British UDI Military Intervention 1966

Hunter W.

Banned
If I am not mistaken Wilson was more willing to use more force than Home would have ever considered. Remember, Harold Wilson had to frequently convince the Americans of the merit of economic sanctions (Nixon lifted some in the early 1970's) not sure about Ted Heath.

As for military force, the Rhodesian Army of the day had been somewhat modernized thanks to arms sales from Britain, and secret support from France. If the SAS attempted an operation at any rate it would require significant force, and would enrage the South Africans. Perhaps they could dispatch some crack parachute divisions to neighboring Zambia and Malawi. It is quite possible a lot of causalities result I personally think that's why Wilson shied away from direct intervention, instead hoping the UN and other Commonwealth nations would comply with his request for economic pressure.

Would be a massive popularity boost for the pretty mediocre Wilson government of the day, didn't have a majority and wasn't bold.
 
Last edited:
As for military force, the Rhodesian Army of the day had been somewhat modernized thanks to arms sales from Britain, and secret support from France. If the SAS attempted an operation at any rate it would require significant force, and would enrage the South Africans.

Since the Rhodesians would not have resisted British forces we probably could have sent a detachment of half a dozen Red Caps, however we did not know that for sure at the time. As I've said above a det of 22 SAS and 16 Para Bde would get the job done and hang what the South Africans think. It's not their colony.
 

Hunter W.

Banned
Since the Rhodesians would not have resisted British forces we probably could have sent a detachment of half a dozen Red Caps, however we did not know that for sure at the time. As I've said above a det of 22 SAS and 16 Para Bde would get the job done and hang what the South Africans think. It's not their colony.

Well considering the South Africans at this time were pretty pissed about the hardline approach against Apartheid I doubt they will sit around milling about the implementation of majority rule past the northern frontiers.

As for the Rhodesians felt they were standing up to a larger bully, and thus the whites rallied around Ian Smith. They wouldn't throw their weapons to the British easily.
 
Would be a massive popularity boost for the pretty mediocre Wilson government of the day, didn't have a majority and wasn't bold.

I think you are being quite optimistic about the 1960s British public. White Rhodesians would definitely be viewed as British by the majority and the idea of removing Brits from power and replacing them with black majority rule would be opposed by at least a significant portion of the public.
 

Hunter W.

Banned
I think you are being quite optimistic about the 1960s British public. White Rhodesians would definitely be viewed as British by the majority and the idea of removing Brits from power and replacing them with black majority rule would be opposed by at least a significant portion of the public.

All the Powellites would come out of their caves. I guess?
 
Since the Rhodesians would not have resisted British forces we probably could have sent a detachment of half a dozen Red Caps, however we did not know that for sure at the time. As I've said above a det of 22 SAS and 16 Para Bde would get the job done and hang what the South Africans think. It's not their colony.

Why? The evidence presented in this thread suggests it'sas likely that the British Forces won't fight the Rhodesians.

It's likely to throw up problems in Northern Ireland if it does go ahead. A stretched British military and the precedent of the British military intervening in that manner will likely have Unionists even more scared and paranoid. You migt see worse riots and less capacity to respond.
 

Hunter W.

Banned
Why? The evidence presented in this thread suggests it'sas likely that the British Forces won't fight the Rhodesians.

It's likely to throw up problems in Northern Ireland if it does go ahead. A stretched British military and the precedent of the British military intervening in that manner will likely have Unionists even more scared and paranoid. You migt see worse riots and less capacity to respond.

I doubt this, the Ulster Constabulary operated in the province with virtually no violence. The actual religious violence began in 1969, after a minor event I can't remember occurred thus sparking The Troubles.
The British still had small outposts across Asia and the ongoing anti-insurgency operations in Aden. All of which Denis Healey handled spectacularly.
 
Top