AHC and WI: British Ireland

[Mirza Khan]

What post-1900 PODs might result in Ireland not becoming an independent country, and what might some of the effects be? For one, I think British Ireland will almost certainly have some form of devolution, and thus the precident for devolution within the UK could be set much earlier than OTL (1910's-1920's vs. the OTL Scottish and Welsh parliaments in the 1990's).

Any other thoughts?

[Gallowglass]

Go for having state intervention on a large scale in the Great Famine, and Home Rule at the earliest stage possible. How you would manage either of them, that's the rub.

[azander12]

Originally Posted by Mirza Khan

What post-1900 PODs might result in Ireland not becoming an independent country, and what might some of the effects be? For one, I think British Ireland will almost certainly have some form of devolution, and thus the precident for devolution within the UK could be set much earlier than OTL (1910's-1920's vs. the OTL Scottish and Welsh parliaments in the 1990's).

Any other thoughts?

Fascist Britain post-CP Great War victory, which is victorious in an alt-Second Great War? They might annex Ireland during the war, in an equivalent of lebensraum.

[67th Tigers]

No WW1 in 1914.

Home rule had been passed but implementation was suspended for the duration of hostilities.

[black angel]

in OTL at the end of the Anglo-Irish War in 1921 the IRA was about a week from running out of arms, the reason the Brits came to the table was because of lack of public will to keep fighting have the Government fight for a month more the IRA falls apart, or the British it is thought agreed to peace terms because the terms would be unexceptable to the IRA, the IRA would keep on the war so the British Government would be able to keep up the war, so something happens to Michael Collins so Éamon de Valera, Liam Lynch, and Joe McKelvey lead the IRA to war for a second time, they are crushed by 1923

[Falkenburg]

Originally Posted by 67th Tigers

No WW1 in 1914.

Home rule had been passed but implementation was suspended for the duration of hostilities.

This.

Post 1900 the only way to pull this off is to derail the Great War (or delay it for 5 years or so).

Of course you could push the British domestic political situation back by 5 years, creating the circumstances for Redmonds bargain with Asquith (and the time to do the deal), but that's probably just as complicated to achieve.

The latest POD would probably be having Gladstone succeed in the 18880s or 90s.
That would give the new dispensation time to bed in without having to mess with WWI.

The Dominion of Ireland would almost certainly play a stalwart role in the Imperial War Effort, cementing the ties and vindicating devolution.

Falkenburg

[Falkenburg]

Originally Posted by black angel

in OTL at the end of the Anglo-Irish War in 1921 the IRA was about a week from running out of arms, the reason the Brits came to the table was because of lack of public will to keep fighting have the Government fight for a month more the IRA falls apart, or the British it is thought agreed to peace terms because the terms would be unexceptable to the IRA, the IRA would keep on the war so the British Government would be able to keep up the war, so something happens to Michael Collins so Éamon de Valera, Liam Lynch, and Joe McKelvey lead the IRA to war for a second time, they are crushed by 1923

No.

This will merely postpone the end, not change it.

After the Rising and even moreso after the Anglo-Irish War, the days of a 'British Ireland' are numbered.

Even assuming Churchill is able to unleash 'Terrible War' against Ireland (in the event the Treaty is rejected), the Republic would live on in the hearts and minds of the people.

The next generation would take up the struggle and Britain would find herself constantly engaged in a debilitating guerilla war for decades.

Imagine trying to carry that burden in the 30s.

Now try it in the 40s, while fighting a World War in the name of Liberty.
(Good luck getting American support for your efforts)

Now picture the Post War world. Austerity. Rationing. Rebuilding. Yet still the bleeding wound of Ireland weeps.

Now we're into the 60s. Civil Rights. Peoples Democracy. Insurrection.

It's the 70s now and along with the terrible haircuts we have industrial unrest, 3 day weeks, oil embargoes and mass Irish 'Terrorism'.

The 80s witness the 'Big Bang' in the City of London. Although it might not be the one from OTL.

