AHC. Get Britain to side with the CSA.

The thing that also has to be remembered here is that if the US commits to a war with Britain they are taking men off the front line to 1) man the defences of the harbours and along the coast and 2) sit or attack on the frontier in Canada. Neither of those options is incredibly palatable for the US as it means they are taking men from other fronts and fighting a war on the other side of the country. This helps the CSA in the short and long term. Meanwhile when the crisis breaks out the US has to wait until spring 1862 before they can effectively organize a new army or attack Canada (so realistically they have to attack sometime in late June or early July) which gives the British time to prepare themselves somewhat better. No invasion of Canada is going to be a cake walk either, crossing the river is tough and the overland route through Maine and the Maritimes is a logistical nightmare. And considering the US needs some 100,000 troops (probably) to accomplish this it is a pretty serious drain on resources, especially when you factor in the forces needed to man the coastal defences.

This isn't even factoring in the probable (IMO certain) French intervention.
 
The thing that also has to be remembered here is that if the US commits to a war with Britain they are taking men off the front line to 1) man the defences of the harbours and along the coast and 2) sit or attack on the frontier in Canada. Neither of those options is incredibly palatable for the US as it means they are taking men from other fronts and fighting a war on the other side of the country. This helps the CSA in the short and long term. Meanwhile when the crisis breaks out the US has to wait until spring 1862 before they can effectively organize a new army or attack Canada (so realistically they have to attack sometime in late June or early July) which gives the British time to prepare themselves somewhat better. No invasion of Canada is going to be a cake walk either, crossing the river is tough and the overland route through Maine and the Maritimes is a logistical nightmare. And considering the US needs some 100,000 troops (probably) to accomplish this it is a pretty serious drain on resources, especially when you factor in the forces needed to man the coastal defences.

This isn't even factoring in the probable (IMO certain) French intervention.

I am not seeing why the French would get involved. What could France hope to gain from a conflict with the United States?
 
I am not seeing why the French would get involved. What could France hope to gain from a conflict with the United States?

For Nappy III it's of immense help to his Mexican adventure and it's aftermath, it also helps end the cotton crisis developing in France at the time, and is a chance for him to expand into North America with British help. If he wins he rides a wave of popular support at home and gets international prestige. If he loses...well nothing really different from OTL.
 
For Nappy III it's of immense help to his Mexican adventure and it's aftermath, it also helps end the cotton crisis developing in France at the time, and is a chance for him to expand into North America with British help. If he wins he rides a wave of popular support at home and gets international prestige. If he loses...well nothing really different from OTL.

It seems that the French are more of a wild card than I realized. I would think that Great Britain would temper any extreme reactions from the French.
 
For Nappy III it's of immense help to his Mexican adventure and it's aftermath, it also helps end the cotton crisis developing in France at the time, and is a chance for him to expand into North America with British help. If he wins he rides a wave of popular support at home and gets international prestige. If he loses...well nothing really different from OTL.

However he gets all that without risking a single French soldier. If the US is fighting the CSA and even just keeping an eye on British troops in Canada it will be too busy to do ANYTHING about Mexico. If the Brits break the cotton blockade the French gain cheaper cotton without firing a shot.
 
However he gets all that without risking a single French soldier. If the US is fighting the CSA and even just keeping an eye on British troops in Canada it will be too busy to do ANYTHING about Mexico. If the Brits break the cotton blockade the French gain cheaper cotton without firing a shot.

Ground troops probably will not happen, but I think the French would provide some naval vessels to help break the blockade. This would be a low risk, low casualty adventure that would also help his prestige both at home and in the international community.
 
What could France hope to gain from a conflict with the United States?
From a major conflict, very little: however, to add to some of the points already made, part of Napoleon's foreign policy in the early 1860s was an entente with Britain. If we're still speculating about a Trent war, France- like the other European powers- sided with Britain. If Napoleon can make a token contribution to support Britain, such as a few ships to patrol the West Indies and help protect commerce, he's likely to do so.
 
Ground troops probably will not happen, but I think the French would provide some naval vessels to help break the blockade. This would be a low risk, low casualty adventure that would also help his prestige both at home and in the international community.

Possibly, but that would make little difference. The Brits can easily break the blockade without French help.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Possibly, but that would make little difference. The Brits can easily break the blockade without French help.
There's also the financial issue, I think. Two foreign backers (in the broadest sense) instead of one deepens the kinds of loans the CSA can take out... and how deeply in debt it can be to Europe.

Actually, that would be an interesting TL. European (Anglo-French) assistance helps the CSA gain independence... and then the Brits pass the Great Reform Acts, public opinion in the UK becomes even more directly influential on politics, and the UK politely informs the CSA that they should consider phasing out slavery.
 
There's also the financial issue, I think. Two foreign backers (in the broadest sense) instead of one deepens the kinds of loans the CSA can take out... and how deeply in debt it can be to Europe.

Actually, that would be an interesting TL. European (Anglo-French) assistance helps the CSA gain independence... and then the Brits pass the Great Reform Acts, public opinion in the UK becomes even more directly influential on politics, and the UK politely informs the CSA that they should consider phasing out slavery.

The CSA would get few loans more than it already had gotten. It was already chin deep in loans by 1862.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
The CSA would get few loans more than it already had gotten. It was already chin deep in loans by 1862.
Well, chin deep isn't eyeball deep...
They'll take out loans as long as they can, and if it's considered to be in the interests of the British government to offer loans then they might get some more.

I'm thinking that the most likely situation for a CSA independence relies on European involvement, at least to keep the country afloat until there's a peace born from sheer exhaustion. This isn't to say it's likely, just that it's the most likely way to get a CSA that consists of more than a Lost Cause at the end of it all.
 
True, but with the blockade broken the CSA can now sell their cotton without having it all rotting on the docks.


True, but much of it WAS rotting. Like anything else organic untreated cotton will rot. They aren't going to pay much for rotten cotton.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
True, but much of it WAS rotting. Like anything else organic untreated cotton will rot. They aren't going to pay much for rotten cotton.
That may be true for the year the blockade gets broken (it depends on when in the year it is). But the next year's crop can be sold, if the blockade stays broken - which is actual cash flow for the CSA. (Even if in practice it'll just pay for some of the British intervention.)
 
Top