Alternate Scramble for Africa to include as many colonist nations as possible?

Could A-H get anything?
Austria-Hungary has a weak naval position by itself. The straits of Gibraltar, Suez Canal and the strait of Otranto make up bottlenecks for possible Austro-Hungarian ship traffic. If Austria-Hungary had any colonies, having them in the mediterranen would probably be an advantage. What about Egypt?
 
Denmark held West African forts until it sold them in the 1840s. Denmark being better off economically could have them take some territory in Africa.
 
Could A-H get anything?

Possibly. The main issue here is who gets to administer the colony. After the Spanish-American War Spain tried to sell Rio de Oro (aka the majority of the modern Western Sahara) to A-H but Hungary objected to the idea and the deal fell flat.

The closest the Habsburgs came to a colony after the Ausgleich was Bosnia, which ultimately became a condominium between the two halves, and I imagine that any African colony would have to be administered in a similar fashion.

In terms of colonies, Cyrenaica and a decent port in East Africa (with maybe a bit of hinterland) would be very sensible (and depending on how the butterflies flap their wings, a purchase of Rio de Oro could still be in the cards).
 
- Netherlands: Ghana, South Africa
- Denmark: Congo, Ghana or Togo/Benin
- Sweden: Congo, Ghana, or Togo/Benin
- Russia: Eritrea, Ethiopia
- USA: Liberia
- Oman: Swahili Coast, Madagascar
- Ottoman Empire: Sudan, Chad Basin and/or Somalia
- Persia: Swahili Coast, Madagascar, Somalia
 

Lusitania

Donor
- Netherlands: Ghana, South Africa
- Denmark: Congo, Ghana or Togo/Benin
- Sweden: Congo, Ghana, or Togo/Benin
- Russia: Eritrea, Ethiopia
- USA: Liberia
- Oman: Swahili Coast, Madagascar
- Ottoman Empire: Sudan, Chad Basin and/or Somalia
- Persia: Swahili Coast, Madagascar, Somalia

Sorry but Liberia was never a US colony.

As for the non Europeans they not have any chance of capturing of keeping the African territory once the Europeans begin their imperialistic growth and scramble for Africa. The Germans landed in East Africa and defeated all local and regional powers and that would of included any Persian or ottoman territory. Ottomans used to control much of Eastern Africa coastline and Zanzibar. That control disappeared with the appearance of the Europeans in Indian Ocean in the 16th century. So for them to continue you need to butterfly the Europeans away.

As for Ottoman the British and french wanted the Suez Canal and provided Egyptian leaders with support to defeat the ottomans. Historically they controlled much of North African but for them to stay then you need to butterfly away British and french powerful states.

So unless we have very weak British and french along with a non unified Germany who wanted to have German colors on the world map non Europeans are not in the picture.
 
Sorry but Liberia was never a US colony.

As for the non Europeans they not have any chance of capturing of keeping the African territory once the Europeans begin their imperialistic growth and scramble for Africa. The Germans landed in East Africa and defeated all local and regional powers and that would of included any Persian or ottoman territory. Ottomans used to control much of Eastern Africa coastline and Zanzibar. That control disappeared with the appearance of the Europeans in Indian Ocean in the 16th century. So for them to continue you need to butterfly the Europeans away.

As for Ottoman the British and french wanted the Suez Canal and provided Egyptian leaders with support to defeat the ottomans. Historically they controlled much of North African but for them to stay then you need to butterfly away British and french powerful states.

So unless we have very weak British and french along with a non unified Germany who wanted to have German colors on the world map non Europeans are not in the picture.

I never said it was a colony? If I did point it out please...... -______-

What I posted was suggestions where these nations could have had control over. I thought it wouldn't be that hard to understand but apparently it is.

P.S. Ottoman control never reached further than Somaliland. Only Mombassa was taken and that for a brief period in the late 16th century. And the Ottomans never had access to the Indian Ocean, Persian Gulf or Red Sea before the Europeans pre-European era. Let alone rule Zanzibar.
 

