Minimal decolonization

Which empire do you think could have kept the most of its territory into the modern day?

Is it possible to have a Netherlands that keeps both Suriname and West Papua, for example?

What about Portuguese Angola? If not, could the Portuguese have kept Cape Verde, Sao Tome and Principe, and Cabinda? The latter I find especially interesting, because they could theoretically have a whole string of small territories stretching into the middle of Africa that all *want* to be part of Portugal.

Could France keep Oran in a situation like Ceuta/Melilla?

France would've been in a good situation to keep Gabon and/or Senegal. I don't know much about Algeria, but these countries were very close to France.
Anyway France has gone much better than any colonial power out of the decolonisation. Proof of it is it has a space center in Kourou, the largest superficy of territorial waters in the world, it kept all its Pacific holdings, and still has kept massive influence over West Africa.
Is this a coincidence? Does the UK have such a soft power in India or eastern Africa?

DracoLazarus said:

France would've been in a good situation to keep Gabon and/or Senegal. I don't know much about Algeria, but these countries were very close to France.
Anyway France has gone much better than any colonial power out of the decolonisation. Proof of it is it has a space center in Kourou, the largest superficy of territorial waters in the world, it kept all its Pacific holdings, and still has kept massive influence over West Africa.

Click to expand...

Well French Guiana is exactly the perfect example that I wanted to go off of. Centuries of being French and then they understandably don't want to leave. The Portuguese territories were the same but for an even longer period of time, so I think there is definitely potential for them to keep them.

Caramelcorn said:

Centuries of being French

Click to expand...

Mostly a convict colony. Cayenne was known for its bagne.
The type of decolonisation has an impact.
I think the reason most of the ex-Commonwealth states, Canada excluded, are so distanciated from the UK is that most of them got their independence with a fight.
There are three types of independences, unhappily I don't have examples for the 3rd type.
1st is decolonisation after an independence war. Never good for relations. Think France-Vietnam or France-Algeria. They barely can stand each other.
2nd is being "dropped down". What happened to most of French Africa. It creates a longing and dependence on any colonizer willing to keep influence - Françafrique, basically.
3rd is a joint independence process. Some way, the country chooses completely about its destiny - independence or being part of the colonizer.
I believe Mayotte might be 3rd that didn't wish independence.
You need as many 3-types as possible.

DracoLazarus said:

Unhappily I don't have examples for the third type

3rd is a joint independence process. Some way, the country chooses completely about its destiny - independence or being part of the colonizer.

Click to expand...

I believe New Caledonia is an example of that. Power is gradually being transferred from France to New Caledonia and by 2018 they vote on whether to rejoin France in a more formal way or become independent.

I don't know about the Portuguese keeping any of their colonial holdings in Africa. They got utterly wrecked by the revolutionaries in Guinea and Capo Verde, and that's the war that put the most strain on the war effort and hastened the end of their empire. All of their colonies had long borders with pro-revolutionary African nations, so in the long run it was impossible. And they couldn't have possibly kept their holdings in India or China. Maybe East Timor is a possibility?

France is probably the best bet, as a lot of the countries in French West Africa opted to remain in a French Union after the war. The troubles in Indochina and Algeria ruined that. so there should be a PoD to alter those outcomes. Calling them colonies would be a no-no however, I would think, but they basically would be in such a Union.

Britain, I don't think so. Once India and Egypt left a lot of the Empire became redundant from a national point of view, and it was becoming too difficult to hang on to what was left. I can't see them putting in the effort to hold it together like France did.

Don't know much about the Netherlands outside of Indonesia.

No way in hell Belgium was keeping the Congo. That would've be a terrifying guerrilla war.

I think colonialism could've been extended somewhat if the Europeans don't get hit by the one-two punch of two world wars, so that may be a PoD of interest.

