DBWI : Independent Egypt

Now I've been hearing that after the Great War (OOC: WW1), Egypt was so close, only one step from real independence. It was even actually de facto independent, and Ottoman suzerainty was actually be meant for formality only, and for some first years post-Great War it really was. Abbas II was obviously the most responsible figure in keeping Egypt attached to Ottoman Empire and eventually in leading it to be reintegrated into Ottoman Empire. Would it be helpful if he's to be got rid off ? But wasn't he struggling hard himself ?

Without changing the victors of the Great War, how would be the way for Egypt to be a separate state from Ottoman Empire ? I doubt Egypt would be able to survive the influence of Ottoman capital though, but at least they could have been a completely separate nation-state, no ?
 
Last edited:

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
The Ottomans favored the Egyptians as their vassals. You can almost say that even if The Ottomans were du jure the overlord of Egypt, it was de facto independent. The Ottomans were weak after WW1, even though they had supported the winning side, it wouldn't be much of a stretch for them to completely recognize Egypt.
Then we'll of course have the Libyan problem. The Libyans had a great deal of autonomy but not as great as the Egyptians. If the Egyptians got out, and the Ottomans lose their land borders with Libya, the Libyans would aslo want to get out.
And then the most disputed Sudan question of course. Constantinople and London agreed that Sudan was british, Cairo always protested. The Sultan many times had to travel to Egypt to calm down his vassal, however what would happen if the Egyptian king was not a Ottoman vassal?
 
Then we'll of course have the Libyan problem. The Libyans had a great deal of autonomy but not as great as the Egyptians. If the Egyptians got out, and the Ottomans lose their land borders with Libya, the Libyans would aslo want to get out.

OOC: Let's drop this. What was the fact IOTL was that Libya was a hell hole during Italian occupation was because that the natives wanted Ottomans back. Before Italy got there, it was a legally integrated vilayet with representation on Ottoman parliament (not even a significant autonomy over other vilayets would be likely, from this perspective). So no, I can't see Libya would want to go out once they've rejoined Ottoman realm. And actually, if we're for late PoDs in this DBWI it'll be even harder for Libya to rejoin Ottoman empire, for Italian position there at the time weren't threatened by anybody even indirectly. This way, at least it'll take several years before Ottoman can regain Libya, depends on how thing would gonna turn out to be. But if the PoD should be earlier, perhaps it can be worked on so that Germany would be in the position to push Italy giving back Libya to OE after the war. :)
Though in either scenario would be chosen, I won't be against Ottoman Libya at all ;)

1) The Ottomans favored the Egyptians as their vassals. You can almost say that even if The Ottomans were du jure the overlord of Egypt, it was de facto independent. The Ottomans were weak after WW1, even though they had supported the winning side, it wouldn't be much of a stretch for them to completely recognize Egypt.

2) And then the most disputed Sudan question of course. Constantinople and London agreed that Sudan was british, Cairo always protested. The Sultan many times had to travel to Egypt to calm down his vassal, however what would happen if the Egyptian king was not a Ottoman vassal?

IC :

1) Indeed. But apart of that general sense, I know nothing else.... :(

Though with Abbas II would still be the Khedive of Egypt, would it be possible for us to have him renounce his goal to rejoining Egypt into OE ? Or should he just be gone as the only way to have an independent Egypt ?

2) Well it was for the exchanging Ottoman suzerainty over Egypt, that the Sudan become solely British possession. It was only after Abbas II was succeeded by his son Muhammad Abdul Mun'im, Egypt began to be noisy for getting Sudan back. But they got Sudan back after the Second Great War anyway....

Maybe if we prevent Abbas II from being restored as Khedive post-GW1, and independent Egypt emerged as the result, Sudan would be part of Egypt by default. Though now the question is, how do we prevent him from getting his throne back with the Central Powers still winning ? Would it be really hard ? Or was it actually easier than it usually sounds ?
 
Last edited:
The Ottomans favored the Egyptians as their vassals. You can almost say that even if The Ottomans were du jure the overlord of Egypt, it was de facto independent. The Ottomans were weak after WW1, even though they had supported the winning side, it wouldn't be much of a stretch for them to completely recognize Egypt.
Then we'll of course have the Libyan problem. The Libyans had a great deal of autonomy but not as great as the Egyptians. If the Egyptians got out, and the Ottomans lose their land borders with Libya, the Libyans would aslo want to get out.
And then the most disputed Sudan question of course. Constantinople and London agreed that Sudan was british, Cairo always protested. The Sultan many times had to travel to Egypt to calm down his vassal, however what would happen if the Egyptian king was not a Ottoman vassal?

[OOC: Ottoman Libya wasn't autonomous, it was an integral province of the empire - or rather Tripoli was - Barca was largely autonomous and run by the Senusi order.]
 
Bump.

1) Though with Abbas II would still be the Khedive of Egypt, would it be possible for us to have him renounce his goal to rejoining Egypt into OE ? Or should he just be gone as the only way to have an independent Egypt ?

2) Maybe if we prevent Abbas II from being restored as Khedive post-GW1, and independent Egypt emerged as the result, Sudan would be part of Egypt by default. Though now the question is, how do we prevent him from getting his throne back with the Central Powers still winning ? Would it be really hard ? Or was it actually easier than it usually sounds ?

No answer ?
 
Top