foreign relations of Brazil next to a British Argentina

This thread is in reference to what would have happened to Brazil's foreign relations if the British had been successful in the Rio de la Plata in 1806-07. I think that Britain and Portugal, being allies, would have signed an agreement relatively quickly (say, in the context of the Congress of Vienna) to settle boundaries between their respective territories in southern South America and to demarcate their spheres of influence. An independent Brazil would maybe have switched alliances, so to speak, from Britain to France to act as a counter-weight to British Argentina - either right upon Brazilian independence or when a dispute arises between Brazil and Britain in the 1830s or 1840s (over an issue like slavery). (If the latter, France would intervene in a Brazilian-British dispute and take over from Britain, if you will.) And after all, France was a world power competing with Britain at that point. This could have an impact on slavery and the monarchy in the last third of the 19th century and beyond. Britain, though, would still have financial influence in Brazil no less than in the rest of South America (real life or otherwise). What do you think? Would Brazil have switched alliances from the British to the French, or would it have stayed with the British?

How much of Argentina do you see this version of the United Kingdom gaining? Are they settling directly? How big / powerful do you see this region in 2012?

Just going off your post, I'd say there's very likely going to be some conflict with Brazil during its imperial phase, with a few skirmishes and at least a war or two there. With the Royal Navy, however, during the 19th century, I would posit the British would win any such dispute. General relations would be on the slightly tense side before and after such wars, but I can see economic cooperation evolving in the 20th century after most imperialism dies down.

JJohnson said:

How much of Argentina do you see this version of the United Kingdom gaining? Are they settling directly? How big / powerful do you see this region in 2012?

Click to expand...

I see Great Britain taking up, in stages, pretty much all of Argentina with one or two exceptions, and I see Argentina in 2012 being as powerful as Canada, probably a little more.

JJohnson said:

Just going off your post, I'd say there's very likely going to be some conflict with Brazil during its imperial phase, with a few skirmishes and at least a war or two there. With the Royal Navy, however, during the 19th century, I would posit the British would win any such dispute. General relations would be on the slightly tense side before and after such wars, but I can see economic cooperation evolving in the 20th century after most imperialism dies down.

Click to expand...

So you're saying that Brazil would still have closer relations with Britain than with France even with a British Argentina next door? And the skirmishes and possible wars would revolve, I suppose around slavery as well as the Christie ship of the early 1860s?

yofie said:

I see Great Britain taking up, in stages, pretty much all of Argentina with one or two exceptions, and I see Argentina in 2012 being as powerful as Canada, probably a little more.



So you're saying that Brazil would still have closer relations with Britain than with France even with a British Argentina next door? And the skirmishes and possible wars would revolve, I suppose around slavery as well as the Christie ship of the early 1860s?

Click to expand...

Brazil and British Argentina will be having the tense relations and through BA, with the United Kingdom. I'm thinking it will flare up off-and-on through the 19th century, and also in part depending on how the British take Argentina, how quickly, and what they do with the people already there who speak Spanish. Do they push out all of them, or do some welcome the British as liberators and help them out, thus easing the transition of power from Spain to Britain?

Remember Germany and Britain's relationship - Prussia was their partner during the American Revolution and pretty much during the Napoleonic Wars, but after Empire, Germany kind of stumbled around and made most of the world mad at them, leading to OTL WW1 and WW2 (that's the short version of the last 250 years!!).

It's very possible that, if we keep just about everything else the same - aside from British Argentina, which comes before the Monroe Doctrine, so the US would likely not argue it too much - I could postulate Brazil during its imperial phase will try to start wars with Britain, especially if Spaniards come running north with (exaggerated) tales of British horrors, and/or the British push into Brazil proper (Uruguay and the area encompassed by the Uruguay River). Clashes and outright wars, maybe months to a year or two in length, forcing Brazil to capitulate a few times. This antagonism may set Brazil to the Central Powers and possibly the Axis, or both.

With Britain involved in the South, this might also draw more settlers from Canada to British Argentina, due to climate over the course of the 19th century, making Canadian growth slow in relation, and making BA the more vibrant dominion. A posibility is Oregon Territory could be split more in favor of the US - fewer British up there, fewer defenders for the territory, so the Americans may end up north of 49°...maybe up to 52°, as one timeline on the board I had read.

