A Different Scramble for Africa

[AuroraBorealis]

yes, they'd probably have Gibralter, but would also likely be able to do whatever they want in the Mediterranean outside of French waters because of the Royal Navy

so if they focus on having to go around the Cape, what do you think would be some colonies they establish mostly as restocking points?

they had the islands in the Atlantic..and they will keep the French islands...all of them.... that they seized in the Indian from the French in the Indian... Seychelles, Mauritius and ile Bourbon. or pass some to allies that had remained on side (less likely).... which puts them in a good position with the French position in the Indian ocean and probably India eliminated to intervene/influence both the Omani-Zanzibaris and the Imerina ( perhaps in a more hands off protectorate way a la the indian states. With France dominating the Dutch either directly or through a sattelite kdm re-established under a regency for Louis's son. You could get the Cape re-established as republic under the Statholder and mere protectorate of Britain. A smaller directly ruled colony could then be established in the East Cape and Natal.

Ghana is probably a given, since they are already there. and i suppose they could establish themselves more strongly in the Gambia River to oppose the French. Portugal could also be encouraged or backed as a surrogate. Same to some extent with Spain.... Any peninsular War situation , does not necessarily translate to French client. Guerilla warfare would be rampant under a French occupation and French imposed monarch. If the french withdraw The iberians witll make common cause with each other and under the British umbrella for their own protection. Britain will have an interest in seeing that anything like the Carlist pretenderes are resolved somewhat more conveniently for everyone.

 

[Badshah]

India. This is the big fish that really prevents French Egypt. As long as Britain holds on to India, they will do whatever they can to keep the Mediterranean as British as they can. And so they will invest a lot more into Egypt if they have to to secure the khedive's support, over the French, who have no real colonies in the Indian Ocean to speak of.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

slip of the mind forget i mentioned those two, then though Denmark did have a few small colonies in West Africa IOTL iirc

they did have forts in the vicinity of Accra and points east...If Britain has the former Dutch positions to the west, they may just let well enough alone on the Eastern Danish holdings...Its simply a matter of whether the Danes can make a go of something in Togo or not.

 

[Malta]

I want a Independent Egyptian creating a North and East African Empire/Client State.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

I have a couple possible POD that might get you what your looking for. King Leopold almost drown as a child. He also had an older brother who died when he was young. Reversing either of these, and you have a different king That would butterfly away the Berlin Conference, which would keep the actual "scramble" from happening. You would still get a slow encroachment, but there might never be a European meeting where they decide not to fight one another over territory. Butterflying away the Belgian Congo opens it up to most likely being in French hands (but there's a possibility that it goes someone else or is shared by the British, depending on how different the world is.) There is nothing stopping the French from taking Egypt, depending on how violent the scramble becomes. Of course, a different scramble could drastically alter the face of Europe. Also, a different Congo means a drastically different Africa. The Congo is incredibly rich in mineral wealth, but Leopold squandered it by basically enslaving the entire country. There was no infrastructure, no education, etc. You would have the french attempting to "Civilize" them with European customs, rather than just pillaging the countryside. If you had a contiguous territory that spanned all of North Africa and into the center, it would be much more likely to remain stable today.

I can see the Khedivate as a French client, more than a French colony. They are likely to save his finances (provided they are as bad and providing the excuse for direct intervention) just to keep the British from taking over the place. And the British won't want the french to directly control the place simply because they need that short transit link to India. and and independent Khedive even under french influence is not likely to close that link because of the revenue it generates.

btw..The Berlin conference was specifically to set the ground rules on what to do with the Congo, but arguably the British intervention in Egypt and the French compensation with Madagascar, had as much to do with setting things off as the conference did...The conference simply set ground rules for the Europeans extending their control from their holdings on the coast. And there is that whole 'civilizing mssion' garbage to consider as well that carried a great deal of influence, or it was just a convenient excuse in many cases.

Even without that conference doing the job, once any of the European states start extending their influence inland from their coastal holdings over the adjoining native states because of whatever perceived slight or grievance to their nationals or interests or insolvency then the others will start moving to, less someone get one over on them. There will eventually be

some conference regarding how its done or prohibits it entirely (unlikely) is going to happen at some point. Or it occurs in a more evolutionary but diliberate manner only when strategic interests are at stake, and where there might be more than a illusory gain to be had.