More british dominions in africa

What if Uk had created more dominions in africa after WWI? They already had south africa, but what about a dominion of kenya controlling most of british east africa? or a great dominion of rhodesia? Would this be possible?
 
These dominions would be more likely to survive decolonization should they become majority white (i.e. like America or Canada). If not then they will likely be dissolved by the black population of the countries in question during de-colonization.
 
These dominions would be more likely to survive decolonization should they become majority white (i.e. like America or Canada). If not then they will likely be dissolved by the black population of the countries in question during de-colonization.
In Canada in 1867 there were 3.4 million people, of which almost all but 125,000 indigenous were Europeans. There's no where in Africa with that size of population. Though the British could have made a colony for just the whites, who would do all the labour?
 
It would take a major shift in the attitudes about race for it to happen and succeed. Too much prejudice to allow Dominions in other colonies I think at that time.
 
What if Uk had created more dominions in africa after WWI? They already had south africa, but what about a dominion of kenya controlling most of british east africa? or a great dominion of rhodesia? Would this be possible?
There were two-and-a-half attempts at this IOTL. IIRC Nigeria was created by joining several separate colonies together. There was the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland created in the early 1950s and dissolved in the early 1960s when Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland became independent as Zambia and Malawi respectively. The half was the East African High Commission consisting of Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, which survived into the 1970s and had the potential to develop into a country called East Africa.

With the OTL British territory in Africa that's all that's possible. But if in World War One the UK got all of Togo and Cameroon from Germany instead of partitioning them with France they might be added on to Nigeria, but that would create a greater Nigeria, not an additional federated super-colony. Similarly IIRC Somalia, Rawanda and Burundi wanted to join the EAHC at one time, but that would create a greater East Africa instead of an extra dominion. It would have been the same if the UK had got Rawanda and Burundi from Germany after World War One instead of them going to Belgium. It would have been a greater Tanzania within a greater EAHC.
 
But that's kinda what the native blacks were for, though. Plus white people have too high of death rates in most of Africa because of disease and the heat. There aren't many places to put them besides parts of Kenya, Rhodesia, and South Africa. And the white settlers in Kenya and Rhodesia were pretty known for their elitist attitudes toward other whites and probably wouldn't appreciate convicts being dumped there. I guess maybe separate Nyasaland/Malawi from Rhodesia and use that as a colony for whites? It's one of the only places in Sub-Saharan Africa north of South Africa that has a climate decent for Europeans, after all.
 
With the OTL British territory in Africa that's all that's possible. But if in World War One the UK got all of Togo and Cameroon from Germany instead of partitioning them with France they might be added on to Nigeria, but that would create a greater Nigeria, not an additional federated super-colony.

Dahomey is still in between Togo and Nigeria. British Togoland was added to Ghana after a plebiscite. Then got a substantial portion of it flooded by Lake Volta. :)

I guess maybe separate Nyasaland/Malawi from Rhodesia and use that as a colony for whites? It's one of the only places in Sub-Saharan Africa north of South Africa that has a climate decent for Europeans, after all.

It's also the most densely populated part of Southern Africa, I believe. It had pretty small white settlement during the Rhodesia days.
 
Dahomey is still in between Togo and Nigeria. British Togoland was added to Ghana after a plebiscite. Then got a substantial portion of it flooded by Lake Volta. :)
Correction.

With the OTL British territory in Africa that's all that's possible. But if in World War One the UK got all of Togo and Cameroon from Germany instead of partitioning them with France they might be added on to the Gold Coast and Nigeria respectively, but that would create a greater Gold Coast and a greater Nigeria, not additional federated super-colonies.

But with a pre-1900 POD where the British colonise Dahomey instead of the French and add it to Nigeria then there is a good chance that they would try to federate the Gold Coast with Nigeria if they also got all of Togo in the Treaty of Versailles. That is a prospect that I like because then its more plausible to have a railway linking the deep water port of Takoradi in what is now Ghana with the Nigerian railway network.
 
But with a pre-1900 POD where the British colonise Dahomey instead of the French and add it to Nigeria then there is a good chance that they would try to federate the Gold Coast with Nigeria if they also got all of Togo in the Treaty of Versailles. That is a prospect that I like because then its more plausible to have a railway linking the deep water port of Takoradi in what is now Ghana with the Nigerian railway network.

Got it. I agree. Anything that avoids the stupid chopping up of that coastline can only benefit the region.
 

Deleted member 94680

weren't they sent to Australia?

There'll be more convicts after the ones sent to Australia. Transportation ended in the late 1860s.


AFAIK "Dominions" were majority White colonies with 'responsible government' and were considered to be self-governing by the Empire. Other than South Africa (mainly as a sop to the Boer community) none of the colonies in Africa would fit the criteria in the Imperial period.
 
There'll be more convicts after the ones sent to Australia. Transportation ended in the late 1860s.


AFAIK "Dominions" were majority White colonies with 'responsible government' and were considered to be self-governing by the Empire. Other than South Africa (mainly as a sop to the Boer community) none of the colonies in Africa would fit the criteria in the Imperial period.

How was South Africa becoming a dominion a 'sop to the Boer community'?
 

Deleted member 94680

How was South Africa becoming a dominion a 'sop to the Boer community'?

By making the Union of South Africa self-governing, it made being part of the Empire easier to bear. If it had been controlled directly from London, there's every chance the Boers would have risen up again.

Given that it was a minority white population, with a recent armed conflict that had riven the territory, it hardly fit the "stable and with responsible government" criteria that the other Dominions attained.
 
By making the Union of South Africa self-governing, it made being part of the Empire easier to bear. If it had been controlled directly from London, there's every chance the Boers would have risen up again.

Given that it was a minority white population, with a recent armed conflict that had riven the territory, it hardly fit the "stable and with responsible government" criteria that the other Dominions attained.

The Union was formed from four colonies that were already self-governing. Dominion status was also only granted in the 1920s, a fairly long time after the end of the Boer War.
 

Deleted member 94680

The Union was formed from four colonies that were already self-governing. Dominion status was also only granted in the 1920s, a fairly long time after the end of the Boer War.

I stand corrected on the self-governing aspect, I apologise.

It was, however, a Dominion from its creation in 1910 - where did you get 1920s from? Are you referring to the Balfour Declaration of 1926? The Prime Minister of South Africa - Barry Hertzog - was at the conference where the Declaration was written, if South Africa wasn't a Dominion at that point, he wouldn't have been there.
 
I stand corrected on the self-governing aspect, I apologise.

It was, however, a Dominion from its creation in 1910 - where did you get 1920s from? Are you referring to the Balfour Declaration of 1926? The Prime Minister of South Africa - Barry Hertzog - was at the conference where the Declaration was written, if South Africa wasn't a Dominion at that point, he wouldn't have been there.

I think we're both half right - dominions existed from the declaration of Canada as one in the 19th century, but their status was only clarified in '26 with the Balfour Declaration.
 

Deleted member 94680

I think we're both half right - dominions existed from the declaration of Canada as one in the 19th century, but their status was only clarified in '26 with the Balfour Declaration.

I'll agree with that. They existed, but '26 legally defined what they were - with a good deal of prodding from Herzog.
 
Top