Portuguese Congo: Effects on Portugal?

[Desmond Hume]

I seem to remember once seeing a thread on here (one the Search function doesn't feel like finding right now) speculating that if King Leopold had not gotten his hands on the Congo, Portugal was the colonial power most likely to get it.

So, suppose Portugal gets an African colony that is roughly the same as OTL's Congo Free State / Belgian Congo. I'm not so much interested in what POD would allow this to happen as I am how this would effect Portugal in the years to come. A roughly-OTL sized Congo that belonged to Portugal would make Portugal one of the biggest colonial powers in Africa (more so than it was already). So how would this impact Portugal?

Keeping in mind I know basically nothing about Portugal in the 19th century, these are the questions that occur to me:

1. How much of an economic impact will owning the Congo have? Will it make Portugal significantly wealthier?

2. How does owning the Congo affect the survival of the Portuguese monarchy?

3. What geopolitical ramifications are there? Will another power(s) try to take the Congo from Portugal?

 

[Don Lardo]

1. How much of an economic impact will owning the Congo have? Will it make Portugal significantly wealthier?

The economic impact will be negligible and the colony might end up costing Portugal money. Leopold never made the millions he planned on despite unleashing a horde of fiends in human shape to wring all the rubber and ivory they could from the region.

2. How does owning the Congo affect the survival of the Portuguese monarchy?

Other than possibly draining Portugal's treasury dry sooner, causing more/earlier bankruptcies, and triggering an earlier 1910-style revolution which drives the monarchy out of the country, not much.

3. What geopolitical ramifications are there? Will another power(s) try to take the Congo from Portugal?

Germany and Great Britain came to private agreements twice, once in 1898 and once in 1913, to divide the Portuguese Empire between them. Both powers took great care to exclude any other powers from the talks and to keep the agreements secret. In the second agreement, both powers even took steps to ensure that another Portuguese bankruptcy would occur.

Portugal declared bankruptcy twice between 1892 and 1902. If owning the Congo adds to the problems which led to those bankruptcies, Portugal might attempt to trade bits and pieces of the Congo in return for various considerations. Any consideration Portugal receives will very likely trigger a conference between the European powers. Colonial questions were so ticklish during this period that everyone had to be consulted whether they had a horse in the race or not.

 

[Gonzaga]

Other than possibly draining Portugal's treasury dry sooner, causing more/earlier bankruptcies, and triggering an earlier 1910-style revolution which drives the monarchy out of the country, not much.

Or having Congo means that the Portuguese wouldn't push for the "Pink Map Area", so no British ultimatum, less middle class nationalists and intellectuals become Republicans, and the monarchy only falls after the ITTL WWI or during it.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Or having Congo means that the Portuguese wouldn't push for the "Pink Map Area", so no British ultimatum, less middle class nationalists and intellectuals become Republicans, and the monarchy only falls after the ITTL WWI or during it.

You might even see greater Anglo-Portuguese economic collaboration. A Benguela-Beira Railroad via the Zambezi Valley largely financed by London financiers probably gives the British an economic interest in keeping the Portuguese solvent an in their debt rather than anyone else.

Britain would probably gain Katanga in much the same way the French gained the West bank

 

[Don Lardo]

Or having Congo means that the Portuguese wouldn't push for the "Pink Map Area", so no British ultimatum, less middle class nationalists and intellectuals become Republicans, and the monarchy only falls after the ITTL WWI or during it.

Or having the Congo, which is contiguous with Angola, makes Portugal more anxious to link her possessions on Africa's west and east coasts so the Pink Map effort is pushed even harder.

I think you can make a plausible case for either scenario.

 

[Don Lardo]

You might even see greater Anglo-Portuguese economic collaboration.

Like the UK's economic collaboration with France regarding the Suez Canal? Just which economic collaborator ended up owning that canal after the dust settled?

A Benguela-Beira Railroad via the Zambezi Valley largely financed by London financiers probably gives the British an economic interest in keeping the Portuguese solvent an in their debt rather than anyone else.

In 1898, Britain conspired with Germany to prevent any other power granting loans to Portugal in the hopes of triggering another bankruptcy in order to grab Portugal's empire. In 1913, Britain conspired with Germany to grant Portugal loans on which it was sure to default in order to grab Portugal's empire.

An financially attractive railroad might make Britain covetous instead of collaborative.

 

[Gonzaga]

Or having the Congo, which is contiguous with Angola, makes Portugal more anxious to link her possessions on Africa's west and east coasts so the Pink Map effort is pushed even harder.

I think you can make a plausible case for either scenario.

I'm not so sure. IOTL Portugal only really pushed for the union of Mozambique and Angola after the loss of Congo was felt as a diplomatic failure. If they have Congo - which was their primary target - than they might accept even a smaller Mozambique.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Like the UK's economic collaboration with France regarding the Suez Canal? Just which economic collaborator ended up owning that canal after the dust settled?