Now, if you go with a Brazil that has had a history of antagonism during the 19th, and one or maybe two international alliances against British Argentina (and by extension, the UK), this somewhat mirrors Germany, which today is not considered an enemy of the United Kingdom, but an ally (at least as far as I know). Depending on how Brazil de-militarizes after your possible one or two world wars, and "repents" and turns away from its antagonism, it could have a new government installed by the Allies that turns the country towards the British and towards British (and likely also) American values.

Just some ideas for you, so take them as far as you wish.

JJohnson said:

Brazil and British Argentina will be having the tense relations and through BA, with the United Kingdom. I'm thinking it will flare up off-and-on through the 19th century, and also in part depending on how the British take Argentina, how quickly, and what they do with the people already there who speak Spanish. Do they push out all of them, or do some welcome the British as liberators and help them out, thus easing the transition of power from Spain to Britain?

Click to expand...

When Britain takes the Rio de la Plata basin in 1807, and eventually most of the rest of that general region, the Spanish people are not pushed out of the Rio de la Plata any more than the French were pushed out of Quebec ca. 1760 or the Dutch pushed out of the Cape in 1795 or 1806. The Spanish people are accommodated by the British in some way or another much like the French in Quebec were. So I see a large Spanish-speaking minority (with a majority in some areas, especially in the west and to a degree in the north) in British Argentina.

JJohnson said:

It's very possible that, if we keep just about everything else the same - aside from British Argentina, which comes before the Monroe Doctrine, so the US would likely not argue it too much - I could postulate Brazil during its imperial phase will try to start wars with Britain, especially if Spaniards come running north with (exaggerated) tales of British horrors, and/or the British push into Brazil proper (Uruguay and the area encompassed by the Uruguay River). Clashes and outright wars, maybe months to a year or two in length, forcing Brazil to capitulate a few times. This antagonism may set Brazil to the Central Powers and possibly the Axis, or both.

Click to expand...

I very much see the British keeping Uruguay as well as the western half of OTL Rio Grande do Sul. After all, the British even OTL took over Montevideo and other parts of the "Eastern Bank" coast as much as Buenos Aires in 1807.

JJohnson said:

With Britain involved in the South, this might also draw more settlers from Canada to British Argentina, due to climate over the course of the 19th century, making Canadian growth slow in relation, and making BA the more vibrant dominion. A posibility is Oregon Territory could be split more in favor of the US - fewer British up there, fewer defenders for the territory, so the Americans may end up north of 49°...maybe up to 52°, as one timeline on the board I had read.

Click to expand...

Some settlers may be diverted from Canada, but many more would go to Canada anyway, if only because it's geographically much closer to Britain than South America is, and is next to the United States (which attracts a huge number of British settlers no matter what). Besides which, some more people (though not many) may migrate from the British Isles than OTL with much of southern South America under British control.

It's quite feasible a British Argentina would expand into Chile also. It was certainly on London's wishlist.

As for the rivalry, I'm not so sure. Generally when one power is by far the dominant, the interest of the next power isn't to rival them, it's to not upset them too much. Hence the reason Portugal tried to get on with Spain during the middle ages. Unless Brazil can find a sponsor that can credibly defend them against Britain, which is difficult during the 19th Century, they'll prefer to just keep their heads down.

Socrates said:

It's quite feasible a British Argentina would expand into Chile also. It was certainly on London's wishlist.

Click to expand...

London definitely wanted that, but I'm not so sure it would have actually been successful. For one thing, the Andes in the 19th century were even more formidable a barrier than now with vastly more primitive transportation - the alternative was going by ship around the treacherous Cape Horn area. Also, even more importantly, once the British take over the River Plate area, they would be too preoccupied with consolidating their gains in that area and securing nearby external areas, through battle or otherwise. Once that was done, Chile would become independent anyway, not too different in language, ethnicity, etc. from its OTL counterpart.

Socrates said:

As for the rivalry, I'm not so sure. Generally when one power is by far the dominant, the interest of the next power isn't to rival them, it's to not upset them too much. Hence the reason Portugal tried to get on with Spain during the middle ages. Unless Brazil can find a sponsor that can credibly defend them against Britain, which is difficult during the 19th Century, they'll prefer to just keep their heads down.

Click to expand...

I guess, then, that it would be difficult for Brazil to get a world power like the French to be a sponsor to help defend itself against Britain?

yofie said:

London definitely wanted that, but I'm not so sure it would have actually been successful. For one thing, the Andes in the 19th century were even more formidable a barrier than now with vastly more primitive transportation - the alternative was going by ship around the treacherous Cape Horn area. Also, even more importantly, once the British take over the River Plate area, they would be too preoccupied with consolidating their gains in that area and securing nearby external areas, through battle or otherwise. Once that was done, Chile would become independent anyway, not too different in language, ethnicity, etc. from its OTL counterpart.

