Quebec independent

Would an association-type thing be more likely in that scenario?

That was pretty much a non-starter in the rest of Canada, at least with the public. The idea is still sneered about even in Ontario today when the PQ raised the idea of Quebec independence in 2014 (which got them booted from office by Quebec voters). It is perceived as the rest of us still paying for Quebec while Quebec being a separate country. Certainly in this OTL Canada and Quebec would have greatly intertwined economies and probably a common customs/defense area would emerge but the PQ's dream of "Soveringty Association" meaning, money still flows from Ottawa to Quebec and Quebec still gets all sorts of perks in Canada like a seat at the Bank of Canada was simply a Separatist fantasy. If Quebec goes, it goes it alone, not on the pocketbook of anglophone Canada.
 
If Quebec wants to be independent I'm pretty sure they're going to be at least a little hostile.

Alaska has free and open sea routes to it that are quite close to Seattle, If Quebec goes independent, then Canada DOES NOT have any good sea routes to the marinetimes, and the nearest port to them is pitiful Churchill.

And on top of that, the Hudson bay is frozen for half the year.

Yeah, without a land connection to NB I can't see Canada be willing to let Quebec go.

I don't see any reason why Canada and Quebec couldn't have good relationships if Quebec would get independence peacefully and legally.

And there is planes so they can always fly if can't go sea route.

For example Kaliningrad is separated from Russia by Baltia and Baltic nations and Russia not be best friends.
 
. The real challenge they would face is what would they do when all the natives in Quebec voted to leave and rejoin Canada (which in OTL they threatened to do if "Oui" won the referendum)?(1) The challenge facing the new PQ National Government is: If Canada is divisible, why isn't Quebec?(2)

1) I am not sure, but didn't they sent this threat to force the PQ to the negotiation table with them ? (To be sure to keep their right guaranteed by the Canada in the new country ?)

2) It depend. Canada is a federation, the union of many entities, and if nothing prevent it in the constitution, an entity can theoretically seceded. If Quebec decide to be a republic, it could decide to be indivisible.
 
Calgary's number one rivalry will always be Edmonton.

it is an article of faith among "nationalistic" Edmontonians that shadowy forces in Calgary dread the prospect of an Edmontonian/northerner becoming premier, and will do anything possible to prevent that.

Funny thing is, when, in 1986, Alberta finally got its first northern premier since 1935, and it's first Edmontonian since 1910, the voters of Edmonton responded by nearly shutting his party out of the city, and then voted out the man himself in '89.
 
I don't see any reason why Canada and Quebec couldn't have good relationships if Quebec would get independence peacefully and legally.

And there is planes so they can always fly if can't go sea route.

For example Kaliningrad is separated from Russia by Baltia and Baltic nations and Russia not be best friends.

Russia has St. petersburg close by, and it doesn't cost TOO much to keep it icebreaked in the winter.

Canada has no such options, and even succeeding peacefully is going to fuck with Canada's economy for a bit. So they definitely won't be friends at first.

So why would Canada in this case want to depend on Quebec for access to the maritimes?

I think they would try to prevent that to the best of their ability and weasel a land connection from Ontario to NB, as well as partall control over the St. Lawrence.
 
I don't see any reason why Canada and Quebec couldn't have good relationships if Quebec would get independence peacefully and legally.

And there is planes so they can always fly if can't go sea route.

For example Kaliningrad is separated from Russia by Baltia and Baltic nations and Russia not be best friends.


Well it certainly would be a bitter relationship to be sure, but these are two countries which are already economically intertwined and, unlike Russia, not militaristic at all. I doubt you would see a Canada acting towards Quebec the way Russia acts to former Soviet Republics like Ukraine or Georgia. There is also the USA to figure in all this.
 
1. There was alot of conversation that Western Canada would join USA

But no serious conversation. For all the feelings of western alienation and the frustration it brings, very few want to actually leave Canada-- they want to run it (or at least have a bigger say in running it).

For instance, Roy Romanow, premier of Saskatchewan, formed a secret committee to explore the province's 'options' in the event of Quebec secession. One of those was western Canada secession; but when he approached Ralph Klein (premier of Alberta) about it Klein dismissed it out of hand as "bordering on treason".

Joining the USA is an even more unlikely option, because Canadian provinces have more autonomy than an American state, and infinitely more influence. No premier will advocate for an arrangement that will lessen their own role, and the population isn't going to be happy to hook their cart to America.

If western Canada actually secedes it would 1) be its own country, and 2) be after several decades of rump Canada being more akin to "Greater Ontario". Like, a continued political division where the West votes straight Reform while Ontario votes straight Liberal, and this leads to continuous Liberal governments because Ontario is more seat-rich than the rest of the provinces combined. Maybe even some cases where the Premier of Ontario moves up to become Prime Minister of Canada. In that case, you would see serious conversation about secession. But those conditions aren't yet available in the 90s; western Canadians are still western Canadians.

2. Could Quebec have survived -- Joined France --
Quebec is not going to fight for several decades for sovereignty only to turn around and give it up to another country.

Nor is there any particular love or longing for France in Quebec. Why would there be? Quebec has been separated from France for over two centuries-- and because France traded them for some sugar islands. Quebec's identity has never, never rested on some attachment to France, and it's not going to start in the period of the greatest swell in Quebec pride.
 
2) It depend. Canada is a federation, the union of many entities, and if nothing prevent it in the constitution, an entity can theoretically seceded. If Quebec decide to be a republic, it could decide to be indivisible.

