AHC- Reunify/Restore the British Empire

[Joshuapooleanox]

Scenario 1: Post-1945 try and hold onto the British Empire, and try and make it more democratic/representative.

Scenario 2: Post-2017 try and reunify the British Empire, by either force or through referendums, diplomacy etc.

Bonus points if you don't have to fire a shot to hold it together. Have fun!

 

[jerseyrules]

Easy.

America joins the Commonwealth of Nations following a wave of pro-British sentiment following the Royal Wedding of Kate Middleton and Prince William. This is largely an attempt to foster closer ties with the former British territories (primarily India) but the US proclaims it will be joining the monarchy with Queen Elizabeth acting as the Head of State. The US Navy becomes the Royal Navy of the United States; all ships with USS designations become HMS.

This move stuns the world, and the US sets to work on creating a security wing of the Commonwealth of Nations, as well as an economic one. Negotiations begin for a multilateral trade union, as well as a multilateral security alliance a la NATO.

Following these moves, the UK is unable to secure a waver for the EU's normal trade agreement policy, and the rest of the EU members see any attempt at a trade agreement with the rest of the Commonwealth of Nations as a British attempt at resurrecting their imperial glories. President Juncker proclaims that the UK "must decide whether to relive its colonial dreams of the past or remain decidedly European." Brits decidedly vote for the former with their referendum to leave the European Union in 2016, and following stalled negotiations on Brexit leave unilaterally in 2017.

Within several years' time the Commonwealth of Nations goes from a glorified sporting association to a full-fledged economic, political, and defense organization, with a total GDP far outstripping the European Union and interstate trade among members up significantly. Economic growth rates are impressive, and some have even begun talk of adopting a common currency.

While this doesn't really qualify as an empire, it is probably the best you're going to get with a post-1945 POD (though I'm not an expert on the collapse of the British Empire by any means). And though it's economic and political center is in Washington, London plays a very important symbolic role and remains incredibly influential -- the queen is now on the US dollar, the UK retains some of the world's finest universities, and London remains one of the largest centers of global finance, probably only second to New York.

 

[Miss Construction]

Easy.

America joins the Commonwealth of Nations following a wave of pro-British sentiment following the Royal Wedding of Kate Middleton and Prince William. This is largely an attempt to foster closer ties with the former British territories (primarily India) but the US proclaims it will be joining the monarchy with Queen Elizabeth acting as the Head of State. The US Navy becomes the Royal Navy of the United States; all ships with USS designations become HMS.

This move stuns the world, and the US sets to work on creating a security wing of the Commonwealth of Nations, as well as an economic one. Negotiations begin for a multilateral trade union, as well as a multilateral security alliance a la NATO.

Following these moves, the UK is unable to secure a waver for the EU's normal trade agreement policy, and the rest of the EU members see any attempt at a trade agreement with the rest of the Commonwealth of Nations as a British attempt at resurrecting their imperial glories. President Juncker proclaims that the UK "must decide whether to relive its colonial dreams of the past or remain decidedly European." Brits decidedly vote for the former with their referendum to leave the European Union in 2016, and following stalled negotiations on Brexit leave unilaterally in 2017.

Within several years' time the Commonwealth of Nations goes from a glorified sporting association to a full-fledged economic, political, and defense organization, with a total GDP far outstripping the European Union and interstate trade among members up significantly. Economic growth rates are impressive, and some have even begun talk of adopting a common currency.

While this doesn't really qualify as an empire, it is probably the best you're going to get with a post-1945 POD (though I'm not an expert on the collapse of the British Empire by any means). And though it's economic and political center is in Washington, London plays a very important symbolic role and remains incredibly influential -- the queen is now on the US dollar, the UK retains some of the world's finest universities, and London remains one of the largest centers of global finance, probably only second to New York.

And the flapping of the millions of ASB wings instantly solve global warming. Don't get me wrong I *love* this scenario, it's truly inspired.

 

[jerseyrules]

And the flapping of the millions of ASB wings instantly solve global warming. Don't get me wrong I *love* this scenario, it's truly inspired.

Honestly minus the part with America adopting the monarchy (that part was mostly for fun), I don't think it's super unrealistic. Technically the US is eligible for Commonwealth membership no?

 

[Joshuapooleanox]

There's no way of salvaging the British Empire? Not even say the Dominions into a sort of Federal Democracy?

