A larger French colonial empire in the late 19th/early 20th centuries?

CaliGuy

Banned
What realistic ways are there to create an even larger French colonial empire in the late 19th and/or early 20th centuries?

Also, which additional colonies could France realistically acquire? For instance, could France realistically purchase the Belgian Congo from Belgium after King Leopold II's excesses there become known and publicized?

Any thoughts on all of this?
 
This is somewhat difficult, because France would always be at a disadvantage to Britain in terms of a navy, and a navy is how you would build an overseas colonial empire. The political instability of France wouldn't help either. France would also be somewhat adverse to punishing Belgium for any misdeeds in Congo-Kinshasa, as they were committing as bad atrocities in Congo-Brazzaville. Still, a few POD's at multiple points in time could see France get a much bigger empire.

For example, during the scramble for Africa Belgium could be cut out altogether, with the British, French and German governments deciding 'nuh-uh, geopolitical midgets don't get colonies' and leaving France to gobble up more of Central Africa.

The French also had interests in India, but I don't know enough about that time period and location to present a POD for them to take more than Pondicherry.

Madagascar and the Indian Ocean colonies that France held IOTL could be a good launching point for the colonization of Western Australia, if the French could overcome the problem of the British navy for long enough. Bringing Provencal farmers to the Mediterranean climate of Western Australia could establish a quite thriving colony. With a POD in the late 18th/early 19th century, you could see the colonists who IOTL would have become the Pieds Noires of Algeria instead going to Western Australia, and Algeria kept in the French colonial sphere but as a protectorate rather than a settler colony.
 
If you can avoid the Franco-Prussian War then the French might have a better chance in the future.

@twovultures I don't know if France would give up having a settler colony in Algeria. Like Spain and Italy, I believe they saw North Africa as rightfully theirs in some vague Roman-successor fashion (without actually believing themselves to be Roman successors). Plus, it's a lot closer to France than Western Australia, and French journeys to the Pacific early on weren't exactly the most successful endeavours.

Africa is always going to be their best bet. I do believe that a neutral Congo was never guaranteed. If you can avoid the existence of Germany, then France and Britain (and Portugal) might very easily come to some sort of agreement wherein Portugal gains the mouth of the river (as long as it remains neutral and internationally accessible), Britain gains Katanga, and France gets much of the rest. It went to Leopold iOTL because none of the 'great powers' wanted the others to have it.

Early enough POD's might see French Egypt + Syria (Napoleonic era), or permanent French areas of India (7 Years War). After the Napoleonic Wars, though, I don't see France ever gaining new lands in India beyond what they already had, or North America of course.
 
There are lots of ways to do this:

1) The French, not Castille, sponsors the initial exploration of the Americas, and beats everyone else to Mexico.

2) The French beat Portugal to southern Brazil (they tried).

3) The French settle what became New York instead of the Dutch, and then connect New York to Montreal via the Hudson and Lake Champlain

4) They discover and settle Australia first

5) Like the British, they pretty much open up the settlement of their American colonies to all comers.

6) They win the Seven Years war

7) Successful invasion of England by Napoleon, who helps himself to big chunks of the British empire

8) They grab Korea from China (this almost happened IOTL)

9) They get Egypt (again this almost happened IOTL)

10) No Franco-Prussian War or they win it, and then they defeat whatever coalition the British amass in ITTL World War I

Most screw England/ Spain and screw Castille/ Spain will have the French get a bigger colonial empire.
 
@twovultures I don't know if France would give up having a settler colony in Algeria. Like Spain and Italy, I believe they saw North Africa as rightfully theirs in some vague Roman-successor fashion (without actually believing themselves to be Roman successors). Plus, it's a lot closer to France than Western Australia, and French journeys to the Pacific early on weren't exactly the most successful endeavours.

I guess the idea appealed to me because (and I say this as the son and grandson of Pieds Noires) France would be much better off in the 20th century without the albatross of the Algerian settler colony around its neck.

Ultimately, we must separate OP's question of 'how France gets a bigger colonial empire' from 'how France gets better off'. It is certain that, with the British and to a lesser extent the Iberians weakened, France gets more colonies. However, whether France as a whole benefits from these colonies is quite another matter.
 
Assuming you want a POD in the 19th century, if the French end up with Egypt or, at least, in control of the Suez Canal, couldn't they focus their maritime efforts in the Med? If so, then they can leverage their control over the canal to keep Britain from pushing them around too much.
 

Deleted member 97083

What realistic ways are there to create an even larger French colonial empire in the late 19th and/or early 20th centuries?

Also, which additional colonies could France realistically acquire? For instance, could France realistically purchase the Belgian Congo from Belgium after King Leopold II's excesses there become known and publicized?

Any thoughts on all of this?
Go back to the 1600s or late 1500s and have New France receive the level of settlement that the Thirteen Colonies did. By the time of the Napoleonic Wars then Bourbon Restoration, French North America will actually have too many people, and then Quebecois settlers can be sent across the globe to rule France's colonial empire.