Click to expand...

London my want that but I doubt Britain would be able to take Chile, it is not worth the expense. Never the less the southern border will be decided in Britain's favor - Chile could not afford to upset Britain. Like everything south of Coihaique would be in Britain's control.

And if Chile "behaves" Britain might actually help it on its adventures against Bolivia and Peru in the north.

I'd be interested to know what Paraguay would do if Britain was right next door. I don't think they would be very happy about it. Could Brazil and Paraguay become allies instead of enemies?

jycee said:

London my want that but I doubt Britain would be able to take Chile, it is not worth the expense. Never the less the southern border will be decided in Britain's favor - Chile could not afford to upset Britain. Like everything south of Coihaique would be in Britain's control.

Click to expand...

I see Chile being in control all the way down to Punta Arenas and the western half of the Strait of Magellan, though Britain (and ultimately Argentina) controls the rest of the strait as well as all of Tierra del Fuego (aka Fireland). One big reason why I'm thinking so is because Punta Arenas was founded in 1843 by the Chilean government as a means of claiming sovereignty in those parts. This, keep in mind, was well before the height of the OTL disputes between Chile and Argentina over Patagonia and the Strait of Magellan and so forth. In this TTL, Chile as well as Britain/Argentina would have both wanted control over these areas too, and in the end, Britain gets somewhat more than Argentina got OTL and Chile gets some areas too.

Kidblast said:

I'd be interested to know what Paraguay would do if Britain was right next door. I don't think they would be very happy about it. Could Brazil and Paraguay become allies instead of enemies?

Click to expand...

When Britain takes over the River Plate area, Paraguay gets totally cut off from the Spanish Empire (it's not connected in any meaningful way with Upper Peru and so forth - still a part of the Spanish Empire - because of the as-yet-unconquered Chaco wilderness separating that from Paraguay). Thus, a chartered company not unlike the British East India Company or the Hudson's Bay Company buys Paraguay, with some Brazilian stakeholders in that company as well. That chartered company controls Paraguay for several decades until it becomes a formal British protectorate ca. 1870.

yofie said:

I guess, then, that it would be difficult for Brazil to get a world power like the French to be a sponsor to help defend itself against Britain?

Click to expand...

The problem is that France is utterly non-credible as a defence against the British in this time period (early 19th century). If a war ever erupted, Britain is already immediately present due to having a colony in the area, has absolute naval supremacy to stop French troops getting there, and would also consider an alliance with strategically non-important country in far flung South America to be of secondary important if ever they did fight Britain. Strategically, Brazil's best approach is to try and become friends with the schoolyard bully in the hope that he gets picked on least.

Socrates said:

The problem is that France is utterly non-credible as a defence against the British in this time period (early 19th century). If a war ever erupted, Britain is already immediately present due to having a colony in the area, has absolute naval supremacy to stop French troops getting there, and would also consider an alliance with strategically non-important country in far flung South America to be of secondary important if ever they did fight Britain. Strategically, Brazil's best approach is to try and become friends with the schoolyard bully in the hope that he gets picked on least.

Click to expand...

So it seems to me that the most plausible outcome of the presence of a British Argentina as far as British-Brazilian relations are concerned is that these relations would be not much different from OTL? And does that mean that slavery would be abolished more or less at the same time as OTL, and the republican coup would take place either in/around 1889 or a few years later depending on the strength of the Brazilian army (given that the monarchy was in such trouble succession-wise anyway)?

/Facepalm
Not another try of British ubersmench taking over an undeveloped piece of land half the size of Europe and turning it into a major power out of the power of red shirts and 5 o' clock tea!

Portugal/Brazil will want control of the Eastern Bank (current Uruguay) so they can control the only meaningful means of communication with the Matto Grosso and the British will inherit all the border disputes between Spain and Portugal in the area that today is eastern Argentina.

However, they aren't in a position to challenge the Royal Navy. Maybe they could try to join the party in 1812, thinking the RN has enough in their plate with the wars against France and the USA, but that won't work well. Also, they could assist Spanish attempts to retake the River Plate, either in exchange of the Eastern Bank if sucesful or, if anything, because disputes with Spain would be easier than with a victorious Britain.

juanml82 said:

Portugal/Brazil will want control of the Eastern Bank (current Uruguay) so they can control the only meaningful means of communication with the Matto Grosso and the British will inherit all the border disputes between Spain and Portugal in the area that today is eastern Argentina.

