Reagan Offers To Buy Baja California from Mexico

In this article here:

http://lenpenzo.com/blog/id587-how-...-industry-sell-baja-california-to-the-us.html

The writer quotes left-wing journalist John Ross, who claimed Reagan wanted to buy Baja California from Mexico. However, I can't much online to back this claim up.

Let's say Reagan offered to buy Baja from Mexico. I found this 1986 article referencing debt and a summit, so let's say the offer is made here.

I can imagine a lot of people being upset, as this is the US using Mexico's debts to potentially bite off territory, although I would imagine the people there would have all the rights of U.S. citizens.
 
It's ASB. Even ignoring Mexico's refusing such a deal, in 1986, Baja had a population of over a million people.
 
I think it's unlikely but interesting.

Financially, while the economy was on the way up since '83 there's no way in hell people will be happy with such a massive purchase unless it can show almost immediate results in terms of profitability. I don't know how much oil can be exploited immediately in Baja or in the Sea of Cortez, but for $200 Billion it had better be a lot.

Secondly, the purchase would be just that for some time: a purchase...

Read: A territory a la Puerto Rico.

This both exacerbates and alleviates the immigration question in my opinion. On the one hand, Mexican immigrants might split between flocking to the U.S. both legally and otherwise as OTL, and flocking to U.S. Baja to get government oil rig jobs; a choice that the U.S. government might actually support.

I know some older folks who are moderately well off who got a place down there on the sea for fishing and tequila drinking until their ticker ticks its last. I don't know how long ago the American expats in Baja phenomenon began, but with Baja a U.S. territory I could see a drastic increase in American workers, tourists, and retirees from day one. This historically goes a long way towards eventual statehood. The idea that such a new territory could be made a state before Puerto Rico though would be absurd to Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Baja Californians so expect Puerto Rican statehood pressure to increase.

Would both territories become states by 2013, ttl? I can't say. I will say that in such a TL that it would be better and more dramatic from a writing perspective for Puerto Rico to receive statehood sometime in the nineties, and for Baja to receive the same by the present day.

As for the cartels and terrorist concerns, I'm sure as a territory the government is able to get away with sending police and military forces suitable to such an enterprise. (Though keep in mind I'm not sure how much of the cartels and terrorists exploiting the border story is non-fiction... Certainly the cartels are more likely realistic threat, but I don't have the facts on what their presence in most of Baja is. I'm aware of first hand accounts of them having an arm via gangs that operate along San Diego/Tijuana, but whether this would increase or decrease ttl is debatable.)

The more I write the better an idea I think it is; however it is cost prohibitive in the short term. If Mexico is hurting that badly the U.S. could get away with a better offer.

The effects on immigration reform are astronomical, though. Mexicans now have a place to go to "naturalize" before moving into California or Arizona. It's much easier for Puerto Ricans to immigrate legally than it is for Mexicans, as far as I know, and Mexicans who move into a recently Mexican U.S. territory would have an advantage over fence jumper types.

I think it's a cause for Reagan's successor to get hounded in the general, but ultimately another positive notch on the semi-fictitious but always fascinating belt of the Reagan Legacy.

EDIT: Maybe a slightly earlier POD would be required: one that makes Mexico a lot worse off and makes America a lot better off. I.e. A financial collapse in Mexico, and an earlier bounceback in the U.S. economy under Reagan, maybe?
 
This could set a precedent if a country is suffering they just sell off some land to a another country. I ain't sure if that's a gods thing.

Well if Baja is assimilated into the Union would at the very least make a good retirement spot for the old folk. Also the map won't look awkward anymore in the US - Mexico border.
 
This could set a precedent if a country is suffering they just sell off some land to a another country. I ain't sure if that's a gods thing.

Well if Baja is assimilated into the Union would at the very least make a good retirement spot for the old folk. Also the map won't look awkward anymore in the US - Mexico border.

Might set a good example for the UK, which then buys the Costa Munga and all its fish and chip shops from Spain
 
I hate how the term "ASB" gets thrown around willy-nilly nowadays.

Alright, let me clarify - with a POD in the 1980s, it's ASB. There is no way on earth the Mexican government would have signed over two states to America, states that are home to over a million citizens.
 
Last edited:
Cough <Alaska> cough.

Alaska was a territory, and is was a territory in the 1860's, over 100 years before this. Selling off an integrated part of your country, without even giving them a say in the matter, is far diffrent than selling a mostly empty polar bear garden.
 
Here is my problem with this sort of thing, and I think one of the areas of alternate history I have gotten a little Nirvana on:

Why does this need to go anywhere? Why does it need to be any more than a bit of discussion, and maybe a footnote proposal that doesn't amount to anything. That's how things in history work. So much is just historical sod around the pretty flowers of things that actually happened.

We melodramatize things too much.
 
Single state, but it’s possible. Such a purchase would catapult Puerto Rico’s status forward; we could very well see 51 states before 2000.

Agreed.

And 52 not long afterward if things go well. (At the very least to make the flag look right.)

EDIT: Oh and I meant both territories meaning Puerto Rico and Baja...
 
Alright, let me clarify - with a POD in the 1980s, it's ASB. There is no way on earth the Mexican government would have signed over two states to America, states that are home to over a million citizens.

I think what he means to say it's highly implausible, but not technically impossible, and ergo not ASB.
 
Now now extortion might work with individuals in local areas but if it's on the international scale the UN would get involved.

And great pwoers will either ignore it or ake it so all is legal on paper. Say some resource rich but otherwise poor country owes a lot of money they can't really repay as interest alone are big part of their income. Think African states. Some country, let's say for the sake of argument it has a letter A in its name, goes around quietly buying this debt. Once they bought it up, or bought a lot of it, ambassador from this country asks for meeting with indebted country's leader and informs him that his country is willing to trade the debt for a chunk of their territory. Or they'll do some creative things with the debt. So country agrees to sell the land. All proper and legal.
 
Top