PDA

View Full Version : (E.I. Game) Hold It-- Africa


Risban
December 1st, 2006, 07:51 PM
Alright, no offense Rameiro, but I think you've made some minor historical mistakes that are now becoming major, and I'm going to list them now:

-1. France owns Algeria, not Tunisia, I believe. I don't think they acquire Tunisia until 1881.

-2. Italy has no claims on the east African coast. That doesn't happen until later.

-3. The Ottoman Empire does NOT have any authority of anything west of Egypt. The Caliph is like their Pope, and that is about it. The Ottomans have not been able to exert any authority over there since the 18th century. Libya, Tripolitania, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco (aka: The Barbary States), are all virtually independent of TOE (especially Algeria, since it is occupied by the French).




Now, for more detail on Tunisia:
French control over Tunisia, achieved in 1881, brings to an end several decades of diplomatic jockeying between three colonials powers, France, Britain and Italy. All three are officially involved in the region from 1869.

The local dynasty of beys (technically subordinate to the Turkish sultan but in practice independent) have in recent decades spent lavishly to modernize their country, using funds borrowed in Europe. The programme, accompanied by necessary attempts to increase taxes, creates profound local resentment. By 1869 it is clear that the province is bankrupt. France, Britain and Italy are placed jointly, by international agreement, in control of Tunisian finances.

This arrangement is inevitably a platform on which three rival colonial powers jockey and trade for position. France and Britain stand together in 1871 when the Italians begin to press vigorous claims (justified in the sense that Italy has more investment and more nationals settled in Tunisia than either other contender).

By 1878 France and Britain come to a quiet agreement that the British will allow Tunisia to be a French sphere of influence in return for French acceptance of the recently established British presence in Cyprus. This still leaves the Italians as the chief claimants for a colonial presence in Tunisia, until the French make a pre-emptive strike in 1881.


So, yeah, no one controls it now.
Italy doesn't lay claim to anything near Ethiopia until later.

As for the "moods" towards the continent, France and Britain historically were the two positioning for power around it. Once Italy was unified, they pushed for the northern coastline (as the quote above shows) as they felt their claim to it was strongest, and they also eventually settled on the east as well. Spain and Portugal each could have claims as they are both respected (former) colonial powers, and the already have claims in Africa. The Dutch feel they have some claims to make, the Americans have a protectorate in Liberia, the Ottomans sort of control Egypt and have no way of controlling anything west of Egypt, etc. Russian involvement in Africa would be a little disdained by most Europeans, but not stopped--- however, Russian claims to authority over the Ottoman Empire's lands would NOT be met well, no matter what the circumstances, by Europeans--- mostly because the Europeans would want a chunk of the action as well, would like to try keep this balance of power bit in place, and would announce ideological reasons why Russia shouldn't be able to do that. So, DGNT, I'd have your delegate stop really claiming that at this particular meeting as Russia would already be on rather shakey grounds.
Austrian and Prussian claims are recognizable, since Prussia I believe has already staked some out, but Austria is in absolutely no position to be getting crank and making such hard-lined demands, because Austria is no where near a respected colonial power and never really becomes one. I'd suggest Austria try be a bit more compromising.
Italian claims would be a little mixed, as the prime portion of the kingdom is just recently independent from Austria and France and still in the process of completely unifying (though, please note, that it is not a civil war between Piedmont-Sardinia and the Two Sicilies; even historically, Giuseppe Garibaldi did this all himself "in the name of Victor Emmanuel." This time, Savoy just gave Garibaldi a few extra troops). However, Italy claims in the Mediterranean area would most likely be met respectably, so long as they aren't incredibly demanding and unflinching to the Great Powers, and would only be able to lay claim to other lands congenially and with the will of the others. We need to bear in mind that in this alternate-history, Italy is a bit more active in part thanks to the French not being able to dictate so much to the Italians, and this conference historically happened in the future when Italy WAS unified, but now it's in the process still, so yeah. Some goes for France-- they are weaker, but still powerful and respected. However, they are probably in no position to be making too mant demands.

Finally, the RPers should remember that without a powerful France, in Africa it will be Britain calling most of the shots and it is Britain's suggestions that, in the long run, should be taken most carefully (even though the Portuguese host is offering great compromises). Russia falls close behind Britain in the influence, but Russia's influence over most of Africa is no where near the Briton's power, primarily to the British uber-fleet versus Russia. So, keep that in mind. It would pay to be polite to everyone (for the smaller powers), but ESPECIALLY the British.


I suggest a pause really quick on IC responses to the topic until we, ya know, get this out there...

General_Paul
December 1st, 2006, 08:30 PM
Alright, I do realize that I made some very...expansive demands in Africa, namely because I felt that most of the areas that I was laying a claim to, namely Abyssinia, Somaliland, Tripoli, and Chad, were just vast expanses of desert wastelands. The areas of Kenya, Uganda, and the other smaller areas are the biggest problem in my mind, and rightfully so. The reason I got so hardline in the other post, is that not only were my claims totally brushed to the side and ignored, but the one claim given over to Austria, was one part of Libya.

Now, I'm not going to turn into a claims whore, but the fact of the matter is, even Italy was given better standing than the Austrians were. Austria can easily enforce its claims to the colonies, while the Italians are still busy with their fight with the Two Sicilies. I'd at least hope that some of my claims in East Africa could be recognized and not toally ignored...

Risban
December 1st, 2006, 08:56 PM
Piedmont-Sardinia isn't fighting the Two Sicilies, and didn't historically. Giuseppe Garibaldi is fighting the Two Sicilies, and the Piedmontese have given him a small amount of troop support. ;)


Besides, anyone can tell that the Two Sicilies is going to be sort of knocked over by Garibaldi (it happened historically, WITHOUT the Piedmontese back-up), and that means that Italian forces won't be held up for too long. Furthermore, Piedmont-Sardinia is more than capable of flexing military power overseas in this day and age. Historically, Piedmontese soldiers fought in the Crimean War.
Following up on this, it is unrealistic that as soon as the people in the conference carve up Africa they are expected to immediately take them over. These things take years.

Leej
December 1st, 2006, 11:01 PM
I hope expansion into Africa will be handled realisticly and count as negatives against the economy of the nations involved...

Hell is it even possible this early? Medicine won't be developed enough to get far yet...

Mexico
December 2nd, 2006, 11:20 PM
I hope you all enjoy my suggestions and apologies for my inactiveness the last two days, I've been busy.

DGNT
December 2nd, 2006, 11:34 PM
Always good to have you.
Thats some nice arrogant British there :P

rameiro
December 3rd, 2006, 01:40 AM
I apologize for any confusion, but I'm just going by the "Final Cartography" posted on this site. According to that map, which is the one I posted, all of the territories were under the administration of those countries.

The main reason for this conference was to benefit Portugal, although your nations don't know this. At this time, Portugal hope to expand into Northern Rhodesia and connect Mozambique and Angola to greatly expand their economy and reestablish themselves as a major colonial power. With "Trans-African" colony, the Portuguese would have access to both the Indian and Atlantic coasts through one territory.

Mexico
December 3rd, 2006, 01:47 AM
arrogant British
Redundant? :p