AHC: Dutch Congo

So, your challenge is, with a PoD after July 21, 1830, to make what was OTL's Belgian Congo/Congo Free State a possession of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Belgium must remain an indepedent nation.

EDIT: The Dutch must also keep the East Indies as well.
 
Last edited:
It's ok everyone, take your time. :rolleyes:

Or you could give people a bit more than three hours to respond. Remember, this is quite an international board, and it's the weekend, so most members are probably either asleep or genuinely busy. As well, knowledge of either Congo or of Dutch history is rather niche (although we do have several Dutch members).

Patience, my friend.

At a guess though, if Indonesia was denied to them, those foul Batavians might find Congo a suitable rubber colony as much as the Belgians did. That doesn't bode any better for the Congolese than OTL, but it fulfills your conditions.
 
Or you could give people a bit more than three hours to respond. Remember, this is quite an international board, and it's the weekend, so most members are probably either asleep or genuinely busy. As well, knowledge of either Congo or of Dutch history is rather niche (although we do have several Dutch members).

Patience, my friend.

At a guess though, if Indonesia was denied to them, those foul Batavians might find Congo a suitable rubber colony as much as the Belgians did. That doesn't bode any better for the Congolese than OTL, but it fulfills your conditions.

But after 1830 they already have Indonesia. So what I'm asking is, can they have the Congo and Indonesia?
 
So, your challenge is, with a PoD after July 21, 1830, to make what was OTL's Belgian Congo/Congo Free State a possession of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Belgium must remain an indepedent nation.

EDIT: The Dutch must also keep the East Indies as well.
There are a couple of problems with a Dutch Congo. First of all the Dutch stopped caring about Africa in the 19th century. They actualy still had some colonies in Africa (Dutch Ghana), but sold them to the British. That leads to the next problem, if the Dutch want an African colony, the most likely choice would be an increased Dutch Gold Coast, not Congo. Besides that there is the danger of overstretching. The Netherlands is only a small country; it can only have a limited amount of colonies, before Dutch resources are spread too thin, including most importantly Dutch administrators and colonists, but also money (the Netherlands was pretty poor during the 19th century).

Too solve these problems I propose this scenario:
he Netherlands does better than OTL during the Belgian revolt and manages to keep Antwerp and occupies more of Limburg (and Luxemburg?). So in the peace the Netherlands keeps Antwerp and western/OTL Belgian Limburg (and Luxemburg?). Because of the important Antwerp port and the coalmines of Limburg the Dutch economical situations is better than OTL (also the Netherlands have a slightly larger population). In the late 19th century the Netherlands decide not to sell the Dutch Gold Coast to Britain (this also leads to a British Aceh, which was part of the same deal). Because of the larger population, stronger industrial and economic positio and lack of Aceh (the most troublesome part of the Dutch East Indies), the Netherlands is less overstretched than OTL (although OTL was still within the Dutch limits). Although the Dutch still have the Gold coast in Africa, they don't realy care a lot fo it, it is scattered between various British outposts and does not make a lot of money. Anyway the scramble of Africa happens and the Netherlands is invited. The problem of the Congo comes up. None of the great powers wants any of the other great powers to have it. Belgium, lacking the port of Antwerp, is not interested either. The options left are Portugal and the Netherlands. The Netherlands offers to trade their, rather worthless, Gold coast outpost with Britain for the Congo. The British accept the offer. The Germans, who have a good relationship ith the Netherlands, accepts it and France agrees too. TheCongo is smaller than OTL Belgian Congo as parts of it end up British, German or French.
 
I think that there would be a realistic chance for the Netherlands to have gained the Congo, even without gaining a stronger position during the Belgian Revolt. The problem is that the Dutch weren't interested in the slightest. Perhaps king William I could have channeled his energy into expanding the Colonies after losing Belgium. This could lead to a stronger colonial tradition and an earlier conquest of the East Indies would free up man and materials to invest in Africa. Still depends on how the Great Powers decide to divide Africa, but the Netherlands, with good relations with most of them, would be a more neutral choice that Francophile Belgium (or their king) or longtime British ally Portugal.
 
The Congo was there for the taking by anyone until Leopold II made it his target. If a Dutch prince had financed Stanley's expedition (or an earlier one by a different explorer with similar abilities and determination), it can lead to a Dutch Congo.

The same is true of any other country who the major powers could tolerate as ruler (Papal States Congo anybody?).
 
Top