Alternatively, prevent the French Revolution and continue an uninterrupted conservative regime, so the French demographics grow similarly to British and German during the 19th century. This higher population will allow for heavier industrialization, so France can form an empire on par with the British (which they pretty much already did, well, they came close at least).
 
The Yunnan region, in South-West China was very close to the French authorities. They even built a railway between there and Vietnam. The region was often at odds with the central Chinese government and the post-1880 period was not the best for Chinese authority anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunming–Hai_Phong_Railway

It's not out of the field of possible for a Yunnan governor to say fuck it and just declare itself independant. After a couple years (necessary cooldown period), it asks for French protection.
The other possibility is heavier French involvement in the region, especially economic. At some point, the French ask for a concession in Yunnan to "protect their economic interest".
They can pull a similar trick in the Canton region as it's contiguous to their Protectorate of Tonkin. The Brits might not appreciate but I'm sure they can be placated in other ways. Of course, effective control of the region will be VERY tenuous. They already had massive issues holding on the Fort Bayard concession in Kwang-Tchéou, but cooptation of local elites through massive opium fueled bribes might help.
I guess they could probably annex the island of Hainan as it's litterally RIGHT THERE. Looking at maps it always annoyed me.

You probably cannot do both because of the Brits but there is some expansion possible in Thailand. I mean further expansion. Sure the Thai were not happy about continuous French encroachment but they couldn't do a thing, except ask the English who took territories as payment for their "protection".


The other area of expansion is South America, thanks to one of my favourite colonial stories: the Republic of Counani
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Independent_Guyana

The Guyane border was defined, partially, by the treaty of Utrecht but it was always a bit fuzzy, especially because it's deep jungles. Basically the said a river was the frontier but Brasil and France couldn't agree which river it was. In 1886, a couple guys decide to try their hand at exploiting the territory.
It goes well, makes them a lot of cash. They see that a large local population actively wants to be administered by the French. Why? Well, they were former slaves and slavery was abolished in France. So our two guys decide to create an independant republic, under the protection of France. It worked quite well for a few years but after that, they couldn't get the necessary backing to exploit it more and France wasn't willing to annex and have a war with Brasil. The thing is, it would have massively increased the size of Guyane, just look at it!

carte_rep_cunani.jpg


Now, what if France had been willing to fight for it, or had another reason to fight Brasil?
 
Go back to the 1600s or late 1500s and have New France receive the level of settlement that the Thirteen Colonies did. By the time of the Napoleonic Wars then Bourbon Restoration, French North America will actually have too many people, and then Quebecois settlers can be sent across the globe to rule France's colonial empire.

Alternatively, prevent the French Revolution and continue an uninterrupted conservative regime, so the French demographics grow similarly to British and German during the 19th century. This higher population will allow for heavier industrialization, so France can form an empire on par with the British (which they pretty much already did, well, they came close at least).

It shouldn't have too many people. This is a lot of land to settle:

newfrance_1712.jpg


The second one might be more plausible.
 

Deleted member 97083

It shouldn't have too many people. This is a lot of land to settle:

newfrance_1712.jpg


The second one might be more plausible.

Well, the western portion is progressively drier Great Plains that can't be intensively cultivated until the late 19th century, and the northern portion is mostly tundra with a thin belt of arable land in southern Canada. Only about a third of French North America is fully habitable at the time, the portion along the Mississippi River, Ohio Valley, and St. Lawrence.

By the 1830s, there will be enough emigration push factors that the French empire will be able to recruit settlers from North America with ease. The Thirteen Colonies still being there means a North America with at least double the population of OTL.
 
Well, the western portion is progressively drier Great Plains that can't be intensively cultivated until the late 19th century, and the northern portion is mostly tundra with a thin belt of arable land in southern Canada. Only about a third of French North America is fully habitable at the time, the portion along the Mississippi River, Ohio Valley, and St. Lawrence.

By the 1830s, there will be enough emigration push factors that the French empire will be able to recruit settlers from North America with ease. The Thirteen Colonies still being there means a North America with at least double the population of OTL.

But just the land from the St. Lawrence down to the Gulf of Mexico can accommodate a large population. That area is many times larger than France itself. I think you would certainly see many Canadiens migrate out of Canada proper but it would be to the Pays d'en Haut (Great Lakes region) and Louisiana. Eventually you'd probably see a migration to the Pacific, as in the OTL United States. I think that's more likely than expecting North Americans to move en masse to New Caledonia, Madagascar or wherever else.
 
Rekt Germany that much to the point where you don´t need to do anything more(maybe partition of it between Prussia and Austria, so that to create eternal enemies), have France annex Belgium in a way or another, add to that Luxemburg, Saarland and maybe Pfalz as well. Now you have a stronger industrial based and ports, you can have France essentially dominate North Africa by removing even the Spanish sections and maybe even butterfly Italy(I guess if France and Austria ally each other against Prussia and Russia).

