FBU involvement in Africa

[Targan]

I back Web's take on Africa. Good summary.

[Ironside]

Yes, the story hangs together well.

[Olefin]

I disagree with Web as to South Africa - depending on what happened there they may have 4-5 nukes still in their arsenal. And while thats not a lot its enough to really not make the Soviets day if they, oh for instance, give them to the Israelis to get some pay back one day or put them on a ship to try to pay the Sov's back themselves. (especially considering there isnt much left of the Sov Navy to stop them)

Course that depends on if you see South Africa as a pariah nation or if they have embraced change and are back in the company of nations again.

Also keep in mind that Senegal and Dijbouti hold together as nations according to the RDF - now if Africa is a nuked EMP blasted continent I doubt very much there would have been much left of either nation to join the FBU.

(I do heartily agree that much of Nigeria would be glowing in the dark because of the importance of its oil industry to the US and Western Europe)

However I can definitely agree that much of the continent would be a mess even if not one nuke landed south of Libya. In the module I am working on the 1st and 2nd Congolese Wars still occur - and its those wars that help turn much of Africa between the Sahara and South Africa into a landscape of failed nations - except for the ones the French and Belgians supported like Rwanda and Burundi (i.e. the Tutsi armies that came out of the Rwanda massacre)

[Legbreaker]

I'm with Web on this one.

[Olefin]

well I am with Frank Frey on this one and its his notes that are being used for Kenya. And I doubt that Kenya is the only nation in Africa that is in good shape.

[Webstral]

It's not an either-or. I'm describing an overall state of affairs. I specifically made allowances for islands of relative peace and prosperity so that Kenya and some other locations like it could be incorporated into an overall picture without the need for taking sides over something so ill-defined as Africa in 2000.

Surviving intact is very much a relative term in 2000. Even places that haven’t been directly affected by the nuclear exchange are going to be affected by the collapse of the global trade network and the disruption of the global petrochemical network. Even places that produce enough oil for fuel for their own needs and some export still can’t necessarily produce a wide variety of important petrochemical products, such as pesticides and fertilizers. Other products not produced locally will be unavailable. The local economy will be affected by the steep decline in trade—especially in places like Mombasa that were relatively cosmopolitan before the war. The ever-present urge for self-determination among the tribes not in power will grow as communications and interdependence decline.

Again, this isn’t worth taking sides over. There’s no Webstral’s-way-or-the-highway or Frank Frey’s-way-or-the-highway.

[Olefin]

No and I dont think that either Webstral - dont take my disagreeing with you as saying its my way or the highway - I am saying that I dont agree with Africa being massively damaged by EMP - but I do agree with you that economic damage from world trade being shut down is making Africa rapidly fall apart in many places

[Raellus]

To me, this EMP argument is moot. Regardless of whether Africa is or is not affected by EMP, it is still going to be a hot mess once WWIII kicks off. Somalia is the modern epitome of a failed state. There are fairly routine rolling blackouts in Nairobi and Mombassa now, in 2012. Nigeria teeters on the brink of tearing itself apart (again- remember Biafra?) in a fresh wave of sectarian violence. There was a coup in Mali just last week. If all of this has happened during the "Pax Americana", imagine how much crazier it would have been as the Cold War superpowers spiralled towards open warfare.

In the topsy-turvy lead in to a full-blown (read "nuclear") WWIII, Africa is only going to get more chaotic. Without the money and technical expertise of the U.S., Soviet Union, and/or China (depending, to a degree, on what timeline you use), many African nations are going to struggle to keep it together. Cold War patronage did contribute to some of the violence and instability in Africa during the '50s-'80s, but it also, in some cases, kept the violence fairly localized and, in others, prevented wider African wars from breaking out. Without that external influence, the situation in Africa would likely have gotten a whole lot worse. We all saw what happened in Rwanda when the world turned a blind eye.

Yes, some parts of Africa might be able to maintain relative peace and order, but these regions are going to be small, few, and far between. They are going to struggle to beat back the tide of chaos that surrounds them and they are going to have to do so more or less alone. There's not going to be some powerful patron nation there to step in and help with lawyers, guns, and money. Hell, there's not going to be a U.N. even.

Kenya might be one of those countries that doesn't completely collapse, but it will be faced with some staggering challenges, with or without nuclear strikes/EMP.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Kenya might be one of those countries that doesn't completely collapse, but it will be faced with some staggering challenges, with or without nuclear strikes/EMP.

