A weird Rhodesian thing I saw...

[MacCaulay]

However, Portugal did have more formal links with Rhodesia than most other states did. Portugal did maintain a diplomatic mission in Salisbury that was an embassy in all but name. Portugal had also accepted an independent Rhodesian representative against the wishes of the British government in September of 1965 (just before UDI). Also, Portugal's national airline TAP was the sole European carrier to serve Salisbury between 1965-1975 (making it one of the airline's most lucrative routes).

Another country that had somewhat close relations with Rhodesia was Greece. The Greek government refused to close its consulate in Salisbury due to the country's large Greek community of 15,000. Also, many of the tankers that ignored the oil embargo against the Rhodesia Pipeline were Greek vessels. Also, Greece was a military dictatorship at during the 1967-1974 so its government was not too concerned with human rights.

In the latter stages of the Rhodesian War, the South Africans sent 8 T-55s to Rhodesia that they had intercepted on a cargo ship bound for Mozambique for use by FRELIMO; they ended up being the only heavy armour that the Rhodesian Armoured Corps would ever operate.

It makes me wonder if there couldn't have been some sort of Iran-Contra-type deal with the South Africans selling arms to the Portuguese through ARMSCOR and setting them up on the ramp at Joburg or anywhere else, then a Portuguese aircraft flagged under their national airline could pick it up and fly it to Salisbury under the normal route.

That way the Rhodesians are able to get arms on a fairly regular basis that are high quality, the Portuguese don't have to ship them literally thousands of miles, and the South Africans get to maintain some semblance of benevolent neutrality.

 

[The_Duke]

But it is also startling how small the Rhodesian army actually was. (orders of battle)
I think that there is little chance that they could ever spare enough troops to dramaticly change the situation in the Portuges colonies.

The Rhodesian army was indeed very small but unlike neighbouring South Africa they had no pretentions of fighting a conventional war. They knew they would have to fight a counter-insurgency war and their army was perfectly tailored to that role. Thanks to this focus on COIN and their air-superiority, the Rhodesians were not only winning the Bush War but helping Portugal win the war in Mozambique as well. It is however doubtfull whether Rhodesia would have been able to go on indefinitely without at least South African aid. In the end sanctions killed long before the war would have.

The Portuguese might not have officialy recognised the Rhodesian state but they were allies in every sense of the word and there were few countries who had better relations with Portugal than Rhodesia. Official recognition would have done little. What they needed was for the big dogs to officially recognise them like somebody already mentioned. This was never going to happen.

So to get back to the point, Portugal was aiding Rhodesia as much as it could, which, due to her own commitments, did not add up to much. As I mentioned before Rhodesia was of more help to the Portuguese than anything else.

What Rhodesia needed was help in surviving sanctions and the only country even remotely willing (and at the same time capable) to do that was South Africa. And as I mentioned before John Vorster was never going to go for it. Seeing as this was the most likely origin of their salvation, one has to think no other outcome was possible. Rhodesia was doomed.

 

[The_Duke]

It makes me wonder if there couldn't have been some sort of Iran-Contra-type deal with the South Africans selling arms to the Portuguese through ARMSCOR and setting them up on the ramp at Joburg or anywhere else, then a Portuguese aircraft flagged under their national airline could pick it up and fly it to Salisbury under the normal route.

Good idea. South Africa was helping the Rhodesians on a covert basis. South African special forces operators were serving secretely in the SAS and were rotated backwards and forwards between SA and Rhodesia by SAAF C-130's. Supply of arms as you mentioned also took place. It is doubtful whether Vorster knew of this and even if he did the SA military was always only going to be allowed to ship surplus or captured weaponry.

