has no known oil deposits.

I always assumed the Persian Gulf.

Originally Posted by Raellus

Also, when in the v1.0 timeline does the 173rd get deployed to Kenya?

Frank had a post on the Herd that went into more detail than the one in the archive. If I remember right, I wanna say 1997. I'll take a look and see if I can't find the old post.

[HorseSoldier]

I always assumed the Persian Gulf.

Nigeria? Though how it gets from Nigeria to Kenya I can't guess -- I don't see road traffic from point A to point B being viable in the T2K era.

[shrike6]

I guess you guys do have it in the archive.
http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=1630

And Frank didn't say exactly when the the Herd went to the Africa.

[HorseSoldier]

Well, if it was to secure surviving oil production infrastructure, but they still had viable airlift to get them there I'd guess it would have been early '98 or so. Earlier and it wasn't an issue, later and the ability to get a brigade there and even make a half-hearted attempt to support it logistically is off the table.

[Abbott Shaull]

One has to remember that 173rd when the game originally was printed and even up until the GDW closed was more or less a Airborne Infantry Task Force rotating a Battalion from the 2nd Brigade (325th Airborne Infantry Regiment) in and out of the base in Italy. The unit was known as the
Southern European Task Force (SETAF). Which in 2000 the was transformed into the 173rd Airborne Brigade in 2000. At the time it was still basically an over sized battalion, but listed as Brigade. Just before it jumped into Northern Iraq, after the 4th Mechanized Division was denied rights to land and move through Turkey, had a second Parachute Infantry Battalion activated, with Airborne Field Artillery Battalion, Forward Support Battalion, Cavalry Troop, and other Support units.

It was only after Cold War that it decided to turn this Task Force into larger force as response to various NATO Allies reducing their forces as well as the brutal breakup of Yugoslavia help in slowly re-organizing the over sized battalion task force into a force with two Parachute Infantry Battalions, 1 Airborne Artillery Battalion, 1 Forward Support Battalion and other Support units.

Ironically in 2008 the SETAF was reactivated and morphed into the US Army Africa Command in October 2009.

[HorseSoldier]

I think part of the backstory for the 173rd being in Africa was that the battalion at Vicenza was fleshed out into a true brigade before the Twilight War kicked off (is it art imitating life if art does it first? ).

SETAF is otherwise one of the US units not accounted for in the Twilight timeline, though I always kind of figured they got overrun when the Italians defected.

[shrike6]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

Nigeria? Though how it gets from Nigeria to Kenya I can't guess -- I don't see road traffic from point A to point B being viable in the T2K era.

That's why the Persian Gulf is the only that makes sense given its relative proximity. Plus I would think that the refineries in the Gulf would be taken out early by the Soviets to deny their use to the US et al.

[Raellus]

This is great guys, thanks.

My next question is, what exactly is the 173rd being sent there to protect the refineries from?

The Kenyan military, although quite modest, would have been able to defend the refineries from the various marauder units listed in the first archive thread (I haven't looked at the other yet). A whole American brigade seems a bit like overkill if the threat is just brigands and such. Better to send in a couple of SF A-Teams to bolster the Kenyan military. It seems like an entire brigade could be put to better use somewhere else. When all the Soviets would have to do to deny the Kenyan refineries to NATO is nuke them, what's the point? I must be missing something.

Is there a pro-communist revolution/coup in Kenya in the late '90s or after the Twilight War begins? That would make the Soviets think twice about nuking the refineries. If so, using an entire brigade combat team to capture and secure them for NATO would make more sense. I'm just trying to make sense of all of this.

[Fusilier]

Can't nuke all the refineries.

In my time line, I had the 173rd operating mostly in South Africa and other places (ala Hackett's book concepts regarding events in Africa). Kenya was pretty much stable as can be, but keeping a petroleum supply active ends up being worth shifting the brigade there later on - even if only to act as a theater deployable reserve type of deal.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Fusilier

Can't nuke all the refineries.

Why not? I'm not trying to be snarky or anything; I just want to hear your reasoning.

And why not deploy to Nigeria instead of Kenya? One explanation is that the Nigerian oilfields/refineries have already been nuked into oblivion (probably by the Soviets). Another is that it would be harder to ship Persian Gulf oil around the Cape of Good Hope to Nigerian refineries than just around the Horn of Africa to Kenya. I still feel like I'm missing this piece of the puzzle as well.

[Fusilier]

Mmm... Because it wasn't a total nuclear exchange. I stick with the notion that it was a limited exchange. It is limited since we can clearly see in canon that there are still lots of valuable targets untouched.

For each shot one side fired they could expect to lose the same in return. Each side seemed only willing to go just far enough as to help knock the other one out of the game - not send it back to the stone age and suffer the same consequence as well. Also...

Maybe the refinery there isn't large.

Maybe it was deemed being geographically isolated from any consumer worth keeping the product from.

