DBWI: Paraguay Alone?

Roberto · May 17, 2009

I was reading a book about the War of the Triple Alliances (the Great Southern Cone War to you Brits), and the author repeatedly mentioned how it was Franco Solano Lopez´s incredible diplomatic skills that allowed him to bring Bolivia and Chile into the war with Paraguay. What if Lopez had been a lesser diplomat, but had retained his almost obsessive insistence on going to war? Would he have been less ambitious than in Our Universe, or would he have still took on the Montevideo Pact? Would Paraguay have had a fighting chance either way, if they were solo?

Gonzaga · May 17, 2009

Roberto said:
I was reading a book about the War of the Triple Alliances (the Great Southern Cone War to you Brits), and the author repeatedly mentioned how it was Franco Solano Lopez´s incredible diplomatic skills that allowed him to bring Bolivia and Chile into the war with Paraguay. What if Lopez had been a lesser diplomat, but had retained his almost obsessive insistence on going to war? Would he have been less ambitious than in Our Universe, or would he have still took on the Montevideo Pact? Would Paraguay have had a fighting chance either way, if they were solo?

OOC: I like the idea, but when is your POD? In 1864/1865 Bolivia was passing through internal problems, with the coup against the president José María de Achá and the civil war between Manuel Mariano Melgarejo and Manuel Isidoro Belzú. And Chile at that time was still busy with the war against Spain, which has also started in 1864 (Bolivia would join them in the end of 1865, when their internal conflict were already solved). The POD is before 1864 and these conflicts never happened, or you are proposing that both wars would be merged?

Metro · May 17, 2009

The only way Bolivia could help Parguay would be via supplying them. But that was very difficult in that century. Not many roads from Bolivia via the Chaco to Paraguay.

Bolivian soldiers fighting alongside Paraguay would not do well since Bolivians are use to high attitude terrain not swampy lowlands.

Chile would have been a good allie to have. They could have blocked the River Platt. Chile might have even helped those Argentine States that wanted to separate from Bueno Aires control.

A war between Paraguay and Argentina, Chile might have gotten involved. If Brazil joined the war probably not.

Paraguay against only Brazil or Argentina might have had a chance. Fighting both not really. There is a small chance if they could get supplies via Bolivia. But during the War Bolivia ceded parts of the Paraguay river to Brazil so it had to come overland via the hostile Chaco.

Also, Paraguay should have waited for the arrival of there Ironclads before starting the war. Same thing happened to the Germans in WW II. The German Navy wanted time to build up there Navy before entering WW II but the leadership in the German government did not want to wait.

Admiral Brown · May 18, 2009

Roberto said:
I was reading a book about the War of the Triple Alliances (the Great Southern Cone War to you Brits), and the author repeatedly mentioned how it was Franco Solano Lopez´s incredible diplomatic skills that allowed him to bring Bolivia and Chile into the war with Paraguay. What if Lopez had been a lesser diplomat, but had retained his almost obsessive insistence on going to war? Would he have been less ambitious than in Our Universe, or would he have still took on the Montevideo Pact? Would Paraguay have had a fighting chance either way, if they were solo?

I don't think he would have thought alone, since he stood absolutely no chance of winning. He might have thought aginst Argentina if he was assured that Brazil would remained neutral (and secrety allied with him). he might have even attempt to fight Brazil alone if he had Uruguay and Argentina on his side (even if as informal allies). But since Brazil and Argentina where toghether, he would never have attecked. He only did so because he had Chile and Bolivia on his side, and he knew that would be enough to keep Argentina out of the war, at least in practice.

Roberto · May 18, 2009

Gonzaga said:
OOC: I like the idea, but when is your POD? In 1864/1865 Bolivia was passing through internal problems, with the coup against the president José María de Achá and the civil war between Manuel Mariano Melgarejo and Manuel Isidoro Belzú. And Chile at that time was still busy with the war against Spain, which has also started in 1864 (Bolivia would join them in the end of 1865, when their internal conflict were already solved). The POD is before 1864 and these conflicts never happened, or you are proposing that both wars would be merged?

