Is the US destined to go to war with an Independent CSA

[IchBinDieKaiser]

We've all read books and timelines involving an Independent CSA. There are a number of ways of which this could be achieved but what I am wondering is that are the CSA and USA destined to become bitter enemies and fight several wars as occurs in every timeline, or are they more likely to become the best of friends?

I understand that this depends on how the south achieved independence. If it was peaceful, than the relations between the USA and CSA would most likely be peaceful. If it was a hard fought war without foreign aid than I would think it would be tense at first but by the end of the century things would have cooled down and the two would be pretty friendly. However if the CSA had achieved victory after a hard fought war with foreign assistance I can imagine the CSA and USA being more enbittered with eachother.

These are just my thoughts, who else wants to chime in?

[XNM]

Well, the US seceded from Britain, fought two wars and were rather bitter towards one another for a while, and then became the best of friends later on. I don't see why the same thing can't be true for the USA and CSA -- eventually all the revanchists and their grandchildren will be dead, and the two can recognize their similarities and such.

Though, the South maintaining slavery and/or oppression of blacks wouldn't help relations.

[Perkeo]

IMO, the CSA won't last either way, because it is simply too backward: A country whose economy was based on agriculture and slavery, created way after the dawn of the industrial age and in the decade when even Czarist Russia abolished serfship...

The US might not even need a war to accomplish reunification. They just have to wait for the economic collapse of the CSA and then either have them creeping back into the Union or leave them as a third world neighbor.

[Malta Shah]

Nations that break off from other nations tend to get into life and death struggles alot. Germany and France. Serbia and Kosovo. India and Pakistan. Yaddayadda.

[Corbell Mark IV]

Originally Posted by MKN

Well, the US seceded from Britain, fought two wars and were rather bitter towards one another for a while, and then became the best of friends later on. I don't see why the same thing can't be true for the USA and CSA -- eventually all the revanchists and their grandchildren will be dead, and the two can recognize their similarities and such.

Though, the South maintaining slavery and/or oppression of blacks wouldn't help relations.

The South would try to industrialize, probably pretty quickly if for no other reason than to build cannons!

Assuming industry grew, that implies they are selling to someone, and all their customers are going to be giving them an increasingly hard time about slavery.


And once formal slavery is over, that would be enough until, hell the 50s? the 70s?

[Dalmighty]

Originally Posted by Corbell Mark IV

The South would try to industrialize, probably pretty quickly if for no other reason than to build cannons!

Assuming industry grew, that implies they are selling to someone, and all their customers are going to be giving them an increasingly hard time about slavery.


And once formal slavery is over, that would be enough until, hell the 50s? the 70s?

Without the Civil War, you'll get increasing numbers of militant abolitionists in the South, that'll create unrest, worsening the economic position of the CSA. The South's economy's going to crash within a decade of seccession, depending on the timing, things may turn out for the worse.

It'll either have to reform, or crack down.

[Snake Featherston]

It's not destined, no. The very problematic nature of a viable CS state will lead the USA to adopt a PRC-North Korea attitude of "Let's ignore this as long as we can and we don't really so much *want* to try anything here" for quite some time. The two would not be friendly neighbors by any sense of the word but if the CSA can find a means to last a long time, even as a dysfunctional military dictatorship trying to save a slave economy the USA will not be likely to want to absorb it. However if that dictatorship in itself starts coming unglued and some Confederate Pancho Villa starts raiding the US border the Great Reunification War will create the Reunited States of America.

[Fiver]

It's not inevitable, but a second USA-CSA war is very likely. There are several territorial disagreements that will not disappear with independence.

It's clear that the Confederacy considered all slave-holding states theirs by right, and invaded and set up puppet governments in Missouri and Kentucky in OTL. Actually holding either is unlikely; CSA logistics were poor. They're probably going to lose West Virginia and East Tennessee at a minimum as well. Revanchism will not evaporate after the ACW.

The CSA also obviously thought they deserved a route to the Pacific and all of the mineral producing parts of the West they could get ahold of. In OTL they failed abjectly in attempts to expand west into California or north into Colorado. The postbellum Confederacy economy is going to make acquiring those gold and silver fields increasingly attractive. And the only way to get a transcontinental railroad is by seizing territory.