The 90s bring us Cruel Britannia. As desperately as the old girl seeks to reinvent herself the same old story out of Ireland.
Repression. Resistance, Reprisal. Recrimination. Repeat ad nauseum.

Ireland unfree shall never be at peace. It is a question of when, not if.

The only way to keep Ireland within the UK (and thereby 'British') is to have that be a freely exercised choice on the part of the Irish people.

Falkenburg

[black angel]

Originally Posted by Falkenburg

snip

this is highly unlikely, through the whole War there was more support for the status quo than the IRA, the were a small minority, the Republicanism took YEARS to to be fully pushed onto the Irish people, they had the Monarchy for close to 30 years after the Anglo-Irish War, it was de Valera's life long obsession, not hard to see a history where Ireland is still a Monarchy sharing the Crown head with the UK.

you'd see an IRA, you did after the war in OTL, but like in OTL it died in both Northern and Southern Ireland, you might see flare ups from time to time, but likely in the North were Catholic suppression is a real day to day issue for people, in a Southern Ireland with-in the UK there'd be no reason to fight, people would have the same rights and a better standard of living than they had in OTL, fine ideas of an Irish state only go so far not many people die for fine ideas.

[Falkenburg]

I couldn't disagree more, black angel.

Once the rubicon of a national insurgency has been crossed there's no going back.
If one then adds in the brutality and repression, that would be required to re-establish effective British control across the entire island, the stage is set for future Risings.

The longer the British Government insists on using force to maintain the Union the deeper the resentment and the stronger the repulsion for anything perceived as 'British.

The only way to create the circumstances for an Ireland that remains within the UK, or 'British', is through persuasion and co-operation.

After the Easter Rising (and more importantly its' Aftermath), that job becomes progressively more difficult.

After the Anglo-Irish War, attempts at persuasion will fall on deaf ears.

After a renewed Anglo-Irish War (in the event The Treaty is rejected), the job becomes impossible.

Each subsequent phase of resistance and repression would only force the parties further apart.

Earlier Home Rule, or the 1914 Act not being derailed by the Great War, is the only plausible way to create the circumstances for amicable relations and the necessary devolution that could forestall separation.

Falkenburg

[Devolved]

Originally Posted by Falkenburg

No.

This will merely postpone the end, not change it.

After the Rising and even moreso after the Anglo-Irish War, the days of a 'British Ireland' are numbered.

Even assuming Churchill is able to unleash 'Terrible War' against Ireland (in the event the Treaty is rejected), the Republic would live on in the hearts and minds of the people.

The next generation would take up the struggle and Britain would find herself constantly engaged in a debilitating guerilla war for decades.

The Irish were fighting for independence on and off for 300 years before the 20th century so 'the republic living on in the hearts and minds of the people' would be no different from before.

A period of continued repression in Ireland into the mid 1920's would be exhausting but workable. Not all Irish wanted independence (including many catholics).

A long drawn out struggle in which the IRA are reduced to ambushes, kidnappings and murders would became a burden not a cause and I think the violence would die down in the mid 1920's and then recur every other decade until membership of the EU makes violent independence struggles increasingly irrelevant (such as the IRA and ETA OTL).

[67th Tigers]

Originally Posted by Devolved

The Irish were fighting for independence on and off for 300 years before the 20th century so 'the republic living on in the hearts and minds of the people' would be no different from before.

Only in the propaganda. It's far more complex than that. The notion of cutting all ties with Britian and going independent was a minority opinion even ca. 1922. The preferred solution amongst the mainstream nationalists was something like a dual-monarchy.

[Dunois]

I think that having the Irish Convention succeeding would probably do the trick. The resulting Ireland would be firmly devolved within the United Kingdom and while some protestant extremists might be unhappy at first, the general mood should subsequently change towards acceptance of the compromise.

The Easter Rising was not the end of a British Ireland, especially considering the very hostile reaction the rioters got from the majority of the population of Dublin. Executing the rioters was certainly a step too far though.

