Spanish Morocco remains Francoist

Should Spain remain Francoist or return to a more Falangist structure and hold onto Spanish Morocco, what does Morocco look like under continued rule from Madrid?
 
Well, not too much. Even with a Francoist regime the Sahara is going to be lost in 1975, as no Francoist is going to be as mad as to defy USA by going hard againt Morocco. And Ceuta and Melilla would go more or less as they are now.
 
It's pretty much impossible to keep Spanish Morocco Francoist if just because the Spanish Nationalists, especially Franco himself, got along fairly well with the Moroccans. Moroccans were the elite shock troops of the Spanish Nationalist Army in the Civil War (Franco led the Army of Africa, largely comprised of Moroccans). As a result, many of the influential figures of post-independence Morocco were actually close friends with Francisco Franco. Many Republican Spanish troops refused to take Muslim prisoners, executing them on the spot.

To stop the independence of Spanish Morroco...well, you've actually probably got to take Franco out of the picture. Maybe he dies instead of José Sanjurjo and Emilio Mola. Which would strictly at least not make it Francoist Spain repressing Moroccan independence.
 
Or the Northern Protectorate? Given the Rif rebellion that broke out a year or two after Spain returned the area back to Morocco, there appears reason to believe that the locals may have gone for a deal involving autonomy and continued relations with Spain, but I don't know.

In 1974, Spanish civilians made up around 21-22% of the population of Spanish Sahara, and was growing fast due to a hot phosphate-driven economy. If Madrid could figure out a way of dealing with the Green March without killing hundreds of marchers, it could have won the demographic war in time.
 
To stop the independence of Spanish Morocco...well, you've actually probably got to take Franco out of the picture. Maybe he dies instead of José Sanjurjo and Emilio Mola. Which would strictly at least not make it Francoist Spain repressing Moroccan independence.
How would the end result be any different for Spain and Morocco?
Or the Northern Protectorate? Given the Rif rebellion that broke out a year or two after Spain returned the area back to Morocco, there appears reason to believe that the locals may have gone for a deal involving autonomy and continued relations with Spain, but I don't know.

In 1974, Spanish civilians made up around 21-22% of the population of Spanish Sahara, and was growing fast due to a hot phosphate-driven economy. If Madrid could figure out a way of dealing with the Green March without killing hundreds of marchers, it could have won the demographic war in time.
That’s something I didn’t know - how willing were the locals to compromise with Madrid?

Did Franco, or Spain in general, ever pursue any extensive program of resettling Spaniards in their African colonies? Like you said, some sort of situation in which Spanish locals end up constituting a majority might allow Spain to retain its presence in Morocco.
 
Or the Northern Protectorate? Given the Rif rebellion that broke out a year or two after Spain returned the area back to Morocco, there appears reason to believe that the locals may have gone for a deal involving autonomy and continued relations with Spain, but I don't know.

In 1974, Spanish civilians made up around 21-22% of the population of Spanish Sahara, and was growing fast due to a hot phosphate-driven economy. If Madrid could figure out a way of dealing with the Green March without killing hundreds of marchers, it could have won the demographic war in time.
But employment the phosphate industry would have an upper limit, and then what would draw in more Spainards afterwards?
 
But employment the phosphate industry would have an upper limit, and then what would draw in more Spainards afterwards?
Tourism?

That is build beach resorts along the coast. It might be cheaper to build them there than the Canary Islands. E.g. they won't have to import sand from Africa.
 
Tourism?

That is build beach resorts along the coast. It might be cheaper to build them there than the Canary Islands. E.g. they won't have to import sand from Africa.
The Canaries would be cheaper (you have to ship everything to the Western Sahara, since it's all desert, and its a lot further away than the Canaries).
 
The Canaries would be cheaper (you have to ship everything to the Western Sahara, since it's all desert, and its a lot further away than the Canaries).
AIUI quite a lot had to be shipped to the Canaries before the infrastructure was built.

Furthermore, the tourist resorts are mainly in the south of the islands, which are deserts.

The Western Sahara is further away from the Canaries, but IMHO it's not necessarily a lot further away than the Canaries. Looking at the map the northern end of the Western Sahara is roughly level with the Canaries. It's a 4-and-a-half hour fight from NE England to the Canaries, it doesn't look that much longer than another hour in the air from the north end of the Western Sahara to the south.

From the point of view of the tourist, an extra hour in the air, might not be much of a burden after factoring in things like the journey from the tourists home to the airport, the time it takes to check in at the domestic airport, getting off the aeroplane at the destination and the transfer to the airport.

And, European tourists fly to destinations in Africa that are even further away than the Western Sahara, i.e. Senegal and The Gambia.
 
But employment the phosphate industry would have an upper limit, and then what would draw in more Spainards afterwards?

Possibly other resource-driven industries. The EEZ would support at least a million tons per year fish catch. According to a book by Tony Hodges on Western Sahara, there are extensive iron ore deposits, including one associated with a world-class vanadium deposit. So there are other economic possibilities.
 
AIUI quite a lot had to be shipped to the Canaries before the infrastructure was built.

Furthermore, the tourist resorts are mainly in the south of the islands, which are deserts.

The Western Sahara is further away from the Canaries, but IMHO it's not necessarily a lot further away than the Canaries. Looking at the map the northern end of the Western Sahara is roughly level with the Canaries. It's a 4-and-a-half hour fight from NE England to the Canaries, it doesn't look that much longer than another hour in the air from the north end of the Western Sahara to the south.

From the point of view of the tourist, an extra hour in the air, might not be much of a burden after factoring in things like the journey from the tourists home to the airport, the time it takes to check in at the domestic airport, getting off the aeroplane at the destination and the transfer to the airport.

And, European tourists fly to destinations in Africa that are even further away than the Western Sahara, i.e. Senegal and The Gambia.
I'm talking about shipping in supplies like food and such. That's going to eat in at the profit margins.
 
Possibly other resource-driven industries. The EEZ would support at least a million tons per year fish catch. According to a book by Tony Hodges on Western Sahara, there are extensive iron ore deposits, including one associated with a world-class vanadium deposit. So there are other economic possibilities.
But are they large enough to support Spanish migration (modern iron mining isn't a very a employment intensive industry in developed countries)? And the fishermen might end up being based out of the Canaries (since there's already a fishing base there).
 
But are they large enough to support Spanish migration (modern iron mining isn't a very employment intensive industry in developed countries)? And the fishermen might end up being based out of the Canaries (since there's already a fishing base there).
What else would attract Spanish immigration to its Moroccan colony?
 
Hmm... Could Spain reach a deal with Sahrawi activists? Sahrawis get a big payoff from the resource industries and local autonomy (i.e. money and power for the activist group); in return they continue to support nominal Spanish rule, including doing the dirty work of stopping the Green March. That keeps Morocco from taking over and grabbing all the goodies.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... Could Spain reach a deal with Sahrawi activists? Sahrawis get a big payoff from the resource industries and local autonomy (i.e. money power for the activist group); in return they continue to support nominal Spanish rule, including doing the dirty work of stopping the Green March. That keeps Morocco from taking over and grabbing all the goodies.
In addition to supporting the Sahrawis, someone suggested supporting the Berbers in Morocco so they could both make up a bloc opposed to Moroccan annexation. As for the Green March, Madrid might actually reinforce the colony and threaten to go to war with Morocco over its "autonomous province" but I think one issue with that would be if the average Spaniard would support it.
 
Top