PC: Major Russian fleet in Russian Alaska

Is there any situation where Russia might be able keep Alaska and station a large fleet out of Sitka? I assume the UK and the United States might have a problem with this, but maybe if transatlantic relations are strained, for some reason, one side might allow Russia to put a fleet there? And what next? Could we see a Russian fleet pull a Pearl Harbor on Vancouver, or Seattle., or Portland? Could we even see a Russian fleet attack San Francisco?
 

Germaniac

Donor
The Russian fleet was stationed out of San Fransisco for an extended time, there was no infrastructure in Alaska to support a large Russian fleet.
 
The Royal Navy maintained a large presence on Vancouver Island, the Pacific Station, at what is now CFB Esquimalt. It was there to protect BC from the Yanks, and counter the Russian presence in the North Pacific. Should Russia put too threatening a naval force in Alaska I find it likely London would want to put a permanent end to the Russian presence, perhaps by forcibly seizing Alaska.
 
The Royal Navy maintained a large presence on Vancouver Island, the Pacific Station, at what is now CFB Esquimalt. It was there to protect BC from the Yanks, and counter the Russian presence in the North Pacific. Should Russia put too threatening a naval force in Alaska I find it likely London would want to put a permanent end to the Russian presence, perhaps by forcibly seizing Alaska.

British Alaska would have been awesome and, better yet, eventually another province of Canada. I always thought that discontiguous United States was aesthetically somewhat unpleasing...:D

Alaska would look good on Canada.
 
So say The United States and the UK have some kind of a disagreement- particularly a violent one? Might Russia be able to station a fleet there if one side- most likely the United States- invites it to do so?
 
A Russian Alaska would be awesome, but difficult for the Russians to defend. The British would probably take it during a time of Russian weakness - like oh say after the Russian-Japanese war during which point the large Russian fleet is recalled to defend Port Arthur, mostly sunk or captured by the Japanese, and Russian power is greatly diminished.

Depending on when it happens this would have a interesting butterfly though, as technically the British would be in violation of the Monroe Doctrine.
 
I'd say the British are probably more than happy to have the Russian fleet based out of Alaska. Keeps them away from India and more importantly, is probably a sign that Russian and American relations are not going well, and it's always good for your rival to have one more enemy to deal with. Yes, they'd probably make a bit of noise but I don't think they would care that much about it. Canada isn't going to be lost just because the Russian fleet gains superiority over the Western Canadian coastline, after all.

Russia should be able to keep Alaska if they found gold in the region earlier.

I think infrastructure will be the main problem but if gold is discovered in the Yukon the impetus to develop Sitka (or at least Juneau/Skagway) might be increased, though the Russian government would probably be a hindrance in the affair.
 
Last edited:
Infrastructure's been mentioned as a problem, but what if a naval base and naval construction were part of the reason for Russian Alaska in the first place?

That would also be a reason to justify direct government control, instead of a fur company.

When did Russia get a Pacific fleet, and did they have any ice free ports to serve it already?
 
Infrastructure's been mentioned as a problem, but what if a naval base and naval construction were part of the reason for Russian Alaska in the first place?

That would also be a reason to justify direct government control, instead of a fur company.

When did Russia get a Pacific fleet, and did they have any ice free ports to serve it already?

Russia didn't have an ice free port on the Pacific until they gained Port Arthur in 1898. Until that point they'd been based out of Vladivostok. Russia gaining Alaska for an ice free port could work pretty well but you'd need to give them a reason to care about doing that earlier than OTL. Although, on the other hand, Alaska is quite far removed from any Russia's immediate interests in Asia or the Pacific.

Here's a train of events that I could see working:

-Gold discovered in Alaska earlier than OTL. This sparks massively increased immigration and settlement. An Alaskan port is developed as a point to load the gold onto ships for transport to Russia and the world markets. Come the American Civil War one or more of the Confederate raiders operating in the Pacific attack the Russian ships transporting the gold. Maybe they were shipping the gold to the US government, maybe the Russians were just more supportive of the Federals ITTL, either way the why isn't really important. What is important is that the attack convinces Russia to shift naval forces to Alaska to protect further gold shipments. This necessitates the construction of a rudimentary naval base to support said forces. Over the following decades Russia builds up its naval forces, as happened IOTL, and the Alaskan base is upgraded along with the rest of the fleet. The Alaskan port is essentially just a base for the forces keeping order in the colony until TTL's Alt Russo-Japanese War. In this war Russia's fleet in blockaded into its East Asian bases and when it breaks out heads for the safest Russian port in range. Alaska.

There you go; it's roundabout as hell but I think it would work.
 
British Alaska would have been awesome and, better yet, eventually another province of Canada. I always thought that discontiguous United States was aesthetically somewhat unpleasing...:D

Alaska would look good on Canada.

100% agreement. :cool:

I'd say the British are probably more than happy to have the Russian fleet based out of Alaska. Keeps them away from India and more importantly, is probably a sign that Russian and American relations are not going well, and it's always good for your rival to have one more enemy to deal with. Yes, they'd probably make a bit of noise but I don't think they would care that much about it. Canada isn't going to be lost just because the Russian fleet gains superiority over the Western Canadian coastline, after all.

Countering the Russian presence in North America was one of the reasons for moving the Pacific Station from Valparaiso to Esquimalt. I don't think it's likely the British would simply shrug if Russia placed a strong military presence right next to one of Britain's white settler colonies, especially during the Great Game.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Why would any nation bother in the Nineteenth Century?

100% agreement. :cool:

Countering the Russian presence in North America was one of the reasons for moving the Pacific Station from Valparaiso to Esquimalt. I don't think it's likely the British would simply shrug if Russia placed a strong military presence right next to one of Britain's white settler colonies, especially during the Great Game.

Alaska is about as far away from Europe as one can get in the northern hemisphere, as long as the technology is steel and steam...the only nation that DOESN'T have somewhere better to put its ships in the Nineteenth Century is...none of them.

The US was able to defend Alaska, quite sucessfully, from 1867 to (almost) 1941 with the likes of vessels like this:




And again, not to bring historical reality into it, but it is not like the North Pacific or Bering Sea was a prestige station for the Russians OR the British - who didn't exactly cover themselves in glory at Petropavlovsk in 1854, which is the one time they actually faced off in the theater...

Best,
 
A Russian Alaska would be awesome, but difficult for the Russians to defend. The British would probably take it during a time of Russian weakness - like oh say after the Russian-Japanese war during which point the large Russian fleet is recalled to defend Port Arthur, mostly sunk or captured by the Japanese, and Russian power is greatly diminished.

Depending on when it happens this would have a interesting butterfly though, as technically the British would be in violation of the Monroe Doctrine.

Well, in 1905 I think the United States wouldn't care if Russia sold Alaska to the British in exchange for some cash after they just got their asses handed to them by the Japanese.

I like the idea that, assuming butterflies didn't completely change the world when Alaska remained Russian in 1867 (How much would really be affected by them keeping it anyway?), perhaps Japan could end up with it, or more likely, try to get it and have it snapped away from them by the British thanks to American arbitration to keep a non-white power from having colonial territory in North America.

When you think about it, this PoD can have lots of outcomes.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Except the Russians (and the US bought) for a reason

Except the Russians (and the US bought) for a reason; it wasn't just to keep the lines on the map tidy...

Best,
 
Top