Persia was, during the latter half of the 19th C, a rather weak country with poor armed forces and a lot of Russian influence. What POD would it take for Russia to fully annex it, or most of it? And what might the effects be? (I'm particularly wondering how much benefit ice-free ports on the Persian Gulf would be)
Russian Persia
- Thread starter warsfan
- Start date
ASB. There is no way that the Russians would be able to hold on to a vast, populated land with a drastically different culture and religion, not to mention a strong sense of 'national' identity. Now, it is entirely possible that the Russians, maybe due to a seriously screwed British empire, manage to make Persia into a puppet state with dominance of their markets and control of their ports, with a local government that answers to St. Petersburg. Annexation though is impossible. If they tried, the expense in blood and treasure of repressing the endless revolts aided and abetted by outsiders would cause the Russian Empire to collapse.
Poland?
(Well, aside from the vast territory thing).Anyhoo, political Islam was barely a little sprout at the time [1], so I'm not sure why they would have much more trouble than in Central Asia...unless the British stir up trouble, which they almost certainly would.
Bruce
[1] British Egypt? There was a _lot_ of the Islamic world being ruled over by Europeans at the time - it took a while for the reaction to really set in. Russia is unlikely to hold onto Iran in the long run, but if they can come to some sort of gentleman's agreement with the British, I don't see why they couldn't hold onto it for a few decades without excessive strain on the Empire as a whole.
Poland?
Anyhoo, political Islam was barely a little sprout at the time [1], so I'm not sure why they would have much more trouble than in Central Asia...unless the British stir up trouble, which they almost certainly would.
Poland is hardly comparable to Persia in this case, as its terrain is significantly less conducive to guerrilla warfare and the country itself is much smaller in raw size. Furthermore, it is directly adjacent to the Russian heartland, and so there'll be much less difficulty in controlling and administering it than there obviously would be with Persia.
Trouble is, there's just no way that the British could reach any such agreement with the Russians. The idea of the Russians pushing into the Persian Gulf and thus obtaining a warm-water port was just terrifying at the time to the Empire, as it would put many of its own key positions there and in India at potential risk. There could be concessions, there could be zones of influence, but Persia had to maintain some sort of veneer of independence to act as a buffer, if nothing else, alongside Afghanistan.
I remain sceptical re the Deadly Muslim Guerilla War-ri-ors (projecting modern guerilla struggles into the past strikes me as another kind of essentialism) but I agree that the British are likely to be immovable on the subject: I was just making one of those "If we had some ham we could have ham sandwiches, if we had some bread" what ifs.
Bruce
Incognito
Banned
I know Ottomans & Russian Empire often did not see eye to eye, but is there any way Russian Tsar & Ottoman Sultan agree to an anti-British alliance & divide Persia between Russia & Ottoman Empire?
Poland?
Anyhoo, political Islam was barely a little sprout at the time [1], so I'm not sure why they would have much more trouble than in Central Asia...unless the British stir up trouble, which they almost certainly would.
Bruce
[1] British Egypt? There was a _lot_ of the Islamic world being ruled over by Europeans at the time - it took a while for the reaction to really set in. Russia is unlikely to hold onto Iran in the long run, but if they can come to some sort of gentleman's agreement with the British, I don't see why they couldn't hold onto it for a few decades without excessive strain on the Empire as a whole.
As previously mentioned by Rousseau, Poland and Persia are not comparable. In addition, Poland and Russia are much more similar in culture than Russia and Persia.
As for why they would have more trouble:
1) Demography/Geography: Persia has a lot more people, is farther away, and has a relatively advanced pre-existing polity. Central Asia, as far as I know, had nothing resembling 19th century Persia.
2) Persian nationalism: Central Asia was (and is) divided ethnically and along clan and tribal lines; Persia had plenty of this too, but there was some unified sense of national identity, especially.
The example of Egypt is actually a good one. The Russians could take over and administer Persia in the same way that Britain administered Egypt: through a puppet state with control over its economy and military, but with a local face and substantial involvement of native elites in the lower and middle strata of the power structure.
I remain sceptical re the Deadly Muslim Guerilla War-ri-ors (projecting modern guerilla struggles into the past strikes me as another kind of essentialism) but I agree that the British are likely to be immovable on the subject: I was just making one of those "If we had some ham we could have ham sandwiches, if we had some bread" what ifs.
Bruce
While the idea of "Deadly Muslim Guerillas" (TM) is silly, resistance to the invading Russians would be substantial. The tribes of Persia were relatively warlike and dispersed, and if mobilized could be a huge problem, what with the large landmass and mountainous nature of much of Persia. As well, the cities would be hotbeds of political unrest. Basically, imagine the Caucasus for Russia, make it worse, and multiply the size by a few dozen times. That's the headache Russia would have, even before British intervention.
