Challenge: Better Decolonization of Africa?

After France, Belgium, Britain, Portugal and Spain gave their colonies in Sub Saharan Africa independence, the new states usually descended into civil war, ethnic/tribal conflicts, came under the control of brutal/inept/corrupt dictators or remained under the control of a white minority (in the case of Rhodesia & South Africa). Minorities of educated professionals (Indians in Uganda, whites in Zimbabwe) fled. Oil & resource rich states ironically became even poorer as corrupt elites monopolized the wealth or else armed gangs fought for it. There were a few exceptions (Botswana has been a liberal democracy for 50 years, never suffered a civil war or coup and has become relatively prosperous) but they only serve to prove the rule.

I've seen threads addressing how certain African countries could have been better off, but what about the continent in general?

The best idea I can come up with would be a completely different generation of more educated, liberal and responsible African leaders, groomed during the 1940s and 1950s for the explicit purpose of taking the reigns of power. This, combined with more planning, foresight, gradual reforms and state-building (to create non-corrupt civil services & capable but civilian-controlled militaries) in the years leading up to independence could have made a difference. Greater liberalization of domestic food markets in the developed world could also have contributed to the creation of agricultural export-economies in post-colonial African states, allowing them to develop more. This all would have required colonial powers to take greater interest in the welfare of their colonial subjects, the populist African socialists to lose out, the white minorities to voluntarily hand over power with less resistance and for the colonial powers to take less interest in securing Cold War allies & supplies of natural resources (see Belgium's intervention in the Congo).
This is allot that would have right, is pretty unrealistic in my assessment and is imposed from the top-down. Any other ideas that would be broadly applicable to the entire continent?

With a POD no earlier than 1945, create a scenario in which African decolonization occurs with significantly fewer civil wars, coups, strongmen, more economic progress, and less overall instability & authoritarianism. I'm not expecting any economic miracles, but allot better than OTL.
 
This all would have required colonial powers to take greater interest in the welfare of their colonial subjects, the populist African socialists to lose out, the white minorities to voluntarily hand over power with less resistance and for the colonial powers to take less interest in securing Cold War allies & supplies of natural resources (see Belgium's intervention in the Congo).

About those populist African socialists losing out, I dunno. I think more leaders like Julius Nyerere might have been a good thing. I mean, yeah, his economic policies kinda sucked, and he wasn't beyond tossing his political opponents in jail, but when you compare him to Bokassa, Mobutu, Amin, Mugabe, and a few dozen other tyrants in the general vicinity, he was a virtual saint.

Kenyatta was okay too(by those standards), and I've heard some good things about Jerry Rawlings in Ghana. And of course Botswana has been a multi-party democracy with a pretty good human-rights record since decolonization.
 
With a POD no earlier than 1945, create a scenario in which African decolonization occurs with significantly fewer civil wars, coups, strongmen, more economic progress, and less overall instability & authoritarianism. I'm not expecting any economic miracles, but allot better than OTL.

You need the US and the URSS to don't care about Africa . Basically, they support the decolonization to destroy the influence sphere of the European Country and turn Africa into a Proxy war . So less support for decolonization from US and URSS and well you could have Commonwealth style for the French Colony by giving them independence in the 80 . Some part will even be french department . After that, i don't know really about the others colony. But the role of the USA and URSS was really important
 
You need the US and the URSS to don't care about Africa . Basically, they support the decolonization to destroy the influence sphere of the European Country and turn Africa into a Proxy war . So less support for decolonization from US and URSS and well you could have Commonwealth style for the French Colony by giving them independence in the 80 . Some part will even be french department . After that, i don't know really about the others colony. But the role of the USA and URSS was really important
Yeah the Cold War story of Africa is the USSR backing socialist dictatorships that impoverished their people to enrich a small oligarchy class and the US backing anti-socialist dictatorships that impoverished their people to enrich a small oligarchy clas.
 
About those populist African socialists losing out, I dunno. I think more leaders like Julius Nyerere might have been a good thing. I mean, yeah, his economic policies kinda sucked, and he wasn't beyond tossing his political opponents in jail, but when you compare him to Bokassa, Mobutu, Amin, Mugabe, and a few dozen other tyrants in the general vicinity, he was a virtual saint.

Kenyatta was okay too(by those standards), and I've heard some good things about Jerry Rawlings in Ghana. And of course Botswana has been a multi-party democracy with a pretty good human-rights record since decolonization.

