Challenge: Argentina as a superpower
- Thread starter Zuvarq
- Start date
More competent Spanish economic policies in the 16-18th centuries?
somehow including Chile and 'guay's without costly wars of occupation would probably hel pas well.
somehow including Chile and 'guay's without costly wars of occupation would probably hel pas well.
The Falklands Crisis of 1770 results in war between Britain and Spain. Britain wins and takes Argentina/Chile/Paraquay to strengthen its presence in the South Atlantic. Following the American Revolution, fleeing Loyalists are offered land grants and government offices in British South America. With the acquisition of Cape Town in 1806, the British now have a lock on South Atlantic trade and control both major sea lanes out of the Atlantic Ocean (with interesting butterflies on the USA's own mercantile expansion).
The mineral riches of the Andes and the agricultural strength of the Pampas, combined with the trade advantages of the British Empire, give Argentina the necessary ingredients for its own industrial revolution. As with the United States, World Wars I and II strengthen Argentine industry, science, and education while Europe's infrastructure is battered into rubble. (This assumes the world wars or their equivalent are not butterflied away.) Argentina emerges in the latter half of the 20th Century as a major world power, with its own global navy and commercial interests.
Just a throwaway after a couple of minutes on Google, but not impossible IMHO.
The mineral riches of the Andes and the agricultural strength of the Pampas, combined with the trade advantages of the British Empire, give Argentina the necessary ingredients for its own industrial revolution. As with the United States, World Wars I and II strengthen Argentine industry, science, and education while Europe's infrastructure is battered into rubble. (This assumes the world wars or their equivalent are not butterflied away.) Argentina emerges in the latter half of the 20th Century as a major world power, with its own global navy and commercial interests.
Just a throwaway after a couple of minutes on Google, but not impossible IMHO.
Deleted member 5719
Doable, if you refine it a bit. But you lose points for having fleeing loyalists.
It's worth remembering how small the Argentinean population of Argentina was in 1810 (yes I mean that, think about it). Maybe 500,000 settled in an area less than half the size of today's Argentina. It's not going to be a superpower without serious wank...
Why not resettle fleeing Loyalists in Argentina? More than 75,000 Loyalists left the new United States during and after the Revolution, most going through Canada, some through the Caribbean. They scattered throughout the Empire, some in Canada, others in Britain and elsewhere. They'd be perfect for settling the recently acquired territory in Argentina. Other immigrants would arrive from Britain itself, and Irish Potato Famine immigrants would add their numbers in the first half of the 19th Century. Add an influx of immigrants from central and eastern Europe late in the century. Not at all unlikely to see major population growth. The thing with making it a British territory is that it suddenly acquires sources of new residents and markets that OTL Argentina lacked.
Last edited:
Except that Argentina already had access to British markets and residents: considerable amounts of Irish, Welsh and Scottish immigrants went to Argentina in the XIXth century, and there were many English as well, primarily because of the railroad network.
Essentially, Argentina was as close to being a British colony without becoming one outright, and really, by independence, it would have been impossible (and unnecessary) for the UK to conquer Argentina: Buenos Aires became a prominent port because it was the main port by which the British smuggled goods in and out of La Plata, and after independence, Argentina and the UK were very, very close economically. It wasn't called a "Dominion of Honor" for nothing
In any case, making Argentina a superpower isn't really all that difficult. While it might be easier to do so if it had held on to all of the Viceroyalty of La Plata's territory (Bolivia's minerals in particular would have been a great help), it isn't entirely necessary. Argentina was already wealthy and powerful without those territories. Still, it is entirely possible that Argentina could keep at least Uruguay, which it gave up because of British pressure for Uruguayan independence (to prevent Argentine dominion of the River Plate) despite winning the war against Brazil. Perhaps if someone other than Belgrano is chosen to lead the expeditions to Paraguay and later Bolivia, there might be a chance of reconquering those territories, but that's rather difficult.
The best PODs to ensure that Argentina remains a superpower are post-1900 IMO, but even pre-1900, there may be a few good ones: avoiding the anarchy that gripped the country post independence, lasting until 1829, would allow the country to develop a bit sooner. Maybe a shorter Rosas dictatorship, or Rosas using his authority to end the division of the country, would also help a bit.
By 1880 though Argentina was well on its way to become a superpower, even if it did lack the population for it...
