Impact of British Alaska on Canadian Confederation and British Columbia

PGSBHurricane

In OTL, the USA purchased Alaska from the Russian Empire in 1867. But, what if Britain expressed more interest and was able to purchase it from the Russians? How does this affect the formation of the Canadian Confederation and how is British Columbia in particular affected by this? Do they join Canada if it even forms at all where British Alaska exists? I ask because I'm drafting a redux of my CSA victory timeline and one of the effects would be the US most likely not purchasing Alaska, enabling the British to purchase it instead as the Russians didn't particularly care for it by that point.
 
Last edited:
EnglishCanuck

EnglishCanuck

Hmm I like this. Say Britain nabs it in 1856-57 as the Russians try to cut their losses (a successful holding of Petropavlosk?) and get rid of an ineffective mass of territory. Without the Americans purchasing Alaska in '67, then the people of British Columbia may feel less threatened by an encroaching American presence. That may make them less desirous of joining Canada at first. However, if the Transcontinental Railroad still gains steam (as I believe it would) once the Canadians purchase Rupert's Land in 1869, then the inclusion of British Columbia might wait until later, when a 'proof of concept' like more of the railroad is built. Might delay BC entering Canada until the late 1870s or mid 1880s.
 

PGSBHurricane

EnglishCanuck said:
Hmm I like this. Say Britain nabs it in 1856-57 as the Russians try to cut their losses (a successful holding of Petropavlosk?) and get rid of an ineffective mass of territory. Without the Americans purchasing Alaska in '67, then the people of British Columbia may feel less threatened by an encroaching American presence. That may make them less desirous of joining Canada at first. However, if the Transcontinental Railroad still gains steam (as I believe it would) once the Canadians purchase Rupert's Land in 1869, then the inclusion of British Columbia might wait until later, when a 'proof of concept' like more of the railroad is built. Might delay BC entering Canada until the late 1870s or mid 1880s.
Click to expand...
Alternately, what if Britain grabs it in 1867 when the US turns it down?
 

Hugh Third of Five

PGSBHurricane said:
Alternately, what if Britain grabs it in 1867 when the US turns it down?
Click to expand...
It's unlikely the USA would turn it down and even if they did, Russia was more willing to sell to the USA because they wanted be keep it from falling into the hands of the British without having to expend the resources to maintain it as a colony. If the Brits are going to get it the Crimean war makes more sense than getting it in 1867. If the sale falls through, maybe the Brits would get it eventually, but it probably wouldn't be in 1867.
 

PGSBHurricane

Hugh Third of Five said:
It's unlikely the USA would turn it down and even if they did, Russia was more willing to sell to the USA because they wanted be keep it from falling into the hands of the British without having to expend the resources to maintain it as a colony. If the Brits are going to get it the Crimean war makes more sense than getting it in 1867. If the sale falls through, maybe the Brits would get it eventually, but it probably wouldn't be in 1867.
Click to expand...
The question becomes, would the US be able to afford it in the event the CSA wins the Civil War? If not, then would it stay in Russia's hands indefinitely?
 
Aghasverov

Aghasverov

I've wondered before, are there any possibilities where the UK requires a stronger direct presence in the Northern Pacific, to the extent that BC as we know it is never unified... perhaps Vancouver Island remains a Crown Colony in the manner of Newfoundland, while the mainland maybe becomes a "New Caledonia Province" or some such... a British Alaska might provide the impetus for something like this...
 

PGSBHurricane

Hugh Third of Five said:
It's unlikely the USA would turn it down and even if they did, Russia was more willing to sell to the USA because they wanted be keep it from falling into the hands of the British without having to expend the resources to maintain it as a colony. If the Brits are going to get it the Crimean war makes more sense than getting it in 1867. If the sale falls through, maybe the Brits would get it eventually, but it probably wouldn't be in 1867.
Click to expand...
Even in the event where the Confederacy wins the Civil War? Because that's actually a scenario where the US COULD turn down Alaska and the scenario I was thinking about in the OP. My apologies if I wasn't clear.
 
Last edited:

Analytical Engine

Does British Columbia get the Alaskan Panhandle in such a scenario?

Given the population of Prince Edward Island, Alaska would probably still become a province of Canada.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top