AHC/WI: Ottoman or Barbary-American Alliance

We're not getting anyware about this by bickering. What we should do is discuss such an alliance, and we can adobt both opinions into an alternate world of an Ottoman-American alliance.

Typically, the reason that the bickering is being done is that the PoD is quite far fetched. The more unlikely the PoD and the resulting events are, the more concern that it will bring. The answer to such quandaries is to not say they do not matter, or to just handwave them and focus on the point you desire to talk about (at which point, such discussion might be better suited for the writer's forum or for ASB). Some of the reasons suggested behind the premise do not match up well, and are why we are discussing it, to try and reach a point that is as realistic as we can come across.

-

The US does not need help in defeating the natives - the only group the managed to successfully push back the line of settlement, multiple times, would have been the Comanche - the other native tribes never effectively managed to push back the settlement. And that rate of settlement will only be increased by altering the location or the amount of settlement that is desired (i.e., the US accepting more immigrants). The US forces were rather incompetent at times against the natives, but they never asked a foreign power OTL to help them out. They were rather keen on keeping foreign militaries out of their boundaries (and the US government was incredibly unhappy about Britain dragging its feet in vacating them). The US, at a point in time at which its military was practically nonexistent, would not invite another power's armies to do a job that they could do on their own, when it is required. (well, usually, it was a day late and a dollar short, but close enough).

Why go out of its way to clear land that would be unused at that point, because there were no settlers to take their place? Increase the rate of settlement, and you increase the rate at which the US will push the tribes back. It was not a function of not having enough support.

Also, while the Treaty of Tripoli disavowed the US being a Christian Nation explicitly, various US states still maintained state churches well into the 19th century (Connecticut until 1818, Massachusetts disestablished its taxation in 1833, and New Hampshire required all state senators to be protestant until 1877). At the same time, the Barbary made no distinction that the US was not a Christian nation, as either way they were still infidels, which made the attacks by them against the US shipping rather sanctioned. This religious impetus would be hard to overcome. Not to mention the religious revivals of the 19th

At best, immigrants from the Ottoman empire would be majority Christian, at least - and while there would be some support for them on basis of finally reaching a land where they not need fear the Mohamedan, as it were, they would still be discriminated. There would also be a threat in the US, wondering why the US is encouraging the Christians of the Middle East to abandon their ancient homeland so eagerly.

-

Your best bet to have some kind of Ottoman-American relationship unfold is for the Ottomans to be the one European power who makes it a point to not meddle in American affairs. You could have the British and the French and the Spanish and later the Germans and even the Russians (bickering over the Pacific Northwest, possibly due to earlier discovery of gold). There was a very weak fondness felt for Russia over the other Europeans because the Russians were the one power that would keep themselves to European affairs and leave the Americans well enough alone.

Manage to keep the Ottomans a little bit stronger, and have them be the one European power that will not meddle in the New World - and have the US actually be able to trust them as an impartial negotiator in conflicts between them and old world powers. (Say, let the Ottomans help arbitrate some treaty between them and Russia, along with similar reciprocal arbitration on the US's behalf). This could eventually lead to a kind of understanding between the US and the Ottomans, but it isn't going to lead to anything until the US is done settling its frontier, at the earliest.

Then, at that point, the understanding eventually morphs into camaraderie. "For a century, the Ottomans have dealt with us a fair hand. They have ensured that we are fairly treated upon with the other ravenous powers of the Old World, and at the turn of this 20th century, it might be well time for us to grant them some support in kind. They have developed into a stable and prosperous Empire, which has slowly liberalized over the years. With American influence, we might show the Orientals their way to a more equitable society". Even then, you'd have a lot of resistance based on their treatment of native Christians.

The longer you keep the relationship pure realpolitik, however, the better.
 
Top