What if Biafra defeated Nigeria in 1967

[Afroboy]

Of course, it is widely published that Nigeria, meaning Niger Area, was put together by the British who gave them their identity and even coat of arms. However, the indigenous people who have different history and value systems have continued to have serious problems till date. A major attempt to regain and reclaim their identity and real nation happened in 1967, when the tribes of the then Eastern Region- the Igbo, Efik, Ibibio, etc., after being killed in their hundreds of thousands throughout the country, seceded and formed the Republic of Biafra, a very promising nation with immense oil reserves. However the British government supplied Nigeria with loads of ammo and weapons, alongside the then Soviet Union and Arab League to defeat Biafra after 3 years of fighting.....

If Biafra had won the war, today there would probably be four nations, namely, BIAFRA, ODUDUWA, AREWA, and Kingdom of Bini (Benin, not to be confused with modern day Benin that took its name from this existing kingdom), and the fictitious name Nigeria would have been no more, along with the large level issues that have plagued this area for 50 years and counting.....



Today the struggle continues

 

[Hagre]

If the Biafrans managed to get more overt support from the countries already supporting it and took Lagos, the Nigerian government is probably forced into negotiations. You might see Yorubaland secede too and a rump Nigeria in the Muslim Hausa-Fulani areas to the north.

 

[CalBear]

Of course, it is widely published that Nigeria, meaning Niger Area, was put together by the British who gave them their identity and even coat of arms. However, the indigenous people who have different history and value systems have continued to have serious problems till date. A major attempt to regain and reclaim their identity and real nation happened in 1967, when the tribes of the then Eastern Region- the Igbo, Efik, Ibibio, etc., after being killed in their hundreds of thousands throughout the country, seceded and formed the Republic of Biafra, a very promising nation with immense oil reserves. However the British government supplied Nigeria with loads of ammo and weapons, alongside the then Soviet Union and Arab League to defeat Biafra after 3 years of fighting.....

If Biafra had won the war, today there would probably be four nations, namely, BIAFRA, ODUDUWA, AREWA, and Kingdom of Bini (Benin, not to be confused with modern day Benin that took its name from this existing kingdom), and the fictitious name Nigeria would have been no more, along with the large level issues that have plagued this area for 50 years and counting.....



Today the struggle continues

MEDIA EDIT

Please note: If you want to discuss current politics this needs to go into Chat.

 

[Vespasian]

Biafra needed to be successful in its operation to strike through the Mid-West Region towards Lagos. The difficulty, aside from the distance and related logistics is that they would increasingly go through Yoruba country. Yorubas would likely be fearful of an Biafran (largely Igbo...but perhaps Edo as well because Biafra created the puppet regime of the Republic of Benin) invasion.

If the Biafrans can capture Lagos in 1967, I can see the Nigerians suing for peace. Also, the Biafrans could let the political fallout occur or push for an independent Western Region (Yorubaland).

With Nigeria severely weakened/destroy, I see wider geopolitical outcome in the:
OAU
Anti White Minority Rule struggle in Rhodesia, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique and South Africa
Unrest in Niger as the French/Nigeriens try to gain hold of Hausa-speaking Northern Nigeria. Maybe Chad tries to gain a foothold in the Borno historical regions around Lake Chad.
Eritrea
Western Sahara
Somali revanchism

I have additional questions:
- Do the Biafrans attempt to continue their hold on the Benin Republic
- What is Biafran foreign policy like? Are they pan-Africanists? What will their relationship with Muslim Africa and the wider world be?
- Is Biafra a geopolitical ally to France? How does Britain take this?
- If the 1973 Yom Kippur War still happens, how rich does Biafra become the 1970s and what will their do with their immense riches?
- What will Biafra's relationship be like with the wider African diaspora, particularly the African-Americans, Jamaica and Haiti?