OOC: I was thinking that Franco Lopez had been a different person, and had pursued a different strategy before the war... Maybe choosing a friendly candidate in Bolivia prior to the interal issues and backing him up succesfully, and Chile resolving its war with Spain somewhat earlier.

Metro said:
The only way Bolivia could help Parguay would be via supplying them. But that was very difficult in that century. Not many roads from Bolivia via the Chaco to Paraguay.

Bolivian soldiers fighting alongside Paraguay would not do well since Bolivians are use to high attitude terrain not swampy lowlands.

Chile would have been a good allie to have. They could have blocked the River Platt. Chile might have even helped those Argentine States that wanted to separate from Bueno Aires control.

A war between Paraguay and Argentina, Chile might have gotten involved. If Brazil joined the war probably not.

Paraguay against only Brazil or Argentina might have had a chance. Fighting both not really. There is a small chance if they could get supplies via Bolivia. But during the War Bolivia ceded parts of the Paraguay river to Brazil so it had to come overland via the hostile Chaco.

Also, Paraguay should have waited for the arrival of there Ironclads before starting the war. Same thing happened to the Germans in WW II. The German Navy wanted time to build up there Navy before entering WW II but the leadership in the German government did not want to wait.

OOC: Dude, this is a DBWI.

Admiral Brown said:
I don't think he would have thought alone, since he stood absolutely no chance of winning. He might have thought aginst Argentina if he was assured that Brazil would remained neutral (and secrety allied with him). he might have even attempt to fight Brazil alone if he had Uruguay and Argentina on his side (even if as informal allies). But since Brazil and Argentina where toghether, he would never have attecked. He only did so because he had Chile and Bolivia on his side, and he knew that would be enough to keep Argentina out of the war, at least in practice.

Yeah, I didn't think that the Paraguayan leadership would risk it either, unless we specifically made Lopez a megalomaniac, but that's frankly Out of This World.

Gonzaga · May 18, 2009

Roberto said:
OOC: I was thinking that Franco Lopez had been a different person, and had pursued a different strategy before the war... Maybe choosing a friendly candidate in Bolivia prior to the interal issues and backing him up succesfully, and Chile resolving its war with Spain somewhat earlier.

OK, I'll go with that.

Admiral Brown said:
I don't think he would have thought alone, since he stood absolutely no chance of winning. He might have thought aginst Argentina if he was assured that Brazil would remained neutral (and secrety allied with him). he might have even attempt to fight Brazil alone if he had Uruguay and Argentina on his side (even if as informal allies). But since Brazil and Argentina where toghether, he would never have attecked. He only did so because he had Chile and Bolivia on his side, and he knew that would be enough to keep Argentina out of the war, at least in practice.

Roberto said:
Yeah, I didn't think that the Paraguayan leadership would risk it either, unless we specifically made Lopez a megalomaniac, but that's frankly Out of This World.

Considering how the Paraguayans performed during the war, I think they could have a chance of winning alone, but that would depends on breaking the alliance between Brazil and Argentina (nothing the diplomatic genious that Lopez was couldn't do). Even IOTL he tried to get the support of Chile and Bolivia exactly to try to make Argentina give up the fight and avoid Brazil advancing through Argentine territory to reach Paraguay. If he is alone, maybe he would try to declare war only against Brazil while making negotiations with the Argentines, or the contrary.

However, as that would result in something a bit similar to OTL, I prefer the idea of Paraguay losing. Even if Paraguay had won alone, the reasons that created later the "Guerra Grande", or "South American War", or "Deserts' War", as you prefer to call it would still be there. With a Paraguay that had lost the conflict of the 1860's that conflict wouldn't happen, maybe only as a exclusively Pacific war.

For my country, if we had won the war with Paraguay maybe we would still be living under an Empire, as the roots of the monarchy's fall can be traced from that defeat. Also, with a winner Army we wouldn't have dissatisfied officers trying to get more political power to the Armed Forces. So, even if a Republic is eventually proclaimed, probably we would be spared from the military dictatorships and the political unrest that plagued us during the late 19th century and early 20th.