In 1898, Britain conspired with Germany to prevent any other power granting loans to Portugal in the hopes of triggering another bankruptcy in order to grab Portugal's empire. In 1913, Britain conspired with Germany to grant Portugal loans on which it was sure to default in order to grab Portugal's empire.

An financially attractive railroad might make Britain covetous instead of collaborative.

That was OTL...that does not necessarily mean that in this instance they will be interested in granting the Germans anything ITTL especially if the Portuguese African empire in essence an economic dependency of the Br. empire.

The Germans are likely to be told to take a hike.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

I'm not so sure. IOTL Portugal only really pushed for the union of Mozambique and Angola after the loss of Congo was felt as a diplomatic failure. If they have Congo - which was their primary target - than they might accept even a smaller Mozambique.

Wasn't the Niassa company essentially run by British financial interests.

 

[Don Lardo]

That was OTL...

Yes it was the OTL. The OTL or, as it's also known, reality.

I should think the fact that something actually occurred in reality would be a good indication that it or something very similar to it would happen in an ATL, wouldn't you?

... that does not necessarily mean that in this instance they will be interested in granting the Germans anything ITTL especially if the Portuguese African empire in essence an economic dependency of the Br. empire. The Germans are likely to be told to take a hike.

Did you notice the date of the second secret Anglo-German agreement: 1913? Or did it slip your mind?

Nineteen Thirteen. In the midst of a naval arms race between the two powers, after the militaries and governments of both powers have been planning to fight the other, after British officers have been conferring with their French counterparts for several years, after the crises involving Agadir, the Panther, and other incidents, after the Daily Telegraph interview, after a drumbeat of invasion scares in books, magazines, and stage plays, after all of that Britain secretly colluded with Germany not just to seize Portugal's empire after bankruptcy but to force a bankruptcy to occur.

If the OTL Britain of 1913 can plot with her number one identified enemy Germany to divide up the Portuguese Empire, you're going to need a lot of changes for Britain to cut Germany out of the picture in an ATL.

 

[Desmond Hume]

Very interesting discussion so far!

Let's try another question: suppose that Portugal gets the Congo, and then loses it to one of the Anglo-German conspiracies (either 1898 or 1913). What happens to Portugal then? Could it bring a nationalist, revanchist government to power? Might it lead Portugal to fight on the anti-British side in an alt-WWI (perhaps allied with Germany in the hopes of regaining the British cut of ex-Portuguese Congo or some comparable slice of the British Empire in Africa)?

 

[Don Lardo]

Let's try another question: suppose that Portugal gets the Congo, and then loses it to one of the Anglo-German conspiracies (either 1898 or 1913). What happens to Portugal then? Could it bring a nationalist, revanchist government to power? Might it lead Portugal to fight on the anti-British side in an alt-WWI (perhaps allied with Germany in the hopes of regaining the British cut of ex-Portuguese Congo or some comparable slice of the British Empire in Africa)?

I'd think plausible arguments could be made for all of that.

About the Congo, it isn't the treasure house ripe for exploitation too many would like to believe it is. Owning the Congo drove Leopold to bankruptcy, owning the Congo cost rather than earned Belgium money, and none of the post-colonial Congo nations have been anywhere near solvency. The Congo is a bane, not a boon.

This means that gaining the Congo doesn't make Portugal a bigger or better colonial power. It means that gaining the Congo only makes Portugal a bigger and better target.

 

[HJ Tulp]

The economic impact will be negligible and the colony might end up costing Portugal money. Leopold never made the millions he planned on despite unleashing a horde of fiends in human shape to wring all the rubber and ivory they could from the region.

It is true that while the Free State cost ALOT of money to set up, more then Leopold really had, Belgium would in the end most certainly make a profit out of it.

Source: Congo, A History

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Yes it was the OTL. The OTL or, as it's also known, reality.

I should think the fact that something actually occurred in reality would be a good indication that it or something very similar to it would happen in an ATL, wouldn't you?

Did you notice the date of the second secret Anglo-German agreement: 1913? Or did it slip your mind?

Nineteen Thirteen. In the midst of a naval arms race between the two powers, after the militaries and governments of both powers have been planning to fight the other, after British officers have been conferring with their French counterparts for several years, after the crises involving Agadir, the Panther, and other incidents, after the Daily Telegraph interview, after a drumbeat of invasion scares in books, magazines, and stage plays, after all of that Britain secretly colluded with Germany not just to seize Portugal's empire after bankruptcy but to force a bankruptcy to occur.

If the OTL Britain of 1913 can plot with her number one identified enemy Germany to divide up the Portuguese Empire, you're going to need a lot of changes for Britain to cut Germany out of the picture in an ATL.

