What would happen to Africa if Germany won WWI?

Sam Biswas · Jul 5, 2018

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_East_Africa#World_War_I
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_African_Campaign_(World_War_I)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelafrika
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/mittelafrika.268913/
German colonies in Africa 1922 (alternate history) (please read the comments from more research)
German colonies in Africa 1944 (alternate history)
Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck
THE GREAT JUNGLE WAR (Please don’t watch this documentary. Is way too stupid and bias to watch through, I suggest you read the comments below, they’re pretty well informed in both historical research and the response to that video.)
1. “What the British accomplished was nothing short of spectacular and took sheer nerve and bravery. These men were real men who said no to any kind of failures. I am amazed at the comments that speak against them. They did what none other at the time could ever dream of doing. Some need to grow up truly. People are conquered and conquer throughout history. This is how ideas and technologies spread. Look into Jewish history. They were enslaved many times and defeated time and again. Look at them today. A mighty nation in every way bringing innovation and technological achievements to the entire world. And yet others who have been conquered still believe the lie they are owed something and continue to produce little or contribute little or build their own countries. Most of these places can't build bridges, skyscrapers, roads, cars, computers, cameras, Tv's, rail roads or nearly anything on their own. Stop playing the victim and learn from those who were stronger. Rise and be mighty. Be the best you can be. Stop crying and making excuses.”
2. “ This comment section is the reason I usually avoid documentaries on YouTube and instead watch lectures by professors. All the big words and lack of melodramatic music means that the edgy 13 year old neonazis tend to avoid them.
  "OMG, the British built a railroad in Kenya, they're totally worse than the nazis"
3. “ Since some brought up Lettow-Vorbeck, his Schutztruppe & the Askaris, here's an anecdote:
  The Askaris were paid a war pension by Germany (from what I remember almost double of what the French and Brits paid theirs). When it couldn't be paid for a while due to war, economic crisis, etc. Germany would later repay them in full. When they sent the bank people with the money, many of the former Askaris, who had shown up to collect what was owed, no longer had any papers or documents proving their service. So the bankers had an idea. Each applicant was given a broom handle and they'd shout rifle drill commands at them in German. Not a single one failed the test.”
4. “ Mostly irrelevant to the subject of this video, but I love watching these kinds of movies that contain scene re-creations, not just because the history and learning about stuff, but also to see how some details are missed/awkward/wrong...Such as @2:27 - They forgot to remove the modern fire alarm break glass, which they realised their mistake just a clip later @2:34, Then it returns again in subsequent scenes.”
5. “ Forget all about this typical British propaganda. Realize that in the First world War, General VON LETTOW, despite having a miniscule army, against the BRITISH EMPIRE WITH ALL ITS LIMITLESS manpower and military might, was UNDEFEATED throughout WWI. A true GERMAN HERO. Censored by the victors of WWI and unholywood..”

twistedirregular · Jul 5, 2018

German colonies like German Southwest Africa or Togoland might be restored to German colonial rule but I can’t see many changes outside of that. I doubt the Germans would’ve had the ability to enforce any peace terms outside of Europe, not with the RN. You might see German investment in independent African countries like Ethiopia, Liberia or Egypt as well as German military missions. There might also be a large influx of former soldiers from the German Armed Forces which could see a German majority being established in Southwest Africa.

MichaelWest · Jul 5, 2018

The outcomes are different in each possible scenario, a limited war versus a general war (i.e. limited to just France/Russia versus Germany/A-H), and early victory, shortened war with "victory" or a late war stalemate. I believe you need the UK in the war to seize the German colonies fully, a non-belligerent Britain likely does not encourage Japan to seize Tsingtao or the Pacific possessions, it may overlook seizing possessions in Africa but most likely you have France seizing Togo and Kamerun, raiding elsewhere. You need Germany occupying some French soil to give them leverage enough to demand the return of any taken colonies. To get all the colonies back status quo antebellum I think you need an early victory or a shortened war scenario with a limited war that does not fully entangle Britain since only she can truly seize the German overseas possessions.

