Originally Posted by 1990

Benin was in green because the reign of Kerekou (and before) seemed 4T.

I'll take another look.

If Uganda, Tanzania, and Southern Africa (this includes not just South Africa, BTW) had 4Ts when you say, then they are 2T now, not 3T. So you say Kenya is 3T, but not Uganda and Tanzania?

You're right.

Kenya is 3T (Mau Mau uprising ends in 1959).

As for South Africa itself, Xenakis said he thought it to be entering 3T, with the last crisis being post-WWII. This period included the beginning of Apartheid in 1948 and the creation of the Republic in 1961.

Well, if John said that, it doesn't make any sense. If there was a post-WWII crisis, it included the early apartheid. You could make the case for the run-up to 1960 being part of the crisis, but the 1960s held the Regeneracy. Do you have a link?

EDIT: Oh, and it seems you put Guinea back in grey?

I'll have to look at a map. I thought I had them memorized. Guess not. Will fix tonight.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

Morocco was an unwilling participant in WWII. Its Crisis effectively ended in 1943 as American soldiers moved on into Algeria, Tunisia, and Italy. Turkey and Ireland have effectively been drawn into the orbit of western European history even as neutrals if they missed WWII (see also Sweden, Switzerland, and Portugal. Spain's Crisis, thank you, ended in 1939 with Franco's consolidation of power).

Nope. Morocco's last crisis war was the Rif War. All battlegrounds for WWII weren't necessarily in a crisis era.

Sudan is clearly in the worst stage of a genocidal 4T -- usually the last stage that results in utter exhaustion or utter defeat. I can imagine its leaders ending up much like those who ruled Germany, Italy, and Germany during WWII and many of those of Iraq before 2003.

Ya. The climax is very close to rearing its ugly head.

Mexico? Hit by the same Great Depression as the United States, and forced into the same cycle by its giant neighbor. It was a minor participant in WWII, but it was a participant. Closely synchronized with the USA since 1945.

See above. Mexico's last crisis was the Revolution.

Haiti? The country seems to be in a perpetual Crisis without relief.

You confuse crisis with Crisis. We're talking generational cycles here.

Arabian Peninsula? I see Saudi Arabia as a classic powderkeg... with the sort of government that tries to divert people from its failure by funding those who would attack it to turn elsewhere. That is ultimately suicidal... If Saudi Arabia is operating on a 90-year or 100-year cycle it is on target for a 4T.

Chad -- didn't Muammar Khaddafi invade and occupy about half the country a few years ago? Even if that is a triviality, Chad was a French colony, and the struggle between Vichy and the Free French took place in Africa before it came to pass in France itself.

The Chadian-Libyan War didn't read like a crisis war to me. Seemed a lot like low-level, sporadic violence. I should have looked into it more, and I will take a second look eventually.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

I'll take another look.



You're right.

Kenya is 3T (Mau Mau uprising ends in 1959).

With some more research, your idea seems correct. For whatever reason, Kenya is on a timeline than Uganda and Tanzania. The Mau Mau Rebellion is clear 4T, and then the 1990s bring 2T protests and reforms in Kenya. Yet Uganda and Tanzania have a clear Crisis ending around 1979.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Well, if John said that, it doesn't make any sense. If there was a post-WWII crisis, it included the early apartheid. You could make the case for the run-up to 1960 being part of the crisis, but the 1960s held the Regeneracy. Do you have a link?

No, he told me this via email. I was never totally sure, but it seemed sensible at the time, especially given the oh-so 2T reforms of the early 1990s -- end of Apartheid, freeing of Mandela, etc.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

I'll have to look at a map. I thought I had them memorized. Guess not. Will fix tonight.

Yeah, I thought we had settled Guinea.

Okay, so I agree with you about Uganda and Tanzania, and am putting them in green. I am also putting Sudan in blue, weird as that sounds, because my map is supposed to be set circa 2015.

(As an aside, Sudan is such a sad country. 22 years of civil war, then just as the civil war in the south winds down, a new one begins in a remote desert region of the north)

Originally Posted by 1990

No, he told me this via email. I was never totally sure, but it seemed sensible at the time, especially given the oh-so 2T reforms of the early 1990s -- end of Apartheid, freeing of Mandela, etc.