I also find it funny that no one ever suggest settling X with Anglo-Saxons as a way of turning a country into a pariah state.
Not a matter of race/ethnicity, as much as you might like it to be for the sake of humor. In the 18th and 19th Centuries, they were the ones with the money, the technology, and the will. Who else is available? Ask the same question in the latter half of the 21st Century, and the answer may well be the Chinese.
Actually, the rich British were the ones with the money, technology and the will. The Irish people escaping from the famine were not. And you can have no doubt they've used those three things in Argentina during the 19th century. And it didn't quite work for us because, logically, they've used them to benefit Britain, not Argentina (note that I'm not saying that Argentina didn't benefit at all).
A larger territory post Independence might help. Say Uruguay, Bolivia, maybe Chile with a pre 1800 POD were the Spanish don't separate Chile from the new Viceroyalty of the River Plate. A far shorter civil war would certainly be a huge bonus.
I also think, how about the industrial development in the 1930-40s focus on profitable sectors only, the economy becomes more efficient and less prone to the economic rollercoaster it is, the Argentinean movie industry consolidates instead of going under, no French advisors for the military in the cold war means the military don't fall as hard against the universities and the country moves into a better position for the information technology age. Thus resulting in a country with a cultural production more renown worldwide, a smoother economy, self sufficient in oil and energy, with much greater abilities to reap the benefits of globalization at atracting capitals for stuff like videogames and software, engineering consulting, R&D, genetic research, maybe add acess to markets so some kind of Argentinean Nokia might appear. All while at the same time reaping the benefits of OTL agricultural, petrochemical and turistic sectors.
Not quite a superpower and a bit of a wank, but certainly a more solid and important country. And for the sake of it, you can add fission nukes and ballistic missiles to it if you want to compliment the military side of it.
Well, there's always South Africa..I also find it funny that no one ever suggest settling X with Anglo-Saxons as a way of turning a country into a pariah state.
Yeah, civil war, corruption, and especially military coups are basically what stopped Mexico, Gran Columbia, Brazil, and Argentina from becoming Great Powers. Most of Hispanic America got off to a bad start in their independence, which still plagues them today.
Brazil, on the other hand, was stable until the Empire went under in the late 19th century. Argentina was too, despite its bad start, but both fell under the thumb of coups. Funnily enough, Mexico under Diaz was considered first world or near-first world, but he was so oppressive that when he left the Mexican Revolution broke loose, and well...
So avoid coups. Argentina was the 10th wealthiest nation per capita in 1913; this is after the political instability started to happen.
It would help if Argentina could contain Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile and the Falklands too. You'll also have to make Brazil unstable so it can't try to stop the rise of Argentina. It would help to keep the USA out of Latin America too, maybe they try to take Canada instead of Northern Mexico and are curbstomped by Britain? Of course, if Mexico gets too strong it will pose a danger to Argentina's rise too.
This South Africa makes some important points: South Africa was first a Dutch and then an English colony. We can consider these two colonial powers rather equal in money and knowledge. Whereas the English had some more settlers to bring there, note that many Germans emigrated through Dutch ports, so emmigrants available for settling werre rather equivalent as well. Nevertheless, South Africa is no superpower. Why?
The main point, IMHO, is population. If South Africa had a population of, let's say, 200 million, many of which with immigration background (knowledge and money from Europe as discussed above), this would be different. But if South Africa was a British colony and did not receive sufficient immigrants to become a superpower, why should Argentina get enough? Why should the loyalists go to Argentina instead of Canada? Or South Africa?
The main point here is: how to make millions of European immigrants going to Argentina instead of the US, a democratic country with sufficient land, favorable climate, no "old world" power demanding military service or taxes or religious afiliation and a much shorter and cheaper journey?
Argentina doesn't need to be a superpower in order to have a highly developed economic status economy in South America. Argentina with a population of 40 million is enough to be a developed nation but not superpower aka Australia or Canada. The hindrance of Argentina to be a superpower is that Argentina's location is too isolated from the rest of the world than the United States. Second, Argentina has only the Atlantic coast and the Pampas area which is not viable to be a industrial superpower. Third, Argentina lacks coal unlike United States. Fourth, bad governance and corruption from Rosas was being climaxed during the 1930 coup that leads Peron to poison the minds of the Argentines that free market is a bad idea. And fifth, presidential system of government is not a viable system of government because it encourages the incompetents and populists such as Peron, Menem, and Kirchner to take the presidency and powerful executive branch is subject to power abuse.
