WI: Napoleon didn't send troops to Haiti

Artillery Gnome

Banned
In 1802 Napoleon sent French troops to Haiti in order to reestablish French control. Haiti had not declared independence, though former slave Toussaint Louverture had gained significant political power and had drafted a constitution that undermined french authority. The French invasion led to tens of thousands of casualties on both sides,an independent Haiti, a new Haitian emperor,and the massacre of the Frenchmen who remained on the island.

What would happen if Napoleon respected Toussaint's authority? He would have 40,000 more troops to use in Europe, would this have helped him much? How would Haitian history change if it got independence later and remained a colony of France for a few more years? What would cause France to eventually give up control of Haiti?
 

AuroraBorealis

Artillery Gnome said:
In 1802 Napoleon sent French troops to Haiti in order to reestablish French control. Haiti had not declared independence, though former slave Toussaint Louverture had gained significant political power and had drafted a constitution that undermined french authority. The French invasion led to tens of thousands of casualties on both sides,an independent Haiti, a new Haitian emperor,and the massacre of the Frenchmen who remained on the island.

What would happen if Napoleon respected Toussaint's authority? He would have 40,000 more troops to use in Europe, would this have helped him much? How would Haitian history change if it got independence later and remained a colony of France for a few more years? What would cause France to eventually give up control of Haiti?
Click to expand...

Actually they would probably see use in the Caribbean and Louisiana and curbs on slavery in the French Islands. The latter would be the hard part.
 
SlyDessertFox

SlyDessertFox

Artillery Gnome said:
In 1802 Napoleon sent French troops to Haiti in order to reestablish French control. Haiti had not declared independence, though former slave Toussaint Louverture had gained significant political power and had drafted a constitution that undermined french authority. The French invasion led to tens of thousands of casualties on both sides,an independent Haiti, a new Haitian emperor,and the massacre of the Frenchmen who remained on the island.

What would happen if Napoleon respected Toussaint's authority? He would have 40,000 more troops to use in Europe, would this have helped him much? How would Haitian history change if it got independence later and remained a colony of France for a few more years? What would cause France to eventually give up control of Haiti?
Click to expand...
Maybe Napoleon comes to terms with Louverture (didn't he invite him to France to work something out, but imprisoned and killed him instead?). Napoleon doesn't sell Louisiana and maybe considers making an American empire.
 

Magneto

Napoleon's plans for North America were entirely based upon the reimposition of slavery, there's little chance he could have reached a peaceful accord with Louverture, especially when the latter man was actively trying to carve out Haiti as a semi-autonomous dictatorship of his own.

In the unlikely event the two men do manage to thrash out some sort of deal where Louverture becomes some kind of colonial governor for life, then from my perspective there's two possibilities.

Either in time Louverture attempts to keep increasing his power and conflict erupts anyway. Alternatively if Louverture is happy with his power, keeps loyal to France and doesn't push too hard against slavery, then Louisiana will be retained and Napoleon would invest more into it's development and especially New Orleans. Of course if Napoleon loses the Napoleonic Wars, it'll revert back to Spain anyway and then without needing to keep Louverture sweet for Louisiana, the new French government may well be more hostile towards him and depose him anyway.

I don't see a long term happy outcome for Haiti whatever way. Either it's a reimposition of slavery and stability to supplement French Louisiana or it's political instability.
 
Last edited:
SlyDessertFox

SlyDessertFox

Magneto said:
Napoleon's plans for North America were entirely based upon the reimposition of slavery, there's little chance he could have reached a peaceful accord with Louverture, especially when the latter man was actively trying to carve out Haiti as a semi-autonomous dictatorship of his own.

In the unlikely example event the two men do manage to thrash out some sort of deal where Louverture becomes some kind of colonial governor for life, then from my perspective there's two possibilities.

Either in time Louverture attempts to keep increasing his power and conflict erupts anyway. Alternatively if Louverture is happy with his power, keeps loyal to France and doesn't push too hard against slavery, then Louisiana will be retained and Napoleon would invest more into it's development and especially New Orleans. Of course if Napoleon loses the Napoleonic Wars, it'll revert back to Spain anyway and then without needing to keep Louverture sweet for Louisiana, the new French government may well be more hostile towards him and depose him anyway.

I don't see a long term happy outcome for Haiti whatever way. Either it's a reimposition of slavery and stability to supplement French Louisiana or it's political instability.
Click to expand...
What exactly were Jefferson's plans if Napoleon turned down his offer for New Orleans?
 

Magneto

slydessertfox said:
What exactly were Jefferson's plans if Napoleon turned down his offer for New Orleans?
Click to expand...

Haven't a clue, probably not a great deal considering how much he ran down the armed forces during his Presidency and his desire to avoid war with France. Probably something as barmy as the various embargo acts he passed against the French and British during his Presidency.

