WI: No XYZ Affair?

wolf_brother

Banned
Warning: Wall of Text

I tried looking for something along these lines using the search feature, but it seems like all previous threads on the subject have gone the other way with the affair escalating the Quasi-War into something larger.

So I want to ask WI close relations continued between the US and France? Basically the shift would be due to the French not being suck idiotic dicks throughout the whole affair :p I'm not sure what an exact POD could be, but for brevity's sake lets simply assume that the French don't demand tribute from the Americans, open diplomatic relations are maintained, and (perhaps) the equivalent of a Jay Treaty for Franco-American relations solving the issue of America's debt to France and some other misc. issues that needed to be worked out. IOTL the Quasi-War was a bit of a joke and a highly embarrassing to important factions on both sides, and AFAIK The Convention of 1800 was resolved so quickly primarily because both the Americans and the French wished to bury the subject; France wanted a neutral America to trade with, and America didn't wish to become caught up in the Revolutionary Wars.

So what are the long-term effects here? In the (very) short run no XYZ means no build up the American Navy, no Alien and Sedition Acts and no accompanying strengthening of the executive branch and of the Federalist party in early America. On the flip-side no Quasi-War means France maintains a stronger Navy world-wide, especially in the Atlantic and Caribbean, and a neutral-friendly America continues to trade with France in 1798-1800, especially sending to the continent important goods like grain.

I don't know why but I have this image in my head of Britain pissing off the Americans by pirating and disrupting the trade of a neutral country (see: Battle of Copenhagen, in which the British fleet surprise attacked a coalition of non-combatants including Prussia, Russia, Denmark, and Sweden who had joined to protect neutral shipping from Britain's blockade of France) leading to the Americans declaring war on Britain and joining the revolutionary republicans in the War of the Third Coalition. Might butterflies prevent Napoléon from crowning himself Emperor and instead 'settle' for the title of Consul-for-Life?
 

Last of the Stuarts

I can't see this having much effect on Britain, they mantained a strong fleet in the Caribean and may have divered troops to Canada from other theatres of war.

If America did declare war on the Brits they would loose, as they had no real navy and it would be down to land forces, am I am not sure that the Americans wanted to fight a foreign war?
 
Grey Wolf

Grey Wolf

Donor
Don't forget the Barbary States in the formation of an active US navy - IIRC they used the war in Europe as an excuse to abrogate their agreement to stop raiding, and the US was one of the first to get severely pissed off an punitive. This scenario would surely give them an ATL reason to build up a fleet, tho it might have a completely different format than OTL - eg the heavy frigates were really aimed at European navies

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 

wolf_brother

Banned
Last of the Stuarts said:
I can't see this having much effect on Britain, they mantained a strong fleet in the Caribean and may have divered troops to Canada from other theatres of war.

If America did declare war on the Brits they would loose, as they had no real navy and it would be down to land forces, am I am not sure that the Americans wanted to fight a foreign war?
Click to expand...

A war on the North American continent would divert Britain's attention away from Europe. AFAIK Britain at the time had a fairly small but professional army and largely replied on its Navy for defense. Now IOTL, again AFAIK, the British used the 'wooden wall' to keep Napoleonic France from crossing the channel. ITTL though either Britain has to peel away some of her naval defenses to deal with American privateers, and ship troops to Canada, with all the implicated butterflies that involves, or the Americans run-rampant over a lot of British territory.

I don't imagine the Americans would send forces to Europe or the French vise-versa to North America, but opening a second theater of combat does mean serious butterflies; hardly 'not much effect on Britain.'

Grey Wolf said:
Don't forget the Barbary States in the formation of an active US navy - IIRC they used the war in Europe as an excuse to abrogate their agreement to stop raiding, and the US was one of the first to get severely pissed off an punitive. This scenario would surely give them an ATL reason to build up a fleet, tho it might have a completely different format than OTL - eg the heavy frigates were really aimed at European navies
Click to expand...

The Barbary Wars are past the POD; and I'm really not sure if the Americans would get involved there without the Quasi-War. I'm sure the US would feature some naval buildup ITTL, but to what degree and in what direction would...

One area that could be interesting IMHO would be Franco-American cooperation vis-à-vis operations in the Caribbean vs the British; American Jamaica?
 

LordIreland

wolf_brother said:
A war on the North American continent would divert Britain's attention away from Europe. AFAIK Britain at the time had a fairly small but professional army and largely replied on its Navy for defense. Now IOTL, again AFAIK, the British used the 'wooden wall' to keep Napoleonic France from crossing the channel. ITTL though either Britain has to peel away some of her naval defenses to deal with American privateers, and ship troops to Canada, with all the implicated butterflies that involves, or the Americans run-rampant over a lot of British territory.

I don't imagine the Americans would send forces to Europe or the French vise-versa to North America, but opening a second theater of combat does mean serious butterflies; hardly 'not much effect on Britain.'
Click to expand...

Isn't this effectively what happened with the war in 1812? The big difference here is that Britain has not yet formed the Peninsular Army. But that being said Britain was able to man and supply the PA and stall the American thrusts into Canada throughout 1812 - 14.

I guess the big factor here is that Trafalgar has not yet happened, so France still has a 'fleet in being'. But Britain has an awful lot of ships and the capability to build more if needed.
 
Grey Wolf

Grey Wolf

Donor
wolf_brother said:
I still don't understand your point :confused:

XYZ Affair - 1798/1800

First Barbary War - 1801/05
Click to expand...

Um, if you read it I don't understand how you don't understand my point

This bit seems pretty important for a start

American diplomatic action with Algeria, the other major Barbary Coast state, was much less successful than with Morocco. Algeria began piracy against the U.S. on July 25, 1785 with the capture of the schooner Maria and the Dauphin a week later.[5] All four Barbary Coast states demanded a sum of $660,000 compared to the limited allocated budget of $40,000 given to the envoys to achieve peace.[6] Diplomatic talks to achieve a reasonable sum for tribute or for the ransom of the captured sailors struggled to reach any headway. The crews of the Maria and Dauphin remained in captivity for over a decade, and soon were joined by other ships captured by the Barbary States.[7] In 1795, Algeria came to an agreement with the U.S. that resulted in the release of 115 sailors they held, at the cost of over $1 million. This amount totaled about 1⁄6 of the entire U.S. budget,[8] and this amount was demanded as tribute by the Barbary States to prevent further piracy. The continuing demand for tribute ultimately led to the formation of the United States Department of the Navy, founded in 1798[9] in order to prevent further piracy attacks upon American shipping as well as to end the extremely large demand for tribute from the Barbary States.
Click to expand...

Beset Rearguards
Grey Wolf
 

Last of the Stuarts

LordIreland said:
Isn't this effectively what happened with the war in 1812? The big difference here is that Britain has not yet formed the Peninsular Army. But that being said Britain was able to man and supply the PA and stall the American thrusts into Canada throughout 1812 - 14.
Click to expand...

This is what I meant when I said "not much effect on the British" as they had to do exactly that in 1812.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top