[black angel]

Originally Posted by Falkenburg

I couldn't disagree more, black angel.

Once the rubicon of a national insurgency has been crossed there's no going back.
If one then adds in the brutality and repression, that would be required to re-establish effective British control across the entire island, the stage is set for future Risings.

The longer the British Government insists on using force to maintain the Union the deeper the resentment and the stronger the repulsion for anything perceived as 'British.

The only way to create the circumstances for an Ireland that remains within the UK, or 'British', is through persuasion and co-operation.

After the Easter Rising (and more importantly its' Aftermath), that job becomes progressively more difficult.

After the Anglo-Irish War, attempts at persuasion will fall on deaf ears.

After a renewed Anglo-Irish War (in the event The Treaty is rejected), the job becomes impossible.

Each subsequent phase of resistance and repression would only force the parties further apart.

Earlier Home Rule, or the 1914 Act not being derailed by the Great War, is the only plausible way to create the circumstances for amicable relations and the necessary devolution that could forestall separation.

Falkenburg

if national insurgency is a line in the sand and you can never go back Ireland would have left the Union 6 or more times before 1922, as for co-operation, history shows us more Irish co-operation with the British than with the IRA, to wit, in the whole war about 15,000 men served with the IRA, but the real story is that the IRA had at most 3,000 men on the field at any given time, the Royal Irish Constabulary was 9,500 men strong so 3 times as many Irish men were fighting and working for the British government as were members of the IRA at the same time.

the Easter Rising was a joke btw, it was 1,000 guys storming the post office they had NO popular support when they were being brought out the people of Dublin spat on them.

[Falkenburg]

Originally Posted by black angel

the Easter Rising was a joke btw, it was 1,000 guys storming the post office they had NO popular support when they were being brought out the people of Dublin spat on them.

True (allowing for poetic licence). I did say the aftermath was more important.

The point of the Rising was not whether it succeeded or failed but that the attempt had been made in the face of British Power that was, if anything, even greater than it had been in the past.

The Rising as a whole had the effect of radicalising a majority of the population.
Look at the electoral results (Local and National) subsequently.

My point, which you seem determined to ignore, for reasons best known to yourself, is that "Keeping Ireland British" is simply not feasible if it must be done at the point of a gun.

Politically, economically and spiritually, Britain could not pay the price. Nor should it.

To be clear, I believe it is possible to achieve the OPs' aim but not through military means.

Falkenburg

[The Oncoming Storm]

The Rising was an unmitigated fiasco, it's well documented that Pearse was jeered by passers by while reading the Proclamation and when the rebels eventually surrendered they were met with shouts of "If you want to fight go to France!" there were I believe some cases of British soldiers having to protect rebels from being lynched. The executions did go too far especially that if James Connolly who had to be shot in a chair as he had been wounded in his ankle, but this wasnt what caused the decisive shift in opinion. That began with the harsh emergency measures such as curfews and internment that turned a lot of people who until then had supported the British or had been indifferent to militant Republicanism into supporting it. The point of no return was the conscription crisis, after that people began to move towards Sinn Fein.

Keeping all of Ireland either in the UK or in an Australia/Canada style arrangement is very easy with an early enough POD, but 1916 is the point at which it becomes much harder.

[Mirza Khan]

Originally Posted by The Oncoming Storm

The Rising was an unmitigated fiasco, it's well documented that Pearse was jeered by passers by while reading the Proclamation and when the rebels eventually surrendered they were met with shouts of "If you want to fight go to France!" there were I believe some cases of British soldiers having to protect rebels from being lynched. The executions did go too far especially that if James Connolly who had to be shot in a chair as he had been wounded in his ankle, but this wasnt what caused the decisive shift in opinion. That began with the harsh emergency measures such as curfews and internment that turned a lot of people who until then had supported the British or had been indifferent to militant Republicanism into supporting it. The point of no return was the conscription crisis, after that people began to move towards Sinn Fein.