Well, as long as the 4T encompasses the 1960s then I'm OK. I think the regeneracy was in 1960, with the Sharpeville Massacre.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Well, as long as the 4T encompasses the 1960s then I'm OK. I think the regeneracy was in 1960, with the Sharpeville Massacre.

But the regeneracy is usually only a few years into the 4T. So we're talking about a 4T starting MAYBE as early as 1954-56, and probably ending in the early 1970s. Thus the beginning of apartheid was 3T?

Obviously South Africa and its neighbors will need some more research.

Originally Posted by 1990

But the regeneracy is usually only a few years into the 4T. So we're talking about a 4T starting MAYBE as early as 1954-56, and probably ending in the early 1970s. Thus the beginning of apartheid was 3T?

Yeah. The Boer War ended in 1902.

Obviously South Africa and its neighbors will need some more research.

Ugh. I got so much to look over.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Yeah. The Boer War ended in 1902.



Ugh. I got so much to look over.

Amen. It's overwhelming, yet so stimulating.

Just now, I was thinking: how are we judging rebellions/revolts/uprisings? What makes one more significant than another? For example, why was Kenya's Mau Mau Rebellion a 4T, but not, e.g., Mexico's Zapatista Rebellion?

I am not challenging our diagnosis, but we need to be able to defend and explain our criteria.

Originally Posted by 1990

Amen. It's overwhelming, yet so stimulating.

Just now, I was thinking: how are we judging rebellions/revolts/uprisings? What makes one more significant than another? For example, why was Kenya's Mau Mau Rebellion a 4T, but not, e.g., Mexico's Zapatista Rebellion?

I am not challenging our diagnosis, but we need to be able to defend and explain our criteria.

The Mau Mau Uprising was a HUGE, MAJOR event in Kenya that was ginormous in scale. It was extremely violent and extremely significant, so much that it forever changed Kenya, being directly related to Independence not just in Kenya, but much of East Africa. The Zapatista Rebellion will be forgotten in 30 years. We're looking at two completely different movements here.

Of course, the Mau Mau Uprising began a First Turning while the Zapatista Rebellion did not reset the cycle. We can worry more about this when we complete the "audit trail."

Originally Posted by 1990

Amen. It's overwhelming, yet so stimulating.

Priorities:

1) Resolve, double, triple check West Africa, make list of possible crises, possible scenarios if they had been crises

2) Re-check East Africa

3) Re-check Southern Africa

4) Leave Africa, Fly to South America

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Priorities:

1) Resolve, double, triple check West Africa, make list of possible crises, possible scenarios if they had been crises

2) Re-check East Africa

3) Re-check Southern Africa

4) Leave Africa, Fly to South America

Agree with these priorities, though if I were really nitpicking I might put #3 before #2. Anyway, this is absolutely the right way to go about things.

EDIT: If West Africa is the first priority, as it should be, I will start re-researching a lot of these countries. For now, I'm leaning toward putting Chad and the C.A.R. in 5T maroon, unless I can find good evidence that there was a recent crisis before the brand-new Central African War. Will also look back at old favorites like Mauritania, Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire (cringe), Mali, Niger...

BTW, I have removed Benin from green until we re-research it. But I have kept Guinea in green because I seem to remember we compiled a very convincing case for that.

I'm randomly looking through some countries in West Africa.

Chad -- are we sure there hasn't been a crisis war since Rabih al-Zubayr? Encarta:

"In 1960 Chad, like other French colonies in Africa, became independent. Desperately poor, the governments of President François Tombalbaye, a southerner, were supported by French aid. The dissatisfaction of northern Muslims first surfaced in 1963 and forced some changes in the Bantu-dominated one-party government. This, however, was not enough to satisfy them, and in 1969 Muslim guerrillas began to operate in the north. With support from neighboring Libya, their attacks escalated during the following years. Despite military aid from France, Tombalbaye’s situation was made totally untenable by the drought of the early 1970s. He was assassinated in 1975."

This sounds like the transition from 3T to 4T to me.

