WI: European colonies in Africa and Asia demand reparations for colonialism.

fashbasher

Banned
In addition to the full withdrawal of European forces, they demand that they be paid full reparations, although they are willing to compromise, and are willing to pursue war in order to exact them; the Soviet Union has begun distributing nuclear bombs to some African rebels. Inspired by this article.

Note: This occurs during the 1950s, before they gain independence.
 
Last edited:
European nations start funding rebels to coup the government colluding with those people. If those nations actually go to war, they'll lose- or at least the regime would be ousted. If they use nukes...

Reparations for slavery, and colonialism is impossible to accurately determine- even if you could, there's enough 'gaps' in historical knowledge that makes the idea impractical, not to mention it'd bankrupt the European Nations decolonizing the region. And who'd you give it to?

If you give the cash to the regime now in control, that money probably isn't going anywhere, except in African dictator's pockets.
 

fashbasher

Banned
European nations start funding rebels to coup the government colluding with those people. If those nations actually go to war, they'll lose- or at least the regime would be ousted. If they use nukes...

Reparations for slavery, and colonialism is impossible to accurately determine- even if you could, there's enough 'gaps' in historical knowledge that makes the idea impractical, not to mention it'd bankrupt the European Nations decolonizing the region. And who'd you give it to?

If you give the cash to the regime now in control, that money probably isn't going anywhere, except in African dictator's pockets.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but these nations are not independent at the time. (ergo the word Colonies in the title) These are African and Asian separatists in the 1940s-1960s who are making these demands of their colonial masters and are backed with weapons. If Europe doesn't pay up before granting independence, Africa and Asia will be a sea of blood; remember that there are hundreds of millions of Africans and Asians living in colonies at the time vs. far fewer Europeans and even fewer who are militarily capable in the immediate postwar era.
 
Sorry if I wasn't clear, but these nations are not independent at the time. (ergo the word Colonies in the title) These are African and Asian separatists in the 1940s-1960s who are making these demands of their colonial masters and are backed with weapons. If Europe doesn't pay up before granting independence, Africa and Asia will be a sea of blood; remember that there are hundreds of millions of Africans and Asians living in colonies at the time vs. far fewer Europeans and even fewer who are militarily capable in the immediate postwar era.
They're not giving reparations. That's not negotiable. They can complain all they want, even send complaints to the UN when they get independence- but they're not giving out cash, period. And there's not much that those Africans and Asians can do, except go on with their lives.

Imperialism did not end because of the UN or USA said so. It ended because the cost-benefit ratio swung to the 'not worth it' side. If you have to give reparations- a guerilla war could very well be cheaper.

The only way that any Africans can get reparations is if they somehow oust the European regimes, and thoroughly defeat the Europeans to force them to pay, Versailles-style. The consequences would set back Europe into another economic crisis not seen since the end of WW2- or until the Euro crisis.

This is a fantasy scenario, however- I don't think I need to explain why.
 
Sorry if I wasn't clear, but these nations are not independent at the time. (ergo the word Colonies in the title) These are African and Asian separatists in the 1940s-1960s who are making these demands of their colonial masters and are backed with weapons. If Europe doesn't pay up before granting independence, Africa and Asia will be a sea of blood; remember that there are hundreds of millions of Africans and Asians living in colonies at the time vs. far fewer Europeans and even fewer who are militarily capable in the immediate postwar era.

I don't see them realistically getting reparations even in this scenario. If the European powers are already moving towards granting independence, what would their incentive be to pay such reparations? A blood bath is avoidable for them, assuming they're able to preemptively move the majority of their own forces/citizens out of the country. So it seems like it would be just another demand made, without a lot of weight behind it.
 

fashbasher

Banned
They're not giving reparations. That's not negotiable. They can complain all they want, even send complaints to the UN when they get independence- but they're not giving out cash, period. And there's not much that those Africans and Asians can do, except go on with their lives.

Imperialism did not end because of the UN or USA said so. It ended because the cost-benefit ratio swung to the 'not worth it' side. If you have to give reparations- a guerilla war could very well be cheaper.

The only way that any Africans can get reparations is if they somehow oust the European regimes, and thoroughly defeat the Europeans to force them to pay, Versailles-style. The consequences would set back Europe into another economic crisis not seen since the end of WW2- or until the Euro crisis.

This is a fantasy scenario, however- I don't think I need to explain why.

Understood and liked although it could make a good ASB fantasy map. Europe could just grant them independence, like it or not, if they cease to become profitable (the major empires were very lopsided demographically, with colonial subjects often outnumbering voting citizens). Just like what Malaysia did to Singapore.
 
Understood and liked although it could make a good ASB fantasy map. Europe could just grant them independence, like it or not, if they cease to become profitable (the major empires were very lopsided demographically, with colonial subjects often outnumbering voting citizens). Just like what Malaysia did to Singapore.

As far as I know, Malaysia did not spit out Signapore for lack of profitability. Signapore would literally have been the richest province of Malaysia. Singapore literally did not join the Union of Malaysia when it formed, due to 'political differences'. Same with Brunei.

Also, you just described what happened IRL.
 
This seems completely implausible. The USSR would not send nukes to African countries (let alone rebels) and most colonial legislatures in Africa were in the hands of reliably pro-Western parties. Even those politicians who firmly opposed colonialism, such as Nkrumah and Lumumba, were relatively moderate in their demands during the 50s.
 
Top