PC/WI: Post-independence African leaders are willing to engage in border revision?

CaliGuy

Banned
Would it have been even remotely plausible for post-independence African leaders to willingly engage in border revision?

Also, if so, what would this border revision have looked like and what would the consequences of this border revision have been?
 
Not unless a superpower enforces it, as is the case of Ethiopia losing Eritrea after the collapse of the USSR, or Sudan. Of course, in the Cold War, when you're being heckled by a side who wants to partition you, chances are, the other superpower would become your new best friend.

Odds are, virtually no leader, especially in Africa, would willingly give up land to separatists. South Africa under apartheid, maybe (they did claim that the Bantustans were independent protectorates as a way of disenfranchising Africans in the country). Other than that, not really.
 
A powerful United Nations, that had enough goodwill in Africa, might be able to organize it. If both Lumumba and Hammarskjold survive they might be able to negotiate something, but it'd probably require an earlier POD to give the UN enough power independent of the superpowers.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Not unless a superpower enforces it, as is the case of Ethiopia losing Eritrea after the collapse of the USSR, or Sudan. Of course, in the Cold War, when you're being heckled by a side who wants to partition you, chances are, the other superpower would become your new best friend.

Odds are, virtually no leader, especially in Africa, would willingly give up land to separatists. South Africa under apartheid, maybe (they did claim that the Bantustans were independent protectorates as a way of disenfranchising Africans in the country). Other than that, not really.
Interesting point about the Cold War dynamics in regards to this.

However, what about after the end of the Cold War?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
A powerful United Nations, that had enough goodwill in Africa, might be able to organize it. If both Lumumba and Hammarskjold survive they might be able to negotiate something, but it'd probably require an earlier POD to give the UN enough power independent of the superpowers.
Would either the U.S. or the Soviet Union actually be willing to give the U.N. too much power, though?
 
Would either the U.S. or the Soviet Union actually be willing to give the U.N. too much power, though?

An ambitious, politically savvy Sec Gen like Hammarskjold could theoretically leverage an African request to negotiate border revisions into more independent power for the UN, so long as the superpowers were led by people, like JFK, who weren't adamantly opposed to such. Whats more likely I think though would be for some scenario where the US and USSR stay friendly after WW2, and use the UN as a joint vehicle for decolonization. That's not a totally inconceivable idea. If decolonization were handled in something approaching a comprehensive, organized manner, there'd be a lot less deference to the colonial borders, and probably some sort of good faith transition to self government period in which the various ethnic problems might become apparent.
 
The partition of Israel is probably the closest OTL analogue to what I'm thinking, which reminds me of the other possible scenario for acceptance of border revision, which is along cease-fire lines. That might not count as "willingly" according to OP, but could be plausible regardless of the larger geopolitical situation.
 
Top