Somewhere in the multiverse the Tories don't unseat post-war Labour until the end of the 50's/start of the 60's and the Socialist International is THE union of European nations; while the French have had their backs completely turned away from Europe focused on maintaining or even expanding their doomed colonial empire. NATO is never formed either and US influence in Europe consists of an army stationed in West Germany and West Berlin.
Britain still a world power?
- Thread starter Shtudmuffin
- Start date
Somewhere in the multiverse the Tories don't unseat post-war Labour until the end of the 50's/start of the 60's and the Socialist International is THE union of European nations; while the French have had their backs completely turned away from Europe focused on maintaining or even expanding their doomed colonial empire. NATO is never formed either and US influence in Europe consists of an army stationed in West Germany and West Berlin.
Hyperion
Banned
Internally, better running of the economy, and perhaps getting a few more successes in WW2, possibly doing something that shortens a couple of theaters by two or three months compared to OTL.
Externally, either the Chinese Civil War, The Sino-Soviet border disputes of the late 1950s and into the 1960s goes worse, or even the late 1970s Chinese/Vietnamese war goes much, much worse, and Britain ends up in control of Hong Kong beyond 1997.
5-6 million more subjects under British rule, and the ecomonic powerhouse that Hong Kong is, that would definitely put Britain in a more powerful position. I would assume with an early enough POD, Britain might not build more or bigger carriers, but the idea of building and permanently stationing three or four additional frigates and destroyers in the region wouldn't be out of the question.
Externally, either the Chinese Civil War, The Sino-Soviet border disputes of the late 1950s and into the 1960s goes worse, or even the late 1970s Chinese/Vietnamese war goes much, much worse, and Britain ends up in control of Hong Kong beyond 1997.
5-6 million more subjects under British rule, and the ecomonic powerhouse that Hong Kong is, that would definitely put Britain in a more powerful position. I would assume with an early enough POD, Britain might not build more or bigger carriers, but the idea of building and permanently stationing three or four additional frigates and destroyers in the region wouldn't be out of the question.
A minor point and a major point.
First, the minor point. New York recently reclaimed its title of financial capital. This is no way diminishes the fact that the City a huge player in the world of finance.
Second, you forgot a very important area of influence--The UK is a major cultural influence. I think it that we can all agree that its cultural influence is disproportionate to its size.
The UK's cultural influence is especially true in pop music. The UK has a special cultural genius of taking American ideas, such as rock'n'roll, punk, soul, etc., and making it more acceptable to the middle class.
Likewise, UK movie people are pretty influential as UK writers.
Culture is still big money.
First, the minor point. New York recently reclaimed its title of financial capital. This is no way diminishes the fact that the City a huge player in the world of finance.
Second, you forgot a very important area of influence--The UK is a major cultural influence. I think it that we can all agree that its cultural influence is disproportionate to its size.
The UK's cultural influence is especially true in pop music. The UK has a special cultural genius of taking American ideas, such as rock'n'roll, punk, soul, etc., and making it more acceptable to the middle class.
Likewise, UK movie people are pretty influential as UK writers.
Culture is still big money.
Flocculencio
Donor
The trouble here is that the Cold War proper only really froze over a few years after Indian Independence. Of course you could delay Indian independence but that has serious repercussions on Britain's conduct of WW2 since the Independence process was basically the Indian National Congress' price for assisting in the war effort. If they called for non-cooperation in India Britain's war effort gets a lot more difficult. The other problem is that the US was in many ways quite supportive of the principle Indian independence and viewed the British Empire with quite a bit of distaste. Barbara Tuchmann's book Stilwell and the American experience in China deals in part with American involvement in India during WW2 from the perspective of General Stilwell who was commanding US forces in the India-Burma-China theatre and he makes his dislike for the British quite evident.
Increased investment in the economies and infrastructure of the British Empire by both the British Government and Private investers to tie the economies of these places closer to the UK.
The UK doesnt need a population of 300-400 Million people itself if it basically owns/runs the economies of other countries coming to that many people or more....
For example BP & Shell being *the* major oil companies in Africa and the Middle east into the 21st century.
Modernisation of the British Shipbuilding industry including ownership of overseas yards in Africa & SEA.
Maintenance of the UK Merchant Marine as the largest or one of the largest in the world.
Further investment in UK companies for comercial aircraft design and production. For example have one of the Major UK aircraft builders being a true competitor to Boeing on the same sort of scale as airbus.
Offer the continued presence of UK troops in African countries as a counter balance to instability with the host country paying for the unit. For example a brigade based in Rhodesia or Kenya etc, with a Royal Marine or Air Assault Division available in the UK as a Rapid Reaction force.
The UK doesnt need a population of 300-400 Million people itself if it basically owns/runs the economies of other countries coming to that many people or more....
For example BP & Shell being *the* major oil companies in Africa and the Middle east into the 21st century.
Modernisation of the British Shipbuilding industry including ownership of overseas yards in Africa & SEA.
Maintenance of the UK Merchant Marine as the largest or one of the largest in the world.
Further investment in UK companies for comercial aircraft design and production. For example have one of the Major UK aircraft builders being a true competitor to Boeing on the same sort of scale as airbus.
Offer the continued presence of UK troops in African countries as a counter balance to instability with the host country paying for the unit. For example a brigade based in Rhodesia or Kenya etc, with a Royal Marine or Air Assault Division available in the UK as a Rapid Reaction force.
Technically that one would not be a more powerful UK, but a new Franco-British world power.
Riain
Banned
Soft power of finance and the like is all well and good, but it`s not quite the same as the SAS guiding a 1000lb LGB down an access shaft of the Presidential Palace, now, is it. Soft power must be complimented with hard power for a country to be properly called powerful and this is where Britain falls short in many respects, especially given its legacy of great power.
Post war Labour IOTL was pretty anti EEC.
Super Mac is a better bet (and in the 30's he nearly joined labour) even Churchill had a Europhile phase post war
EDIT: Rab Butler might be good but IDK enough about him to say for sure