You know the dripping sarcasm is unnecessary. I suggested that the British Financial interests would be even more invested in in the Portuguese African interests...thus a bankruptcy would have a greater impact on the London financial interests. Since they are affected Since its a project of their work why are they interested in cutting the Germans in. This is 30 ;years after the POD after all things are likely to have transpired somewhat differently no?

And yes they may have conspired to do that OTL... but nothing came of it did it, in that the Portuguese Empire remained intact. The suggestion was that they would be more interested in keeping the Portuguese, an economic dependency..solvent on their own terms...or did you miss that

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Very interesting discussion so far!

Let's try another question: suppose that Portugal gets the Congo, and then loses it to one of the Anglo-German conspiracies (either 1898 or 1913). What happens to Portugal then? Could it bring a nationalist, revanchist government to power? Might it lead Portugal to fight on the anti-British side in an alt-WWI (perhaps allied with Germany in the hopes of regaining the British cut of ex-Portuguese Congo or some comparable slice of the British Empire in Africa)?

And why would they not be neutral, given that its both powers that have partitioned the Empire.

 

[Gonzaga]

Wasn't the Niassa company essentially run by British financial interests.

Not only the Niassa, but also the Mozambique Company (they had German, British and South African capital). The Company of the Boror was founded by Swiss investors, but had mainly German capital, while the Zambeze Company was the most international of them, with resources coming from American, British, German, French, South African and even Portuguese investors. In Mozambique operated the companies Sena Sugar Estates (British) and and the Societé du Madal (French), among others.

 

[The Sandman]

I was fairly certain that Leopold earned a great deal of money from the Congo, although the fact that he was an expert at finding ways to shift the bill for running it to other people also helped. He might have seemed poorer than he was because he despised his daughters and wanted to disinherit them to the greatest degree possible; because of the way Belgian law worked, this meant that he kept most of his wealth tied up in construction projects and things he didn't personally own.

I have a copy of King Leopold's Ghost somewhere, so when I locate it I can probably get more exact figures.

 

[Don Lardo]

I was fairly certain that Leopold earned a great deal of money from the Congo, although the fact that he was an expert at finding ways to shift the bill for running it to other people also helped. He might have seemed poorer than he was because he despised his daughters and wanted to disinherit them to the greatest degree possible; because of the way Belgian law worked, this meant that he kept most of his wealth tied up in construction projects and things he didn't personally own.

I have a copy of King Leopold's Ghost somewhere, so when I locate it I can probably get more exact figures.

When you re-read Ghost, you'll remember that Leopold built a very shaky house of financial cards with the Congo.

Most of his "revenue" was actually in the form of loans, loans which used projected future revenues from the territory as collateral. Leopold siphoned off portions of those loans for personal use "washing" the money through various means and for various purposes to hide it's origins from anyone who looked. He also "washed" what revenues the Congo produced for the same reasons.

Leopold spent as little on the Congo as he could get away with. For example, he alternately ignored or starving of funds infrastructure projects like the much needed railway which bypassed the river's falls to link the sea-going ships with the steamers of the interior. As long as his Merry Band of Ghouls raped enough ivory and rubber out of the interior to keep the banks from asking to examine the books, Leopold was happy.

What I've been trying to point out is that the Congo isn't some economic panacea for Portugal. Gaining the region isn't going to solve Portugal's many systemic ills and isn't going to magically put the kingdom on a sound financial footing. The amount of investment needed to even begin identifying the Congo's resources, let alone exploiting them, is staggering. One huge cost will be in transportation. Until you manage to get a railway surveyed and built, moving large amounts of trade goods, machinery, ivory, rubber, and anything else in and out of the interior involves a man and animal killing portage past the falls I mentioned earlier.

And money isn't the only problem.

Much of the region had yet to be mapped, tackling the disease environment was still beyond the medicine of the period, and the locals are none to friendly. Leopold got what little he did out of the region by employing methods the Portuguese and anyone else who isn't a fiend in human shape will not use. That means everyone who isn't Leopold is going to end up spending to produce less.

The Congo, like nearly all late imperial colonies, is going to be a drain on it's owner. The Congo isn't going to make Portugal be anything but a better target and, when we remember how heavily invested the OTL UK was in Portuguese colonies and how the UK and Portugal had been allied for centuries, business and diplomatic ties are not going to keep Portugal out of the other, greater powers' gun sights.

 

[SunilTanna]

There was a Portuguese Congo in OTL - it's today the Cabinda exclave of Angola.

 

[Archangel]

Portugal had the willigness to invest in the development of the colonies, even if through internationally owned companies.
While there would always be the risk of Portugal losing a part of its empire in a war that included African theaters, gaining Kongo will mean no loss of face as in OTL Ultimatum, and the Monarchy gets an oxygen balloon. Any financial gains that help diminish the many economic crisis that afflicted Portugal in the XIX century will make the monarchy lasts a bit more, after which, it starts depending a lot of the capacity of the Monarchy and its political class to enact economic and social reforms.