WIIHD: Colonialism in Africa

WIIHD -- What If It Happened Differently -- basically a "What If" composed of numerous parts. What if...

*Zanzibar remained united and a British protectorate, while Italian claims to Somalia were rebuffed, giving a united "East Africa" (minus Mozambique) to Britain (admittedly similar to discussions in this thread -- feel free to gloss over this as setting the scene for the other two)...

*Germany got the Congo instead of Leopold (through something like this TL)...

*and the Sokoto Caliphate remained a sovereign nation (similar to ideas discussed in this thread, post 28)?

That's the idea; I know it retreads some familiar territory, but I never got to really discuss the effects of changes put together. (Also, sorry I don't have a map to go with this :eek:)
 
WIIHD -- What If It Happened Differently -- basically a "What If" composed of numerous parts. What if...

*Zanzibar remained united and a British protectorate, while Italian claims to Somalia were rebuffed, giving a united "East Africa" (minus Mozambique) to Britain (admittedly similar to discussions in this thread -- feel free to gloss over this as setting the scene for the other two)...

*Germany got the Congo instead of Leopold (through something like this TL)...

*and the Sokoto Caliphate remained a sovereign nation (similar to ideas discussed in this thread, post 28)?

That's the idea; I know it retreads some familiar territory, but I never got to really discuss the effects of changes put together. (Also, sorry I don't have a map to go with this :eek:)

I have tired eyes - care to explain what's going on in Onkle Willie's TL that gave Germany the Congo?

But as to your original point -- well, it seems pretty well covered in the original thread. Combining all of this has a pretty obvious result; a drastically different Africa with many satisfied Great Powers (Germany gets the Congo, Britain gets, well, whatever they want really and France doesn't have to worry about the British on the Niger due to a useful buffer in the Sahel). This might ease a lot of tensions between these powers.
 
But as to your original point -- well, it seems pretty well covered in the original thread.

Yeah, I was a little hesitant to put it in, but I wanted to paint a wider picture of what I was thinking in TTL Africa; mostly I'm interested in the effects of a German Congo and sovereign Sokoto Caliphate.

Combining all of this has a pretty obvious result; a drastically different Africa with many satisfied Great Powers (Germany gets the Congo, Britain gets, well, whatever they want really and France doesn't have to worry about the British on the Niger due to a useful buffer in the Sahel). This might ease a lot of tensions between these powers.

Had not thought of that... :)

I have tired eyes - care to explain what's going on in Onkle Willie's TL that gave Germany the Congo?

Idea is, Germany allies with Russia, and feels more desire for colonies (as Wilhelm II wanted OTL); to better secure claims to the Congo, they steer clear of Britain's design on holding Zanzibar together.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Independent Sokoto means independent Bornu too (if not the French go there through Chad, but that's unlikely). Sokoto and Bornu would be real odd birds today's world though, I doubt the feudal structure of Sokoto would survive the revolutionary waves. And of course the British, French and Germans would be bitching about Fulani and Hausa slavery.
 

archaeogeek

Banned
Independent Sokoto means independent Bornu too (if not the French go there through Chad, but that's unlikely). Sokoto and Bornu would be real odd birds today's world though, I doubt the feudal structure of Sokoto would survive the revolutionary waves. And of course the British, French and Germans would be bitching about Fulani and Hausa slavery.

It would be interesting; also you'd probably butterfly away stuff like the Nigerian Civil War if you had Sokoto and Bornu independent; what happens in this situation to the coasts? I have trouble seeing Biafra and Benin/Yorubaland forming a single country post-decolonization.
 

Susano

Banned
It would be interesting; also you'd probably butterfly away stuff like the Nigerian Civil War if you had Sokoto and Bornu independent; what happens in this situation to the coasts? I have trouble seeing Biafra and Benin/Yorubaland forming a single country post-decolonization.

