Mississippi as international border, twin city to New Orleans?

Let's ignore how it happens, biut let's say that the Mississippi river end up the western border of USA or British America. Would we see USA make a twin port city to New Orleans. Would it evenj be possible or do New Orleans completely control the access to the river?
 
The USA would take New Orleans. It is so critical, it would be the main forgien policy point of any administration or government.
Okay let's say that New Orleans aere in hand of a country which can pretty much land a army in Washington, New York and Philadephia and burn them down for giggles if USA decides to try to conquer New Orleans.
 
Okay let's say that New Orleans aere in hand of a country which can pretty much land a army in Washington, New York and Philadephia and burn them down for giggles if USA decides to try to conquer New Orleans.
Tough circumstance. Nearly all western trade goes through New Orleans, at least until we get railroads. New Orleans will, at least, have a very large American emigre population of traders and such. I have a feeling, if war is off the table, we will have very close relations with whoever does own it. The mouth of the Mississippi is the key to the entire West.
 
Tough circumstance. Nearly all western trade goes through New Orleans, at least until we get railroads. New Orleans will, at least, have a very large American emigre population of traders and such. I have a feeling, if war is off the table, we will have very close relations with whoever does own it. The mouth of the Mississippi is the key to the entire West.
Is it really impossible to build another port in the 19th century as example at Lake Pontchartrain and connect it with a canal to the Mississippi?
 
New Orleans is (mostly) on the east bank of the river so if the river were the western border, the US would already have the city. The other country would need a competing port.
 
The Mississippi is, of course, navigable for most of its length, and as the US Navy showed in the American Civil War, oceangoing ships of the nineteenth century had no trouble going up.

The issue is whether New Orleans could be fortified so as to deny navigation. The Confederates were none too successful at that IOTL, but they only had a year to do so.

I wonder if you couldn't circumvent it by digging a canal. Suppose a canal were dug from Vicksburg to Jackson and then down the Pearl River--would it enable navigation from the Mississippi River to the Gulf through the state of Mississippi? It would certainly be a large undertaking--but then, so was the Erie Canal at this time. Could a canal fit for ocean-going ships be built, or would it be limited to river barges?

Outright conquering New Orleans would be cheaper, I think, unless this is a world where Napoleon is triumphant and France can dictate terms to everyone.
 
Last edited:
The Mississippi as an international border would be very difficult since it's always shifting it's course meaning there's lots of land that would be left on the wrong side of the river assuming borders weren't renegotiated. The floods are also unpredictable and can be destructive and landowners on either side have a real incentive to try and bomb each others levees to save their lands from flooding (this was a problem OTL, now imagine if it could cause an international incident!). New Orleans is indefensible if it's owner doesn't control both sides of the river.

IMO I think the Pearl River would wind up the border. It just makes more sense.
 
Is the US granted transportation rights of the Mississippi? If yes, there could be an argument for America trying to forge some kind of joint administrator deal though whatever power held New Orleans would have a stranghold on US economy.

If America was denied river rights, I feel that Britain influence America,andwould over time reunify with UK seems most likely with US given home-rule, where UK controls aspects of its commerce and foreign policy.
 
Top