How to keep the French and Spanish out of the ARW?

Hey Guys,

How could you stop the French and Spanish getting too involved (or better yet not involved at all) with the American Revolution? I'm unsure around that whole area of history and so it would be good if someone could explain why they got involved other than to piss of and weaken the British.

Also how would the Revolutionary War go? Without the French and Spanish support could the British keep more land after the end of the war? Could the British even win the war or is that just ASB?

Thanks to anyone who can help me in this area of history :)
 
Hey Guys,

How could you stop the French and Spanish getting too involved (or better yet not involved at all) with the American Revolution? I'm unsure around that whole area of history and so it would be good if someone could explain why they got involved other than to piss of and weaken the British.

Also how would the Revolutionary War go? Without the French and Spanish support could the British keep more land after the end of the war? Could the British even win the war or is that just ASB?

Thanks to anyone who can help me in this area of history :)

well a jackass American will tell you our independence was pre-ordained and any loss was ASB, I, OTOH, am not that kind of Jackass. :D

To keep out the Spanish and French, I think you need the Americans to lose at Saratoga. If they lose then strategically the Americans are really SOL. If Burgoyne wins at Saratoga then the Americans are split in two. The more rebellious N.E. colonies are blocked away from the Mid Atlantic (read New York) and the south (both regions were lukewarm about the whole Revolution thing anyway). Provided these dominoes fall you have an American loss in the Revolution. As for post war strategies in the recently subdued colonies, I am not sure but I think you end up with summary hangings for most of the true blue revolters (Adams', Jefferson, Franklin, Patrick Henry, Washington, Arnold, Lord Stirling) and prison, hard labor, forfeiture of property or any combo of the aforementioned, for most of the lukewarm ones (John Dickinson, Lees of Virginia, etc).

In the scenario I outlined above any territorial gains are out of the question because they just fight the Americans and not Spain and France.

I think any sort of British victory is really less and less likely as the war goes on and is in my opinion increasingly unlikely by the 1780s, bordering on the ASB by OTL Treaty of Paris in 1783. The thing that really ended the ARW was the falling of Lord North's Govt not what caused it, Cornwallis wasn't defeated so much as boxed into a corner, if the English Political will was greater than it was in OTL than the Brits can win in the 1780s if it isn't than it goes the way we remember it. For the British to win and really control the situation you need the war over quick before it festers and before the colonials get it in there head they can win.
 
You could have the Americans successfully sieze and hold Canada in 1775-76. This would butterfly away Saratoga. In OTL the Spanish opposed American westward expansion, should the rebels occupy Illinois, Ohio, Michigan and say West Florida the Spanish could become quite hostile.
 
Even if Saratoga doesn't happen, the French and Spanish were bankrolling the Americans as early as 1776, selling them needed weapons through a Portuguese dummy company, with two million livres in capital from both France and Spain. It is still in their interest to see Britain lose the colonies. If Saratoga doesn't draw France in, a later victory might.
 
An easy way for the French to keep out of the ARW - have Louis XV die after 1763. France at this time is crushing in massive debt which needs to be paid off, somehow. Without someone like Louis XV, his successor (Louis XVI) would have to fix France's debts and internal problems fast (especially if we want to retain a French monarchy) or we have the French Revolution happening all over again. Even if the American Revolution fails, the French one could, unless it could be mitigated by solving the root causes of France's problems.
 
You could have the Americans successfully sieze and hold Canada in 1775-76. This would butterfly away Saratoga. In OTL the Spanish opposed American westward expansion, should the rebels occupy Illinois, Ohio, Michigan and say West Florida the Spanish could become quite hostile.
:confused:But the importance of Saratoga was that it was a major victory, and the rebels were seen as viable. Taking Canada would be an even bigger victory, and bring the French in SOONER. No?
 
:confused:But the importance of Saratoga was that it was a major victory, and the rebels were seen as viable. Taking Canada would be an even bigger victory, and bring the French in SOONER. No?

thanks Dathi..

To spin off the OP is there a possibility that France makes America return Canada to France as a condition of aid. Or is French interest in Canada gone at this point? and there debt to much to handle?
 
:confused:But the importance of Saratoga was that it was a major victory, and the rebels were seen as viable. Taking Canada would be an even bigger victory, and bring the French in SOONER. No?

True - but couldn't bringing the French involved vis-à-vis *Canada create some form of backlash? Particularly since the French basically viewed New France as basically worthless in comparison to the sugar colonies?
 
To keep out the Spanish and French, I think you need the Americans to lose at Saratoga. If they lose then strategically the Americans are really SOL.

That was my initial reaction too. The French promised to provide the Americans with troops, guns and ships, but on the condition that the Americans had to demonstrate that they could go toe to toe with the British in open field and win.
 
What many don't realise is that the entire period after the French joined led to no further gains for the US. Have Saragota a defeat, then the Americans are more willing to open peace talks earlier, and a (broadly similar) US is created in 1777/78. Possibly there may be the caveat of a nominal link to Britain (say, the US as an independent Kingdom under George III, similar to Canada today), but even that may not be written in.
 
A British victory at Saratoga may get what you're looking for, but it may just delay the inevitable (not American victory but yet another round of Britain vs. France/Spain colonial war). As others have said, France was already bankrolling the Revolution (along with the Dutch) and Britain most likely would have eventually declared war on France for this reason alone, as they did with the Dutch at a later date. To change this you need to change France's foreign minster's, Charles Gravier, comte de Vergennes, perception of the Revolution. Make the revolutionaries a bit more radical or have Vergennes marginalized. He was no fan of revolutionaries and France's support of the Revolution was financially disastrous for France. Perhaps if he was more willing to ignore the challenge presented by Britain or if he was rebuffed and replaced by King Louis XIV France could avoid becoming involved in the American Revolution. Only a completely neutral France could have avoided a conflict with Britain during the Revolution.

With no French monetary support the Revolution has even less chance at success then one in which there is no direct French military involvement. The Dutch may still provide some loans and American smugglers and shell companies could still bring in some money but it would not be enough. The Revolution would peter out fairly quickly. Most likely the revolt would be over by the winter of 1777-78 and the primary rabble-rousers arrested. With an early defeat of the Revolution I'm betting that North would be forced to be fairly lenient, especially since Pitt the Elder is still alive. Even a failed Revolution will shock Parliament and might discredit North. From there it will depend on whether the King backs those supporting harsh punitive actions or conciliatory measures.

Harsh measures will surely set the scene for yet another revolution in 10-20 years. Conciliatory measures may lead to the formation of a the type of Trans-Atlantic Union all the Brit lovers love. Either way I think Britain and France are destined to go yet another round or two for control of global trade and the prime colonization spots. If the American colonies are angry and bitter under the harsh rule of a despotic King there is yet another chance for France to support the Second American Revolution. On the other hand if Britain has addressed colonial concerns and accepted the Americans as a vital part of a greater British Empire then France is screwed for missing the boat and having their inaction pave the way for an even more powerful British for.

Benjamin
 
Top