 

[Vespasian]

OAU - Biafra tested the OAU, with Nyerere of Tanzania publicly supporting Biafra. A lot of states on the OAU feared post-colonial state breakdown. Does the OAU and the Cairo Declaration just become severely damaged? How does pan-Africanism, both politically and philosophically develop in a fractured climate?
Anti White Minority Rule struggle in Rhodesia, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique and South Africa - Nigeria spent a lot of money trying to liberate Southern Africa from apartheid regimes and colonialism. If Nigeria cannot do that now, who bears the weight? Algeria? Egypt?
Unrest in Niger as the French/Nigeriens try to gain hold of Hausa-speaking Northern Nigeria. Maybe Chad tries to gain a foothold in the Borno historical regions around Lake Chad - Niger has a Hausa plurality and the Kanuris in Borno have affinities in the entire Lake Chad region.
Eritrea - If Biafra can succeed, is Eritrea's fight against Ethiopia much stronger in support?
Western Sahara - See above, but it's Morocco versus Western Sahara
Somali revanchism - If Nigeria can break down, why can't Somalia just invade Ethiopia AND Kenya?


**Forgot to add, if Liberia and Sierra Leone still experience state break down in the 1980s and 1990s, can we see Biafran marines restoring order much like Nigeria attempted to do in the 1990s.

 

[Rickshaw]

I wrote a time line on this several years ago. I had the Biafrans liberated by a Cuban Armoured Brigade.

 

[Hagre]

Eritrea - If Biafra can succeed, is Eritrea's fight against Ethiopia much stronger in support?
Somali revanchism - If Nigeria can break down, why can't Somalia just invade Ethiopia AND Kenya?

On Eritrean and Somali insurgency, I don't think I see much changing with how much foreign support they were operating on IOTL. There was already quite a bit of Arab, Soviet, and Chinese support for the Eritreans (also divided by religious, ethnic, and ideological factors) waning by the 1970s. Ironically enough, this might give more impetus for Addis Ababa to handle the insurgency in Eritrea better and potentially crack down on it even more harshly as it was doing in 1973. As for Somalia, you have what happened IOTL and the issue of invading a British Commonwealth realm that probably won't go over well with the rest of the Commonwealth.

 

[walmart]

issue of invading a British Commonwealth realm that probably won't go over well with the rest of the Commonwealth.

The commonwealth isn’t a defense pact nor a United geopolitical bloc. The big issue in attacking Kenya is British forces training in the country.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Anti White Minority Rule struggle in Rhodesia, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique and South Africa - Nigeria spent a lot of money trying to liberate Southern Africa from apartheid regimes and colonialism. If Nigeria cannot do that now, who bears the weight? Algeria? Egypt?
Unrest in Niger as the French/Nigeriens try to gain hold of Hausa-speaking Northern Nigeria. Maybe Chad tries to gain a foothold in the Borno historical regions around Lake Chad - Niger has a Hausa plurality and the Kanuris in Borno have affinities in the entire Lake Chad region.

With Nigeria out of the picture in ATL, would Egypt (either with or without north Sudan) would able to take the brunt? Which other countries could potentially take Nigeria's place?

It is completely out of the question for the Biafra and the other coastal areas in the country to coalesce into a roughly independent version of the Southern Nigeria Protectorate under another name (not sure which name would be a suitable alternative in place of Southern Nigeria or Nigeria), whilst landlocked rump Northern Nigeria either merges with Niger or is divided between Niger and Chad?

 

[walmart]

With Nigeria out of the picture in ATL, would Egypt (either with or without north Sudan) would able to take the brunt? Which other countries could potentially take Nigeria's place?

Nigeria was easily replaceable in terms of funding. Anti-apartheid and anti-colonialism was popular among the elite in the post-colonial world. The various liberation movements in Southern Africa had numerous and more Important backers so lack of Nigeria doesn’t change anything.

 

[walmart]

, whilst landlocked rump Northern Nigeria either merges with Niger or is divided between Niger and Chad?

Northern Nigeria is far more populated than Niger or Chad

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Northern Nigeria is far more populated than Niger or Chad

Do not disagree just looking at different options, it would be an unequal merger in the case of a merger between Northern Nigeria and Niger.

 

[Desert Journeyman]

Some broader African considerations, one relevant to the United States, and one relevant to NATO.

First, a Biafran victory could have inspired both a number of other revolts, particularly in South Sudan and the Congolese interior, but potentially in Southern Africa as well.