Lusitania

Donor
I never said it was a colony? If I did point it out please...... -______-

What I posted was suggestions where these nations could have had control over. I thought it wouldn't be that hard to understand but apparently it is.

P.S. Ottoman control never reached further than Somaliland. Only Mombassa was taken and that for a brief period in the late 16th century.

The ottomans at one point controlled North Africa from egypt to Tunisia, over the centuries it lost Egypt to “allied” government and both Libya and Tunisia were subject nations till the early 19th century.

Now for US the country of Liberia was under the protection of US (against colonial powers) due to its association with American private charity that bought the land for returnee African-Americans. There was never control when compared to other colonies. The Americans wanted nothing to do with Africa. You need a different US for them to have interest and then Liberia might not even be the location they would choose.
 
Have Nikolai Achinov's colonialist venture be successful in establishing a series of outposts along the Eritrean coast where an increased number of Cossack troops manage to capture the city of Asmara and/or the Christian Eritrean Highlands, focusing on consolidation during the Zemene Mesafint. St. Petersburg sends reinforcements of men and material support to Nikolai's force while Nikolai becomes more interested in Ethiopian affairs, especially when it is found out that Ethiopia is an Orthodox Christian kingdom. Russia opts to support the successfully centralizing Emperor Tewodros II with advisors and material support but once Empress Tewabech Ali dies, he becomes increasingly mentally unstable and his previous efforts at centralization fall apart to the point where Gondar comes close to war with London as Russian diplomats negotiate the release of imprisoned European officials in Ethiopia. Nikolai turns Russian support from their former client to Lij Kassa Mercha who has been successfully in expanding his control throughout Tigray and into central Ethiopia as a Russian-backed coup d'etat sees Lij Kassa Mercha soon crowned Emperor Yohannes IV. Yohannes is much more successful in maintaining Ethiopian centralization, instituting reforms that are backed by Russian-trained and equipped troops under the command of the loyalist Ras Alula Engida as the nobles' revolts are crushed when land and tax reforms are introduced. Yohannes has become a Russophile, attempting to modernize with the Russian Empire as a model, utilizing the Table of Ranks in transforming the remnants of the nobility into a centralized and state-oriented bureaucracy in Yohannes' government. His modernization efforts prove quite successful but they have reduced Ethiopia to a de-facto Russian protectorate, especially when the Ethiopian Orthodox Church breaks away from Alexandria and joins the Eastern Orthodox Church in 1884. Under Yohannes and Menelik, Ethiopia manages to expand her borders to those roughly of OTL by 1896.
 

Lusitania

Donor
Have Nikolai Achinov's colonialist venture be successful in establishing a series of outposts along the Eritrean coast where an increased number of Cossack troops manage to capture the city of Asmara and/or the Christian Eritrean Highlands, focusing on consolidation during the Zemene Mesafint. St. Petersburg sends reinforcements of men and material support to Nikolai's force while Nikolai becomes more interested in Ethiopian affairs, especially when it is found out that Ethiopia is an Orthodox Christian kingdom. Russia opts to support the successfully centralizing Emperor Tewodros II with advisors and material support but once Empress Tewabech Ali dies, he becomes increasingly mentally unstable and his previous efforts at centralization fall apart to the point where Gondar comes close to war with London as Russian diplomats negotiate the release of imprisoned European officials in Ethiopia. Nikolai turns Russian support from their former client to Lij Kassa Mercha who has been successfully in expanding his control throughout Tigray and into central Ethiopia as a Russian-backed coup d'etat sees Lij Kassa Mercha soon crowned Emperor Yohannes IV. Yohannes is much more successful in maintaining Ethiopian centralization, instituting reforms that are backed by Russian-trained and equipped troops under the command of the loyalist Ras Alula Engida as the nobles' revolts are crushed when land and tax reforms are introduced. Yohannes has become a Russophile, attempting to modernize with the Russian Empire as a model, utilizing the Table of Ranks in transforming the remnants of the nobility into a centralized and state-oriented bureaucracy in Yohannes' government. His modernization efforts prove quite successful but they have reduced Ethiopia to a de-facto Russian protectorate, especially when the Ethiopian Orthodox Church breaks away from Alexandria and joins the Eastern Orthodox Church in 1884. Under Yohannes and Menelik, Ethiopia manages to expand her borders to those roughly of OTL by 1896.
The biggest issue for Russian colonization of this area is that it is subject to both Ottoman action closing access to Russian Black Sea ports especially with Baltic ports freezing part of year. Plus Russian ships also have to contend with British interference in using the Suez Canal. But I like it and makes sense since the Russians believed they were protectors of all Orthodox Christians.
 
