German Patagonia

The Conquest of the Desert lasted until 1884. Would it have been possible for a German Patagonia? Say German pledges support for Chile in excahnge for getting some land in Patagonia (OTL Santa Cruz Province and Tierra Del Fuego?)
 
The Conquest of the Desert lasted until 1884. Would it have been possible for a German Patagonia? Say German pledges support for Chile in excahnge for getting some land in Patagonia (OTL Santa Cruz Province and Tierra Del Fuego?)

No. If this was during the reign of Wilhelm II, maybe, but at this point Bismarck ran the show and would veto any proposal of this nature.
 
No. If this was during the reign of Wilhelm II, maybe, but at this point Bismarck ran the show and would veto any proposal of this nature.

It would be interesting if Wilhelm contacted Chile on dividing up Patagonia and to get revenge against the Argies. When WW1 hit Chile could side with Central Powers and Argy with the Allies.
 

Beer

Banned
No. If this was during the reign of Wilhelm II, maybe, but at this point Bismarck ran the show and would veto any proposal of this nature.
Hi!
Not necessarily! Bismarck was no fan of colonies, but if there were to be other advantages, the Prince would not veto it. For my TLs I read a lot about the colonial age.
Bismrack would have been interested in Patagonia for the side effects, not the region itself. In my "Eisen, Blut..."-TL, Germany has the need for a secure sea lane deep into the Pacific. Such a need would convince Bismarck to look for Patagonia and the Strait of Magellan.
 

Beer

Banned
British objections?
Monroe Doctrine.
British objections: No British objections, due to the fact that the timeframe we talk about (roughly up to 1890), the German-British relations were good. It is NOT 1914. Britain had the Falklands as base, so a German Patagonia in that time would have not met with objections from London. (But I´m sure the disciples of your actual minister Gove, who are unable to compute their own old documents when it runs contrary to their "Rule Britannia" worldview, will see it different. Never let reality intrude on your ignorance, seems to be his motto)

The MD is an unilateral claim to power, not a treaty. In the timeframe we talk about (practically 1850-1890), esp. the early years, the Monroe doctrine was less worked out, e.g. the passus about no new colonies in the Americas came only in 1870 or even later. In any case, the US of that time would have been hardpressed to enforce the MD in South America. In the e.g. 1880s the US Navy would not have been able counter a real try by any European Great Power down there.
As for my TL, Germany bought Patagonia during the ACW, while giving at least clandestine help for the North. So Germany got no problems with Washington after the fact.
 
British objections: No British objections, due to the fact that the timeframe we talk about (roughly up to 1890), the German-British relations were good. It is NOT 1914. Britain had the Falklands as base, so a German Patagonia in that time would have not met with objections from London.
Britain had extensive economic interests in the 'southern cone' of South America, and so might possibly have objected to the idea of another European power establishing itself there.

(But I´m sure the disciples of your actual minister Gove, who are unable to compute their own old documents when it runs contrary to their "Rule Britannia" worldview, will see it different. Never let reality intrude on your ignorance, seems to be his motto)
Ireelevant flame-baiting. Reported.

In any case, the US of that time would have been hardpressed to enforce the MD in South America. In the e.g. 1880s the US Navy would not have been able counter a real try by any European Great Power down there.
But IOTL it could potentially have received the Royal Navy's support in that enforcement.
 

Beer

Banned
Ireelevant flame-baiting. Reported..
I never reported about posts from you, no matter how inflamming they were. And while you might not see it, there were some. As for Gove, his less than historical accurate opinions made it into the newspapers. This is no flamming, just stating a fact.

As for the US calling on the British in the 1880s, that is much more hypothetical than probable. There were still residual tensions from the ACW and the US was turned inward, the Monroe doctrine held mostly because African colonies were en vogue, so no one tried for the Americas anymore.
 
on the one hand, Britain is busy trying to make that region part of their sphere of interest. They're not going to sit around idly while another major power encroaches in that neck of the woods.

on the other hand, the main reason no one conquered the desert prior is that there was no profit in it. The further south you go, the less reason there was to force your way in. Ultimately, the conquest was undertaken when modern weaponry made it easier to do so and because Chile began eyeballing the entire cone, so Argentina had to do something.
 
Top