Sir Ray wrote:Way back in Jr High School during the end of the 70s (1979 to be precise), in World History (i.e. non-American history) we concentrated on European History and Asian History (for some reason I remember a whole class spend on Indian cooking and lifestyle - pretty cool cooking vessels they brought in). Anyway Africa was given about a week...
And in this week, our Teacher discussed the Capetown to Cairo railroad, which of course was never built, and how it would have really opened up Africa to development and boosted its economy. What do you guys think (assuming the gauge problem was worked out, and Germany agreed to allow Britian a ROW across it's colonial terrority - start the clock at, say 1890).
(We may have discussed this on the old board, but I think that was more which routes African could have used nowadays).
I think that the Cape to Cairo railway was an imperialist fantasy of Cecil Rhodes. It would not have had any economic point.
All the railways that were built had an economic intention - except perhaps the Uganda Railway from Mombasa to Kisumu. That purpose was always to transport produce from the interior to the Coast. The Uganda railway was billed as a cure for the slave trade, but did become economically useful.
South Africa had a network because there were European settlements and industrial sites all over. The lines to the north were to support first the European settlements in Rhodesia and then the mines. The tentacles of the southern African industrial economy reached as far north as the Congo Copper Belt (partly in modern Zambia). Those lines were all Cape Gauge.
The East African lines were all metre gauge and were built for local purposes. The Uganda Railway created the conditions for British settlement in the Highlands of Kenya and opened up industrial plantations in Uganda itself. The German line from Dar es Salaam to Kigoma was built to enable Germany to control that area and for trade. There was no point in any connection to the south (or north). In Uganda a line to the north of the country was built in the 1960s but never seems to have attracted enough business and is probably derelict at present.
What would have been the point of a rail line from Uganda to Sudan?
Now that there is oil in Sudan there are grandiose plans for more railways in southern Sudan, but their main motivation is political. The Southerners want to link more with the southern states - Uganda and Kenya - to get out of the domination by the Arabs of the northern Sudan. Will they be built? We shall see.
Sudan is not connected to Egypt by rail. Maybe the oil wealth will see a connection built. If so, I hope it is to European standard gauge as is used in Egypt.
Africa is full of proposed railways. So far none of the recently proposed lnes have been started. Nigeria has the money - while oil prices remain as high as they are at present. Sudan may have the money but the oil is only just beginning, and there is always the danger of war.
To build a Cape gauge line from Dar es Salaam where the Tazara line ends (built to carry Zambian copper when Rhodesia was in rebellion) to Sudan would be possible but who would finance it and what would the return be? Regauging the East African lines would also be possible but at huge expense - and metre gauge allows tighter curves so that civil engineering work would be needed.
There are proposals to cross the continent from east to west. Can anything come of that? The Kasese line in Uganda - currently derelict - could be extended into the Congo. Uganda army officers have been looting eastern Congo of its minerals but that is not the basis of a settled industry.
Chad is going to have an oil industry. Perhaps the Nigerian lines may be extended into Chad. That would leave a gap to Sudan. I think that is fantasy.