Have Nikolai Achinov's colonialist venture be successful in establishing a series of outposts along the Eritrean coast where an increased number of Cossack troops manage to capture the city of Asmara and/or the Christian Eritrean Highlands, focusing on consolidation during the Zemene Mesafint. St. Petersburg sends reinforcements of men and material support to Nikolai's force while Nikolai becomes more interested in Ethiopian affairs, especially when it is found out that Ethiopia is an Orthodox Christian kingdom. Russia opts to support the successfully centralizing Emperor Tewodros II with advisors and material support but once Empress Tewabech Ali dies, he becomes increasingly mentally unstable and his previous efforts at centralization fall apart to the point where Gondar comes close to war with London as Russian diplomats negotiate the release of imprisoned European officials in Ethiopia. Nikolai turns Russian support from their former client to Lij Kassa Mercha who has been successfully in expanding his control throughout Tigray and into central Ethiopia as a Russian-backed coup d'etat sees Lij Kassa Mercha soon crowned Emperor Yohannes IV. Yohannes is much more successful in maintaining Ethiopian centralization, instituting reforms that are backed by Russian-trained and equipped troops under the command of the loyalist Ras Alula Engida as the nobles' revolts are crushed when land and tax reforms are introduced. Yohannes has become a Russophile, attempting to modernize with the Russian Empire as a model, utilizing the Table of Ranks in transforming the remnants of the nobility into a centralized and state-oriented bureaucracy in Yohannes' government. His modernization efforts prove quite successful but they have reduced Ethiopia to a de-facto Russian protectorate, especially when the Ethiopian Orthodox Church breaks away from Alexandria and joins the Eastern Orthodox Church in 1884. Under Yohannes and Menelik, Ethiopia manages to expand her borders to those roughly of OTL by 1896.
Would Italy dare attack Ethiopia if that meant going against Russia?
 
As for Ottoman the British and french wanted the Suez Canal and provided Egyptian leaders with support to defeat the ottomans. Historically they controlled much of North African but for them to stay then you need to butterfly away British and french powerful states.

So unless we have very weak British and french along with a non unified Germany who wanted to have German colors on the world map non Europeans are not in the picture.

Not nessicerily. The move by Europeans for more direct control over North Africa wasen't exactly inevitable: its instigating events (Charles X's initiation of the conquest of Algers; largely for domestic political reasons in order to try to outflank Liberals who'd taken control of the Chamber of Deputies and were trying to bring down the ultraroyalist Polignac Ministry and utalize the Crown's need for their approval to raise funds in order to gain a measure of power from the Crown) and the Oriental Crisis (Which there's a real chance could have panned out in a different direction had the Ottomans gotten the upper hand in the Ottoman-Egyptian War of 1839, which is hardly impossible, and Muhammed Ali finds his autonomy much less than OTL). Particularly if both events are butterflied away, France might very well keep a pro-Ottoman policy and try to leverage their traditional good relations with the Porte into getting their commerical and canal presence in Egypt under Ottoman terms (Alternatively, the Brits could take a stiffer and more continious pro-Turkish policy if they feel France would gain the benefits of local Egyptian rule under a pro-French party... basically prevent the July Monarchy-era detante between the two powers).
 