"Tombalbaye’s successor, General Félix Malloum, was not able to end the civil strife. By 1979 the war had engulfed the south, Malloum was overthrown, and a northerner, Goukouni Oueddei, emerged as president. In 1980 Libya intervened to support Oueddei against rebels under former defense minister Hissène Habré, who was backed by Sudan and Egypt. After the Libyan forces withdrew late in 1981 at Oueddei’s request, Habré renewed his offensive, and his troops captured N’Djamena in June 1982. In 1983 the ousted Oueddei formed a rival government in the north. In the continued civil strife, Oueddei had the backing of Libyan troops, while France sent troops and supplies to keep Habré in power. By the end of 1988, Libyan forces had been driven out of Chad, and the two nations had normalized diplomatic relations. In December 1990, however, Habré was ousted by an insurgent group, the Patriotic Salvation Movement, which had Libyan support. The rebel leader, General Idriss Deby, then assumed the presidency. In January 1992 the Deby government claimed to have crushed a rebellion by forces loyal to Habré, and France sent more troops as a safeguard. In the early 1990s Chad continued to suffer from widespread political and ethnic unrest, including the massacre of 82 civilians by President Deby’s private guard in August 1993."

Note that there is possibly a crisis war here, in addition to severe political instability. A 4T in the 1975 timeline would have been exactly on-time after the 1895 timeline of al-Zubayr. In this case, the current Central African War could be a 2T in Chad (even though it is clearly deep into a Sudan 4T). As for the Central African Republic, while it had civil strife in the 1970s, I see no mass revolt, rebellion, revolution, or war. So it's possible that the C.A.R. is still TWO TURNINGS overdue for a crisis, while Sudan is close to finishing its (which was one turning overdue), and Chad had its on-time.


Moving west to Niger. Encarta again (Wikipedia is so sucky for African countries - really much better for Asia and Europe):


"In 1960 Hamani Diori was elected president by the legislature. In 1964 the government crushed a rebellion aimed against the Diori regime, and in April 1965 the president survived an assassination attempt. He was reelected in 1965 and 1970. Niger was one of six sub-Saharan nations affected by a five-year drought, which was broken by summer rains in 1973. Accused of corruption and of mishandling the famine, Diori was overthrown in a military coup d’état in April 1974. After the coup, Niger was ruled by a Supreme Military Council, headed by Lieutenant Colonel Seyni Kountché. His first priority was economic recovery after the drought, and to that effect a new agreement with France was concluded in 1977."


This could be the rising instability and dissatisfaction of a 3T, as nothing is said of a student movement (2T) or uprising of the people (4T).


"Seybou was reelected president in 1989 after introducing a new constitution that returned Niger to civilian rule under a single-party system. A wave of strikes and demonstrations in 1990 led him to legalize opposition parties. The same year, the nomadic Tuaregs of northern Niger began to rise up in favor of an independent Tuareg state. The Tuaregs, many of whom had left Niger in the early 1980s to escape a prolonged drought and had recently returned in large numbers, claimed that Seybou’s government had failed in its promises to adequately aid the returning nomads. After violent clashes with Nigerien forces the separatist movement became a full-scale rebellion. A constitutional conference, convened in July 1991, stripped Seybou of his powers and established a transitional government, headed by André Salifou. A constitution instituting a multiparty electoral system was ratified in December 1992. In elections in early 1993 Mahamane Ousmane of the Alliance des Forces du Changement (AFC; Alliance of the Forces of Change), a nine-party coalition, was elected president, and AFC candidates won a majority of the seats in parliament. In late 1994 the cabinet was dismissed by a vote of no confidence in the National Assembly. Ousmane called for legislative elections in January 1995. A coalition of four opposition parties won a majority in the National Assembly, with the Movement National pour une Société de Développement (MNSD; National Movement for a Development Society) taking the largest number of seats. Friction between Ousmane and Prime Minister Hama Amadou, head of the MNSD, soon created a governmental deadlock. This slowed the implementation of an April 1995 peace accord signed with the northern Tuareg rebels."


Now I think you've said in the past that the Tuareg Rebellion in both Mali and Niger is not a true 4T, but I'm curious why you consider it so. It seems to have been a formative moment. Checking Mali's experience in the 1990s:



"A new constitution providing for a multiparty republic was approved in 1992. Alpha Oumar Konaré, leader of the Alliance for Democracy in Mali, became the country’s first democratically elected president later that year. Rioting students opposed to Konaré’s austerity measures damaged numerous government buildings in Bamako in April 1993. An attempted coup by supporters of Traoré collapsed in December of that year.