It COULD decide that... but how would they go about enforcing it? That's how wars get started. If Quebec cracks down on the people who don't want to live in an independent Quebec then things get ugly. I would hope that the new government wouldn't resort to violence (I doubt they would).
 
2) It depend. Canada is a federation, the union of many entities, and if nothing prevent it in the constitution, an entity can theoretically seceded. If Quebec decide to be a republic, it could decide to be indivisible.


You really think that will be enough to dispel the claims of hypocrisy for a government that just fought for and won independence based exactly on the defense that it was the will of the local people?

At the very least this will be a powerful tool the federal government can hold over the PQ's head in negotiations.
 
That was pretty much a non-starter in the rest of Canada, at least with the public. The idea is still sneered about even in Ontario today when the PQ raised the idea of Quebec independence in 2014 (which got them booted from office by Quebec voters). It is perceived as the rest of us still paying for Quebec while Quebec being a separate country. Certainly in this OTL Canada and Quebec would have greatly intertwined economies and probably a common customs/defense area would emerge but the PQ's dream of "Soveringty Association" meaning, money still flows from Ottawa to Quebec and Quebec still gets all sorts of perks in Canada like a seat at the Bank of Canada was simply a Separatist fantasy. If Quebec goes, it goes it alone, not on the pocketbook of anglophone Canada.

I remember Jacques Parizaeau as premier in the early 90s, talking up seapartism at a time when some in Quebec were interested in bidding for another Olympics. When it was pointed out that separation would probably jeopardize funding for the games, Parizeau replied by saying, oh no, don't worry, Canada will still have to pay for it.

Seriously, he was a smart guy, but he really seemed to assume at times that his followers were all absolute idiots.
 
BTW, here is a link about how the US would have reacted, at least in the short term to a "Oui" vote:

http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/u-s-woul...endence-in-wake-of-yes-vote-in-1995-1.1730253

There was an interesting academic policy paper i saw a while ago which laid out exactly what the US's contingency plans were for both an independent Quebec and a subsequently fragmenting Canada. I will try to find it again and post the link. From what I remember it was pretty much that the US would try to prop Canada together as one entity for as long as possible, statehood was unlikely and if worse came to worse, long-term the Canadian fragments would likely be run almost as a US protectorate or commonwealth. Trust me, the Americans wouldn't have been looking forward to having to deal with this headache.
 
There's no actual longing for Québec in France. They're basically our long lost cousins who speak funny and have funny idioms.

The only reason we'd want Québec as a part of France would be to piss off the brits really
 
....... , Parizeau replied by saying, oh no, don't worry, Canada will still have to pay for it.

Seriously, he was a smart guy, but he really seemed to assume at times that his followers were all absolute idiots.[/QUOTE]

...........................................................
Bigger fish in a smaller pond. By 1970, Quebec had grown as large as it was ever going to get - in North America - son in order to increase their personal power the biggest fish (separatist politicians) tried to decrease the size of the pond.
The British Empire made a big mistake after the Battle on the Plains of Abraham. They limited French-Canadian universities to training doctors, priests and lawyers, in an effort to limit the number of French-Canadians who might challenge British hegemony in business.
The Catholic Church responded by training second tier students to the priesthood. Catholic priests built Catholic schools, hospitals, orphanages, etc. until the church dominated civil administration in Quebec.
Third tier students (not very good at math and could not stand the sight of blood) studied law. Quebec soon produced a surplus of lawyers. When you suffer a surplus of lawyers, some of them become politicians. Quebec exported its surplus of lawyers to Ottawa.
So many French-Canadian lawyers became federal politicians that the standing joke said that any separation agreement would require Quebec to continue supplying Prime Ministers to Ottawa!
Hah!
Hah!
After the Quiet Revolution (1950s) separatist politicians got downright obnoxious, bullying minorities (e.g. Yiddish bookstores in Montreal) in their efforts to rewrite history and put themselves on top of the political pile.

Did I tell you about the times Quebec Provincial Policeman pulled me over - in front of my grandmother's house and refused to speak my mother tongue (English)? Half of my high school graduating class promptly moved out of province.
Separatist politicians may have won the political game, but they shot themselves in the foot financially.
Just as separatist rhetoric peaked during the late 1960s, major banks and insurance companies quietly moved their head offices from Montreal to Toronto. When Alberta oil boomed (circa 1980) big money moved on to Calgary.

"Sovereignty Association" was a pile-dream easily sold to hillbillies who did not understand global finance. Those hillbillies were easily convinced that they could simply turn off the electricity at the New York State border and watch the Anglo bastards freeze in the dark!
Hah!
Hah!
Those separatist hillbillies never comprehended that those hydro-electric dams were funded by major banks headquartered in New York City. When Chase Mannhattan Bank yells "Jump!" the USMC responds "How high sir?"

The USA would never have allowed Quebec to separate completely. The day after separation was announced, the United States Coast Guard would have seized control of the Saint Lawrence Seaway.
Meanwhile, the Canadian Airborne Regiment (backed by the 82nd Airborne Division) would have helicoptered on to seize key bridges.

Separatist politicians continue to rewrite history, re-naming towns and suppressing minorities. They want to party like its 1750, without all those pesky Hurons and Abenakis and Iroquois and Dutch fur traders and Scotsmen and Brits and Irish Catholics and Hollywood and ......
 
Top