In the absence of World War I (and World War II as well, of course), which additional countries could have been colonized by Europeans?
Any thoughts on this?
For the record, by "colonized," I meant more along the lines of "conquered."I doubt they could colonize more, but I believe that a victorious russian empire in WWI could have annexed the entire anatolia, while giving the greeks thrace (apart from Constantinople) and effectively colonize the turks
There weren't too many non-European powers left in 1914, were there?
Ethiopia may eventually be conquered by Italy.
There were one or two twilight zones of sovereignty left in Arabia, at the edges of the Ottoman Empire. Some of them might have been turned into British protectorates.
Khiva or Bukhara might be fully annexed into Russia...whether on the model of the Georgian principalities or some other way. But I think only a revolutionary or reformist government would annex them; generic Imperial conservatism probably wouldn't want to.
Mongolia might be fully detached from China and turned into a full-time protectorate of Russia. This might not be considered undesirable by the Mongolians - not for some time, anyway. Later, things could get complicated.
What counts for Mongolia counts for Tibet, although here Britain or Russia could both plausibly be the "protector".
China proper is IMO too big to be turned into a protectorate, let alone a true colony. But with warlordism flaring up and European powers not caught up in their own war, who knows what might happen?
Would the locals in Khiva and Bukhara have supported such a move, though?
OK. Also, though, could Russia eventually go further than this and go for Xinjiang and maybe Tibet as well?
Khiva in particular had a lot of internal dissent, instability and all around poor governance at this time. You could probably find a few cliques that would welcome annexation into Russia - but they wouldn't be anywhere near a majority of the population.
Maybe. On one hand, Xinjiang was not really on the same level as Mongolia and Tibet; those two had a strong native elite which considered itself only in vassalage or "personal union" with the Qing, and not as actual Chinese provinces. On the other hand, there are ways to overcome or simply ignore that lack of a strong independence movement.
There were those in both Tibet+Mongolia and Russia who wished to see Russia go for Tibet, but Britain wouldn't like that one bit.
Could the European Powers launch a multi-nation expedition to restore order to China in the 1910s in this TL? After all, they certainly wouldn't have World War I to distract them and they previously did this back in 1900!
Also, what about Thailand (Siam), Afghanistan, Iran (Persia), and Liberia?
So, why have Russia bother to go through with an annexation of these two territories?
Perhaps; that would explain a lot.Good point about the native elite part; indeed, the native elite in Xinjiang appears to have been destroyed during the Dzungar Genocide back in the 1700s--thus explaining why China's hold on Xinjiang was more solid than its hold on both Mongolia and Tibet.
Also, though, can you please respond to this part of my post above, Halagaz? :
It could work; indeed, in such a TL, Britain probably gets Bangkok and everything to the west of it while France gets everything to the east of it.What about Thailand/Siam (especially if some Thai elites adopt an undesirable stance like being too friendly to Germany)?
Okay what's up with Sweden still having the Union Flag, and apparently being Norway on the map?For useful handy reference here is a map of the world in 1914:
![]()
Not a lot of room left, the Americas have obviously already been colonised so it leaves a handful of places.