AHC: French Algeria and Italian Libya in 2012

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: After 1900' started by General_Finley, Jul 7, 2012.

  1. General_Finley Liberty Prime

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    With a post WWI Pod is there a way to have both Algeria and Libya still remain part of their respective colonizers and possibly even have a European majority?
     
  2. BlondieBC Kaiser of Ozarks Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2011
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Avoid WW2. Any POD works.
     
    Jasmak likes this.
  3. anotherlurker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Location:
    Mountains, everywhere...
    for italy/libya - not joining ww2, sitting it out while selling stuff to both sides and bribes to stay "neutral".

    for france - avoid all of ww2, or join nazi germany in kicking the soviet union off of the european continent.
     
    Jasmak likes this.
  4. Alex1guy First Of His Name

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    Location:
    The New Zealand Empire
    Good luck with that :/
     
  5. aktarian illegal in 20 states

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Location:
    In your closet/in your head
    Not sure about Italy but I think it was possible France could keep Algeria if they avoid Vietnam war. If Vietnam is allowed to go its way France avoids both waste of resources and defeat and people aren't as sick of fighting to keep such lands. There would be some reorganisation of how Algeria is run but it remains French.
     
  6. TheNordicBrit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2008
    Location:
    Commonwealth of England
    Avoid the Second World War, by 1940 the Italians made up almost 12% of the population of Libya, there's no reason why that shouldn't continue.

    For French Algeria to become majority French I'd say all you really need is for the French to see the success Italy was having in its colonies where Italian settlers were going to and then the French push the benefits of Algerian settlement - though without France being a dictatorship it'll be more difficult, to be sure.
     
  7. Remicas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2011
    Location:
    Armor
    Why avoiding WW2 ? Make the French win the Battle of France, and then the war, that way they didn't lose any prestige. Not sure they won't lose Indochina anyway but that not the point of the thread.

    There were some project to integrate more Algeria into France proper, by according more rights to the Algerian, and eventually citizenship. They were reject, but it's a start.
     
  8. BlondieBC Kaiser of Ozarks Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2011
    Location:
    Arkansas
    It is quite doable in the interwar years.

    1) Different ToV.

    2) Moderate the demands of the ToV sooner. This likely gives a more moderate German government a chance at power, and many in the German public did not want a second war.

    3) Enforce ToV. Invade Germany when it breaks it.
     
    Jasmak likes this.
  9. TheNordicBrit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2008
    Location:
    Commonwealth of England
    It's relatively easy to stop WW2 in a TL, just don't have Hitler come to power in Germany - or preferably have him assassinated post-Munich Crisis. German appetites for expansion are quite satisfied for the time being and war is avoided - The assassination is easy, just have Maurice Bavaud go ahead with his planned shooting in the anniversary of the Beer Hall Putsch.
     
    Jasmak likes this.
  10. Wolfpaw Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Location:
    God Hates Flags
    Massive ethnic cleansing or avoiding the invention of the AK-47 (or a similarly perfect guerrilla weapon) is the only real way to accomplish this.
     
  11. Iori ダークアビスの特使。

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Location:
    Cascadia
    Italian Libya I think is the more likely of the two, apart from the aforemtnioned fact they made-up 12% of the total population, they made-up even more significant populations in the cities, comprising 37% of Tripoli and 31% of Benghazi, and based on the revious immigration and future Italian immigration patterns it would'nt take that long for Libya to be around 30-40% European.

    French Algeria would require France to be more interested in the grievances of its Arab population, notably affording them full rights, which by that time they legally should have had in the first place.
     
  12. Wolfpaw Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Location:
    God Hates Flags
    Indochina ultimately had little to do with Algeria. The Indochina fight was a fight for a colony; the Algerian fight was a French civil war fought mainly in North Africa and was ultimately a fight between White Supremacist bigotry and Algerians who were being told that they have no culture, that the great White French Man has brought civilization to a lucky bunch of dark-skinned subhumans who should be thankful. The Algerians were told to believe in the French promise of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity while being trampled on, denied their rights, and otherwise subject to a horrorhouse of hypocritical domination.

