Asia w/ Napoleonic Europe

[John Fredrick Parker]

From a discussion of a TL where the Franco-Russian Alliance endured:

how does a "Napoleonic" Europe, in the short to medium term, affect the colonial power struggle with regard to Asia and the Indian Ocean? Does it distract Russia from Central Asia, or the British from consolidating control over India? Would Britain suffer French satellite states to keep colonial possessions in the east -- namely, could Bonapartist Spain keep the Phillipines, while the Dutch keep Java? How does this help or hurt the various sultanates and kingdoms (and one shogunate) scattered across the region? And, of course, what about the Qing?

CONSOLIDATE: I'll venture, for the time being, that British influence in India and Russia's in Central Asia proceeds roughly as OTL; that allowing French satellites to keep their Asian possessions would be an acceptable part of European peace for the British; that French would find cultural influence and exchange in some places (e.g. they may find themselves with similar trading privileges to the Dutch within Japan), and possibly alliances with others; and China... still no idea.

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

in my TL, Britain quickly gobbles up most of France's allies' possessions outside of Europe. Including the Dutch East Indies. After that I've pretty much assumed that Britain (or the Coalition generally in TL-speak) has a monopoly on the region (inc. India) so not much happens. As a result China stagnates (without Opium wars, no Taiping to upset the balance).

Japan in the early 1800s was fairly well isolated, they probably won't be too drastically affected until someone forces them open.

- BNC

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

in my TL, Britain quickly gobbles up most of France's allies' possessions outside of Europe. Including the Dutch East Indies. After that I've pretty much assumed that Britain (or the Coalition generally in TL-speak) has a monopoly on the region (inc. India) so not much happens. As a result China stagnates (without Opium wars, no Taiping to upset the balance).

Japan in the early 1800s was fairly well isolated, they probably won't be too drastically affected until someone forces them open.

- BNC

Can Britain expand so much? I mean, OTL they swallowed most of the Dutch overseas empire, but left the Spanish and Portuguese possessions alone. The French didn't really have an overseas empire outside of the sugar and spice islands in the Caribbean, but the British never really worried about the Danish overseas possessions in India or in the Caribbean AFAIK.

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Portugal was British allied, so Britain doesn't take their stuff. Most of the Spanish stuff was the territories in the Americas, which had rebelled or were close to doing so by my PoD in 1812, and Britain doesn't take them. Really only works out to be a few extra islands and things, nothing too significant.

The only other territories I could think of was the Spanish carribean stuff, which mostly went to some sort of self-rule in the TL.

- BNC

 

[Indicus]

France holds no real need to colonize anything in Asia, as it has the resources of Europe at its disposal. What it might do instead is support native states against the British - say, the Sikh Empire may gain French firearms and aid.

 

[pompejus]

One thing to realise is that Britain restored all Dutch colonies (beside Ceylon) during the treaty of Amiens, only tooccupy them later when the a Bonaparte was made ruler of Holland. So depending on your POD, it is certainly possible that the Dutch keep their colonial empire in Asia.

 

[TRH]

Can Britain expand so much? I mean, OTL they swallowed most of the Dutch overseas empire, but left the Spanish and Portuguese possessions alone. The French didn't really have an overseas empire outside of the sugar and spice islands in the Caribbean, but the British never really worried about the Danish overseas possessions in India or in the Caribbean AFAIK.

It's the Pendulum Principle at work. Whereas the US must respond to losing the South by taking Canada, Britain, if it ever gets disappointed on the continent, must take All The Colonies.

As for the OP, my guess is the French don't do much in the short term in Asia. What Russia does is another matter, because the Central Asian khanates never demanded more than a tiny fraction of their resources, and the main constraint in that theater for them was logistics.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

France holds no real need to colonize anything in Asia, as it has the resources of Europe at its disposal. What it might do instead is support native states against the British - say, the Sikh Empire may gain French firearms and aid.

I can see them doing something pretty similar, only in Southesast Asia and the Indies, using the aforementioned remaining colonies of their allies as bases of operations. In either case, I like the idea of France going back to their pre-7YW traditions of extra-euaopean FP.