Could Muhammad Ali Pasha have achieved his aims?

In 1820, the Egyptian wali Muhammad Ali Pasha conquered the Sudan and incorporated it into his Egyptian domans, seeking to supplant the Ottoman Empire as the premier Muslim power. Unfortunately, his goals were never accomplished until the fall of the Ottomans.

My question, in effect, is how could Egypt become the premier Muslim power and supplant the Ottomans by 1900?
 
I remember European powers interfering with Ali's plans. Either they don't or he finds an ally able to help him stand up to the Europeans.

(In my Afrikaner TL, that's the Afrikaner Confederation, which helps him build a navy that bloodies the European forces trying to stop his advance through the Levant and secures him a better postwar deal he got OTL.)

Maybe an earlier-unified Germany that assists Ali to screw with the French? Or a stronger, richer Persia assisting him to screw with the Ottomans?
 
Muhammad Ali had a nominal ally in France but she was unwilling to risk wider european war with other powers for the sake of Egypt. You can have them living up to their end of the bargain or assertive Russia as the main helper but she had big problems of her own in Dagestan and Checenya in the form of big muslim rebellion led by Shamil.
 
Muhammad Ali had a nominal ally in France but she was unwilling to risk wider european war with other powers for the sake of Egypt. You can have them living up to their end of the bargain or assertive Russia as the main helper but she had big problems of her own in Dagestan and Checenya in the form of big muslim rebellion led by Shamil.

Oh. I thought the British and French were working together on this one.
 
What were his aims?

At many points in time, Mehmet Ali Pasha was a loyal servant of the Osman dynasty. Just because he was pretty independent at one point doesn't mean he wanted full independence from the Ottoman Empire.

I think it's much better to claim that he was interested merely in increasing his own power, regardless of whether that meant defying the Ottomans or playing the role of the loyal servant.
 
What were his aims?

At many points in time, Mehmet Ali Pasha was a loyal servant of the Osman dynasty. Just because he was pretty independent at one point doesn't mean he wanted full independence from the Ottoman Empire.

I think it's much better to claim that he was interested merely in increasing his own power, regardless of whether that meant defying the Ottomans or playing the role of the loyal servant.

Er, his clearly-stated aims during the Egyptian-Ottoman War were to declare full indepedence and become an independent King of Egypt with lands in Syria, Palestine, the Hijaz, and Crete.
 
The problem for Egypt is that after 1815 the Turks were nominally considered to be an important facet of European diplomacy, and nobody wanted to let the boat get rocked for fear of a second Revolutionary Wars.

The best bet might be for Muhammad Ali to live a few years longer, and to keep his sanity during that time, allowing him to take advantage of the chaos of 1848. He's unlikely to totally met all of his wishes, but you could see him conquering Palestine and establishing de jure dominion over Hejaz instead of the de-facto control he enjoyed. Also it'd help if all of his decedents and immediate successors didn't piss away all of the gains and opportunities Egypt had.
 
The problem for Egypt is that after 1815 the Turks were nominally considered to be an important facet of European diplomacy, and nobody wanted to let the boat get rocked for fear of a second Revolutionary Wars.

The best bet might be for Muhammad Ali to live a few years longer, and to keep his sanity during that time, allowing him to take advantage of the chaos of 1848. He's unlikely to totally met all of his wishes, but you could see him conquering Palestine and establishing de jure dominion over Hejaz instead of the de-facto control he enjoyed. Also it'd help if all of his decedents and immediate successors didn't piss away all of the gains and opportunities Egypt had.

wolf_brother

One of the problems with this idea is that I've seen it stated that the defeat greatly helped his dynasty. He was forced to give up the vast majority of the army he had been maintaining which was causing serious economic problems and a lot of unrest, especially in areas in Syria when he took control of them. The locals didn't like the levels of tax and control his government was trying to impose.

Hence I think he would have to cut back militarily even if Britain hadn't intervened.

Steve
 
Top