I think the French defeat in the Indochinese war triggered the Algerians into their own war.
Have France negociating some form of Indochinese independence with Ho Chi Minh will probably save Algeria if combined with an earlier Plan Constantine.
France basically dropped down West Africa because it saw no use in keeping them while Algeria was gone.

DracoLazarus said:

I think the French defeat in the Indochinese war triggered the Algerians into their own war.
Have France negociating some form of Indochinese independence with Ho Chi Minh will probably save Algeria if combined with an earlier Plan Constantine.
France basically dropped down West Africa because it saw no use in keeping them while Algeria was gone.

Click to expand...

I'm thinking an earlier Plan de Constantine isn't enough. French citizenship is really the breaking point, because if Plan de Constantine industrializes Algeria, they're just going to... leave in a more peaceful way if they aren't given equal rights. General strikes instead of war and whatnot.

So what would it take for France to grant citizenship to Algerians? Perhaps France being ruled from Algiers for several more years?

I think Spain could have easily kept and integrated Western Sahara and Equatorial Guinea if they had been made autonomous communities by a surviving and stable II Republic along the second half of the century. This makes (excluding the Morocco protectorate) 100% of Spain's XXth century colonial territories!!

Kooluk Swordsman said:

I don't know about the Portuguese keeping any of their colonial holdings in Africa. They got utterly wrecked by the revolutionaries in Guinea and Capo Verde, and that's the war that put the most strain on the war effort and hastened the end of their empire. All of their colonies had long borders with pro-revolutionary African nations, so in the long run it was impossible. And they couldn't have possibly kept their holdings in India or China. Maybe East Timor is a possibility?

Click to expand...

I see that Cabo Verde is probably not going to happen, but I do still think they could keep Sao Tome and Principe for whatever they're worth.

What I was most interested in was Portugal having Cabinda and all its oil, but it seems that would have to be a pretty brutal occupation as well.

Caramelcorn said:

I'm thinking an earlier Plan de Constantine isn't enough. French citizenship is really the breaking point, because if Plan de Constantine industrializes Algeria, they're just going to... leave in a more peaceful way if they aren't given equal rights. General strikes instead of war and whatnot.

So what would it take for France to grant citizenship to Algerians? Perhaps France being ruled from Algiers for several more years?

Click to expand...

There is a hint in "A blunted sickle" : have the French and Brits discover Nazi war crimes earlier in the war (before the Fall of France) and using it as propaganda.
All soldiers in Algerian or colonial units were given the French nationality if I remember well. This could help a lot.

Caramelcorn said:

So what would it take for France to grant citizenship to Algerians? Perhaps France being ruled from Algiers for several more years?

Click to expand...

I can't think of anything that wouldn't imply massive changes.
Not only it would have been fought by Europeans settlers in Algeria; but it's likely to be fought as well by Arabs (maybe less so by Berbers) as french citizenship would have meant the end of regional customs and identity (see Messalist reaction to Blum-Violette proposal)

Rather than attempting that, you'd need something clearly more gradual : with an earlier Décret Crémieux-equivalent, with an actual economical and development in Algeria (that was soon a secondary part in French colonial policy) that would itself imply a lesser french colonialism (not that hard with an earlier and more left-wing republican policy* or, at the contrary, with a living on Second Empire), more important (and diverse) european settlements, and more political will.

*And I mean its anti-colonialist part, because it was far from being unanimous on it.

It's going to be hugely problematic even with a XIXth century PoDs (or likely, set of Pods), but that's basically what could work.

DracoLazarus said:

All soldiers in Algerian or colonial units were given the French nationality if I remember well. This could help a lot.

Click to expand...

It's rather that it made easier their access to French citizenship (they did have French nationality, but as subjects), but they would still have to give up their social/cultural bases.

Kooluk Swordsman said:

Britain, I don't think so. Once India and Egypt left a lot of the Empire became redundant from a national point of view, and it was becoming too difficult to hang on to what was left. I can't see them putting in the effort to hold it together like France did.

Click to expand...