From 1990 on, strife in the north has become a focus of concern for Mali’s government. After the drought of the 1980s ended, Tuareg who had migrated to Algeria and Libya began to return to West Africa. Fighting broke out between the settled African population and the nomadic Tuareg. At the same time the region became involved in a general rebellion of Tuareg demanding greater autonomy from the governments of Mali, Niger, and Algeria, whose borders cross traditional Tuareg territory.


In 1992 a peace agreement, the Bamako Accord, was reached with the main Tuareg groups. Conflict between the army and smaller Tuareg groups continued into 1995. In 1996 more than 2,000 Tuareg former rebels were integrated into the regular army. Thousands of Malian Tuareg refugees were repatriated from Niger.


In addition to a troubled economy and the Tuareg rebellion, Konaré also had to deal with the trials of former president Moussa Traoré. In 1993 Traoré was sentenced to death for his role in the deaths of protesters a few years earlier. This sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by Konaré, but in 1998, Traoré, his wife Mariam Cissoko, and his brother-in-law Abraham Cissoko, went on trial for embezzlement. All three were sentenced to death in 1999, but the death sentences were commuted in 1999 to life imprisonment and hard labor. Before leaving office in 2002, Konaré announced that he had pardoned them."


Now, I've said this before: this really looks like an Awakening to me. The Tuareg Rebellion looks more violent and more devastating in Niger than in Mali. But then, the only possible 4T in Mali would be independence, and that doesn't look violent enough to have been any kind of a 4T struggle.

So right now I'm leaning 2T on Chad, 5T on the C.A.R., and I'm much less secure about Niger and Mali. For Niger, we would need to be sure that the Tuareg Rebellion was not massive enough to really devastate the country. And for Mali, we would need to find some semblance of a 4T somewhere.

Originally Posted by 1990

I'm randomly looking through some countries in West Africa.

Chad -- are we sure there hasn't been a crisis war since Rabih al-Zubayr? Encarta:

"In 1960 Chad, like other French colonies in Africa, became independent. Desperately poor, the governments of President FrançoisTombalbaye, a southerner, were supported by French aid. The dissatisfaction of northern Muslims first surfaced in 1963 and forced some changes in the Bantu-dominated one-party government. This, however, was not enough to satisfy them, and in 1969 Muslim guerrillas began to operate in the north. With support from neighboring Libya, their attacks escalated during the following years. Despite military aid from France, Tombalbaye’s situation was made totally untenable by the drought of the early 1970s. He was assassinated in 1975."

This sounds like the transition from 3T to 4T to me.

This could also be what you described earlier as a country approaching a crisis on time, but having it fizzle before the regeneracy or climax.

"Tombalbaye’s successor, General Félix Malloum, was not able to end the civil strife. By 1979 the war had engulfed the south, Malloum was overthrown, and a northerner, Goukouni Oueddei, emerged as president. In 1980 Libya intervened to support Oueddei against rebels under former defense minister Hissène Habré, who was backed by Sudan and Egypt. After the Libyan forces withdrew late in 1981 at Oueddei’s request, Habré renewed his offensive, and his troops captured N’Djamena in June 1982. In 1983 the ousted Oueddei formed a rival government in the north. In the continued civil strife, Oueddei had the backing of Libyan troops, while France sent troops and supplies to keep Habré in power. By the end of 1988, Libyan forces had been driven out of Chad, and the two nations had normalized diplomatic relations. In December 1990, however, Habré was ousted by an insurgent group, the Patriotic Salvation Movement, which had Libyan support. The rebel leader, General Idriss Deby, then assumed the presidency. In January 1992 the Deby government claimed to have crushed a rebellion by forces loyal to Habré, and France sent more troops as a safeguard. In the early 1990s Chad continued to suffer from widespread political and ethnic unrest, including the massacre of 82 civilians by President Deby’s private guard in August 1993."

Note that there is possibly a crisis war here, in addition to severe political instability. A 4T in the 1975 timeline would have been exactly on-time after the 1895 timeline of al-Zubayr. In this case, the current Central African War could be a 2T in Chad (even though it is clearly deep into a Sudan 4T). As for the Central African Republic, while it had civil strife in the 1970s, I see no mass revolt, rebellion, revolution, or war. So it's possible that the C.A.R. is still TWO TURNINGS overdue for a crisis, while Sudan is close to finishing its (which was one turning overdue), and Chad had its on-time.

