WI: France never loses Haiti?

What if France quashed the Haitian revolt and kept the island? How would they have done that? How would it have affected the Louisiana Purchase?

It's a question of when that will determine plausibility.

Essentially their were two Haitian revolutions.

The original (badass) one in 1791 under the L'Ouverture and a second one in 1802 under mostly Dessalines.

The first one is probably the best one for the French to crush as the precedent of freedom for the enslaved had yet to be set. Once Port-Au-Prince was liberated and the ex-slaves were armed it was going to be a long time quagmire by 1802 for the French to effectively recapture the island permanently, especially with the Brits blockading the Caribbean around that time.

And this same blockade also effects your What If question as if the French were able to crush the revolt in 1791, once the blockade starts, there will most like be another revolt that would succeed a few years later.

ChaoticBrilliance said:

What if France quashed the Haitian revolt and kept the island? How would they have done that? How would it have affected the Louisiana Purchase?

Click to expand...

France can't crush the revolt. The Revolution was dealing with too many external threats for them to ship the needed amount of troops (which would have been very large, due to the high attrition rate stemming from disease and guerrillas).

However, France can probably bargain and turn Haiti into an overseas department where slavery is ended, citizenship is expanded and said citizens get the same rights as those citizens in the Metropole.

Wouldn't be good for the sugar industry unless they go for debt peonage.

Soverihn said:

However, France can probably bargain and turn Haiti into an overseas department where slavery is ended, citizenship is expanded and said citizens get the same rights as those citizens in the Metropole.

Wouldn't be good for the sugar industry unless they go for debt peonage.

Click to expand...

Yep. It was going this way (although L'Ouverture always had an independent streak to him, he seems to have been happy to be nominally subject to the French Republic, so long as they didn't do anything to threaten his position). Then Napoleon decided to intervene, and things went rapidly downhill.

Soverihn said:

France can't crush the revolt. The Revolution was dealing with too many external threats for them to ship the needed amount of troops (which would have been very large, due to the high attrition rate stemming from disease and guerrillas).

However, France can probably bargain and turn Haiti into an overseas department where slavery is ended, citizenship is expanded and said citizens get the same rights as those citizens in the Metropole.

Wouldn't be good for the sugar industry unless they go for debt peonage.

Click to expand...

And then once the various wars against Napoleon begin (presuming no butterflies), Britain, if they want, can 'liberate' the island via direct action or through bribery, negotiation, etc. If they want, of course (even French Guiana was occupied during those wars until 1814)...

It might be returned to France during the same treaty that returned French Guiana of course...

TheMaleRei said:

And then once the various wars against Napoleon begin (presuming no butterflies), Britain, if they want, can 'liberate' the island via direct action or through bribery, negotiation, etc. If they want, of course (even French Guiana was occupied during those wars until 1814)...

It might be returned to France during the same treaty that returned French Guiana of course...

Click to expand...

If Britain tried to invade the place in a timeline where where France decided to do right thing in Haiti, Britain would face a huge quagmire in attempting to hold and suppress the region. There'd be a huge paranoia over re-enslavement and loss of privilege associated with citizenship that would ironically bind Haiti more to the French Sphere.

I think a French Haiti was untenable. Even if they had put down the 1791 rebellion (which would be the best way for the French to hold it), it still was a total disaster demographically. France did not have the navy to be able to project the force necessary to keep it. It would go independent, or more likely British (the planters did invite the British to take over in OTL).

TheMaleRei said:

And then once the various wars against Napoleon begin (presuming no butterflies), Britain, if they want, can 'liberate' the island via direct action or through bribery, negotiation, etc. If they want, of course (even French Guiana was occupied during those wars until 1814)...

It might be returned to France during the same treaty that returned French Guiana of course...

Click to expand...

Britain invaded Saint-Domingue in the 1790s and ended up retreating after suffering horrific losses. In the event of French control after 1804, they probably would have just blockaded the island, and maybe reached a peace deal with Toussaint (who almost certainly has to be alive for Haiti to still side with France). I don't think they'd attempt another takeover of the island.

I would expect French control over Haiti to be recognized by the Congress of Vienna, but how Louis XVIII's government would deal with Toussaint (or his successor) would be interesting. Would there be another 1802-style attempt at restoring slavery?

1) Napoleon not only tried invading Haiti, but also wanted to reimpose slavery. That went over like a lead balloon, obviously. If he had promised NOT to do so, he might have won without a major fight. (So, that's possible.)

2) if the Haitians DO put up a fight, they win. Not militarily, but because the invading army is gutted by malaria, yellow fever, etc., etc. All of which are hard to avoid.


So... to keep Haiti, France really has to make it worth the while of Haitians, or some major subset of them. Carrot and stick could work (threat of invasion as the stick), but there's got to be a decent carrot involved, too.

IMO

Would Louverture have accepted a deal giving him Napoleon-like powers for Haïti and guaranteeing the non-imposition of slavery? For example, by making him "Pro-consul" of the place. If Britain wants to invade Haiti like other French colonies, wouldn't that reinforce the alliance between France and the newly empowered former slaves?

Then, instead of sending a 20k army to die in Haiti, the same army could be send to Louisiana to defend/populate the newly acquired territory. I assume that the US would be much less inclined to get New-Orléans in such a scenario. England would also have much more difficulties to try and invade Louisiana if thus defended.

How could it be made possible for Napoleon to have the foresight to put such an arrangement in place?

MiniaAr said:

Would Louverture have accepted a deal giving him Napoleon-like powers for Haïti and guaranteeing the non-imposition of slavery? For example, by making him "Pro-consul" of the place. If Britain wants to invade Haiti like other French colonies, wouldn't that reinforce the alliance between France and the newly empowered former slaves?

Click to expand...

That was essentially the situation in Saint-Domingue in 1798-1802. He wielded power but remained nominally loyal to France.

In his memoirs, Napoleon regretted his decision to betray Toussaint. How he can arrive at this decision beforehand . . . I don't know.