WI: Canadian-Caribbean Union

[President Lenin]

The possibility of a union between Canada and multiple Caribbean nations has been proposed several times in the past. How could these proposals become successul, would the consequence be of a Canadian-Caribbean union?

[IndefatigableRN]

You need a Canadian government with balls...

Frankly, Canadians tend not to want to rock the boat (I say this as a Canadian), so that's why I say the above about a Canadian government willing to do something 'crazy.'

I seem to remember a timeline (truth be told it might have been an HOI AAR) that had Borden getting the Caribbean as a mandate after Versailles. I can't recall the particulars, sorry.

That seems the most likely time. Canada gets the West Indies as a mandate along the same lines as Oceania for Australia and New Zealand at Versailles. One interesting development might be the improvement of the RCN during the interwar period. With territories in the West Indies, there would be more of an incentive to maintain a decent surface fleet for patrolling, etc. Perhaps there would also be an earlier influx of Caribbean populations to Canada.

[Some Bloke]

I'd be interested to see what happens to Marcus Garvey in this scenario, not to mention the effects on the Rastafarian movement.

[DValdron]

Originally Posted by IndefatigableRN

You need a Canadian government with balls...

Frankly, Canadians tend not to want to rock the boat (I say this as a Canadian), so that's why I say the above about a Canadian government willing to do something 'crazy.'

I seem to remember a timeline (truth be told it might have been an HOI AAR) that had Borden getting the Caribbean as a mandate after Versailles. I can't recall the particulars, sorry.

That seems the most likely time. Canada gets the West Indies as a mandate along the same lines as Oceania for Australia and New Zealand at Versailles. One interesting development might be the improvement of the RCN during the interwar period. With territories in the West Indies, there would be more of an incentive to maintain a decent surface fleet for patrolling, etc. Perhaps there would also be an earlier influx of Caribbean populations to Canada.

Both ways. I could see the Canadian Snowbirds going to Jamaica or Bahamas or some of the other islands instead of Florida. And that would probably drag social services, infrastructure and investment down with them.

[TheMann]

The first question for me on this one is when does this happen, and what the terms are.

If the Caribbean territorites are just a mandate, I would still expect the islands to want independence, and they will probably be treated in a similar way to how Australia led Papua New Guinea until it got independence in 1975. Canada will surely work on developing them, of course, and you can bet that there would be lots of tourists arriving from Canada, and yes the possibility of there being plenty of new arrivals to Canada from the Caribbean is quite high.

If its a full-on annexation into Canada, that changes matter somewhat. Racism was not dead in Canada at the time, and while people like Marcus Garvey would likely gain respect from the Canadians, whether that in the short term changes things that much for the Caribbean islands is an open question. After World War II, however, all bets are off, and if those areas choose to continue sending MPs to Ottawa, the area will quite quickly become a big investment project for the Canadian government and its businesses.

[IndefatigableRN]

Originally Posted by DValdron

Both ways. I could see the Canadian Snowbirds going to Jamaica or Bahamas or some of the other islands instead of Florida. And that would probably drag social services, infrastructure and investment down with them.

This often provides the base for arguments for Canada getting the Turks and Caicos Islands

[IndefatigableRN]

Originally Posted by TheMann

The first question for me on this one is when does this happen, and what the terms are.

If the Caribbean territorites are just a mandate, I would still expect the islands to want independence, and they will probably be treated in a similar way to how Australia led Papua New Guinea until it got independence in 1975. Canada will surely work on developing them, of course, and you can bet that there would be lots of tourists arriving from Canada, and yes the possibility of there being plenty of new arrivals to Canada from the Caribbean is quite high.

If its a full-on annexation into Canada, that changes matter somewhat. Racism was not dead in Canada at the time, and while people like Marcus Garvey would likely gain respect from the Canadians, whether that in the short term changes things that much for the Caribbean islands is an open question. After World War II, however, all bets are off, and if those areas choose to continue sending MPs to Ottawa, the area will quite quickly become a big investment project for the Canadian government and its businesses.

This is pretty valid

[Wet Coast]

Originally Posted by TheMann

The first question for me on this one is when does this happen, and what the terms are.