So very true (sadly). Even in RL right now, with a relatively stable world and foreign assistance, Kenya can't prevent Somali pirate groups raiding coastal resorts and kidnapping foreign tourists. Once the Twilight War kicked off Kenya would be hard pressed just to maintain a basic level of border security. Of course, having formidable US combat assets in country would provide an excellent deterrent effect against a full scale incursion by anything other than guerrilla groups.

[Olefin]

I am actually starting to look at Western Africa and Senegal now for a possible new sourcebook

We do know that per canon the French were heavily engaged in Africa even before the war broke out - not only did they have the units that were historically located in places like Chad, Senegal, Djibouti, etc.. but they had sent additional French Foreign Legion units and possibly the entire FAR to Western Africa to fight Soviet backed guerrillas in Sengal, Mauritania and Mali - thats a pretty big deployment of men even before the general war starts

And adding the Belgians to the mix means that they might be going to places like Benin (which is where the Belgians have trained troops in the past) as well as Rwanda and Burundi and the Congo as well

In fact that heavy committment could explain partly whey the French didnt join the war - i.e. the units that could rapidly respond to events in Germany and could have been deployed quickly when the fighting broke out were already committed to Africa - which gave the French time to think and decide that this war wasnt for them (i.e. during the time they got the units in France up to war readiness)

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Olefin

I am actually starting to look at Western Africa and Senegal now for a possible new sourcebook

We do know that per canon the French were heavily engaged in Africa even before the war broke out - not only did they have the units that were historically located in places like Chad, Senegal, Djibouti, etc.. but they had sent additional French Foreign Legion units and possibly the entire FAR to Western Africa to fight Soviet backed guerrillas in Sengal, Mauritania and Mali - thats a pretty big deployment of men even before the general war starts

And adding the Belgians to the mix means that they might be going to places like Benin (which is where the Belgians have trained troops in the past) as well as Rwanda and Burundi and the Congo as well

In fact that heavy committment could explain partly whey the French didnt join the war - i.e. the units that could rapidly respond to events in Germany and could have been deployed quickly when the fighting broke out were already committed to Africa - which gave the French time to think and decide that this war wasnt for them (i.e. during the time they got the units in France up to war readiness)

And of course, Nigeria is oil-rich.

[Olefin]

and fighting over what is left in Nigeria would be something you could see the French and Belgians getting involved in - i.e. even if the refineries there get nuked (which in my sourcebook I have happening and most likely is what "really happened" if the area had been covered by canon based on the pattern of nukes in places like Mexico and Venezuela and France) there is still the matter of the oilfields - and I dont see the French just letting that area stay in the hands of marauders and Nigerian army remnants

[unkated]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

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.

Katanga was, of course, a locale of mercenary action in the 1960s.

You could have an interesting campaign of a well-stocked mercenary activity kicking off in say 1997 (when all the major powers are otherwise occupied) to seize the province, declare independence, and wait out the war and then set up for business in teh aftermath. The French could be a good early partner, lending military aid and selling equipment in exchange for raw materials. By 2001-5, they and perhaps Brazil and Argentina may be the best customers (semi-intact still-active industrial sectors).

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

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.

Libya is a big place. If it was nuked, I would assume that someone targeted refineries or ports. Nuking very oil well out in the desert would take a lot of shots. Inefficient use of resources; if you are denying oil to your enemies, you are concerned with keeping them from exporting it.

An interesting possibility if Libya was nuked or has otherwise fallen apart would be period French military actions to seize a well, pump out a (truck) convoy's worth or oil, and then be taken off of a minor port.

Another possibility would be to lay a new pipeline to a minor unnuked port for use...

Uncle Ted

[Olefin]

Libya was nuked per Med Cruise - I referred to that in the East African sourcebook - however you are right - they nuked the refineries mostly and also the ports - so you can get oil still - the issue is getting it transported to the coast

Med Cruise had them using merchant convoys bringing drums of barely refined dirty diesel fuel (refined by using 50 gallon drums to seperate the oil that burns as diesel from the heavier elements)

Having the French get involved (or for that matter the Italians out of Sicily) would be a fun way to do a different kind of adventure for the game (and a great way to actually play Italian or French characters)

either as part of the effort to get the oil transported (i.e. convoy guards) or as a recon force trying to find operational oil wells