Maybe it was felt Kenya would descend into chaos and render the fuel unobtainable without having to risk a nuke.

Maybe it was already damaged by bombers operating out of Mozambique or one of the many other African places the Soviets and Cubans have forces based in.

Maybe in the chaos and confusion of losing Soviet command and control, it was spared like so many other places when there was nobody left to coordinate/order any more launches. Or they figured there was enough mutual damaged suffered and the exchange needed to be stopped.

For me - Nigeria went the way of the other side (as per Hackett's book again).

[Rainbow Six]

This isn't mentioned in canon anywhere, but just for info the British Army has maintained a permanent presence in Kenya since 1963 - the British Army Training and Liaison Staff Kenya (BATLSK) based at Kahawa Barracks outside Nairobi.

http://www.army.mod.uk/operations-de...ments/932.aspx

Its numbers are small, and I would suppose it's debatable whether or not it would have remained in place at all in the event of a full blown War, but in the event that it did I'd imagine it's highly possible that its troops might find themselves attached to the 173rd Airborne (if you have the 173rd deploying to Kenya that is; otherwise they'd probably end up operating alongside the Kenyan Army).

Cheers

[Raellus]

@Fusilier: All valid points. Taken together, it is a compelling case. My thinking was that as soon as the U.S. put a brigade on the ground to defend the refineries, no matter how modest they happen to be, they just became that more tempting of a target for a nuke. Two birds with one stone and all that.

Perhaps the Soviets had some hope of someday capturing the facilities. That might make them hold off.

That's why I think a communist revolution/coup in Kenya is the way to go. The Soviets and Cubans could have advisors there to assist the revolutionaries. That would both give NATO a reason to send in a brigade combat team AND force the Soviets to think twice about nuking the facilities.

@Rainbow6: Excellent! Thanks. That would be a great way to include commonwealth troops in the campaign. Another way I just thought of would be to include European PMCs tasked with guarding the refineries prior to the arival of the 173rd. And then there's embassy personel.

[Frank Frey]

Greetings,

The 173rd Airborne Brigade was deployed to Kenya for several reasons.
1.) To provide security for the port of Mombasa and for the oil refineries there.
2.) To help secure Kenya from the depradations of any number of warlord armies so that the country could continue to serve as a staging area for operations in the Gulf.
3.) MilGov cut a deal with the French. The French supply the vehicles and the equipment and the US supplies the manpower for a cut of the oil. This arrangement, BTW, has led to a number of American paras wearing the famous French "lizard" pattern camo fatigues.
In effect, the 173rd are mercenaries fighting for France. Sort of an American Foreign Legion if you will.

Out Here,
Frank Frey

[Raellus]

Wow! That really casts Franco-American relations in a whole new light. We discuss France's role in the Twilight War a lot here and, to the best of my knowledge, this has never come up. It's almost worth its own thread!

Couple more questions for you Frank. What kind of vehicles* and equipment do the French send and how do they get it there?

Second, when and how is the 173rd et al transported to Kenya?

Much thanks!

*I've always wanted an excuse to have American paratroops rolling in Panhard VBL scout cars!

EDIT: Apparently, the U.S. already uses a small number of VBL variants as NBC scouts- ULTRAV M11 (I just found this on Wikipedia). They also use German Fox 6x6 APCs for the same thing. What's with buying foreign-made wheeled APCs for NBC stuff?

[TiggerCCW UK]

Raellus, as far as the Fox goes I think its used because its one the best NBC vehicles around. I've no experience of the Fox, I'm basing that on the fact that the US, the UK and (iirc) some Middle Eastern countries all use the NBC version but not any other version. Also iirc it is listed as a US used vehicle in either the US vehicle guide or the East Euro source book.

[HorseSoldier]

Originally Posted by Raellus

EDIT: Apparently, the U.S. already uses a small number of VBL variants as NBC scouts- ULTRAV M11 (I just found this on Wikipedia). They also use German Fox 6x6 APCs for the same thing. What's with buying foreign-made wheeled APCs for NBC stuff?

I've never heard about us using VBLs, but the Fox NBC recon vehicle are nice, as far as creature comforts go (padded bucket seats, A/C). Not a job I'd want, though -- had a couple friends nearly get killed several times between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad during the invasion, being in an essentially unarmed vehicle that headquarters' they were attached to often stuck in randomly dangerous locations as an after thought to getting their tanks and Bradleys situated.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

Not a job I'd want, though -- had a couple friends nearly get killed several times between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad during the invasion, being in an essentially unarmed vehicle that headquarters' they were attached to often stuck in randomly dangerous locations as an after thought to getting their tanks and Bradleys situated.

Gee how come this doesn't surprise me.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Frank Frey

Greetings,
2.) To help secure Kenya from the depradations of any number of warlord armies so that the country could continue to serve as a staging area for operations in the Gulf.

