Chapter 37: The African Army

  The combat effectiveness of African national armies is only passable in South Africa and Egypt.

  Don't look at the South African army's total strength of less than 100,000, that is determined by their country's geographical location. Like they are equipped with helicopters, wheeled self-propelled artillery, infantry fighting vehicles, and their own developed missiles and other advanced weapons, in some aspects comparable to those of the Soviet Union and the United States.

  Moreover, South Africa is a de facto nuclear state recognized by the world. However, even if they want to have nuclear weapons, it's useless. There are no powerful enemies around them, so what's the point of having that stuff and scaring themselves?

  This is a camel in a flock of sheep on the African continent with an extremely weak industrial foundation.

  The combat effectiveness of the army is sometimes guaranteed by strong economic strength and military-industrial level, and a large part of South African citizens are descendants of early European immigrants, who are white.

  Many of the commanders in the South African military are also white. Setting aside the issue of racial discrimination, these people who inherited the tactical literacy and organizational discipline of the previous colonial army still have a relatively high level.

  Just for these two points, South Africa should be the number one military power in Africa, and there is a big gap between other African countries and South Africa.

  Next is Egypt, where this ancient land has been plagued by war since ancient times.

  It's worth noting that people who live in this environment for a long time are often martially inclined, perhaps it's also an instinct to protect oneself.

  It was just a modern decline, suffering from too large a gap in weapons and equipment, and had no choice but to become a British colony.

  The Egyptian military is the largest in Africa in terms of manpower. The total strength is 450,000 personnel, with 320,000 in the army, 20,000 in the navy, 30,000 in the air force and 80,000 in the air defense command.

  There are also 60,000 National Guardsmen, 12,000 Frontier Troops, 60,000 Public Security Troops and 7,000 Coast Guard personnel.

  It can be seen from this data that the Egyptian army has a relatively complete range of troops.

  It's no wonder that Egypt has also fought many wars, but its main opponent is only one, Israel. However, the Egyptian army has lost more battles than it has won in its confrontations with Israel.

  The root cause is that although US aid to Israel is one aspect, Egypt's own military concepts and tactical thinking also have problems.

  However, Egypt and the Soviet Union fought fiercely, with troops fully equipped with Soviet-style equipment, and their weapons were not much worse than those of Israel. After fighting four times, they not only failed to destroy Israel but also suffered heavy losses themselves.

  Such a poor record is really hard to show off, but considering the historical record and relatively weak industrial foundation, let's rank him second.

  Ethiopia and Nigeria tied for third place.

  Let's start with Ethiopia.

  In 1890, Italy invaded Ethiopia and forced it to accept its protection.

  In 1896, Menelik II defeated the Italians at Adwa and forced them to recognize Ethiopia's independence. This is in all history books and it is one of the most notable events in Ethiopian history.

  Now they still celebrate the anniversary of Adwa as an important national holiday. In 1936, Italy invaded Ethiopia again, this time suffering heavy losses but occupying all of Ethiopia.

  However, the Italian army was one of the most incompetent troops in World War II. Before the outbreak of World War II, they invaded Greece and fought for half a year, resulting in heavy casualties. The German SS went to fight and Greece was defeated in less than a month.

  As for its performance in World War II, it's better not to mention. Italian troops used planes, tanks and poison gas, everything they had, against Ethiopian soldiers armed with spears and machetes; even if they won, there was nothing to brag about.

  The total strength of the Ethiopian National Defense Force is 210,000.

  Among them, there were 200,000 in the army and 10,000 in the air force. The highest military rank was major general.

  Ethiopia has no decent industry, only a few small-scale light industrial enterprises. Tanks are discarded by the roadside after they break down because they cannot be overhauled and there is no capacity to dismantle them for scrap.

  The local people dismantled all the removable parts such as iron sheets from above, leaving only the shell there to be blown by the wind and sun.

  These scrapped tanks can be seen on both sides of the road from the capital to the southern states, but the signs are very miscellaneous, and those from World War I can also be seen.

  Let's talk about Nigeria again.

  The military holds a high position within the country. The total strength of the armed forces is 85,000 personnel, with 8,000 in the navy and 10,000 in the air force.

  Nigeria is now independent but like India it remains a Commonwealth country, and its military personnel wear uniforms and ranks in the British style.

  Many officers in the armed forces, including the current president, have received training at British military academies. Since Nigeria's independence, the army has been used for coups and has not engaged in conflicts with foreign countries, so its actual combat effectiveness is unknown.

  But Nigeria is Africa's largest oil producer and one of the recognized top three powers in Africa, so its military combat effectiveness should not be weak.

  The four countries mentioned above represent three levels. It's better not to mention other countries.

  Overall, the combat effectiveness of African countries' militaries is generally mediocre or below when compared globally. The factors affecting the combat effectiveness of African militaries mainly include:

  I. Level of economic development. This factor directly determines the quality and modernization level of a country's military equipment, with many of the world's poorest countries being in Africa.

  Even South Africa and Egypt, which are relatively better off, are still developing countries. Now, the whole of Africa has the ability to develop its own weapons independently, only South Africa, other countries are completely dependent on imports.