Keeping all of Ireland either in the UK or in an Australia/Canada style arrangement is very easy with an early enough POD, but 1916 is the point at which it becomes much harder.

Would having the Irish police find out about plans for the Easter Rising, and arrest the plotters and roll it up before it starts, be a good POD? After WWI ended, I'm sure the Home Rule Act would be implimented and some of the tension would dissipate.

Question-did the pre-WWI Home Rule Act divide Ulster from the rest of Ireland, or was that post-Anglo-Irish war?

[The Oncoming Storm]

Originally Posted by Mirza Khan

Would having the Irish police find out about plans for the Easter Rising, and arrest the plotters and roll it up before it starts, be a good POD? After WWI ended, I'm sure the Home Rule Act would be implimented and some of the tension would dissipate.

Question-did the pre-WWI Home Rule Act divide Ulster from the rest of Ireland, or was that post-Anglo-Irish war?

Yes, in fact the authorities knew a revolt was planned and were planning to arrest the ringleaders, but they were unable to before the Rising started. Had this happened the ringleaders may well have been locked up instead of executed and they may have been seen by the population as a bunch of clueless incompetents rather than as noble martyrs.

No the Third Home Rule Act applied to the entire island, excluding parts of Ulster would have needed amending legislation. The Fourth Home Rule Act passed post war created Parliaments for Northern and Southern Ireland, partition only became a reality with the independence of the Free State.

[Rapparee]

I'm glad to see its been mentioned already but I'll give my two cents as an Irish person, two things that definiteley galvanised support for Sinn Féin, and republicanism as a whole, was the harsh methods used in suppressing the Easter Rising where all but two of the leaders (a woman and an American passport holder) were executed. Examples such as James Connolly shot in a chair because he was unable to stand, shocked the general Irish public. Especially when you compare it to the fate of the leaders in the Martiz Rebellion by veterans of the Boer war in South Africa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritz_Rebellion

Most of them just got minor prison sentences, not the harsh measures imposed on the Easter Rising.

Then you have the Conscription Crisis in 1917 where the British government proposed to extend it to Ireland, and Sinn Féin was seen to oppose it.

I would disagree with you Falkenburg that the Easter Rising was responsible for the success of the War of Independence. In all likelihood, it wouldn't have enjoyed half the amount of popular support it did without the legacy of the execution of the ringleaders.

[I Blame Communism]

Originally Posted by Falkenburg

Once the rubicon of a national insurgency has been crossed there's no going back.

So I take it that the events in 1641 and 1798 were just diddly-squat?

If you go back, then history retroactively declares that you weren't having a national insurgency. This is precisely the sort of historiographical distorting mirror that makes AH useful as an analytical tool, by giving us a clearer perspective.

Originally Posted by Falkenburg

After the Easter Rising (and more importantly its' Aftermath), that job becomes progressively more difficult.

The rising was unpopular with people at the time: people had family in the army, so a group of people prattling about gallant allies in Europe met a chilly reception and received the blame for the damage and disruption of the rising.

It was Britain's relentlessly ham-handed policies after the rising - execution, internment, and the ghost of conscription - that changed opinion, as others have pointed out.

There were also structural causes: the war meant a very long parliament so that the old guard of Irish parliamentary politicians seemed, well, old and cut off from the turns of events in the country; and a lot of angry young men were kicking about who would, without the war, probably have been in America.

In short, avoiding the war and securing Home Rule does not necessarily mean that Ireland will never become independent within or without the *Commonwealth, but I think that such a PoD is early enough for the OP's task.

[Falkenburg]

To clarify (again ), When referring to 'The Rising' I am talking about the period as a whole.
Not simply the events of 24th - 30th April 1916 in and of themselves.

IMHO, the Rising (and as previously stated the Aftermath) was a catalyst that enabled the profound shift in the political psychology of Ireland that would lead to Independence (rather than Home Rule).

Falkenburg