Lean, Mean, British Imperial Machine

Plus Zanzibar was the site of the shortest war in human history it was over by tea time. :)
Teatime? It was over in time for elevenses. :)


Malaya was very profitable as where Singapore and Hong Kong.
Malaya seems to of been blessed with being in the right place at the right time with the correct conditions - discoveries of large deposits of tin just as Europe starts to industrialise and demand booms, then the rubber plantations to meet the almost insatiable demand.


Sarawak didn't harm the coffers much as it was a protectorate and the Brookes liked to do things by themselves. If the British had invested just a little more into Sarawak to get to its natural resources it could easily have been as profitable as Malaya.
I was under the impression that with the Brookes as sovereign Rajas and Sarawak merely a British protected state that they didn't put any government money into it aside from some small spending to meet their defence obligations?
 
Southern Rhodesia did very well-breadbasket of Africa with first class farming in place-quite profitable. (One major crop was good old baccy). Reason you don't see it too positively now is because of ebagum. Ghana too was full of potential.

That as well?

Really, this is fast devolving to 'Gambia, Northern Nigeria, Nyasserland' as a list of places to ditch.
 
Malaya seems to of been blessed with being in the right place at the right time with the correct conditions.

I was under the impression that with the Brookes as sovereign Rajas and Sarawak merely a British protected state that they didn't put any government money into it aside from some small spending to meet their defence obligations?

Sarawak has a similar climate and could have been a major rubber producer. It just lacked the stimulus that Malaya recieved. Because of the fact that it was a protected state it became somewhat of a back water. It didnt have to be - it could have undergone a similar economic growth as the mainland of Malaysia. Perhaps direct British rule might be economically better as they would have exploited things such as the forests more than the somewhat protectionist Brookes.

Britain missed an oppertunity to benefit from Sarawaks resources, the Dutch and Japanese didnt waste their time in the DEI but Britain did.
 
Not sure Bechuanaland/Botswana contributed much to the British empire, it didnt cost much but perhaps could have been traded for something more profitable.

Iraq was not very profitable in itself but rather as a strategic holding. If conditions whereby the seizure of lots of land was not crucial and India could be protected it would mean that unprofitable northern land could be left.

Not going into Afghanistan at all would have been an improvment, even if russia had gained the entire country they would have been drawn into a hell hole and were unlikely to have previaled or built up sufficiently to threaten India.
 
Last edited:
I think the key is to get better, less conservative governance everywhere. Something more democratic early enough to fight the natural occurence of full scale independence nationalism. I can see federalism as a good fight against that while allowing all the benefits that people who were fighting for better government. Dominions everywhere and an EU-type integration among dominions. All lands can be profitable and helpful if connected correctly and pay for goods and services equally; also without traditional colonial troops holding down a restive population, the costs for holding these 'colonies' will decline quite a bit.
 
Top