In 1980 as Robert Mugabe made himself comfy in his presidential office. SAAF planes were flying in and out carrying out armoured cars that had been lent to Rhodesia as well as large number of Rhodesian special forces personell who had volunteered to serve in the SA army. Some of the flights had to land and depart from airstrips that were under the supervision of the British who had retaken control of Rhodesia before the elections. Neutrality wasn't an issue then but then Vorster wasn't around at that stage either. Vorster simply couldn't grasp the fact that his country was an international parriah and he had to embrace other countries in similar positions (like Rhodesia and Portugal) because they were the only allies available. (As a side-note, SA later did exactly this and one of it's biggest allies was in fact Israel.)

 

[RCTFI]

This is a fascinating thread - the whole situation in that area was a fascinating one, and I'm only just now starting to read up on it and become knowledgeable in that area, so I don't know if I'll be able to contribute much to this discussion... but I will be watching this thread, and others like it, with a whole lot of interest. So, thanks for all the information!

 

[Julius Vogel]

Which is why another POD is needed. Either something earlier or changing Vorster (as a previous poster suggested).

How likely is it that a change from Vorster to someone else would have changed SA policy? I would have thought the same drivers that led Vorster to his position would apply to any leader and therefore might get a similar result but I'm by no means certain about that.

 

[The_Duke]

Which is why another POD is needed. Either something earlier or changing Vorster (as a previous poster suggested).

How likely is it that a change from Vorster to someone else would have changed SA policy? I would have thought the same drivers that led Vorster to his position would apply to any leader and therefore might get a similar result but I'm by no means certain about that.

Vorster was completely dominated by his Chief of Police, Hendrik Van Der Bergh who was an old friend and confidant. Van Der Bergh in an effort to elevate his own importance constantly undermined the military. (In fact the first South Africans to serve covertly in Rhodesia was a police contingent. Also the volatile border with Angola was at first the police's responsibility.) Be that as it may, Vorster was on a mission right from the start to try and gain acceptance for South Africa by the outside world and especially from black Africa. (He was probably one of the last Apartheid idealists. Botha on the other hand slowly did away with some discriminatory legislation. He was however always a conservative man and change would only be allowed at HIS pace. I.e. too slow. Anyway, forgive me for diverging.) This policy and Van Der Bergh's influence really hampered the fight against the communist-backed liberation movements in Southern Africa.

PW Botha was minister of defence at this stage and when he became Prime Minister the whole scheme of things changed. The military way of thinking came to dominate and the military saw the value in supporting Rhodesia. So yes, if Botha had replaced Vorster before 1975, things might have turned out very differently. I doubt if the revolution in Portugal and their subsequent withdrawal could have been prevented. But, there would have been no half-arsed, shoestring invasion of Angola in '75. Dynamic leadership would have seen South African and American backed troops in Luanda before the Cubans had arrived in any strength. Angola would have been capitalist and anti-SWAPO, leaving SA free to intervene in Rhodesia and Mozambique (where ZANLA was based.).

 

[Lord Douglas]

Hrm.

In "What If Gordon Banks Had Played" the Powell Government recognises Smith's regime as soon as it enters office in 1974. I suspect such a move IRL would trigger a movement to expel the UK from the Commonwealth, headed by black African states, but PM Powell in the mid-70s may well prove a Godsend for the Rhodesian government. That would be too late for Portuguese recognition though.

 

[MacCaulay]

This is a fascinating thread - the whole situation in that area was a fascinating one, and I'm only just now starting to read up on it and become knowledgeable in that area, so I don't know if I'll be able to contribute much to this discussion... but I will be watching this thread, and others like it, with a whole lot of interest. So, thanks for all the information!

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't contemplating some sort of alt-Africa story.

Right now it involves something with an independent Katanga and Rhodesia.

 

[The_Duke]

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't contemplating some sort of alt-Africa story.

Right now it involves something with an independent Katanga and Rhodesia.

Go for it! I'm very interested in African history since the end of WWII and from the extensive reading I’ve done I can see that the number of "what if" questions are astounding. There was a constant struggle between pro-western and pro-communist African states and political groupings. The struggle between white-ruled Africa (SA, Rhodesia and the Portuguese colonies) and black-ruled Africa was woven into this struggle. I've always wondered what would have happened if the pro-western factions had been better led, been more dynamic and had been better supported by the US, France and the UK. White-ruled Africa would also have hugely benefited from victories by pro-western factions and this could have changed the face of modern Africa dramatically!