  More than half of the countries can't even make light weapons, don't look at Egypt's current Soviet-style equipment, but compared to its old enemy Israel, it may be far from enough.

  Economic strength is a hard indicator. Without this as a guarantee, national defense modernization cannot be achieved. Those who have the money to import weapons are better off, while those who do not have the money will suffer.

  Most African countries' armies don't even have uniforms, soldiers wear all sorts of clothes, from afar they look like they're going to a fair.

  The rifle in his hand had been polished blue and was now worn white, if he took a closer look at the gun in their hands, he found that the rifling was almost worn out, who knows what era it's from?

  What they call heavy weapons are recoilless guns mounted on pickup trucks and shoulder-fired anti-tank rocket-propelled grenades, all of which are old Russian goods.

  What you want to tell them is something like a missile, few people have heard of it.

  Two, the organizational discipline of the army.

  The army is nothing but scattered soldiers and brave warriors mixed among the common people. It's like this in peacetime, and it's also like this on the battlefield.

  During combat, there is no visible coordination between them. When several people are together, they will not maintain a fighting formation to cover each other. The first impression given is that they have not received regular training, which is unimaginable for an army.

  The disparity in weapons is secondary; if military discipline is lax and slack, it will be completely incurable.

  Three, the cultural quality of officials and soldiers.

  African countries have relatively backward education, and low-ranking military officers may not even have attended school, let alone a military academy.

  However, some countries with conditions have sent military officers to study abroad in the UK and other countries, but those who are fortunate enough to go abroad for further studies are still few and far between.

  The military officers' inadequate education directly leads to backward military thinking. When conflicts break out, they can deploy planes for air raids, which is already a very modernized warfare method in their eyes.

  The political systems and historical factors of most African countries also seem to be a reason for the low combat effectiveness of the armed forces of African countries.

  The state power developed from the tribe is destined to have no cohesion and centripetal force, they only fight for their own tribal interests.

  Who supports their own tribe, who promises to give benefits to their own tribe is supported by whom, in short, it's like a group of bandits occupying the mountain, whoever has strong power will be in power, if they fail, no big deal, just continue being my superior.

  In this case, the army is not for the country but for its own patch of land, resulting in no unified combat norms and combat purposes.

  An army that is not responsible to the state will inevitably be unable to improve its combat effectiveness, and the government will also be unable to command tribal armed forces and conduct unified war training for its own military.

  War is the continuation of politics, if political issues are not resolved well, what combat effectiveness can the military have as a national security guarantee?

  Guinea has an area of 245,857 square kilometers and is located on the west coast of West Africa.

  It is bounded by Guinea-Bissau, Senegal and Mali to the north, C?te d'Ivoire to the east, Sierra Leone and Liberia to the south, and the Atlantic Ocean to the west, with a coastline of 352 km.

  The country's terrain is complex and can be divided into four natural regions:

  The western part (also known as Lower Guinea) is a narrow coastal plain.

  The central part (Central Highlands) is the Fouta Djallon highlands with an average elevation of 900 meters.

  Three of West Africa's main rivers—the Niger, the Senegal and the Gambia—originate from this region, earning it the nickname "the water tower of West Africa".

  The northeastern part (Upper Guinea) is a plateau with an average elevation of about 300 meters.

  The southeastern part is the Guinea Highlands, with Mount Nimba at 1,752 meters being the highest peak in the territory.

  The coastal areas are tropical rainforest climate, the inland is tropical savanna climate, with an average annual temperature of 24-32°C.

  Food cannot be self-sufficient, and aluminum, vanadium, coffee, cocoa, and rubber are the main pillars of the economy, but the development scale of economic crops is not large, making it difficult to compete with other agricultural powers in Africa.

  The variety of export goods is limited, and the international balance of payments is unbalanced. The vast majority of consumer goods are completely dependent on imports.

  Guinea's bauxite reserves account for one-third of the world's total reserves, ranking third in production and first in exports.

  Bauxite and alumina exports account for 97% of the country's foreign exchange earnings, earning Guinea the nickname "Aluminium Country" or "Aluminium Republic".

  During World War II, France was occupied by Germany and General de Gaulle went into exile in Britain as the Deputy Minister of National Defense, organizing a government-in-exile to seek support from African colonies at the cost of granting them independence.

  Young people from Guinea and many other French-speaking African countries arrived in Europe, opened their eyes, found that the superior people and their countries they had been thinking of were nothing more than that, and sprouted a desire for independence.

  After the war, all of French Africa began demanding autonomy or independence.

  In 1954, Algeria in North Africa began an armed struggle that shook all of French Africa.

  In 1958, de Gaulle returned to power and offered many colonies a choice between two options.

  Either as an autonomous republic within the French Community, continuing to receive financial and technical assistance from France.

  Either completely independent and break off diplomatic relations with France.

  The matter was referred to the whole of French colonial territory for a plebiscite.

  Almost all of the countries chose to become autonomous within the French Community, with the exception of Guinea.

  The first President Sékou Touré, facing the crowd in the square, spoke eloquently in front of De Gaulle, fiercely criticizing France's colonialist crimes. Amidst the fervent atmosphere, the Guinean people resolutely chose independence.

  Excerpt from "Research Report" of the Intelligence Bureau of the Southern Huá Federation Military.