What would an independent Katanga be like?

Michel Van said:
The new state of Katanga, would be a mess.

"Official" a Democratic State under President Moïse Kapenda Tshombe
It's a puppet state controlled by the Belgian mining company and Belgium Socialist party (political Mafia) supported by Rhodesian and South African.
Were Democratic and human rights are trample under foot, for the profit of Belgium industrials and politicians

I didn't know anything about that.

It's complex mess of Industrial and Political interworking in Belgium.
The Belgian Mining company like Union Miniere had close ties with Socialist, true the worker Unions FTGB.

For Socialist, they were involved in every Corruption scandal Belgium endure or like IBRAMCO scandal and they play also a role in Katanga case.

In case of Katanga it was even more complex mess
On one side the the Belgian mining companies, who wanted there Interest secured against "communist" and Nationalist desire from independent Zaire under Lumumba.
On Other side Belgium colonist who wanted there interest protected true out Zaire.
Next to that groups of politicians who deploring former Colony of Congo.
And Socialist who protecting there interest
 
Just barely - there would be a bit more Belgian, Portuguese, South African and Katangan mercenaries and aid on Biafra's side, but Katangan support would piss off the Congolese government and likely taint Biafra's image among anti-imperialists and a good chunk of Black Africa.
And Nigeria might use the Katangan example to argue seccessionism is a part of "Neo-Colonialism".
 
One tidbit about Katanga: by African standards it's pretty nice climate-wise. The Katanga Plateau - the southeastern portion where Lubumbashi, the Uranium, and the Copper are - is higher in elevation, cooler in temperature, and has less issue with Malaria and the Tsetse Fly than other parts of Africa. Plus it's at the headwaters of the Lufira River and has had a hydroelectric dam on the river since 1926.

I can see the country doing quite nicely for itself tbh. It's small in population and despite its' being landlocked will probably have access to Angolan ports.

As for Portugal withdrawing from Angola, I imagine Katanga would factor into things. Making money off of shipments out of Katanga changes the cost-benefit analysis of the colonial war in Angola. OTL by the end half the troops in Angola that Portugal had were locally recruited, and Angola was mostly under control when Portugal withdrew. If Katanga exists, France and Belgium are going to want to make sure that the route to the sea through Angola stays open, meaning Portugal will have more support in the colonial war.
 
As for Portugal withdrawing from Angola, I imagine Katanga would factor into things. Making money off of shipments out of Katanga changes the cost-benefit analysis of the colonial war in Angola. OTL by the end half the troops in Angola that Portugal had were locally recruited, and Angola was mostly under control when Portugal withdrew. If Katanga exists, France and Belgium are going to want to make sure that the route to the sea through Angola stays open, meaning Portugal will have more support in the colonial war.

yes, A interesting Coalition
Portugal trying keeping there Colony
Belgium defending The Benguela Railway keeping it operational (with Support of France)
South Africa try cut down Angola rebel support for Namibia struggle for independents
and All fighting against communist influence in Angola like Cubans fighting there.
 
So, how likely do you see secessionists in other African countries to be condemned as "agents" of "Neocolonialism" due to Katanga?
 
yes, A interesting Coalition
Portugal trying keeping there Colony
Belgium defending The Benguela Railway keeping it operational (with Support of France)
South Africa try cut down Angola rebel support for Namibia struggle for independents
and All fighting against communist influence in Angola like Cubans fighting there.

The Portuguese considered giving Cuando Cubango and Moxico to Savimbi and UNITA.

If they do that here, the Angolan War is a walk.
 
So, how likely do you see secessionists in other African countries to be condemned as "agents" of "Neocolonialism" due to Katanga?
That happened IOTL even in cases when it made no sense (see the Nigerian civil war, when Nigeria was propped up by BP and the rebels had an explicitly anti-colonial agenda).
 

kernals12

Banned
That happened IOTL even in cases when it made no sense (see the Nigerian civil war, when Nigeria was propped up by BP and the rebels had an explicitly anti-colonial agenda).
That was a weird war. The US, Britain, and Canada found themselves on the same side as erstwhile allies such as *checks notes* the Soviet Union and against age old enemies such as *adjusts glasses* France, West Germany, Portugal, and Spain.
 
So, independent Katanga may result in Portuguese Angola? Curious.

Could this affect Rhodesia, too?

That was a weird war. The US, Britain, and Canada found themselves on the same side as erstwhile allies such as *checks notes* the Soviet Union and against age old enemies such as *adjusts glasses* France, West Germany, Portugal, and Spain.

What the fuck was even happening there, I look at that allies list I saw once and I just shake my head in pure incomprehension.
 
That was a weird war. The US, Britain, and Canada found themselves on the same side as erstwhile allies such as *checks notes* the Soviet Union and against age old enemies such as *adjusts glasses* France, West Germany, Portugal, and Spain.
What the fuck was even happening there, I look at that allies list I saw once and I just shake my head in pure incomprehension.
Both sides were broadly neutral/west-leaning, so it wasn't going to break along Cold War lines.

Between Commonwealth ties and BP interests Nigeria was able to rope in a good chunk of the Anglo world. Arab states supported it because they wanted to help their fellow Muslims. Some African states with close ties to Nigeria also pitched in. The Soviet block sent support because they had the hair-brained idea that Nigeria's large population would inevitably make it the communist vanguard state of Africa.