Katanga is a fascinating subject about which, admittedly, I know very little and it would be a good subject to explore. Another interesting subject (among many) would be to look at the Biafran succession from Nigeria.

 

[Julius Vogel]

I was reading through several of the good alt Pacific War (France Fights On/relaunch, Markus, Calbear etc) time lines and I started wondering how different the post war era would be if the British African colonies and the Settler countries/colonies somehow contributed far more non White people to the militaries, either as soldiers, support staff or otherwise.

If the numbers were substantially higher, then we would end the War with a much larger body of militarily trained, or at least trained non White men. This could have all sorts of differences later on, in the immediate post war era

 

[KillerT]

If any of you get the opportunity there was a series of articles in 'The Armourer' magazine about being an Assistant Commissioner in Rhodesia. Fascnating day to day stuff and how they were kitted out, tribal politics and so on. Seems his area was fairly peaceful and any guerillas (ZANLA/ZIPRA) were greatly feared. The AC had an Uzi and FN FAL/SLR plus protected vehicle. The Rhodesians were rather adept at creating road clearence vehicles the weirdest of which was the Pookie -powered by a VW Beetle rotary engine and mounting a few shotguns.
Rhodesian army had the RLI-regular unit of whites recruited from all over. Had 3 commandos and a support unit-pretty much operated as a fireforce rapid response unit. The RLI would rush in after request would be put in by (say)national service units of the Rhodesian Regt (these chaps forming the brigades). The Rhodesian African Rifles were the 'regular' black unit and eached a couple battalions. Other infantry was the Rhodesian Defence Regt -part ime local defence unit pretty much copying the principle of the UDR. The SF units were the Selous Scouts-counter insurgency close recce/patrol-rather like UK's SRR, the 1st SAS regt based upon the expanded C Squadron 22SAS, Greys Scouts -who were a mounted infantry and tracker unit. The police and tribal commisions also had their own forces. Rhodesian artillery pretty much limited to some 25pdr guns although I think they also had some 105 Oto's. Rhodesians had shed loads of captured kit-SAS more often used the RPD and AK-I do have a book on them somewhere...

 

[RCTFI]

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't contemplating some sort of alt-Africa story.

Right now it involves something with an independent Katanga and Rhodesia.

Hm... that seems like a fascinating possibility for a TL. One doesn't see too many stories/TLs set in Africa, so if you do start one you'll have at least one interested reader.

If any of you get the opportunity there was a series of articles in 'The Armourer' magazine about being an Assistant Commissioner in Rhodesia.
...

Huh, interesting stuff. They really were using a very eclectic mix of equippment, some of which seems a little outlandish when I look at it now. Fascinating stuff, of course. If there's any chance of an online copy, let me know - I have the sense that that'd be a good read.

Thanks for sharing!

 

[MacCaulay]

Huh, interesting stuff. They really were using a very eclectic mix of equippment, some of which seems a little outlandish when I look at it now. Fascinating stuff, of course. If there's any chance of an online copy, let me know - I have the sense that that'd be a good read.

Thanks for sharing!

They had a mineclearance vehicle from UNIMOG with a V-bottom, maybe five or six years before the South Africans came out with the Buffel.

What's amazing is that it was using the same idea for anti-mine protection (shaped-bottom to redirect blast as opposed to heavy armour) that the US military finally arrived at in the mid-2000s.

They were like 40 years ahead of us in counterinsurgency, and we'd already spent over 10 years fighting that kind of war.