If the Caribbean territorites are just a mandate, I would still expect the islands to want independence, and they will probably be treated in a similar way to how Australia led Papua New Guinea until it got independence in 1975. Canada will surely work on developing them, of course, and you can bet that there would be lots of tourists arriving from Canada, and yes the possibility of there being plenty of new arrivals to Canada from the Caribbean is quite high.

The timing on this would be important. King swept Quebec in the 1921 election and tended thereafter to tailor his foreign policy to accomodate Quebec's isolationist and anti Empire tendancies. If Canada accepted a mandate prior to this I would expect it to become an election issue which might force a divestiture after the election.

[Peace_Monger]

The problem in general with the Canadian government, in terms of foreign policy is that we go out of our way to portrayal a soft-power image. Pre-World War that was a result of our colonial attitudes still within the British Empire and government, post conflict was the image of a middle power that Prime Minister Pearson developed. Now part of this can be the Quebec "issue" but Anglo Canada is just at fault for it; just look to the Afghanistan Conflict to show how both francophone and Anglophone support for an aggressive foreign policy is.

It also doesn't help that Canada's government is always delighted to slash defence spending to nothing in times of peace, or even uncertain times geopolitical speaking. (i.e. see Pre-World War II, Cold War, &modern day). As a result any sort of internal prideful military expeditionary mindset is slashed with the budget; you cannot have generals thinking of deploying overseas when they cannot support their forces within Canada.

Yes on occasion Canada has gone to war(s) or into a serious internal conflict(s), however we have never done this alone; we always look for world support before anything. Now this can be simply attributed to the fact Canada is not all that powerful militarily, but it still underlines the federal Canadian government is unwilling to ever posture in a way that appears aggressive or a least a non-neutral image; without multi-lateral support I mind you.

As result Canada would never and I mean never ever try to land grab a distant area unless it was gifted to them pre-1950, or if the given nation had ASB level support to join Canada. In that sense if say Jamaica or the West Indies had internal ASB support to join Canada; then the actual framework of the Canadian constitution is actually relatively open to the inclusion of new provinces.

[TheMann]

Originally Posted by Wet Coast

The timing on this would be important. King swept Quebec in the 1921 election and tended thereafter to tailor his foreign policy to accomodate Quebec's isolationist and anti Empire tendancies. If Canada accepted a mandate prior to this I would expect it to become an election issue which might force a divestiture after the election.

Perhaps, but the best bet for this to happen is in late Robert Borden era, so it would likely be an issue in 1921. That said, Canada was still close enough to Britain at that point that even if King was to propose divesting themselves of it, London would freak and that would be the end of that idea. More to the point, I would not expect Quebec to be against the idea for too long, simply as the Caribbean being a part of Canada would reduce the majority held by Ontario and the provinces that are deemed to be the opposition to Quebec. Once Duplessis is firmly in charge in Quebec, the issue becomes pretty much a non-issue.

As for the military, having to actually defend the Caribbean territories will result in a bigger influence for the Navy and later on the air force. That's pretty much unavoidable. The reductions in force after WWII were done because everyone was tired of war - and they learned the hard way in Korea the problems with cutting back too far, which is why Canuck units were based in Germany right through the Cold War.

[Wet Coast]

Originally Posted by TheMann

Perhaps, but the best bet for this to happen is in late Robert Borden era, so it would likely be an issue in 1921. That said, Canada was still close enough to Britain at that point that even if King was to propose divesting themselves of it, London would freak and that would be the end of that idea. More to the point, I would not expect Quebec to be against the idea for too long, simply as the Caribbean being a part of Canada would reduce the majority held by Ontario and the provinces that are deemed to be the opposition to Quebec. Once Duplessis is firmly in charge in Quebec, the issue becomes pretty much a non-issue.

As a Mandate, the territories would not become part of Canada but would be a quasi colonial appendage. A perfect target for anti-colonial and anti-Empire factions and not much of a counterweight to Ontario as there would be no representation in Parliament.