There are few scenarios where Germany can get enough victory to dictate terms and enforce a peace globally against the panoply of belligerents from OTL and less that feel more than barely possible and hardly plausible. The most plausible to get Germany as a surviving colonial power has the British non-belligerent, Japan's pro-German faction seeing German strength and eschewing the seizure of German possessions, in fact as Russia weakens they instead expand in China by attacking Russian possessions instead. The Dominions have no cause for war and thus do not take it upon themselves to seize anything, only the French can, do and will be in some position to trade them back. That is the needle to be thread to keep the colonies, not impossible but takes some deliberate road building. Here you can at least argue for some minor adjustments depending upon how well the CPs actually "win." You might get there with a later war entry by Britain but that is a rockier road and the reality is that any additions are very hard to justify.

Thus I have sketched a surviving Imperial Germany with intact colonial empire too, a near enough status quo antebellum. For me I am playing with how ideology evolves in a more cold war like Europe, France (with British backing) opposing the Germans, how that might alter Germany to become a better steward of its colonies in reaction to obvious French challenges, the evolution in German politics towards more Socialism, how that liberalizes the colonies, issues of a white German majority in Southwest Africa, and so on. And if there is no follow on war how the European dominated world deals with the eventual collapse of colonialism, no Communist bogeyman, a multi-lateral world of near peers instead of the duopoly, a sort of modern pre-Great War world soldiering forward. It is still a dangerous road and has tragedy aplenty but in no way apologizing for colonialism finding how the transition to independence could be better for more of the subject peoples.

anotherlurker · Jul 5, 2018

I usually think that a CP victory means no end of colonialism in Africa. It's not the world changing conflagration that WW2 was, the European empires are still there and very healthy, no continental suicide to reshuffle the world, and following WW1 they descend into a cold war and to keep that going the African colonies get militarized and have their resources used for the war effort no matter how much the locals protest and try to fight back, they just get rounded up as traitors and saboteurs and send to work in camps or just shot.

MichaelWest · Jul 5, 2018

anotherlurker said:
I usually think that a CP victory means no end of colonialism in Africa. It's not the world changing conflagration that WW2 was, the European empires are still there and very healthy, no continental suicide to reshuffle the world, and following WW1 they descend into a cold war and to keep that going the African colonies get militarized and have their resources used for the war effort no matter how much the locals protest and try to fight back, they just get rounded up as traitors and saboteurs and send to work in camps or just shot.

I do not disagree but I try to find how these Empires oppose each other through the colonies, how ideology develops to support the opposition, and if we see certain powers undermine the colonial system, such as the USA or USSR did, the first for selfish mercantile reasons and the later to further its ideology and destroy the capitalist world.

My working assumption is that the USA will seek to break the British Empire, usurp it really, to gain new markets. In its own way the Germans should concur, their Empire is small, they value other markets more than they can craft a closed one like Britain can (in theory with Imperial Preference). The French will leverage their Empire to counter German demographic advantage but they were indifferent stewards. So the British behave like the USA did, bolstering the status quo and backing its colonies even if led by scoundrels? The French get diverse but mostly let their Empire stagnate, fighting hypocritical and violently repressive wars in Algeria or Indochina? Filing its Army with Africans or Asians to die for France? Germany loosening the grip as its colonies are not as valuable as global free trade? Does an Imperial Germany put troops on the ground to aid the Dutch in the East Indies for oil? Or back the KMT against Japan in China to expand its sphere there? Does the USA funnel money to liberation movements or nationalists where there is no USSR? I have lots of question marks and bizarre maybes.

anotherlurker · Jul 6, 2018

MichaelWest said:
I do not disagree but I try to find how these Empires oppose each other through the colonies, how ideology develops to support the opposition, and if we see certain powers undermine the colonial system, such as the USA or USSR did, the first for selfish mercantile reasons and the later to further its ideology and destroy the capitalist world.

My working assumption is that the USA will seek to break the British Empire, usurp it really, to gain new markets. In its own way the Germans should concur, their Empire is small, they value other markets more than they can craft a closed one like Britain can (in theory with Imperial Preference). The French will leverage their Empire to counter German demographic advantage but they were indifferent stewards. So the British behave like the USA did, bolstering the status quo and backing its colonies even if led by scoundrels? The French get diverse but mostly let their Empire stagnate, fighting hypocritical and violently repressive wars in Algeria or Indochina? Filing its Army with Africans or Asians to die for France? Germany loosening the grip as its colonies are not as valuable as global free trade? Does an Imperial Germany put troops on the ground to aid the Dutch in the East Indies for oil? Or back the KMT against Japan in China to expand its sphere there? Does the USA funnel money to liberation movements or nationalists where there is no USSR? I have lots of question marks and bizarre maybes.