Experience shows that multiethnic states with two strong ethnicities are always more instable than multiethnic states with a true multitude of ethnicites, so... yes. Of course, the Niger Delta is settled by neither Yoruba nor Ibo, so it could become a terrible fighting ground once oil is found...
 
Some good ideas on Sokoto... Any ideas on what a German Congo would mean?

I'd think the region would be much better off, myself (not that it's that difficult :()
 
Some good ideas on Sokoto... Any ideas on what a German Congo would mean?

I'd think the region would be much better off, myself (not that it's that difficult :()

Well, assuming the British do have all of East Africa, then the Germans are going to run into a lot less trouble when it comes to colnising Katanga and the surrounding area. If Rhodes still has his mad dash for 'Rhodesia' it will probably stop at OTL Zambia, so long as the Crown can connect South to East Africa. IOTL Rhodes made many expeditions into Katanga (they didn't accumulate to anything, but still).

Do the Germans still have Kamerun ITTL? If so, then possession of the Congo is going to lead to some issues surrounding France. In my previous post, I said that the geopolitical situation in Africa may lead to less tensions - I actually might retract that statement. If France is still colonising Gabon and the Upper Congo, then they may still want to connect those territories to Chad. The Germans won't like that - they'll want a land connection between Congo and Kamerun.

In other areas, more colonialism by Germany might mean more of a Naval Race, meaning pushing the Brits even deeper into France's camp.

You know what? All in all it could be a situation very similar to OTL :(

Edit: As for the Congo itself - why do you assume the Germans will treat the natives any better than the Belgians did? The Germans committed some pretty bad atrocities in Sudwest Afrika too.
 
Edit: As for the Congo itself - why do you assume the Germans will treat the natives any better than the Belgians did? The Germans committed some pretty bad atrocities in Sudwest Afrika too.

Just because it's so hard to beat the Belgian's atrocity -- I doubt Germany would be as single minded as Leopold was in turning the Congo into an uber-profitable enterprise, so their agents likely won't be drawn to engage in the mad abuses the CFS was known for (e.g. enslaving villages, raping women captives systematically, cutting off limbs, etc).
 
Just because it's so hard to beat the Belgian's atrocity -- I doubt Germany would be as single minded as Leopold was in turning the Congo into an uber-profitable enterprise, so their agents likely won't be drawn to engage in the mad abuses the CFS was known for (e.g. enslaving villages, raping women captives systematically, cutting off limbs, etc).

Everything you just listed there happened in Sudwest Afrika.
 
Everything you just listed there happened in Sudwest Afrika.

That was a case of Germany wanting to settle the province -- the only such colony where they even tried -- and even then, the genocide didn't really get underway until 1904 through 1907. The Congo disaster, in comparison, was underway over a decade earlier, and lasted decades after -- to say nothing of the 10 million deaths against 100,000 in Namibia).
 
Well, yeah, scale-wise it was worse, but the same atrocities were committed by both governments for very similar reasons. Ludwig was cutting off people's hands, systematically raping women, and murdering because they weren't turning in resources on time.

Wilhelm did this after the natives of his colony rebelled against German rule, which is the difference I guess. But whose to say the Congolese won't have the same reasons to rebel?
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
The Germans had no problems committing terrible atrocities in their colonies, Congo would be no Eden, but anything would be better than Leopold.
 
Wilhelm did this after the natives of his colony rebelled against German rule, which is the difference I guess. But whose to say the Congolese won't have the same reasons to rebel?

For starters, I don't think the Germans are going to try and settle the area, at least not for awhile...

The Germans had no problems committing terrible atrocities in their colonies, Congo would be no Eden, but anything would be better than Leopold.

Roughly, this
 
Okay, let me clarify :rolleyes:

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying I don't think the Germans would be that much better.

Maybe it would help if we tried to settle what the Congo would be like -- I think we've agreed the Germans wouldn't push for settlement for awhile and wouldn't share Leopold's designs on making the colonies uber-profitable, so where does that leave it?
 
Top