 

[The_Duke]

There's no doubt the South Africans learnt a lot from the Rhodesians. In fact to some extent the South Africans used the Rhodesians as guinea pigs for their weaponry. (After reading this thread I've done some more reading and perhaps the amount of support given by SA to Rhodesia is underestimated but it could be that most of it arrived after Botha came to office in 1978. The fact remains though that SA's biggest contribution would have been manpower, which was always going to be the Rhodesians' downfall. This was however never going to happen.) The tactics developed by the Rhodesians and some of the weaponry were eagerly taken over and expanded upon by the South Africans. South Africa's own Border War started at Omgulumbashe in 1966 not long after the Rhodesian Bush War started but SA's war was of a very low intensity and was being dealt with by the police. Rhodesia's more intense war was a perfect opportunity for SA's military to learn before their war kicked of in earnest in 1975 during Operation Savannah.

 

[arrowiv]

How would the US have recognized Rhodesia? Would there be any problems there, especially resulting in a more difficult US-UK special relationship?
Any US recognition of Rhodesia would be caused by an election of a different US president in OTL-Goldwater in 1964 or Reagan in 1976 (No Jimmy Carter means no Andrew Young who is probably Mugage's leading US supporter and apologist). Comments?

 

[RCTFI]

They had a mineclearance vehicle from UNIMOG with a V-bottom, maybe five or six years before the South Africans came out with the Buffel.

What's amazing is that it was using the same idea for anti-mine protection (shaped-bottom to redirect blast as opposed to heavy armour) that the US military finally arrived at in the mid-2000s.

They were like 40 years ahead of us in counterinsurgency, and we'd already spent over 10 years fighting that kind of war.

Huh. You learn something new every day. I think I'll do some Wikipedia research now... thanks for turning me onto a very interesting topic to research, MacCaulay.

 

[Strategos' Risk]

Evereyone's seen this already, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unholy_Alliance_(geopolitical)#Later_use

The question is, could they have done more to help Biafra.

 

[Swiftbread]

They had a mineclearance vehicle from UNIMOG with a V-bottom, maybe five or six years before the South Africans came out with the Buffel.

What's amazing is that it was using the same idea for anti-mine protection (shaped-bottom to redirect blast as opposed to heavy armour) that the US military finally arrived at in the mid-2000s.

They were like 40 years ahead of us in counterinsurgency, and we'd already spent over 10 years fighting that kind of war.

Sounds like they were very inventive. If they effect of sanctions was weakened for any reason (for instance South Africa being more supportive) how long could the counterinsurgency last?

 

[MacCaulay]

Huh. You learn something new every day. I think I'll do some Wikipedia research now... thanks for turning me onto a very interesting topic to research, MacCaulay.

Yup! Always here to spread my gearwhore ways.

The question is, could they have done more to help Biafra.

I think it depends on if the Biafran checks clear. The Biafran war was going on right as the Bush War was heating up and UDI was declared. If the Rhodesians were going to do anything for them, you'd have to probably have some common thread tying them together.

The only way I can see that is anti-communism, like the Nigerians getting backing from...say...Tito's Yugoslavia as well as Egypt and the Rhodesians and South Africans deciding to jump in with some pilots and COIN aircraft of their own in the very real understanding that any future Biafran state will be pro-Rhodesia and pro-South Africa.

How would the US have recognized Rhodesia?

With very thick glasses, on a map across a room. I don't see that happening unless there's some real political changes in what we're referring to as "Rhodesia."

I'm totally fine with other folks pitching alternate scenarios, but look at their neighbours: even South Africa didn't get kissy-kissy with them. There was a reason for that. And if the South Africans didn't, then I don't think the US would.

 

[The_Duke]

Just a quick note on the Biafran war. South Africa did send military advisors to Biafra at the behest of a number of black African states. This was more to do with Vorster's policy of looking for African allies than anything else. The Rhodesians were also indirectly involved through Jack Malloch and his notorious Air Trans Africa. I struggle to find any real benefit for these countries getting involved in Biafra other than trying to make political friends. Biafra wasn't the issue, rather the countries that supported them. At the same time, the Federal Nigerian government was also fiercely anti-SA and anti-Rhodesia.