Also, butterfly away the World War I will also helps Argentina because British money flow will not be interrupted by the war or divert to war effort.
To have Argentina a superpower or just a regional power by 2010 is to have Bolivia, Chile, Uruguay, and Paraguay under the Argentine fold. Belgrano stays healthy and manages the economy. Argentina prefers constitutional monarchy or a British-style parliamentary form of government. Argentina was united immediately instead of falling into a civil war, then Argentina starts to pick up immigrants from Europe until the time come that enough population (lets say 10 million by 1900) will be ready to industrial revolution instead of focusing the low-profit and inefficient agricultural sector. Argentina appoints British or American advisers to guide the Armed Forces instead the French.
My vision for a superpower Argentina by 2010 is a 100 million population, 4 trillion dollar economy, highly developed nation in par with the United States, Britain, France and Germany, respected nation in the political affairs, service-driven and comsumer based economy, and militarily powerful in Southern Hemisphere.
Also, butterfly away the World War I will also helps Argentina because British money flow will not be interrupted by the war or divert to war effort.
To have Argentina a superpower or just a regional power by 2010 is to have Bolivia, Chile, Uruguay, and Paraguay under the Argentine fold. Belgrano stays healthy and manages the economy. Argentina prefers constitutional monarchy or a British-style parliamentary form of government. Argentina was united immediately instead of falling into a civil war, then Argentina starts to pick up immigrants from Europe until the time come that enough population (lets say 10 million by 1900) will be ready to industrial revolution instead of focusing the low-profit and inefficient agricultural sector. Argentina appoints British or American advisers to guide the Armed Forces instead the French.
My vision for a superpower Argentina by 2010 is a 100 million population, 4 trillion dollar economy, highly developed nation in par with the United States, Britain, France and Germany, respected nation in the political affairs, service-driven and comsumer based economy, and militarily powerful in Southern Hemisphere.
Last edited:
It's actually one of the situations in which CSA surviving is helpful. In this case USA will be too busy with its southern neighbour to cause trouble in Latin America. Maybe no Banana Republics in TTL?
That's actually close to ASB. Uruguay I can imagine if one butterflies away José Artigas, and Paraguay would be a stretch but possible, but certainly not Bolivia (every time Argentina tries taking Bolivia, they fail - shouldn't that be a warning for people?) and certainly not Chile (for the simple reason that there's a geographical barrier in the Andes, unless Argentina ends up owning all of Tierra del Fuego, Cape Horn, and the like). As for the Falklands/SGSSI: it would be nice to have them both under Argentine control, so long as they don't simply ignore them and maintain a constant presence there (read: settle it with people, and not just one dinky little settlement). If the British still want them, how about divide it in half? At least in the 19th century it's early enough for stuff like this to happen without any political repurcussions.
As for other areas, this is certainly ASB, but how about this territory that legally was owned by the Viceroyalty?:
For those of you who can read Spanish: Gobernación de Fernando Poo y Annobón
They coëxisted peacefully with each other as countries near the first world, so that wouldn't really work. The best one can hope for in Brazil would be the maintenance of the monarchy.
That I agree with you on.
Failure - the easiest thing to deal with.
Not really - we'd just have a multipolar Latin America.
The coups themselves only started in 1930. Prior to that there were some attempts which were faced by the army.
Actually, millions of poor and uneducated Europeans came to Argentina in the late 19th Century and the first decades of the 20th.
The issue with Uruguay was political, they competed with the Buenos Aires business elite. With Paraguay, it was military - there was a large garrison there to fight the Portuguese if need, so no revolutionary army was going to score military victories there. Regarding Bolivia, if any of the offensives had been more successful (an Argentinean victory at Vilcapugio might do it, or a more unlikely victory at Huaqui) might have kept southern Bolivia as part of Argentina, while funds for the planned offensive which was to coincide with San Martín's amphibous landing on Peru might also help. Regarding Chile, only if it was part of the Viceroyalty, and probably not even in that case.
Wouldn't the Spanish, or any other European power, try to capture it? Unless they don't do it right away and the revolutionary government try to use it as a privateer base and hold it. Was there much spanish trade in that region anyway?