What about the Trucial States (Today's UAE)? Literally all that was required was for them to pay for a protective military presence, there was no resistance to crush.

Or perhaps if they had committed better to the defense of Singapore they could keep it?

Caramelcorn said:

I see that Cabo Verde is probably not going to happen, but I do still think they could keep Sao Tome and Principe for whatever they're worth.

What I was most interested in was Portugal having Cabinda and all its oil, but it seems that would have to be a pretty brutal occupation as well.

Click to expand...

I think with Cabinda, you have to make sure that the decision to make it part of Angola in the 1950s doesn't happen, so that Angola can't officially claim it as their territory once it goes independent...

I think they could keep Sao Tome and Principe, as well as East Timor, but Cabo Verde is less likely as PAIGC had support there I think...

They definitely couldn't keep Guinea-Bisseau, and trying to hold on to that lead to the coup which in turn lead to decolonization...

I think the UK could have kept some additional Caribbean and Pacific islands, and if the Maltese referendum went through, could have incorporated them, their OTL territories, and Malta (at least) like with French DOM-TOM...

France mostly kept the most of what they had, though there could be the possibility of Gabon being a departement (there's a little TLIAD thing on that-Union, Travail, Justice).

Maybe Spain could have kept Equatorial Guinea? I don't know...

Netherlands could have retained Suriname, I think...

For Britain I think they could have kept a lot. They could have kept all of their west Indies. mostly because of the close cultural relationship between britain and their west Indies. They could have also kept Newfoundland Malta singapore and maybe a few other places. Perhaps north Borneo and Sarawak for example?

I have been thing of another way that Britain could have handled decolonization. What of they kept a bunch of Hong Kong's? A major trading and financial city of about 5 million in india. Bahrain to trade with the Arabs. Zanzibar or perhaps mombasa for east africa. Freetown for west Africa. It would give them true global reach and massive amounts of money.

It would be interesting to see modern Britain with mps from Singapore Malta and Newfoundland though

Also not a colony but Ireland

oreocruncher said:

I think with Cabinda, you have to make sure that the decision to make it part of Angola in the 1950s doesn't happen, so that Angola can't officially claim it as their territory once it goes independent...

I think they could keep Sao Tome and Principe, as well as East Timor, but Cabo Verde is less likely as PAIGC had support there I think...

They definitely couldn't keep Guinea-Bisseau, and trying to hold on to that lead to the coup which in turn lead to decolonization...

Click to expand...

Interestingly, PAIGC was scared to even touch Cabo Verde until after both the war in Guinea-Bissau AND the coup. Basically once the people in Cabo Verde had seen Portugal's brutality and instability.

If you can avoid the war in Guinea-Bissau and just let them go at the first sign of trouble, I think Portugal can keep Cabo Verde. The POD for this would have to be that Salazar somehow realizes that a war in Guinea will destroy his nation to an extent it will never recover from. Maybe he actually leaves Portugal for once, visits the territory, and sees that they hate him?

In answer to several comments in this thread. Portugal retaining Cape Verde and São Tomé and Príncipe and them becoming autonomous regions would be relatively easy, as said in https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/wi-cape-verde-still-portugese.309175/. As for Cabinda, that appears to be a lot tougher and Portugal would most likely have abandoned the African mainland. As for East Timor, I think Portugal could have kept it for some years, until it was developed enough to become an independent country.

Ricardolindo said:

As for Cabinda, that appears to be a lot tougher and Portugal would most likely have abandoned the African mainland.

Click to expand...

Cabinda has a low population and lots of oil so Portugal would keep it

Ricardolindo said:

As for East Timor, I think Portugal could have kept it for some years, until it was developed enough to become an independent country.

Click to expand...

Small in population and not hostile to Portuguese rule so it could be keep

I can imagine someways this can be acheived.

To sum up what this would look like however, Polandball can describe it best.
“Some Empires are opressive, some Empires are corrupt! But they’ll put aside their differences and prop eachother up!”