Second, a Biafran victory might have tempted a greater incidence of tampering at the margins of African wars by major and minor powers alike, especially those powers that would have perceived vindication of their support for the Biafrans, such as France, Portugal, South Africa, and Rhodesia.

Third, think whether we would have seen an increase in the number of Americans and Europeans signing up as mercenaries after the “huge success” of mercenary units fighting for Biafra. To the extent that African leaders would have drawn conclusions about the desirability of foreign fighters over regular forces, they might have inadvertently made themselves more vulnerable to palace intrigue over the long term.

Fourth, the political power of the white settler states would have been slightly increased, at least temporarily. Biafra’s struggle prompted Portugal, Rhodesia, and South Africa to offer varying degrees of material support, presumably in hopes of earned refracted legitimacy for their own versions of the ethnostate in Africa. The logic, while tenuous, goes something like this: “See? We support the legitimate expression of minority will in the face of majoritarian persecution. Let us agree that what was good for the Biafran goose must also be good for the southern African gander.” Obviously, the rhetorical strength of this position is weak overall, both because the Igbo position vis-à-vis Federal Nigeria was not equivalent with that of white colonialists vis-à-vis their black subjects, and because all but very loud Biafran endorsement would tend to undercut it. That endorsement would of course have turned on the level of residual conflict with the Nigerian rump state and its geopolitical allies, the British and Soviets. The weaker Biafra’s position, the greater its leaders’ forbearance toward its own motely collection of backers, however odious their racial policies.

Fifth, the conflict would quickly take on Cold War trappings. Partly to give cover to the white settlers and partly to warn off the Soviets, American conservatives would have positioned themselves as Biafra’s erstwhile rhetorical defenders.

Sixth, a Biafran victory could have poisoned the already difficult situation in NATO. Britain would have regarded a Federal defeat as not only added evidence of its imperial decline, but of French perfidy.

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

I wrote a time line on this several years ago. I had the Biafrans liberated by a Cuban Armoured Brigade.

So the Soviets supported Biafra in your timeline?

 

[Rickshaw]

So the Soviets supported Biafra in your timeline?

Nope. That is a common mistake. Cuba had it's own foreign policy. Despite what Washington may claim they had a long history, often counter to Soviet designs in Africa where they worked with the locals. Angola being a case in point - their initial deployments were against Soviet wishes.

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

Nope. That is a common mistake. Cuba had it's own foreign policy. Despite what Washington may claim they had a long history, often counter to Soviet designs in Africa where they worked with the locals. Angola being a case in point - their initial deployments were against Soviet wishes.

Neat.

 

[Rickshaw]

Neat.

Further to what I said previously, the Cubans had an Armoured Brigade stationed in Morocco for basically a decade in the early 1960s onwards. They had advisors in several African nations at the same time and even (with Soviet wishes) a military hospital in North Vietnam. They really did believe at the time in having a foreign policy that not only benefited themselves but the locals in a liberationist theology.

 

[Vespasian]

With Nigeria out of the picture in ATL, would Egypt (either with or without north Sudan) would able to take the brunt? Which other countries could potentially take Nigeria's place?

It is completely out of the question for the Biafra and the other coastal areas in the country to coalesce into a roughly independent version of the Southern Nigeria Protectorate under another name (not sure which name would be a suitable alternative in place of Southern Nigeria or Nigeria), whilst landlocked rump Northern Nigeria either merges with Niger or is divided between Niger and Chad?

I think someone else said that the position that Nigeria held can be filled. After a Biafran victory, I cannot see Biafans attempting to control coastal Nigeria other than what's already located in the Eastern Region and Midwest Region. A key to any Biafran victory is Yoruba disaffection from the cause of "One Nigeria". If the Yoruba get their own country out of the war, that better for Biafra's long-term survival

 

[Vespasian]

Forgot to mention something - what happens to Nigeria's Middle Belt ethnicities like the Tiv and Berom who vigorously were anti-Biafran? The Tiv rose up in revolt in 1964. Possible to see ethnic uprisings across the Middle Belt.

 

[Vespasian]

For reference - Nigeria and a few neighbouring states.