With a POD in the 20th Century, is it possible for the Sudan to be governed by Egypt, or become an integral part of that country?
Plausibility check: Egyptian Sudan
- Thread starter Emperor of Halton
- Start date
celt
Banned
History of the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium
You could have the Egyptians claim Sudan in their declaration of independence in 1922 as they did run the place historically.
You could have the Egyptians claim Sudan in their declaration of independence in 1922 as they did run the place historically.
Alex Richards
Donor
Quite simple really. Make the 1924 de facto division of Anglo-Egyptian Sudan official, during which time the governance of Northern Sudan is ceded more formally to Egypt, and thus British withdrawal from Egypt in '36 is mirrored by a withdrawal from North Sudan (South Sudan remaining British until Kenya and co. get independence.)
Ok, thanks for the replies! I assume it would be harder for Egypt to control South Sudan, having no historical presence there and with it being black Christian dominated rather than Arab dominated?
Well, demographics are a factor, but some would argue that Egypt has controlled what is now South Sudan during ots history. The biggest issue though, more than demographics, is level of development.
We could see Egypt become free of British control with Northern Sudan no problem. I very much doubt that they will get South Sudan (probably just ends up being called Sudan or maybe Juba ITTL).
Problem is... how does Egypt handle Sudanese separatists that are bound to spring up?
Not trying to hijack the thread. Just saying - Egyptian Northern Sudan is very plausible (Southern less so but probably still plausible, not probable).
But what is also plausible is great unrest in Egyptian Sudan, doubly so Egypt includes the Sudan in its entirety.
Problem is... how does Egypt handle Sudanese separatists that are bound to spring up?
Not trying to hijack the thread. Just saying - Egyptian Northern Sudan is very plausible (Southern less so but probably still plausible, not probable).
But what is also plausible is great unrest in Egyptian Sudan, doubly so Egypt includes the Sudan in its entirety.
Well, depending on the border it would have oil, another major port, some (more?) farmland and a higher population.
Fearless Leader
Donor
IIRC having Northern Sudan would also make Egypt the Largest state in terms of physical area in Africa, the Arab World, and the 8th Largest state globally (if Wiki's numbers are to be trusted...).
Having such a large presence in the Sudan might also lead Egypt to pursue a more Afro-centric foreign policy than OTL.
Having such a large presence in the Sudan might also lead Egypt to pursue a more Afro-centric foreign policy than OTL.
At the very least, the majority of Egyptians will not be hudled in shacks on the Nile with all of the fertile land to the South
Well, I'm not sure about that, but it will mean that Africa will matter more in Egyptian foreign policy given that it now borders more African countries with the southward expansion.
Super Parker Brothers
Banned
A shame Fasoda was done in 1899. I would say that it is possible for the Egyptians to ave portions of Sudan if they went about carefully and didnt swallow up Gaza then lose Sinai. We sould tink about the nortern Sudanese border and how Egypt doesnt even get teir claimed border despite Sudan being a fourth world country. Maybe Sudan could be broken up before or after independence. Darfur goes independent or to Chad, Eritrea gets that big of land on their borders, Sudan takes a chunk, South Sudan goes free, and the Egypt either gees down to the bend of te Nile or annexed in a straight line everything to that bottom point of Libya. You could also have Sudan as part of the United Arab Republic.