 

[Miss Construction]

There's no way of salvaging the British Empire? Not even say the Dominions into a sort of Federal Democracy?

In 1945? Pretty much no. The Imperial Federation boat had sailed by the 20s and India was gone too after the 2nd WW. All down hill from there. If you want to turn the Empire into a Commonwealth Federation you have to start making changes at least by 1900, probably sooner.

 

[Joshuapooleanox]

In 1945? Pretty much no. The Imperial Federation boat had sailed by the 20s and India was gone too. All down hill from there. If you want to turn the Empire into a Commonwealth Federation you have to start making changes at least by 1900, probably sooner.

What if I say turned back the clock to 1914? Or say 1918. Or... 1937's Imperial Conference?

 

[Miss Construction]

What if I say turned back the clock to 1914? Or say 1918. Or... 1937's Imperial Conference?

The latest likely chance is Joseph Chamberlain in the 1890s working an Imperial Federation as an alternative to Irish Home Rule. But even then it's iffy. You really need to start back before Canadian Confederation.

 

[Joshuapooleanox]

The latest likely chance is Joseph Chamberlain in the 1890s working an Imperial Federation as an alternative to Irish Home Rule. But even then it's iffy. You really need to start back before Canadian Confederation.

that's... That's it? There's no physical way of uniting after 1890? Post 1890 it's game over?

I managed to restore Rome with Cesare Borgia. Surely the British Empire could be modernised/democratised.

 

[Miss Construction]

that's... That's it? There's no physical way of uniting after 1890? Post 1890 it's game over?

I managed to restore Rome with Cesare Borgia. Surely the British Empire could be modernised/democratised.

Canada is gone after the Alaskan border settlement in 1905. You have to do it before then. Chamberlain's push for Imperial Federation in the 1890s is the best shot after the Treaty of Washington in 1871.

 

[Reydan]

Easy.

...

While this doesn't really qualify as an empire, it is probably the best you're going to get with a post-1945 POD (though I'm not an expert on the collapse of the British Empire by any means). And though it's economic and political center is in Washington, London plays a very important symbolic role and remains incredibly influential -- the queen is now on the US dollar, the UK retains some of the world's finest universities, and London remains one of the largest centers of global finance, probably only second to New York.

Mmmmmmmmm. I think that's quite an unrealistic perception of what British and American politics are like. Can you really, honestly, see a little ephemeral popularity for the British monarchy in the US change the minds of the very serious authorities that negotiate the Byzantine world of American Foreign and Economic Policy? Joining the Commonwealth would be an enormous, destabilizing, world step-change. And even if America wanted to join, I'm not entirely sure Britain would accept. It would mean ceding what power Britain wields in the Commonwealth to the US and entering into a free-trade agreement that might actually disrupt the UK economy by flooding it with American goods.

Really, I've never quite understood this forum's obsession with Imperial Federation. Yes it was an idea kicked about throughout the late c19th and early c20th, but it rarely gained any serious political traction. I think people forget four things when they talk about a surviving Empire/Commonwealth:

• The continual importance of European markets and goods to Britain. At repeated occasions during the period when Imperial Federation was talked about, and after, Britain opted for European opportunities over Empire/Commonwealth ones.
• The attitude of the colonized. I think its sort of interesting that so many Imperial Federation threads just either assume non-white subjects will jump at the chance to continue an Imperial Rule (or just ignore these areas from their timelines completely) that, however it is sliced, will always mean their subordination in some form to London.
• That post 1945, and even really post 1918, colonialism was under constant threat as an ideology. The challenge of Communism and then later (despite some Cold War blips) Democracy via the USA really did shake the hearts and minds of the colonized and weakened the assumptive right to rule of the colonizers.
• The British people didn't care about Empire anywhere near as much as people on this forum think. Yes, a side issue as they weren't the direct decision makers, but British voters and the wider public, especially post 1945, were actually a lot more indifferent to the loss of Empire than is commonly assumed.

 

[naraic]

that's... That's it? There's no physical way of uniting after 1890? Post 1890 it's game over?

I managed to restore Rome with Cesare Borgia. Surely the British Empire could be modernised/democratised.

1890 is the last time for unitary federal state unification.

If you win ww2 without needing American aid you can rescue the white dominions as a British led trading bloc/military alliance having special influence on many ex imperial states.