Possibly. The main issue here is who gets to administer the colony. After the Spanish-American War Spain tried to sell Rio de Oro (aka the majority of the modern Western Sahara) to A-H but Hungary objected to the idea and the deal fell flat.

The closest the Habsburgs came to a colony after the Ausgleich was Bosnia, which ultimately became a condominium between the two halves, and I imagine that any African colony would have to be administered in a similar fashion.

In terms of colonies, Cyrenaica and a decent port in East Africa (with maybe a bit of hinterland) would be very sensible (and depending on how the butterflies flap their wings, a purchase of Rio de Oro could still be in the cards).
In a world where A-H has Bosnia, Rio-de-oro, and Cyrenaica, what else would be happening?
 

Lusitania

Donor
Not nessicerily. The move by Europeans for more direct control over North Africa wasen't exactly inevitable: its instigating events (Charles X's initiation of the conquest of Algers; largely for domestic political reasons in order to try to outflank Liberals who'd taken control of the Chamber of Deputies and were trying to bring down the ultraroyalist Polignac Ministry and utalize the Crown's need for their approval to raise funds in order to gain a measure of power from the Crown) and the Oriental Crisis (Which there's a real chance could have panned out in a different direction had the Ottomans gotten the upper hand in the Ottoman-Egyptian War of 1839, which is hardly impossible, and Muhammed Ali finds his autonomy much less than OTL). Particularly if both events are butterflied away, France might very well keep a pro-Ottoman policy and try to leverage their traditional good relations with the Porte into getting their commerical and canal presence in Egypt under Ottoman terms (Alternatively, the Brits could take a stiffer and more continious pro-Turkish policy if they feel France would gain the benefits of local Egyptian rule under a pro-French party... basically prevent the July Monarchy-era detante between the two powers).

Yes but your response in set in 1830 I talking about France under Napoleon. When he invaded Egypt and defeated the Egyptians last
 
Yes but your response in set in 1830 I talking about France under Napoleon. When he invaded Egypt and defeated the Egyptians last

France post-Napoleon is not the same as France under Napoleon (At the zeneth of its relative power compared to the rest of the world) and the Mamaluks running the joint when he showed up were not the same as the post-Selim Ottoman armies. Its quite possible to get at timeline where the reform attempts of the first half of the 19th century stick and they don't go down the slow rot/getting picked apart path they ended up on IOTL, in which case they can start working to reverse the autonomization of their North African vassals and maintain a status large enough that the GP's don't openly try to undermine it and snatch parts of the edges, prefering to work with the court in Constantinople as a "Partner"/second tier power in their geopolitical influence structure, similar in a way to Nappy III's relations with Italy or Germany's relations with AH post-FPW
 

Lusitania

Donor
France post-Napoleon is not the same as France under Napoleon (At the zeneth of its relative power compared to the rest of the world) and the Mamaluks running the joint when he showed up were not the same as the post-Selim Ottoman armies. Its quite possible to get at timeline where the reform attempts of the first half of the 19th century stick and they don't go down the slow rot/getting picked apart path they ended up on IOTL, in which case they can start working to reverse the autonomization of their North African vassals and maintain a status large enough that the GP's don't openly try to undermine it and snatch parts of the edges, prefering to work with the court in Constantinople as a "Partner"/second tier power in their geopolitical influence structure, similar in a way to Nappy III's relations with Italy or Germany's relations with AH post-FPW

Yes we can get a lot of different stuff to happen but it depends on the POD and whether there is a French revolution and Napoleon. So not sure what you implying. The further you go back the greater the changes both in Ottoman Empire and elsewhere. So if no Napoleon then no Charles X and we could have a different France that invades and conquers Egypt to gain access to India. Case point you can make it as great for Ottoman you wish but 19th century geopolitical and society changes will happen in similar fashions. You might even have the 1848 revolts spread to Ottoman Empire and topple it.
 
Top