I would agree that once Canada accepted such an arrangement there would be no going back but I would expect it to be disruptive in terms of domestic politics because of the colonial appearance. The attitude of those in the Caribbean would probably be key here depending on if they indicate a preference for closer ties or independence.

[TheMann]

Originally Posted by Wet Coast

As a Mandate, the territories would not become part of Canada but would be a quasi colonial appendage. A perfect target for anti-colonial and anti-Empire factions and not much of a counterweight to Ontario as there would be no representation in Parliament.

I would agree that once Canada accepted such an arrangement there would be no going back but I would expect it to be disruptive in terms of domestic politics because of the colonial appearance. The attitude of those in the Caribbean would probably be key here depending on if they indicate a preference for closer ties or independence.

That makes sense, but I suspect that Canada will not be keen on being a colonial power, especially if its King around because as you point out, that would not be seen well by those factions in Parliament and in Quebec. Quebec City would want them either moved off or made into full-fledged provinces ASAP. And I cannot see King not wanting that, because he'll know that if Canada is bringing greater prosperity to these areas, its gonna help his party in Parliament. The Tories will hate it for a variety of reasons, but he can't much lose that way, politically.

[Bob in Pittsburgh]

Interesting thought although other than Cuba all of the islands were colonies of someone. I just don’t see France or the Netherlands, or even Great Britain, going along with any of this.

[Wet Coast]

Originally Posted by Bob in Pittsburgh

Interesting thought although other than Cuba all of the islands were colonies of someone. I just don’t see France or the Netherlands, or even Great Britain, going along with any of this.

Actually this is based on the fact that after WW1 Britain looked seriously at passing its British West Indies colonies to Canada under a League of Nations mandate similar to what was done to the territories in the Pacific that were passed to Australia. These would only be the British colonies, not anyone elses.

[Some Bloke]

This is a very interesting proposal, I say roll with it.

With territory in the Carribean, Canada would have a bigger stake, and therefore a greater desire for influence in the region. With this in mind, how does a more powerful Canada influence the British Empire as a whole?

[miguelrj]

Originally Posted by Bob in Pittsburgh

Interesting thought although other than Cuba all of the islands were colonies of someone. I just don’t see France or the Netherlands, or even Great Britain, going along with any of this.

Albeit not explicitly so, what's being talked about is Canada getting part or all of the British Caribbean because those were the scenarios that were proposed in our timeline.
Great Britain did trust some of their Pacific holdings in one way or the other to Australia and New Zealand, it was almost a domestic issue as they were all part of the same Empire/Commonwealth. That's what eventually happened with Newfoundland and Labrador (to which Canada shared a border), entrusting the rest of British North America to Canada is just a step further.

EDIT: I missed West Coast's reply... Oh well, since I was talking about further steps, what about Canadian Belize or even Canadian Guyana?

[oudi14]

Originally Posted by Bob in Pittsburgh

Interesting thought although other than Cuba all of the islands were colonies of someone. I just don’t see France or the Netherlands, or even Great Britain, going along with any of this.

Haiti and the Dominican Republic were also independent; and had become so earlier than Cuba.

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Another problem is the difference between islands. Iotl, they couldnt make the west indies federation work, i dont think theyd be any happier as a single province. And they are certainly not going to each be a province.

[miguelrj]

Originally Posted by Dathi THorfinnsson

Another problem is the difference between islands. Iotl, they couldnt make the west indies federation work, i dont think theyd be any happier as a single province. And they are certainly not going to each be a province.

All in one province is tough to pull. A province per island is impossible indeed.
Perhaps 3 provinces:
- Jamaica + Cayman
- Bahamas + Turks & Caicos
- Leeward + Windward islands?

[TheMann]

Originally Posted by miguelrj

All in one province is tough to pull. A province per island is impossible indeed.
Perhaps 3 provinces:
- Jamaica + Cayman
- Bahamas + Turks & Caicos
- Leeward + Windward islands?

Add Belize to Jamaica and Guyana and to the Leeward/Windward Islands and that's about what I would expect under this scenario. These areas have sufficient population to be provinces here, as in post-WWI era each of these three will have more people than Saskatchewan or Alberta did at the time.