The thing with interfering in other peoples colonies is that they might do the same to you - Ukraine for the USSR, Philippines for the USA, Korea for Japan, with the European great powers intact i'm not rally seeing anyone messing too much with the others holdings - it might spirial out of control. It's questionable how much liberation wars will be an issue, those were possible because others supported them with weapons, or they just took what was left after WW2 when the occupation trools retreated, and the colonial people saw and opening after the weakness of the colonial powers against Japan and Germany, fall of Singapore and all that. I dont really think that anyone in Europe will mind the occasional Herero massacre as long as the colonies continue to send resources and warm bodies.

There's also the special cases, like how the Germans handled it - durable infrastructure and public shooling, that doesnt really point to them being willing to ever leave because educated people are very useful, it allows to upgrade colonial exploitation to industrial one.

KarneeKarnay · Jul 6, 2018

You might see an earlier collapse of colonial rule. The damage to the British & French Empires would almost certainly lead to instability across their empires. India would likely breakaway post WW1 and the ramifications of this would lead to more demand for independence in Africa.

For anything more accurate it would have to be dependent on the context of the Entente defeat. The most likely scenario was that the French are knocked out early in the initial German thrust. In this scenario the British would probably not have entered the war at all, so would largely be unaffected. If the Germans are smart they won't push the French for European concessions, Africa might see some expansion to the German holdings, but in a scenario of a quick war, the aim would be to humble the French, not dismantle their empire. Besides, the real win for Germany here is Eastern Europe. Knocking the Russians down and keeping them down would be the biggest win for the Germans.

MichaelWest · Jul 6, 2018

anotherlurker said:
The thing with interfering in other peoples colonies is that they might do the same to you - Ukraine for the USSR, Philippines for the USA, Korea for Japan, with the European great powers intact i'm not rally seeing anyone messing too much with the others holdings - it might spirial out of control. It's questionable how much liberation wars will be an issue, those were possible because others supported them with weapons, or they just took what was left after WW2 when the occupation trools retreated, and the colonial people saw and opening after the weakness of the colonial powers against Japan and Germany, fall of Singapore and all that. I dont really think that anyone in Europe will mind the occasional Herero massacre as long as the colonies continue to send resources and warm bodies.

There's also the special cases, like how the Germans handled it - durable infrastructure and public shooling, that doesnt really point to them being willing to ever leave because educated people are very useful, it allows to upgrade colonial exploitation to industrial one.

The British, French and even Germans have democratic and liberal governments at home, each has political ideals that will equate to independence for the colonial subjects and each has enough racism to alienate them too. Germany has a federal model that might fit their colonies into a framework, especially since their empire is already smaller, the French ere trying to integrate at least some into their metropole and Britain eventually ceded autonomy and teased at an imperial realm of equals. These empires will evolve. But during the Cold War the USA and USSR faced each other and actively sought influence in the Third World, the stakes were igh but they armed resistance groups, fanned independence and supported factions to disrupt things in their favor, why would that change much? The USA is certainly open to hypocrisy but its ideology is free markets and open trade, the colonial system if closed is in opposition to it. The USSR must promote the struggle, if we have a Communist state hen it is disrupting things. If we have a cold war in Europe then each side will try to undermine the other and fanning discontent in the colonies is fair game. It is hard to see a quiet status quo, the people themselves will be tugging for autonomy and political voice, outside influences will be wooing them, trade links will restructure friendships, the colonial system will be as unstable, only the military power to suppress things will be in play, but I would argue that once the quest to squeeze them begins it drives them away, the first battle is Ireland, if the Irish break free then the Empire is unraveling, just as if Algeria or Indochina breaks away, the French are doomed as an Empire, Germany would have ample opportunity to fuel the fire.