It's possible that the Libyan-Chad War and Chadian Civil War were a crisis war. I, however, got the impression of low-intensity, sporadic violence. Look into it for me, will ya?

Moving west to Niger. Encarta again (Wikipedia is so sucky for African countries - really much better for Asia and Europe):


"In 1960 Hamani Diori was elected president by the legislature. In 1964 the government crushed a rebellion aimed against the Diori regime, and in April 1965 the president survived an assassination attempt. He was reelected in 1965 and 1970. Niger was one of six sub-Saharan nations affected by a five-year drought, which was broken by summer rains in 1973. Accused of corruption and of mishandling the famine, Diori was overthrown in a military coup d’état in April 1974. After the coup, Niger was ruled by a Supreme Military Council, headed by Lieutenant Colonel Seyni Kountché. His first priority was economic recovery after the drought, and to that effect a new agreement with France was concluded in 1977."


This could be the rising instability and dissatisfaction of a 3T, as nothing is said of a student movement (2T) or uprising of the people (4T).

I think it's what I said above ^^^

"Seybou was reelected president in 1989 after introducing a new constitution that returned Niger to civilian rule under a single-party system. A wave of strikes and demonstrations in 1990 led him to legalize opposition parties. The same year, the nomadic Tuaregs of northern Niger began to rise up in favor of an independent Tuareg state. The Tuaregs, many of whom had left Niger in the early 1980s to escape a prolonged drought and had recently returned in large numbers, claimed that Seybou’s government had failed in its promises to adequately aid the returning nomads. After violent clashes with Nigerien forces the separatist movement became a full-scale rebellion. A constitutional conference, convened in July 1991, stripped Seybou of his powers and established a transitional government, headed by André Salifou. A constitution instituting a multiparty electoral system was ratified in December 1992. In elections in early 1993 Mahamane Ousmane of the Alliance des Forces du Changement (AFC; Alliance of the Forces of Change), a nine-party coalition, was elected president, and AFC candidates won a majority of the seats in parliament. In late 1994 the cabinet was dismissed by a vote of no confidence in the National Assembly. Ousmane called for legislative elections in January 1995. A coalition of four opposition parties won a majority in the National Assembly, with the Movement National pour une Société de Développement (MNSD; National Movement for a Development Society) taking the largest number of seats. Friction between Ousmane and Prime Minister Hama Amadou, head of the MNSD, soon created a governmental deadlock. This slowed the implementation of an April 1995 peace accord signed with the northern Tuareg rebels."


Now I think you've said in the past that the Tuareg Rebellion in both Mali and Niger is not a true 4T, but I'm curious why you consider it so. It seems to have been a formative moment. Checking Mali's experience in the 1990s:



"A new constitution providing for a multiparty republic was approved in 1992. Alpha Oumar Konaré, leader of the Alliance for Democracy in Mali, became the country’s first democratically elected president later that year. Rioting students opposed to Konaré’s austerity measures damaged numerous government buildings in Bamako in April 1993. An attempted coup by supporters of Traoré collapsed in December of that year.


From 1990 on, strife in the north has become a focus of concern for Mali’s government. After the drought of the 1980s ended, Tuareg who had migrated to Algeria and Libya began to return to West Africa. Fighting broke out between the settled African population and the nomadic Tuareg. At the same time the region became involved in a general rebellion of Tuareg demanding greater autonomy from the governments of Mali, Niger, and Algeria, whose borders cross traditional Tuareg territory.


In 1992 a peace agreement, the Bamako Accord, was reached with the main Tuareg groups. Conflict between the army and smaller Tuareg groups continued into 1995. In 1996 more than 2,000 Tuareg former rebels were integrated into the regular army. Thousands of Malian Tuareg refugees were repatriated from Niger.


In addition to a troubled economy and the Tuareg rebellion, Konaré also had to deal with the trials of former president Moussa Traoré. In 1993 Traoré was sentenced to death for his role in the deaths of protesters a few years earlier. This sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by Konaré, but in 1998, Traoré, his wife Mariam Cissoko, and his brother-in-law Abraham Cissoko, went on trial for embezzlement. All three were sentenced to death in 1999, but the death sentences were commuted in 1999 to life imprisonment and hard labor. Before leaving office in 2002, Konaré announced that he had pardoned them."