 

[Great Britain]

For a superpower see a timeline called rule Brittania on an imperial federation.(it's very good)

Post 1945 the uk can do very little,but say it pursues a more French approach to decolonisation-it could itergrate current overseas territories,Malta,Hong Kong,British West Indies, Aden,maybe Singapore,Guyana,Papua new guniea(more difficult since its Australian)Newfoundland ,Belize,Cyprus,Fiji,other pacific territories. Very difficult,but possible if things go a certain way : Rhodesia,Suez Canal Zone and Ceylon,Zanzibar??. Even if that doesn't happen with just a few more territories and a few favourable trade and military deals with Canada,Australia,a non apartheid South Africa and New Zealand public perception may be that the commonwealth is a strong successor to the British empire,which still survives with a sizeable number of outposts around the world. (albeit in reality dependent on the USA). If the uk comes out of ww2 slightly stronger,the USA follows through its agreement with the the uk in the Manhattan project and suez is avoided a different approach may be taken to decolinisation and importantly without suez the British publics pride in the empire will still be as it was in 1945,which is important as if they wish to preserve (parts) governments will deliver,with more investment in the smaller colonies. Also a less messy withdrawal from India may help.

 

[Miss Construction]

Realistically if you want the Empire to survive you have to start making changes in the wake of the loss of the thirteen colonies. Yes you can do it in the 19th century, maybe even in the very early 20th, but it's hard.

 

[Great Britain]

Realistically if you want the Empire to survive you have to start making changes in the wake of the loss of the thirteen colonies. Yes you can do it in the 19th century, maybe even in the very early 20th, but it's hard.

Why the need to do it so early? The empire was the worlds superpower in the 19th century,after all. Can be done quite easily any date from 1870-1900,if there was a will to do it. The difficulty is creating that will so early and avoiding imperial hubris.

 

[Miss Construction]

You also have to remember that if the Empire does turn into a Commonwealth Federation its very definitely NOT British any more. Simply looking at a map tells you the central focus of this state is the Indian ocean.

 

[Miss Construction]

Why the need to do it so early? The empire was the worlds superpower in the 19th century,after all. Can be done quite easily any date from 1870-1900,if there was a will to do it. The difficulty is creating that will so early and avoiding imperial hubris.

Because the Dominions, particularly Canada were going their own way by the end of the 19th century and as another poster stated, the Empire never really rated as high as Europe in British priorities. You have to make the Empire matter as much as the European balance of power to the British.

 

[Reydan]

You also have to remember that if the Empire does turn into a Commonwealth Federation its very definitely NOT British any more. Simply looking at a map tells you the central focus of this state is the Indian ocean.

See, I've never really understood that argument. Why would Britain enter willingly into such an arrangement that shifted power away from London? Also its to misunderstand the importance of London in the 20th century. Population size isn't everything. London will still be THE financial hub for this free-trade commonwealth, with the oldest and most secure financial institutions, and will wield particular economic power over any Federation. I'm not saying that the Indian Ocean won't be important, but don't underestimate the enduring importance and centrality of London and particularly the City.

 

[Miss Construction]

See, I've never really understood that argument. Why would Britain enter willingly into such an arrangement that shifted power away from London? Also its to misunderstand the importance of London in the 20th century. Population size isn't everything. London will still be THE financial hub for this free-trade commonwealth, with the oldest and most secure financial institutions, and will wield particular economic power over any Federation. I'm not saying that the Indian Ocean won't be important, but don't underestimate the enduring importance and centrality of London and particularly the City.

Not saying Britain and particularly London fade to the level of say Newfoundland, they're still very important for exactly the reasons you state. But to make the Federation work you also have to industrialise India and build a solid middle class there that will want to stay in the first half of the 20th century. That means making the Libert bill work and overcoming (to a substantial degree) the massive racism of the Raj before Indian nationalism gets set on independence. Basically you've got to make India matter more than Europe too.

 

[theg*ddam*hoi2fan]

In 1945? Pretty much no. The Imperial Federation boat had sailed by the 20s and India was gone too after the 2nd WW. All down hill from there. If you want to turn the Empire into a Commonwealth Federation you have to start making changes at least by 1900, probably sooner.

What about making CANZUK work? Not an Empire, OK, but still...