The idea to just purchase NO was always a bit of a weird idea anyway, why would France sell only New Orleans when they'd have no other access to the rest of Louisiana if they sold it's port and entry?
 
mightfly

mightfly

If the french didn't sell louisiana then a american encroachment would have likely happened anyway.

Napoleon needed money and would have probably sold the more northern parts of Louisiana anyway.

If it reverted to Spanish control then we see a much earlier Spanish American war. The Americans would have taken the territory no matter what since it will be needed for further expansion. Either way the americans will encroach on the territory and slowly chip away at it with colonist, fur hunters, and surveyors.

Haiti was heading towards independence whether the French wanted it to or not the locals wanted it bad enough that a reinstitution of slavery by the French would lead to future rebellions. With out troops sent and their leader alive Haiti still reaches independence by 1815. Also Haiti stays wealthier as the Haitians wont have had more of their infrastructure and people killed in the fight.

Haiti is also not going to split into the Deminican Republic. This means a wealthier Haiti in the Future as there will not be as much internal conflict on the island.

This may impact all of south america as Haiti was the funder of Simon Boliviar in his mission there.

With fewer problems a united Haiti may have had a bigger part in the Cuban war of independence seeing it as an opportunity for expansion along with other areas of the caribbean.
 

RPW@Cy

mightfly said:
If the french didn't sell louisiana then a american encroachment would have likely happened anyway.

Napoleon needed money and would have probably sold the more northern parts of Louisiana anyway.
Click to expand...

You're missing the whale in the room. If Napoleon doesn't sell New Orleans but tries to hang on to it instead then the British will almost certainly capture it instead some time in the 1800's. They're pretty unlikely to hand it over to the Americans, so the ATL war of 1812 if it happens could take a somewhat different course.
 

Artillery Gnome

Banned
Magneto said:
Napoleon's plans for North America were entirely based upon the reimposition of slavery, there's little chance he could have reached a peaceful accord with Louverture, especially when the latter man was actively trying to carve out Haiti as a semi-autonomous dictatorship of his own.

In the unlikely event the two men do manage to thrash out some sort of deal where Louverture becomes some kind of colonial governor for life, then from my perspective there's two possibilities.

Either in time Louverture attempts to keep increasing his power and conflict erupts anyway. Alternatively if Louverture is happy with his power, keeps loyal to France and doesn't push too hard against slavery, then Louisiana will be retained and Napoleon would invest more into it's development and especially New Orleans. Of course if Napoleon loses the Napoleonic Wars, it'll revert back to Spain anyway and then without needing to keep Louverture sweet for Louisiana, the new French government may well be more hostile towards him and depose him anyway.

I don't see a long term happy outcome for Haiti whatever way. Either it's a reimposition of slavery and stability to supplement French Louisiana or it's political instability.
Click to expand...
I think that Louverture being content with ownership of Haiti would be plausible, he didn't try to do much for abolition outside of Haiti.
 

Faeelin

Banned
RPW@Cy said:
You're missing the whale in the room. If Napoleon doesn't sell New Orleans but tries to hang on to it instead then the British will almost certainly capture it instead some time in the 1800's. They're pretty unlikely to hand it over to the Americans, so the ATL war of 1812 if it happens could take a somewhat different course.
Click to expand...

No, America would seize it.

As Jefferson said,
“There is on the globe one single spot, the possessor of which is our natural and habitual enemy. It is New Orleans, through which the produce of three-eighths of our territory must pass to market, and from its fertility it will ere long yield more than half of our whole produce and contain more than half our inhabitants.”
 
SlyDessertFox

SlyDessertFox

Faeelin said:
No, America would seize it.

As Jefferson said,
“There is on the globe one single spot, the possessor of which is our natural and habitual enemy. It is New Orleans, through which the produce of three-eighths of our territory must pass to market, and from its fertility it will ere long yield more than half of our whole produce and contain more than half our inhabitants.”
Click to expand...

Could this cause a war with Napoleon? Or would he just let it go?
 

Magneto

Faeelin said:
What's Napoleon going to do? Send his mighty fleet?
Click to expand...

Napoleon managed to send 20,000 troops to Haiti, apparently France still had the ability to project large scale forces into the Carribean. 20,000 French soldiers could more than hold the Lower Mississippi. At the time of the Louisiana Purchase the United States had never put an army into the field that size in it's history and Jefferson had deliberately run down the Continental Army and was relying upon militia, the United States navy was also run down at the turn of the century. The British never put an army of size into the field during the war of 1812-15 and more than held their own against the Americans.

Had the French wished for a fight over New Orleans and reinforced the area before they provoked the Americans they could have given a real fight of it. In actual fact in 1800-1805 it would have been far easier for the British to capture NO than the Americans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top