[SIZE=2]
Now, I've said this before: this really looks like an Awakening to me. The Tuareg Rebellion looks more violent and more devastating in Niger than in Mali. But then, the only possible 4T in Mali would be independence, and that doesn't look violent enough to have been any kind of a 4T struggle.

I actually got the opposite idea, and I'm sure of it. The Tuareg Rebellion was more serious in Mali. However,

A) There were no more than 3000 insurgents at a time, and usually much less
B) They were usually bandits who occasionally attacked buildings and travelers before fleeing
C) There was no extensive destruction

Here's the catch: It seems like a major event in the history of Mali and every place I've been to mentions it. So while on paper, it cannot seem like a crisis war, there is a distinct possibility that it acted as one.

This possibility is kind of low though, since it doesn't happen often.

*EDIT*: I believe Niger's Timeline is as Follows: War Against Hausa states (1804-1810), Resistance to French (1890-1901)
The Tuareg might be on a different timeline: I identified an awakening that culminated with the First Tuareg Rebellion in the 1950s. However, while Niger resisted French Rule in the late 19th century, the Tuareg resisted French Rule from WWI to 1922. Of course, the second Tuareg Rebellion was in the 1990s.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

This could also be what you described earlier as a country approaching a crisis on time, but having it fizzle before the regeneracy or climax.



It's possible that the Libyan-Chad War and Chadian Civil War were a crisis war. I, however, got the impression of low-intensity, sporadic violence. Look into it for me, will ya?

I don't have to. Says Wikipedia:

"The Chadian-Libyan conflict was a state of sporadic warfare events in Chad between 1978 and 1987, opposing Libya and Chad"

Sporadic? Bingo. And the casualty toll is listed as "thousands". And the effect must be limited, as the conflict is not even listed in the History of Chad article.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

I think it's what I said above ^^^


I actually got the opposite idea, and I'm sure of it. The Tuareg Rebellion was more serious in Mali. However,

A) There were no more than 3000 insurgents at a time, and usually much less
B) They were usually bandits who occasionally attacked buildings and travelers before fleeing
C) There was no extensive destruction

Here's the catch: It seems like a major event in the history of Mali and every place I've been to mentions it. So while on paper, it cannot seem like a crisis war, there is a distinct possibility that it acted as one.

This possibility is kind of low though, since it doesn't happen often.

*EDIT*: I believe Niger's Timeline is as Follows: War Against Hausa states (1804-1810), Resistance to French (1890-1901)
The Tuareg might be on a different timeline: I identified an awakening that culminated with the First Tuareg Rebellion in the 1950s. However, while Niger resisted French Rule in the late 19th century, the Tuareg resisted French Rule from WWI to 1922. Of course, the second Tuareg Rebellion was in the 1990s.

Seems like the Tuareg are completely consistent: 4T in the 1910s, 2T in the 1950s, 4T in the 1990s. But Niger and Mali do not have any NATIONAL and obvious 4Ts since the 1890s. WTF.

But as you said, every article mentions the Tuareg Rebellion as a major event, and it seems to have had a serious effect - democratization, reforms, and a peace agreement in both countries. I guess in the end, the real question is, was this a Mau Mau-like watershed moment, or a Zapatista-esque "also-happened"?

EDIT: It is notable that many websites are calling the situation in Mali from 1990-1996 a Civil War. Of course, not all "civil wars" are 4T -- ahem, Iraq, anyone? -- and the label can be misleading (Colombia has "officially" been in a "civil war" since 1964, but no one would claim the country has been 4T for 43 years).

But in any case, it being called the Mali Civil War does give it a label that goes beyond "fringe uprising by the minority".

EDIT 2: There was also a "Niger Civil War" beginning in 1991. So many people don't consider the Tuareg Rebellion a rebellion; they consider it a civil war in both countries.

Civil War is an overstatement. It lends a false impression. The Tuareg Rebellion was a rebellion. It's as simple as that.

*EDIT*: The first Tuareg Rebellion was in the 1960s, not the 1950s.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Civil War is an overstatement. It lends a false impression. The Tuareg Rebellion was a rebellion. It's as simple as that.

But the question remains: we think it was a 4T for the Tuareg. Was it enough to reset the cycle in Mali and/or Niger? It seems to have been a pretty major event, forcing some big changes in societal structure. And it came when both countries were already overdue for a crisis.

We need to be sure about this, one way or the other.