Russia annexing Persia is nearly ASB, but this is for geopolitical reasons, not the level of resistance from the population.
The big things people need to remember is just how drastically population sizes have changed in the 20th century;
While Iran today has a population of over 80 million, that is very much a modern thing, in 1900 Iran had a population of 9.86 million while in 1860 it was only about 4.2 million.
Likewise, while Russia's population today falls short of being twice as large at 143.3 million, the population was proportionally orders of magnitude larger in the past; in 1900 Russia had a population of 71.1 million (7 times larger than Iran) while in 1860 the population was 67.1 million (17 times larger than Iran).
The big things people need to remember is just how drastically population sizes have changed in the 20th century;
While Iran today has a population of over 80 million, that is very much a modern thing, in 1900 Iran had a population of 9.86 million while in 1860 it was only about 4.2 million.
Likewise, while Russia's population today falls short of being twice as large at 143.3 million, the population was proportionally orders of magnitude larger in the past; in 1900 Russia had a population of 71.1 million (7 times larger than Iran) while in 1860 the population was 67.1 million (17 times larger than Iran).
PhilippeO
Banned
what about at 1837 Alexander Burnes managed to convince British government to have closer relationship with Dost Muhammad Khan. Russia already have close relationship with Mohammad Shah Qajar. Russia-Persia and British-Afghan then go to war over Herat. British without disastrous Anglo-Afghan War become more confident that Afghan can protect India from Russia. Relationship become closer between each state and their patron, and British diplomacy instead of preserve Persia and Afghan as a buffer, accept de facto condition, that Persia is Russia client.
about warm-water port, probably not much change, Persian Gulf will still be controlled by British. and Persia Gulf to Moscow is very long way away.
about warm-water port, probably not much change, Persian Gulf will still be controlled by British. and Persia Gulf to Moscow is very long way away.
Yes, of course. And look the population density map which wasn't pretty much any different back in 1800es:
Which means that RU could 100% "russify" the eastern 3/4s of the territory ( which is empty indeed ) = establishing 100% russian ethnically dominated land transport corridor between http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorgan ( perhaps named ITTL Gorgorod
) on Caspian sea & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chabahar on the Gulf of Oman - dotted by as many as possible, saturated with RU ethnic population, cities as "way stations / garisons... The rest of the country - split into dozens of RU provinces, free towns, vassal and client states.
The reason RU to not do it OTL is UK, not Iranian.
Yes, of course. And look the population density map which wasn't pretty much any different back in 1800es:
Which means that RU could 100% "russify" the eastern 3/4s of the territory ( which is empty indeed ) = establishing 100% russian ethnically dominated land transport corridor between http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorgan ( perhaps named ITTL Gorgorod
The rest of the country - split into dozens of RU provinces, free towns, vassal and client states.
The reason RU to not do it OTL is UK, not Iranian.
Erm, a lot of the uninhabited areas on that map-especially in eastern Iran-are that way because they're bone dry deserts that are pretty much going to stay empty until humanity invents weather control.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_iran_biotopes_simplified-fr.png
Most of the areas marked "semi-desert" and all of the "desert" on the above-linked map just aren't going to support large numbers of people, period.
As said before, the British Empire is the main concern.
Regarding the population argument, the population was so low in the first case because of the near constant state of war the area of Iran was in from the end of the Safavi era to the beginning of the Qajar one. Once the fighting stopped, the population began to increase substantially. If the Russians conquered the whole area (I'll explain why they won't in the next paragraph), the population might be Russified, yes. But it would still skyrocket. Iran/Persia also benefits from then having regions outside of Russian control (Ottoman Empire, Afghanistan, Khaleej), which would make totally Russifying the people impossible. Think a larger Central Asian state for a cultural example.
Now, as for why they wouldn't anyways. When the last Russo-Persian War ended, the Russians occupied the city of Tabriz, the seat of the crown prince and the capital of Iran's most populous province, until Iran paid off all its indemnities. The Russians hated it. Never mind that they had to go through the Caucasus just to supply their forces, but to convince Iran to give up its chief territory would cause another war that Russia neither wanted or could afford (this was shortly after the Polish Uprising, so Russia was already hurting pretty bad).
In short, Russia can annex parts of Iran/Persia. Namely Azerbaijan, the Caspian coast, and Khorasan. But considering the terrain, population, and significance of these regions, it's highly unlikely to see Russia ever wanting to spend the resources to do so.