PC: More Countries Involved in the "Scramble for Africa"

Which other countries could have been involved in the Scramble for Africa?

  • United States

    Votes: 55 57.9%
  • Russian Empire

    Votes: 32 33.7%
  • Austria-Hungary

    Votes: 41 43.2%
  • Japan

    Votes: 8 8.4%
  • Ottoman Empire

    Votes: 39 41.1%
  • Denmark

    Votes: 40 42.1%
  • Sweden-Norway

    Votes: 43 45.3%
  • Greece

    Votes: 7 7.4%
  • Qing China

    Votes: 3 3.2%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 3.2%
  • Other

    Votes: 5 5.3%
  • Netherlands

    Votes: 62 65.3%

  • Total voters
    95
IOTL Africa was partitioned between 7 European powers, with two countries remaining independent.

Could any other countries have been involved in the Scramble for Africa?

The United States annexing Liberia is probably the most plausible POD. Any others?

300px-Colonial_Africa_1913_map.svg.png
 
Oops, "Other" appears twice.

The option was meant to be for "Persia".

Also, for the Ottoman Empire, it means expanding from what it already controlled in Africa and gaining new conquests during the Scramble for Africa.
 

Maoistic

Banned
The United States is heavily involved today in African affairs, what with its constant bombings and AFRICOM, bought African slaves and even colonised Liberia, so that is an obvious choice. The Scandinavian kingdoms are another, given how heavily they trade with Britain and France and looked for their own colonies, finding them in Greenland, a number of Caribbean countries and some parts of India. Austria-Hungary is another one, as they are related to the Spanish Hapsburgs that colonised America, have ports in the Mediterranean and would be interested in obtaining colonies to compete with Western Europeans.

As for the rest, Russia, the Qing, Greece and the Ottomans are too weak, and uninterested as well, while Japan is too far to colonise in Africa.
 
For a time being there was the Danish Gold Coast, in the right conditions it could have remained Danish territory. There is those various plans for a Jewish state in Africa, certainly not far-fetched to have an area designated or a Yiddish state. An area could be settled by Poles and eventually become it's own country but that would not likely be during the Scramble as such unless you have it partially forced by the Germans.
 
The Turks had a few Red Sea ports until they transferred them to Egypt in the 1860s or so, so it shouldn't be too inconceivable they could keep that land for a bit longer to count for this challenge.

For a time being there was the Danish Gold Coast, in the right conditions it could have remained Danish territory. There is those various plans for a Jewish state in Africa, certainly not far-fetched to have an area designated or a Yiddish state. An area could be settled by Poles and eventually become it's own country but that would not likely be during the Scramble as such unless you have it partially forced by the Germans.

Poland tried to get colonies in the Interwar period, including an attempt to grab a chunk of Liberia.
 
Depends on the PoD; post-1800 I’d say the US, Denmark, and Sweden-Norway are the most likely. Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and maybe Russia are outside options; the rest are near impossible in that era.
 
How about the Netherlands? I completely forgot about them and missed them from the poll. Could they have returned to Africa in the late 19th century after losing everything during the Napoleonic Wars?

EDIT: Added Netherlands to the poll.
 
Last edited:
How about the Netherlands? I completely forgot about them and missed them from the poll. Could they have returned to Africa in the late 19th century after losing everything during the Napoleonic Wars?
Actualy you are mistaken in the believe that the Netherlands lost everything during the Napoleonic wars. They still kept their outposts and fortresses in the Goldcoast. They even tried to develop those into a full colony in the 19th century, but sold them to Britain in 1871 after they decided it was not worth it and focused mainly at the Dutch East Indies. They were even part of the Berlin conference, but never made a claim. The Dutch were simply not interested in Africa anymore (understandable, since Indonesia was one of the if not The best colony in the world).

So you need an earlier POD than 1884, preferably before 1871.
 
Denmark, Sweden and Netherlands are possible with good POD. United States is too possible but probably there should be very early POD and different foreign politics. How would be Brazil?

Russia hardly was intrested and was too weak. Same thing with AH, Greece Ottomans, and Persia. China and Japan were too far and weak. Probably weren't even intrested.
 
Denmark, Sweden and Netherlands are possible with good POD. United States is too possible but probably there should be very early POD and different foreign politics. How would be Brazil?

Russia hardly was intrested and was too weak. Same thing with AH, Greece Ottomans, and Persia. China and Japan were too far and weak. Probably weren't even intrested.

A Brazil involved in the Scramble would require it possessing Angola somehow--not much incentive for the South American nation to stick its nose in Africa otherwise--as well as OTL-divergent local politics. I can see the planter elite supporting an African land grab, but not so much for Dom Pedro.
 
Archduke Ferdinand Max of Austria (the unfortunate Maximillian of Mexico) jad tried to acquire Soqotra and/or some base on the Red Sea coast..
If Austria had been slightly less bothered by continental questions they could maybe have taken Eritrea in the place of Italy.