Originally Posted by 1990

But the question remains: we think it was a 4T for the Tuareg. Was it enough to reset the cycle in Mali and/or Niger? It seems to have been a pretty major event, forcing some big changes in societal structure. And it came when both countries were already overdue for a crisis.

We need to be sure about this, one way or the other.

Well I can't be absolutely sure, but I'm sure enough to color them red.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Well I can't be absolutely sure, but I'm sure enough to color them red.

Good enough for me. On to more African countries. I've been re-examining Mauritania, and I still think there is a decent case to be made for 2T. There may have been a crisis war somewhere among the upheaval and ugliness of the 1970s. Will look into it further...

Originally Posted by 1990

Good enough for me. On to more African countries. I've been re-examining Mauritania, and I still think there is a decent case to be made for 2T. There may have been a crisis war somewhere among the upheaval and ugliness of the 1970s. Will look into it further...

Thanks for saving me some time. Don't just use Wikipedia and Encarta though. If you spend an extra 5-10 minutes looking, you may find your job to be much easier.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Thanks for saving me some time. Don't just use Wikipedia and Encarta though. If you spend an extra 5-10 minutes looking, you may find your job to be much easier.

You got it. I got a good link: http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/mrtoc.html from the Library of Congress, but it seems their data on Mauritania is from June 1988 for some reason. Could still be helpful.

Okay, it would seem that Mauritania and Western Sahara are intimately connected turning-wise. They shared the same basic chain of events during the late 1970s. May have been a 4T, maybe not, but it was definitely an era they shared in common. If there was a crisis war for both, it was definitely the start of the independence movement (from Spain) in Western Sahara by the Polisario. The beginning of this push seems to have been quite violent and turbulent; in recent years the furor has calmed somewhat and the violence gotten more sporadic. The movement was directly inspired by the successful independence movements in Angola and Mozambique.

But I'd like some information more recent than 1988, since if there was a 4T on the 1975 timeline, chances are it ended in 1991 with the beginning of the democratic process.

It is interesting that even though Morocco actually administers Western Sahara, Mauritania was tied in much more closely to events there during the 1970s and '80s than was Morocco.

Compiling different sources including the LOC site, CIA World Factbook, BBC, Wikipedia, and Encarta, it's still not clear whether the early guerrilla activities of the Polisario count as a crisis war, or as a very ugly non-crisis war. What is clear is that at the same time as the Sahara War (that's what Wiki calls it), Mauritania was going through major political changes and upheavals on a bumpy road to democracy. Whatever that counts for.

So was this a 4T? Not sure. I do know that unlike most of the countries we've talked about, Mauritania did not have an obvious 4T around the turn of the 20th century. That suggests that it is in a unique situation, one it shares with Western Sahara. The period from ~1976-1991 looks much more 4T than anything seen during French colonial rule.

UPDATE: So we know there was extreme political turbulence from 1976-1991 in Mauritania. Maybe 4T, maybe not. But in this decade, the mood seems to be drifting toward 2T, suggesting that, yes, the Sahara situation in its early years was a crisis. During the 1990s the government took an anti-Islamist stance and tried to improve relations with the West. This, over time, inflamed Islamist passions, leading to the 2005 coup. This really feels like the mounting fury of an early 2T to me, with the coup possibly serving as a catalyst. (My my, Mauritania has short turnings: a 15-year crisis then 14-year recovery?)

They are closely related because of ethnic ties, specifically the Sahrawi.

Check this out:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1989/WR89/Mauritan.htm

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

They are closely related because of ethnic ties, specifically the Sahrawi.

Check this out:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1989/WR89/Mauritan.htm

Very interesting. What are your thoughts on Mauritania/Sahara's experiences from ~1976-91?

Why didn't I stick with my gut reaction? http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...nia#post187738 (should be 1900, not 1990)

It hasn't been wrong yet. Back to green.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Why didn't I stick with my gut reaction? http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...nia#post187738 (should be 1900, not 1990)

It hasn't been wrong yet. Back to green.

Gut reactions are NEVER wrong. I agree with you on this one.

BTW, have you had a chance to reassess Benin?

And I thought we had settled Guinea? Worth another look?

Originally Posted by 1990

BTW, have you had a chance to reassess Benin?

And I thought we had settled Guinea? Worth another look?

I'll be looking over the regions listed in my priorities post. I'll give updates. Any help would be appreciated.