DBWI: Anglo/Confederate victory in the Great North American War?

As we all know, when the British entered the ACW on the South's side in 1862, a Union victory seemed hopeless, but President Lincoln refused to surrender and after one of the most brutal wars ever fought the Union came out on top.
The challenge here is to have an Anglo/Confederate victory in the war
 
I think the greatest challenge is to remove the overconfidence felt in both London and Richmond at the time of intervention in January 1862, both seemed to think that the Royal Navy was an instant win button. Though it destroyed the Union merchant fleet and opened the Confederacy to economic freedom, it underestimated both the depth of Union resolve, and the unlike the CSA (which had no navy) and Russia (which had one but declined the fight) the United States was more than willing to fight on the seas and in the coasts and on the rivers.

For that matter the Confederate campaigns of 1862 were total slogs which cost far more casualties than the Confederacy could hope to sustain, while the British pinprick attacks on the coast distracted tens of thousands of Union troops, their numerous attempts at invading New York never panned out. By 1863 The Confederacy was reaching the apex of its military power, while the Union was only beginning to gear up. Britain was seeing just how costly this war would be. With a stalemate in the north it was only natural the British would want to bow out gracefully, and then the Union could turn over 100,000 more men on the Confederacy, leading to the final surrender of Confederate authority in January 1866 at Houston after for all intents and purposes the Confederate government ceased to exist when Atlanta fell in September 1865.

If you want the Union to lose have the invasion of Canada go poorly. The Union thrust up through the St. Lawrence could have easily gone the other way, but with Charles Smith leading the army (and willing to engage in risky maneuvers to reach and besiege Kingston) once he appeared in the British rear at Montreal, the British had no choice but to fall back to the island and wait things out there. If the Union army is busy trying to reach Kingston the British might actually pull off their invasion in 1863 and march as far south as Albany, leaving thousands of Union troops distracted into 1864 when the campaign to take Richmond bore fruit, meaning that the Confederates could probably hold on the Rappahannock and Lincoln has an even tougher uphill battle to get reelected, and maybe the Peace Democrats win leading to negotiations in 1865.

Or you could have France work more overtly in favor of the Confederacy. Maybe if they weren't mired in Mexico they would have jumped in rather than just being neutral.

However, if you keep Union troops distracted up north in 1864 I'm willing to bet that Lincoln won't win the election.
 
There was a much deeper effect in the British Alliance with the Confederacy that won the Union the war. With the war being seen no longer as a semi-popular slog to unite the Nation but an act of defense against King George III and his lackeys in Richmond turned many Border Whites to the Union and caused thousands and thousands to volunteer.
 
How could an Anglo/Confederate victory effect the alliance's leading up to the first Global War in 1913? Could the CSA join the Grand Alliance (British/French/Austrian), could the US even win a war on two fronts, what state would the US and CS even be in by 1913?
 
There was a much deeper effect in the British Alliance with the Confederacy that won the Union the war. With the war being seen no longer as a semi-popular slog to unite the Nation but an act of defense against King George III and his lackeys in Richmond turned many Border Whites to the Union and caused thousands and thousands to volunteer.

Exactly. The British intervention caused volunteers to the US Army to more than double. Historians are right to see the effects on American society as foreshadowing the total wars of the 20th century. For the first time in a developed industrial nation, the people accepted scarcities over an extended period in order to help the war effort. It transformed the war from one that the Republicans could lose (and they probably would have, given the skill of Confederate generals to make more happen with less) to one that the American nation would never consent to lose.
 
Apparently, Britain was considering intervening in the Taiping Rebellion to extract more concessions from the Qing. I wonder, had the Brits not been distracted by Sherman moving into Canada, might they have tried it? Something like that could seriously impact China's ability to modernize; the Qing might not be around today without the Great North American War.
 
Shorten the war. The Anglo-Confederate Alliance burned itself out because the former was trying to fight an extremely unpopular war while the other was struggling to hold itself together. Meanwhile the Russo-Prussian-American Alliance had men and material to spare for years of fighting.
 
Of course the deep division in Britain was crucial

It was at the begining a very unpopular alliance.

The british empire at that point in time had some very strong anti slavery feelings, so a lot of people were not happy any ways. The excuse that the war was to protect Canada sounds pretty empty when its the entire reason why canada got invaded in the first place, add to this the fact that the british had global naval commitments, wars in other parts of the world, and had to fight an enemy who was fighting what they felt was a war for their very survivial.

And its not exactly surprising that the british tapped out when they did.

All the intervention did was essentally insure that the ring leaders of the confederacy got hanged instead of getting far more leniant treatment postwar.
 
Top