As far as African militaries go, Kenya really seems to have its stuff squared away. They appear to be better organized, trained, and equipped than most sub-Saharan militaries. I think a larger threat to Kenya and the port/refineries than warlords and insurgencies is needed to justify bringing in an entire U.S. Airborne BCT. From a purely gaming standpoint, the more bad guys arounds the better, and it would be good to offer the PCs more challenging opponents. I'm worried that lightly equipped warlord "armies" wouldn't pose too much of a problem for well trained, well equipped paratroopers.

There are a couple of options to correct this. First is to have the Kenyan military, or a portion thereof, join the bad guys. This would definitely up the threat level as well as justifying the move by Milgov to "secure" (i.e. seize) the refineries in the first place. You could set this up with a coup or succession crisis. I'm kind of reluctant to do this, though, because it would make pretty much the vast majority of Africans in the game into a villain and that smacks of imperialist attitudes.

The second option would be to have Tanzania, having lost their Chinese patrons to WWIII, pushed to invade Kenya and seize the refineries by the Soviets. This would be another threat (in addition to those already identified by Frank) that the already overstretched Kenyan military could not face alone. I'm kind of leaning this way because it keeps the Kenyan military as one of the good guys while still giving the PCs a more well equipped (relatively speaking) adversary to contend with.

Originally Posted by Frank Frey

3.) MilGov cut a deal with the French. The French supply the vehicles and the equipment and the US supplies the manpower for a cut of the oil. This arrangement, BTW, has led to a number of American paras wearing the famous French "lizard" pattern camo fatigues.
In effect, the 173rd are mercenaries fighting for France. Sort of an American Foreign Legion if you will.

I'm really looking forward to seeing what equipment the French would be providing- how much, what type, and how do they get it to Kenya?

I also really need to know when and how the 173rd arrives in Kenya.

Thanks!

[StainlessSteelCynic]

While not specifically addressing the things you're asking about, I thought this may be of interest.
http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/doc...7/africa97.htm
It's about the US military mission to Kenya in 1996 or thereabouts.

From a brief read of that document, I think you could argue that Kenya would be one of the few nations in the region receptive to Western forces so perhaps sending a brigade to Kenya does a few things - shows the Kenyans that the US is committed to their well-being & security, maintains a Western presence in the region and also provides a safe harbour for Western and pro-Western forces in the region. That's not including whatever benefits could be got from the oil refineries and so on.

[Frank Frey]

Raellus,

According to my notes, the 173rd was shipped to Kenya in early 1997. There is nothing in my notes about how they were deployed. That's all I've got.

Frank Frey

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Frank Frey

According to my notes, the 173rd was shipped to Kenya in early 1997. There is nothing in my notes about how they were deployed. That's all I've got.

Thanks, Frank. That really helps. I do have a couple more questions, though. Sorry to be such a pest.

If the 173rd deploys in early '97, air transport shouldn't be any trouble at all.

About the French...

'97 seems early to be cutting a deal with MilGov (IIRC, it hadn't formed yet) so this must have happened in '98. Any idea what kind of gear the French sent to Kenya?

I figure it could have been a shipment of wheeled AFVs (Panhard VLBs, VABs, and either AMLs or ERC 90 F4s*), originally intended for an African ally. With many African nations in complete chaos, the French decide to cut a deal with the more trustworthy Americans for a cut of the oil. Does that sound OK?

*All of which already have sub-Saharan African customers. I'd love to include Giat AMX-10 6x6s but they have not been as extensively exported.

[Frank Frey]

Raellus,

No problem...Airlift would make the most sense at that time. As far as cutting deals with the French, yea, 1998 sounds right. It wasn't an overnight thing either.When the final deal was cut, it basically just formalized on paper what had been going for a while.
As for the equipment, let your imagination run with it. Hell, IIRC I had an American armored cav unit that had been re-equipped with AMX-13's. The aviation unit (228th Aviation Bn.) was using a lot of Gazelles and Pumas.
Hope this helps.

Frank Frey

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I have another possible reason for why NATO forces may be based in Kenya.
Water.
Part of the river system that provides life for Egypt runs through Kenya. A 1929 agreement between Britain and Egypt gave Egypt nearly exclusive use of the water from the Nile to the detriment of those British possessions that also accessed the river system. To quote part of the agreement "No irrigation or power works are to be constructed on the River Nile or its tributaries, or on the lakes from which it flows... which would entail prejudice to the interests of Egypt."

It's the aftermath of a world war, Kenya needs resources especially water for agriculture. Perhaps they start to construct irrigation systems and the Egyptians object to the point of threatening war. It might be a long drive through Sudan to attack Kenya but there are highways literally leading from Egypt right up to Kenya and the Egyptians might choose naval or air attacks instead.
The Egyptians might not even attack directly, they may pay Sudanese or Ethiopian rebels to attack (or even Somalians).

Here's an article that prompted this train of thought
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...e-1987519.html