You would reignite Franco-British rivalry, eventually Russia, Austria and Prussia would be used as bargaining chips, Prussia probably joining the UK´s side(maybe Netherlands as well), Russia is not really going to be friendly with either(maybe France if Austria is abandoned but I don´t see that happening). You seriously need to have France build up a navy though and I don´t see it being as big as Britain´s but at the same time submarines activity would be LETHAL to Britain if conducted from French Coast. The colonial empire would be also hardly siege-able given its sheer size.

Given the aim is "MOAR colonies" France should maximize an approach that removes colonial competitors at coast of pressure points on land, so for example I would think that France could accept a partition of Italy, giving France Sardinia, Aosta, Savoia and Nice(maybe even Elbe, if Napoleon III wants to like troll) and the rest would be puppeted under a kingdom of Italy under either the actual Austria king, or a relative. Same goes for Germany, Austria would effectively create a South German confederation to counterattack a eventual Northern one by Prussia,France would gain land here as well. In the Russo-Austrian conflict France can´t really betray Austria given their mutual interests, I think they would support weakening the Ottoman Empire but avoiding Russian hegemony, thus a harsher peace term on the Ottomans.

I have this map for now, explanation for other area will come later:

auBxOJW.png
This would be what I imagine Europe at the time of the Congress of Berlin, a Franco-Austrian wank basically.
 
The Papal State here would be a puppet of France, maybe even losing Romagna to Habsburg Italy, but still retaining land so not to anger all the Catholics clergy or parties in the 2 Empires, while still using it as a bargaining chip against any Kulturkampf or just interdenominational political infighting in Prussia(essentially only in the Polish Areas and Rhineland, still something). The Bourbon Naples would be a failed state, I can see it being colonized by France and Austria, but we might see something like a Italian nationalist movement move there and getting support(unlikely). In the case of it being a puppet, you essentially have France controlling the mediterranean, I can´t see the UK doing as well here, while they still have their isles and Greece, but I don´t see that relation going so long depending on what France offers to them(Greece), if France accepts Greece claims on Constantinople I can see Greece "betraying" Britain, but by doing so you could have a British-Ottoman alliance, and this quite the beast, still though that wouldn´t end up that good because you essentially have 3 blocks and Britain can´t really manage both of them at the same time(in case of a war).

I´m not sure about Spain, they would also be essentially puppets of France, at least in a economic sense. I think Italy and Spain would be basically become France´s source of colonist and migrants to North Africa, more so than OTL.#

In the Americas, you could have them reconquer Haiti early on(without reinstituing slavery hopefully), maybe also make them succeed in Mexico(in line with their Austrophile tendencies) thus threatening Britan from there as well(to be fair you wouldn´t have the tension start until the war with Prussia or Ottomans, that I imagine happening later). The US wouldn´t be that happy, depending on the circumstances you could have Spain+France+Mexico+Austria fighting a proxy war with UK+US, the last side would probably on stronger territory but not completely(you basically have all big Caribbean islands under the former side and Mexico as well, France could pull off what they did with Russia economically in Mexico or in the Spanish and their colonies)
 
Given the aim is "MOAR colonies" France should maximize an approach that removes colonial competitors at coast of pressure points on land, so for example I would think that France could accept a partition of Italy, giving France Sardinia, Aosta, Savoia and Nice(maybe even Elbe, if Napoleon III wants to like troll) and the rest would be puppeted under a kingdom of Italy under either the actual Austria king, or a relative. Same goes for Germany, Austria would effectively create a South German confederation to counterattack a eventual Northern one by Prussia,France would gain land here as well. In the Russo-Austrian conflict France can´t really betray Austria given their mutual interests, I think they would support weakening the Ottoman Empire but avoiding Russian hegemony, thus a harsher peace term on the Ottomans.
I disagree that a stronger continental France would result in more colonies. On the contrary, if they're good enough in Europe, they won't feel the need to re-inflate the national ego by conquering useless acres of desert and jungles
 
I disagree that a stronger continental France would result in more colonies. On the contrary, if they're good enough in Europe, they won't feel the need to re-inflate the national ego by conquering useless acres of desert and jungles
Is not ego, everyone at this point knows the prestige of being a global power and the fact that they can only beat England by expanding oversea, given that if the go Napoleon they would lose any ally and get coalitioned again.

Plus everyone knows that is important to own global resources, is not useless sand, Algeria and Tunisia would important extension of France.

Also its antithetical to the behavior of most empires, France is strong and can flex his muscles by geopolitically expanding in Africa were given 2 other competitors are mostly removed, are limited to Britain and Portugal´s old holdings. Given they would have an existential threat if Britain takes all of their potential colonies, there is no reason to not expand, at least a little.
 
Last edited:
I disagree that a stronger continental France would result in more colonies. On the contrary, if they're good enough in Europe, they won't feel the need to re-inflate the national ego by conquering useless acres of desert and jungles

It was argued by some at the time that countries should try to conquer whatever lands they could, as a sort of investment in the future; a territory that might be worthless in 1880 might turn out to be valuable 50 years later. In a few cases this turned out to be true. The Algerian desert turned out to have considerable oil and gas reserves, for example.
 
Top