Which they wouldn't be interested in because they had no intention of granting independence to their other colonies.Not sure about that. While the end of WW1 saw colonial exchanges in the form of League of Nations Mandates, the principle of self determination was pretty accepted by the end of WW2. The British trusteeship of Italian Somalia was to be for 10 years as a transition to independence. I would assume a Portuguese one to be similar.
Which they wouldn't be interested in because they had no intention of granting independence to their other colonies.
I think there is, but less than the others. Angola, Guinea and Mozambique pushed them to their very limits. Somalia would add another territory with the disadvantage that they had no time to forge alliances with locals or otherwise build up any sort of presence in the area that would make holding onto it easier. Portugal would resort to unpopular and unsavory tactics, some of which would probably be quite unsustainable in modern times.Exactly. Though do you think there is any scope for them to hold onto Somalia? Cold War dynamics allowing them to position themselves as a bastion against Communism? I recall that the USA had little patience for the Europeans rebuilding their empires after WW2 but after the death of Roosevelt and the Communist victory in the Chinese Civil War, the eased back on their demands for the British to hand over HK and France to give up Indochina.
Could the Portuguese have manufactured some sort of Communist spectre in Somalia which would justify them in holding it indefinitely?
British? Somalia was put under Italian trusteeship post-war.Not sure about that. While the end of WW1 saw colonial exchanges in the form of League of Nations Mandates, the principle of self determination was pretty accepted by the end of WW2. The British trusteeship of Italian Somalia was to be for 10 years as a transition to independence. I would assume a Portuguese one to be similar.
They already had Somalia before WWI and after WIII they used it to attack Ethiopia and British Somaliland, then lost the war.British? Somalia was put under Italian trusteeship post-war.
I suppose you mean WWII.Um, no. They already had Somalia before WWI and after WIII they used it to attack Ethiopia and British Somaliland, then lost the war.
Oh my gosh, you're right. They really did put it under Italian trusteeship. I shouldn't have doubted an AHer so readily.I suppose you mean WWII.
Italy lost the war, yes. Former Italian Somalia was occupied by British (Imperial) forces during the war and for a while thereafter. The peace treaty then restored it to Italian administration as a ten-year UN trusteeship.
I suppose you mean WWII.
Italy lost the war, yes. Former Italian Somalia was occupied by British (Imperial) forces during the war and for a while thereafter. The peace treaty then restored it to Italian administration as a ten-year UN trusteeship.
Portugal wouldn't want it as a trusteeship, probably. They'll ask for a full colony, and had no intention of letting the ones they had go. And in post-WWII, the US would not be happy with that, like, at all.Sincere apologies, you are absolutely right. It was initially occupied by British forces and handed over back to Italy for a 10-year trusteeship.
Which makes it even more unlikely that it would be given to Portugal.
Didn't Salazar offer to join the war but get turned down by the Brits to avoid the possibility of Spanish intervention for the Axis?
No. There was never any possibility of Portugal joining. We had no conditions whatsover to do so, and doing it would almost certainly result in a german-forced spanish invasion, carried out long before the allies could arrive to help...
But if Portugal joins the Allies and then Spain invades them, the Allies will almost certainly declare war on Spain. And Franco had a number of compelling reasons for not wanting that to happen, which is why he didn’t join the Axis IOTL despite being a fascist.
They (more precisely, the imperial Ethiopian Court) may have liked to annex Somalia; I think not administer it as temporary trusteeship anyway (so yes, my wording was a bit vague). It very true that Ethiopia had her issues (pretty serious ones) and in the remote event this were implemented, it would be very unlikely to end well for all parties involved (well, the Italian administration did not really end well either, with hindsight).In regards to what someone said about Ethiopia wanting to administer Somalia, that’s also not happening either when Ethiopia has her own issues to deal with.
I have yet to see any desire in the IEC to directly annex Italian Somaliland but I'd agree that this ends well for no one.They (more precisely, the imperial Ethiopian Court) may have liked to annex Somalia; I think not administer it as temporary trusteeship anyway. It very true that Ethiopia had her issues (pretty serious ones) and in the remote event this were implemented, it would be very unlikely to end well for all parties involved (well, the Italian administration did not really end well either, with hindsight).
It was mentioned in passing in a book I read years ago on Italian colonial history and its aftermath (in the context of the diplomacy leading to the Italian trusteeship), but I suppose it was never particularly serious.I have yet to see any desire in the IEC to directly annex Italian Somaliland but I'd agree that this ends well for no one.