    The moment military technology enters the submachine gun/assault rifle age, Colonialism is living on borrowed time.
     
  13. General_Finley Liberty Prime

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    A related question.

    If Italy is neutral in WWII and are able to keep Libya what kind of situation would have developed in Ethiopia? There really isn't a significant Italian immigration and there is a much larger native population, so does Italy have its own version of the French Indochina war on its hands?
     
  14. Ariosto Populist Republican

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Location:
    Wakefield, Massachusetts
    From what I remember, while there was not significant Italian colonization of the interior of East Africa, there was significant colonization along the coastal territories, notably in Eritrea. It is likely Ethiopia is simply granted it independence while Eritrea would remain in Italian hands.
     
  15. aktarian illegal in 20 states

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Location:
    In your closet/in your head
    In a strictest sense you are right. However my point is that if France avoids war in Indochina it deosn't bleed there, doesn't waste resources trying to achieve military victory, doesn't suffer prestige loss due to military defeat and most importantly French aren't already sick of fighting for oversea lands. All that can be spend in Algeria instead, with addition of being both closer to home, different status and having larger French population. That means French public will be more willing to support war to keep it, if there is no Indochina trauma right before it.

    Reforms would be neccessary, no doubt, and if France is willing to let Indochina go in the first place some rights for Algerians are not out of the question. Since they can offer Algerians some compromise and back it with more credible ilitary fist France can keep it.
     
  16. Wolfpaw Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Location:
    God Hates Flags
    By dint of being their colonizer and the record of oppressive brutality carried out in Algeria dating back to the 19th century, the French little to no prestige to speak of amongst their colonized subjects.

    Why should the French compromise when their Colonialist mindset is spared the reality-smack of Indochina? And Algerians don't want compromise--that assumption is based on the fallacy that the Algerians want to be Frenchman, which by definition is a Catholic White Man. Algerians did not want to be French, they wanted to be Algerians and have nothing to do with a bunch of racist conquerors who legalized mob terror and routinely carried out torture and massacre, all while insisting that they were spreading the virtues of the Enlightenment and Western Civilization.

    France pouring more money into the Algerian abscess, that just means that more Frenchmen (and many, many more Algerians) die. Independence is perhaps delayed by a few years, but the fundamental difference between Indochina and Algeria is that the Viet Cong weren't bombing Parisian cafés.
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2012
  17. Wolfpaw Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Location:
    God Hates Flags
    It depends. The Second Ethiopian War was a Fascist project that moved forward in the face of near-global condemnation. So there is no Ethiopian scenario in a no-Fascists TL.

    However, in a "Fascist Italy that Somehow Remains Neutral" TL, there won't be Italian settlement in Ethiopia--that was never really the point. It was all about Conquest for the sake of Conquest and trying to consume more resources for the Fascist State (of course, the place was a budgetary sinkhole).

    The Italians will never get to keep Ethiopia. When the Fascists are gone, their independence is restored, as it was IOTL. Ethiopia has always been a special case with the European powers mostly due to the great street cred generated by their having Christian rulers.
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2012
    FesteringSpore likes this.
  18. General_Finley Liberty Prime

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    What about Italian Somalia?
     
  19. Wolfpaw Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Location:
    God Hates Flags
    Untenable once the Somalis start getting antsy and rise up--there aren't nearly enough Italians to legitimate staying to duke it out. The only place the Italians have a chance to form a viable settler colony is in Libya, and even that requires a good deal of unpleasant demographic reengineering and bodes very ill for the native Libyans.
     
  20. Ariosto Populist Republican

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Location:
    Wakefield, Massachusetts
    I maintain Eritrea is possible in its own way; the country was already 1 in 10 Italian by 1939, and was experiencing rapid colonization until the closing of the Suez. The were working to bring major industry to the colony as well, but much of that work was destroyed in the British Invasion of the territory.

    Not saying it will be easy, but I can't see it being impossible given the proposed trends and sizable investment they were making.