A mini chain of pearls leading from Trieste to Massawa to the Andaman Islands to North Borneo.

That said, the easist way to achieve this is probably through the Netherlands or Denmark retaining some of their outposts in West Africa.
 
USA: Well there is Liberia. Liberia not becoming a country can boost the land as a US colony. That's about it. There is still lands in the West the USA wants and needs more time to spend.

Russia: If I am not mistaken, Russia did consider having colonies. The best region would be Eritrea with an already decent Orthodox population and bordering Ethiopia, a possible religious and regional ally. A deal with (Ottoman) Egypt can make these plan happen. Russia might be weaker in the 1880s than 50 years ago but still in a better position than the Austro-Hungarians. Optional is Madagascar.

Austria-Hungary: Any colony in North Africa will do. Tunesia or Algeria for example. And especially before the French land there. Alternatives are Togo and Dahomey. Maybe even Western Sahara or Namibia. Although the Congo wouldn't sound that bad either. But the French would not accept it.

Japan: no. Just no. They only modernised recently but that is not the biggest issue. The Pacific is a much better place for Japan.

Ottoman Empire: I guess bringing Tunesia, Algeria and Egypt back under Ottoman rule and some minor takeover in Somalia and Darfur. Not more.

Denmark: Keeping their fortress in Goldcoast only to expand in the area. Or... like Belgium they get the Congo.

Sweden-Norway: Either Togo and/or Dahomey or the Congo.

Netherlands: If the Dutch do not lose the Cape in the early 19th century they have a potential to rule over todays South Africa. An extra would be Ghana as the Dutch have already a fortress there.

Greece: Not seeing it happen. Maybe, just maybe a part of Eritrea. Like I said with Russia, it is some sort of Orthodox. As long as they do not fight the Ottomans like in 1897 it is I guess still possible.

Qing China: No. Like Japan too far away but even weak while Japan modernised hard and fast. If they have the abillity to go for colonies, there is the pacific.

Persia: no. Unless they start from as early as 1800 taking land from Oman in Tanzania. The Qajars reunited Persia at the end of the 18th century only to start a war with Russia in a matter of years making it really hard to focus on such adventures. An earlier united Persia will help a lot.
 
Last edited:
Russia: If I am not mistaken, Russia did consider having colonies. The best region would be Eritrea with an already decent Orthodox population and bordering Ethiopia, a possible religious and regional ally. A deal with (Ottoman) Egypt can make these plan happen. Russia might be weaker in the 1880s than 50 years ago but still in a better position than the Austro-Hungarians. Optional is Madagascar.
From what I can remember the Russian Empire did indeed have a vested interest in Eastern Africa, particularly Ethiopia, but that is more from an arms-length standpoint; they would have certainly sought to attain influence and possibly some direction over the affairs of Ethiopia, but I have serious doubts whether that would ever extend to an actual protectorate over the country, let alone the creation of Russian-sponsored settler colonies. The British would also have been rather unnerved, and may well have granted the same "permission" to Italy to intervene in the region so that French penetration into the region might be halted.

From this point though things get difficult.

On the one hand it is critical that a Russian-supported Ethiopia has some sort of access to the sea, which can be helped in part by a larger victory in the Italo-Ethiopian War by the forces of Menelik the Second. It isn't out of the realm of possibility, but there are risks that in pursuing the Italians into Ethiopia Menelik might have ended up stretching his men too far given many were by then restless to be relieved of service. If we were to assume he were successful in attaining control of Eriteria, it may still change little; most trade that went out of Ethiopia would go through the French-controlled port of Djibouti or the British-controlled port of Zeila, and I can't see the Russians themselves funding a competing railway to Assab (at least with their OTL priorities). That would in turn mean that the French or British could economically threaten Ethiopia should they be seen as favoring Russia, at little cost to themselves.

TLDR, the most optimal way of bringing this about would be Ethiopia hanging onto Eriteria, whilst the Russians are willing to economically invest in Ethiopia, principally a railway from Addis Ababa to Assab.
 
Somewhat out there option but could Madagascar, that had been able to modernise and build close ties with the French but still maintained their independence, possibly have a seat at the table as a French ally?
 
Somewhat out there option but could Madagascar, that had been able to modernise and build close ties with the French but still maintained their independence, possibly have a seat at the table as a French ally?

Not much changes. At least you should rip off racism. Not way that white nations give some non-white nation more land. And only expansion way would be Mozambique which was already on hands of Portugal.
 
I seem to recall that to fend off colonization by any one of the European powers, Morocco made overtures to the US in the early 20th century. If indeed that's correct, there's an opening for an American colonial presence in Africa.
 
Re: Russia. Some Cossack guy lead an incredibly hard-brained scheme wherein he very, very, briefly established a settlement on the Red Sea. But I think that was more of a private enterprise that the Russian government kept at arms length and promptly disavowed when it went to shit.
 
Top