If, as seems likely, the Mississippi River ends up under Union control, the CSA will be split in two. If the CSA maintains control of the Mississippi, that will affect the economy of the Midwest. The CSA is unlikely to accept the first option; the USA is unlikely to accept the second.

[Grey Wolf]

The Union did not immediately go to war with the seceding South in OTL leading many to think that there might be a peaceful parting of the ways. I have also read that Union commissioners actually sold weapons to the South in this ante-bellum period, not expecting them to be used against them

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

[MerryPrankster]

I don't anything is really "destined," but it's really likely, especially if the Confederacy "acts out" toward the neighbors or violently implodes in such a way that could cause problems for the rump U.S.

("Confederate Pancho villas," as Snake puts it, or massive refugee flights, that sort of thing.)

[Lost the game]

Maybe some general seizes power and becomes a confederate Dear Leader?

[Thucydides]

I could also see later US Presidents making an addendum to the Monroe Doctrine about the CSA. Particularly if the CSA is weak and decentralized then the US could certainly assert itself if say, Texas and Louisiana decide to go on an adventure down in South America.

[Evan]

Originally Posted by Grey Wolf

I have also read that Union commissioners actually sold weapons to the South in this ante-bellum period, not expecting them to be used against them

And I've read that those commissioners did that because they favored the South...

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by Lost the game

Maybe some general seizes power and becomes a confederate Dear Leader?

That actually is not a guarantee the USA would intervene assuming the dictator is willing to keep the CSA together and under "law and order". However such a dictatorship would have increasing problems perpetuating itself and would lead CS politics to be as stable as those of the Saigon regime over time. The USA's not going to be immediately enthusiastic about invading a country the size of Western Europe which is very close to it in culture, particularly if as US revanchism may well assume reunification is inevitable by peace, so why screw it up with another war and shooting first? The TL-191 scenario of endless CS-US fighting is not likely, the USA might well wind up drawn into such a war but it would be contingent on circumstances, not by design.

[ImmortalImpi]

Originally Posted by King of Malta

Nations that break off from other nations tend to get into life and death struggles alot. Germany and France. Serbia and Kosovo. India and Pakistan. Yaddayadda.

Germany and France didn't break off from one another.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by King of Malta

Nations that break off from other nations tend to get into life and death struggles alot. Germany and France. Serbia and Kosovo. India and Pakistan. Yaddayadda.

Er, India and Pakistan aren't really so much in life-or-death struggles so much as continual quasi-limited warfare. There are counterexamples to these as well, for instance Finland and USSR, North Korea and South Korea.......

[Turquoise Blue]

Look at North and South Korea. One is a third-world dictatorship, the other is a first-world democracy. Visualize them as the Confederate States and the United States, respectively. The absence of technology, and the massive cost of reconstruction will be enough to keep the Union from trying to bring the South back in the fold. You will have to keep them apart for at least 50 years before this happens, so at least one more war between the States. This scenario is a tad unplausible, because the Confederates would likely industralize.

[David S Poepoe]

Originally Posted by Lost the game

Maybe some general seizes power and becomes a confederate Dear Leader?

Well, we shouldn't rule out the possibility of some general seizing power and becomes a Union Dear Leader.

[David S Poepoe]

Originally Posted by IchBinDieKaiser

We've all read books and timelines involving an Independent CSA. There are a number of ways of which this could be achieved but what I am wondering is that are the CSA and USA destined to become bitter enemies and fight several wars as occurs in every timeline, or are they more likely to become the best of friends?

Nothing is destined. The similarities and common roots of both the US and CS imply that they could get along after a fact. There are three nations inhabiting the North American continent and for all the conflicts in their shared past they get along fairly well

The idea of a continued conflict between the US and CS rests more with the chauvinistic view that United States is the end all and be all and anyone not wanting to be part of it is to be vilified.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by David S Poepoe

Well, we shouldn't rule out the possibility of some general seizing power and becomes a Union Dear Leader.

Actually we can't rule this out in the CSA's sense, not least because if it wins independence at any point after 1863 Kirby Smithdom sets an evil precedent. If it wins independence before it, indiscriminate use of the army and mass slaughter as police forces still set the precedent. By contrast the Union saw plenty of limits on US generals like Burnside, and the Union never went anywhere equivalent with militarization and politics. Absurd point is absurd.