Click to expand...

It wouldn't be necessary for Portugal/Brazil to take control of present-day Uruguay, because as allies with Great Britain, they could come to an agreement on navigation by river to/from Mato Grosso whereby the British (as the rulers in the Eastern Bank and upstream along the Parana River system) could respect Portuguese/Brazilian navigation rights. It's sort of like how the British still ruled over much of the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes system despite that system being a main conduit of travel/communication between the American East Coast and the American Midwest before the Erie Canal and the railroads. I mean, Portugal/Brazil may want to aspire in their hearts to take over Uruguay, but it's quite another step to actually do it - and it would be more difficult with the British being on both sides of the Rio de la Plata.

Socrates said:

The problem is that France is utterly non-credible as a defence against the British in this time period (early 19th century). If a war ever erupted, Britain is already immediately present due to having a colony in the area, has absolute naval supremacy to stop French troops getting there, and would also consider an alliance with strategically non-important country in far flung South America to be of secondary important if ever they did fight Britain. Strategically, Brazil's best approach is to try and become friends with the schoolyard bully in the hope that he gets picked on least.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, it is common enough for a small power confronting a large power to build an alliance with the rival of the larger power. In this case, it would be France, being a rival of Britain. And France did have pretty advanced naval warfare technology in the 1800s (though not quite as good as with the British and with not nearly as big of a navy as the British), like with an ironclad vessel (la Gloire) - it was second only to the British.

But as I'm realizing, it is true - Brazil would have made even more concessions to the British than OTL because of the relative immediacy of British power. A major British naval base in Montevideo would clearly be more intimidating to the Brazilians than anything out of the Falklands, Guyana, or the West Indies.

yofie said:

When Britain takes over the River Plate area, Paraguay gets totally cut off from the Spanish Empire (it's not connected in any meaningful way with Upper Peru and so forth - still a part of the Spanish Empire - because of the as-yet-unconquered Chaco wilderness separating that from Paraguay). Thus, a chartered company not unlike the British East India Company or the Hudson's Bay Company buys Paraguay, with some Brazilian stakeholders in that company as well. That chartered company controls Paraguay for several decades until it becomes a formal British protectorate ca. 1870.

Click to expand...

Dr. Francía took control of Paraguay in 1814, three years after independence. Would he be butterflied away? How could they buy Paraguay that easily? Would the Cabildo of Asunción just give away their power that easily? I don't particularly follow how the British would be able to do that, if they only control Eastern Argentina at this point.

Isn't it more feasible that Argentina will probably see its fair share of revolutions like the rest of Latin America even if it is under British control?

Kidblast said:

Dr. Francía took control of Paraguay in 1814, three years after independence. Would he be butterflied away? How could they buy Paraguay that easily? Would the Cabildo of Asunción just give away their power that easily? I don't particularly follow how the British would be able to do that, if they only control Eastern Argentina at this point.

Click to expand...

You have to understand that very often, British pro-consuls, businessmen, and missionaries (and chartered companies) went to areas as yet uncolonized by Europeans much faster than the formal British government did. If and when these adventurous types established themselves in an area, then the government would formally claim it. Look at the British colonies in much of Africa and Asia, for example. In our case, the British on a formal level would only be in the River Plate region in the era in question, but are trying to expand their reach in nearby parts of the continent, and the pro-consuls and so forth are going to areas yet further in the interior (e.g. Paraguay). The British in Paraguay might allow Francia to govern, but only so long as he didn't pose a regional threat. Once he turned out to be a threat, the British could kick him out.

snerfuplz said:

Isn't it more feasible that Argentina will probably see its fair share of revolutions like the rest of Latin America even if it is under British control?

Click to expand...

If anything, to a minor extent - like in Canada, Australia, or (barring the American Revolution and Civil War) America. Nothing like in much of the rest of Latin America.

Why? Independentist movements in the Spanish colonies started in 1809 and your POD is 1806-7. So, why would the Argentine one be butterflied away?

Oh, BTW, Paraguay was heavily garrisoned by the Spanish. So I'd love to hear how are the British conquering it when, in OTL, were defeated by irregular militias.

Oh, and since we're at this, how is this ATL Half-Argentina becoming some sort of Southern Canada when there isn't a USA to help bolster it's economy and this Half-Argentina still has plenty of border conflicts Canada never had?