anotherlurker · Jul 6, 2018

MichaelWest said:
The British, French and even Germans have democratic and liberal governments at home, each has political ideals that will equate to independence for the colonial subjects and each has enough racism to alienate them too. Germany has a federal model that might fit their colonies into a framework, especially since their empire is already smaller, the French ere trying to integrate at least some into their metropole and Britain eventually ceded autonomy and teased at an imperial realm of equals. These empires will evolve. But during the Cold War the USA and USSR faced each other and actively sought influence in the Third World, the stakes were igh but they armed resistance groups, fanned independence and supported factions to disrupt things in their favor, why would that change much? The USA is certainly open to hypocrisy but its ideology is free markets and open trade, the colonial system if closed is in opposition to it. The USSR must promote the struggle, if we have a Communist state hen it is disrupting things. If we have a cold war in Europe then each side will try to undermine the other and fanning discontent in the colonies is fair game. It is hard to see a quiet status quo, the people themselves will be tugging for autonomy and political voice, outside influences will be wooing them, trade links will restructure friendships, the colonial system will be as unstable, only the military power to suppress things will be in play, but I would argue that once the quest to squeeze them begins it drives them away, the first battle is Ireland, if the Irish break free then the Empire is unraveling, just as if Algeria or Indochina breaks away, the French are doomed as an Empire, Germany would have ample opportunity to fuel the fire.

How do you think the Cold War actually looks like?

IMO you have 3 sides, UK/France, Germany/Mittleeuropa and the Soviet Union, with the USA and Japan mostly confined to their own corners. I dont really see the USA developing the way it did without WW2, no global expansion of US influence and no fight against Communism, especially if Stalin lives longer due to not having the stress of WW2 and suppresses the internationalist Communists, so that takes care of US interests in the colonies of others, they favor the rule of law and the rules say if you have business intersts in Egypt you go through London at that time. Japan though... that one's going to cause issues for everyone else, they're closest to the last piece of uncolonized lands - China.

MichaelWest · Jul 6, 2018

anotherlurker said:
How do you think the Cold War actually looks like?

IMO you have 3 sides, UK/France, Germany/Mittleeuropa and the Soviet Union, with the USA and Japan mostly confined to their own corners. I dont really see the USA developing the way it did without WW2, no global expansion of US influence and no fight against Communism, especially if Stalin lives longer due to not having the stress of WW2 and suppresses the internationalist Communists, so that takes care of US interests in the colonies of others, they favor the rule of law and the rules say if you have business intersts in Egypt you go through London at that time. Japan though... that one's going to cause issues for everyone else, they're closest to the last piece of uncolonized lands - China.

First I am uncertain we get a USSR, but in any longer Great war scenario I think we can. Germany will soon focus on that threat and East Europe will rally to the Germans as the lesser evil. As Stalin rebuilds I believe his revanche will soon show, and he will use the German menace to consolidate his power, build a Soviet war machine and use the ideology of revolution to attack them to weaken them. The British will keep France independent but trade and ideology will draw her to ease up on fellow anti-communist Germany. The USA will follow, perhaps even quicker. The real "cold war" will be France versus Germany post-war and that will be far less intense than between the USA and USSR was unless we get atomics on both sides. The USA should not become a super power but its economy was already the biggest and its defense spending easily matches Britain or Germany without stepping up to cold war levels, so the USA will exert its influence as the mercantilist nation it is, look at China and the Open Door, the USA found Japan a threat and easily found the will to oppose her. The USA historically disliked the imperial British and that friction remains, only the British Empire truly threatened the USA, it should be eager to undo any closed Empire. I think too many underestimate American ambitions or ideology, like France they see their culture as superior. With a USSR the other longer term cold war will be USSR versus the surviving Central Powers and their East European allies, an Anglo-Japanese Alliance mostly focused on containing the USSR in Asia, and a plucky France learning how to live beside the number three world power, behaving as annoyingly independent as it did OTL. And I agree, China will likely be the flash point to open another war. The USA will push for an "independent" China where it can trade freely, not to benefit China but to keep the other imperialists from shutting her out. The USSR will fan all embers of discontent in East Europe, the Balkans especially, but soon the colonies where colonialism is easy to vilify. This is a far more Machiavellian world with more enemies of enemies looking like friends, a concert of frenemies.