Don't get me wrong, Patrice Lubumba would have been allot better than Mobutu. I could certainly imagine a continent in which the military coups/civil wars didn't happen, allowing African socialists to consolidate power and continue multi-decade reigns of single-party stability. But there wouldn't have been much economic progress. Maybe some improvements in health & education (as happened in Tanzania) but no development and a good deal of authoritarianism. Indeed this is what happened in much of the continent. Better, I have to admit. Far from ideal, but better.

The continent would have faired far better economically if these populists lost out to more people like Seretse Khamas, Nelson Mandelas, Abel Muzorewas, and Houphouët-Boignys. I think Africas failures go both ways. The west played it's Cold War chess-games out on the continent, at the expense of the people which contributed to instability & poor leadership that resulted. But you cannot ignore how poor the leadership was.

Julius Nyerere was a mixed picture. He did manage to unify Tanzania's various ethnic groups under a single national identity and made some improvements in health & education, but he was absolutely atrocious on economic development. Combine that with his authoritarianism and I can't really sing him much praise. Sure, it could have been worse. But he still left Tanzania as one of the poorest countries on the continent.

Kenyatta wasn't a socialist as far as I'm aware. He set Kenya on a fairly capitalist path (although he did institute peaceful land-reform) and was very anti-communist in foreign policy. His biggest failing wasn't his authoritarianism per se. China, Singapore, Bismark's Germany and plenty of other authoritarian regimes have demonstrated efficient, prosperous and modern governance. It was the system of patronage, tribal rivalry and corruption he created (or rather, perpetuated/ingrained).
 
You need the US and the URSS to don't care about Africa . Basically, they support the decolonization to destroy the influence sphere of the European Country and turn Africa into a Proxy war . So less support for decolonization from US and URSS and well you could have Commonwealth style for the French Colony by giving them independence in the 80 . Some part will even be french department . After that, i don't know really about the others colony. But the role of the USA and URSS was really important

That's not quite my assessment. The US and USSR were partially opposed to colonialism for ideological reasons (imperialism is looked down at by both Marxist-Leninists in the USSR and Wilsonian moral idealists in the US).

African nationalism, populism and opposition to colonialism was on the rise and had popular support from African subjects and the few educated African elites who did exist. Some African elites in French and Portuguese colonies certainly supported assimilation/integration into their colonial power, but by the 1960s large numbers were fed up with being promised autonomy, citizenship & voting rights without results. The citizens of colonial powers were also becoming less supportive of colonialism and racism in general. That's why Britain was so upset at Rhodesia and South Africa for continuing white-minority rule. Getting rid of the Cold War competition wouldn't be certain to eliminate calls for independence from the white-man and national self-determination.
 
That's not quite my assessment. The US and USSR were partially opposed to colonialism for ideological reasons (imperialism is looked down at by both Marxist-Leninists in the USSR and Wilsonian moral idealists in the US).

African nationalism, populism and opposition to colonialism was on the rise and had popular support from African subjects and the few educated African elites who did exist. Some African elites in French and Portuguese colonies certainly supported assimilation/integration into their colonial power, but by the 1960s large numbers were fed up with being promised autonomy, citizenship & voting rights without results. The citizens of colonial powers were also becoming less supportive of colonialism and racism in general. That's why Britain was so upset at Rhodesia and South Africa for continuing white-minority rule. Getting rid of the Cold War competition wouldn't be certain to eliminate calls for independence from the white-man and national self-determination.

I don't say that they will be colony but for the french case, some colony could have become French Departement . For exemple, Gabon want to become one but was refused by De Gaulle . It's sure that they will obtain independance at some time (Place, like Mali, Cnetrafrique....) but they maybe obtain it too earlier and in way like we need to get the fuck out of here quickly due to Diplomatic pressure .
 
Get Europe to actually take an interest in developing Africa for the sake of Africans. Any benefit to the European country in question is a secondary benefit.

Or maybe get a continent where all the capitalist leaders are like Lee Kuan Yew or Seretse Khama and all the socialist leaders are like Thomas Sankara.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
One problem was that the Colonial Powers had no interest in educating the Africans, except a very minor few, because they simply didn't think decolonization was something that'd ever happen, and even if it happened they didn't think it was that important.
 
Top