France, Germany, and Norway meanwhile were gnawing at the bit to end BP's monopoly over the secessionist region's vast oil reserves. While the Vatican, Spain, Portugal, and Haiti were supporting their fellow Catholics (the Igbo of Biafra). South Africa and Rhodesia were lashing out at the OAU (of which Nigeria was a prominent member). China and Tanzania were there to flip off the Soviets.

And Israel supported both sides for reasons I don't care to know.

So it's a mess, but outside of the Soviet and Israeli involvement it actually makes a reasonable amount of sense.
 
Rule of thumb in Africa is that landlocked countries are a lot poorer and less stable than comparable neighbors with sea access, considering in what a bad shape Congo is/has been... it would be an even bigger mess in Katanga.
 

kernals12

Banned
Both sides were broadly neutral/west-leaning, so it wasn't going to break along Cold War lines.

Between Commonwealth ties and BP interests Nigeria was able to rope in a good chunk of the Anglo world. Arab states supported it because they wanted to help their fellow Muslims. Some African states with close ties to Nigeria also pitched in. The Soviet block sent support because they had the hair-brained idea that Nigeria's large population would inevitably make it the communist vanguard state of Africa.

France, Germany, and Norway meanwhile were gnawing at the bit to end BP's monopoly over the secessionist region's vast oil reserves. While the Vatican, Spain, Portugal, and Haiti were supporting their fellow Catholics (the Igbo of Biafra). South Africa and Rhodesia were lashing out at the OAU (of which Nigeria was a prominent member). China and Tanzania were there to flip off the Soviets.

And Israel supported both sides for reasons I don't care to know.

So it's a mess, but outside of the Soviet and Israeli involvement it actually makes a reasonable amount of sense.
It should be noted that Biafra became a cause celebre in the West after photos of starving children resulting from Nigeria's blockade made their way onto television screens and newspapers all over the world.
 

kernals12

Banned
Rule of thumb in Africa is that landlocked countries are a lot poorer and less stable than comparable neighbors with sea access, considering in what a bad shape Congo is/has been... it would be an even bigger mess in Katanga.
Correlation =/= causation. Botswana is landlocked and is the most stable and wealthy country in Sub-saharan africa.
 
Correlation =/= causation. Botswana is landlocked and is the most stable and wealthy country in Sub-saharan africa.
Yeah it doesn't automatically mean that Katanga would be a terrible place to live, but on the other hand Katanga did have ethnic problems in a way Botswana doesn't. The major cause of "domestic" sentiment in favor of Katangan autonomy and later secession was the belief promoted by the Conakat party that the Lunda and Yeke people were being outcompeted in higher-paying jobs by Luba immigrants from Kasai. Even after the secession was ended these tensions continued, hence a new round of ethnic violence in the early 90s.

Also, when Katanga's secession was proclaimed the Balubakat party (representing the Luba of Katanga) proclaimed its own revolt in northern Katanga, supporting the Congolese government against the secessionists. Even today it's apparently not uncommon to hear those in southern Katanga speak of the north as "useless Katanga" due to its less impressive economic history.

So, how likely do you see secessionists in other African countries to be condemned as "agents" of "Neocolonialism" due to Katanga?
Lots of African nationalists in the 1960s IRL used the term "Tshombe" to refer to more moderate, Western-backed parties in Africa, much as an American may call someone a "Benedict Arnold."

I have a huge collection of books on Katanga and the 1960s Congo. I one day hope to run an online simulation of Katanga's secession. Two good reads on the subject are To Katanga and Back and Katanga Secession.
 
Last edited:
I have to wonder as to what effect this might have in the Kivu region and the masses of refugees from Uganda, Burundi, and Rwanda who headed over the border, and the people who followed after them. I am unsure if it was solely to slaughter them or if there were armed groups striking back among the refugees. I know very little about the conflicts in those countries. Apparently at least one of these doubled the land they controlled de facto, though not with any annexation. Just lots of swiping of mineral resources.
 
Lots of African nationalists in the 1960s IRL used the term "Tshombe" to refer to more moderate, Western-backed parties in Africa, much as an American may call someone a "Benedict Arnold."
So Nigeria might get African nationalists to turn a blind eye to them brutally crushing Biafra by raising the spectre of Katanga?
 
So Nigeria might get African nationalists to turn a blind eye to them brutally crushing Biafra by raising the spectre of Katanga?
I don't think the existence of an independent Katanga would change much in regard to Biafra. They're two different situations. Julius Nyerere for instance had no love for the Katangan secession, whereas he actively lobbied other African states to recognize Biafra.

Also the Biafran secession, even though it had dubious covert supporters (France, Portugal, etc.), was a less clear-cut case of neo-colonialism in nationalist eyes than the Katangan secession. Lumumba became an icon for African nationalists, whereas Tshombe was among those responsible for his murder. Ojukwu didn't have the same sort of notoriety.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the existence of an independent Katanga would change much in regard to Biafra. They're two different situations. Julius Nyerere for instance had no love for the Katangan secession, whereas he actively lobbied other African states to recognize Biafra.

Also the Biafran secession, even though it had dubious covert supporters (France, Portugal, etc.), was a less clear-cut case of neo-colonialism in nationalist eyes than the Katangan secession. Lumumba became an icon for African nationalists, whereas Tshombe was among those responsible for his murder. Ojukwu didn't have the same sort of notoriety.
But we can at least agree Nigerian propaganda would compare Biafra to Katanga?
 
But we can at least agree Nigerian propaganda would compare Biafra to Katanga?
It already did in real life. Biafran spokesmen had to respond against arguments comparing their secession with that of Katanga. Even Mobutu made the comparison when justifying Congo's support for Nigeria against Biafra.
 
Top