Max Sinister · Jul 6, 2018

Some people claim that Germany wanted up to two thirds of Africa. I doubt whether it'd be possible to take over such a huge area in a few years.

Riain · Jul 6, 2018

twistedirregular said:
I doubt the Germans would’ve had the ability to enforce any peace terms outside of Europe, not with the RN.

If the Germans WIN WW1 Britain would be a signatory to such treaties that give Germany colonies, happily trading off colonies in Africa against a German agreement not to annex the Belgian and possibly French Channel coast.

FillyofDelphi · Jul 6, 2018

Riain said:
If the Germans WIN WW1 Britain would be a signatory to such treaties that give Germany colonies, happily trading off colonies in Africa against a German agreement not to annex the Belgian and possibly French Channel coast.

And Germany would want to garrison that hostilely populated and highly exposed salient for years on end because?

The Germans don't want to be there any more than the British want them there, and I find it hard to believe baring an early victory they'd be keen on keeping the war going on any longer than nessicery for the sake of acquiring new money sinks in Africa after already taking on so much wartime debt

destiple · Jul 6, 2018

as soon as war with england starts the colonies are gone
the only hope retaining colonies is that its another Franco-german war in 1914 not WW1

Riain · Jul 6, 2018

FillyofDelphi said:
And Germany would want to garrison that hostilely populated and highly exposed salient for years on end because?

Obviously because of the strategic threat the coastal bases are to a hostile Britain, which is a much worse threat to German security and prosperity than a few saboteurs in Belgium.

FillyofDelphi said:
The Germans don't want to be there any more than the British want them there, and I find it hard to believe baring an early victory they'd be keen on keeping the war going on any longer than nessicery for the sake of acquiring new money sinks in Africa after already taking on so much wartime debt

Nor does Britain want to continue the war, including shelling of Dover from long range guns, air warfare over Kent and a continued naval war in the Channel for the sake of those same money sinks. Bear in mind Germany wins and Britain LOSES the war, losers don't dictate terms to winners.

destiple said:
as soon as war with england starts the colonies are gone
the only hope retaining colonies is that its another Franco-german war in 1914 not WW1

The fate of the colonies will be decided in the halls of Europe not the battlefields of Africa. If Germany and AH defeat France and Britain and Russia then the losers will cough up what the victors want or face even worse fates, much like a vacillating Russia suffered in 1918 and Germany suffered in 1923.

BlondieBC · Jul 6, 2018

The Outcome in Africa is highly variable depending on how Germany wins. I think the general statements are true in most ATL.

The USSR will never exist.
Don't rule out odd arrangements such as colonies being sold to parties not in the war. Or other really odd outcomes. We greatly, greatly underplay the impact of layers of butterflies in ATL's.
If Britain enters the war, Germany will lose most of the colonies in a short war, all of the colonies in a long war; UNLESS won back at the negotiating table. The most likely concession is Belgium colonies for Germany leaving Belgium. The least likely colonies returned are the ones capture by Japan, followed by SW Africa, followed by Togo.
If the UK does not enter the war, then Japan is unlikely to enter the war. So Tsingtao will be held.
If the UK does not enter the war, France will be unlikely to take colonies outside of Togo. And France will likely give back Togo plus additional colonial concession for concessions in Europe; UNLESS Germany does not want the additional colonies.

So we have a maximum loss from no German colonies with Germany keeping fortress on the Belgium Coast and likely many French industrial areas to maximum gain where Germany has MittelAfrika from the Cameroon to the Congo to German East Africa and some other bits.

Riain · Jul 6, 2018

Another factor is the non-negotiable war aim condition Germany that no punitive trade barriers be erected against her, knowing full well that MittelEuropa and MittelAfrika were no substitute for free access to global markets for the German economy. So while the French and British might trade colonies for ending occupations Germany then might give them back in return for free(ish?) trade conditions.

BlondieBC · Jul 6, 2018

Riain said:
Another factor is the non-negotiable war aim condition Germany that no punitive trade barriers be erected against her, knowing full well that MittelEuropa and MittelAfrika were no substitute for free access to global markets for the German economy. So while the French and British might trade colonies for ending occupations Germany then might give them back in return for free(ish?) trade conditions.

Agreed. And these attitudes will be greatly effected by the length of the war and the harshness of any blockade.