Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: Before 1900' started by Ultima Ratio, Apr 3, 2018.
Why would German Ethiopia be more developed than German Eritrea or German Somalia?
Bad choice of words, I meant the collection of those three as being more developed than most French or British colonies in sub-Saharan Africa, maybe except parts of South Africa.
A relatively reformist Nicholas II is certainly a very big deal. Did he marry as IOTL?
Yes, the marriage has not changed (nor the ensuing hemophilia), but NIcholas is a bit different ITTL due to his grandfather's influence.
It probably helps that Germany has one big, connected colony in Africa rather than several small disconnected ones like OTL. All the development money and effort is being concentrated in one place. We can only hope the region ends up better off than OTL (which is a low bar to set, so it shouldn't be hard).
The fact that Ethiopia didn't maintain its independence in this TL could have far reaching consequences for African nationalist movements, even as far away as the United States. They may take a less confrontational, agreesive tone without the legacy of the battle of Adwa.
Is Libya still in ottoman hands?
Colonialism doesn't really work like that. "Development money" tended only to be used to further destroy and undermine native economies/institutions. There's a reason why post-colonial Africa is much more unstable than pre-colonial Africa.
How exactly was it more unstable?
Well in retrospect that was a pretty imprecise and sweeping statement that I made, mostly because I'm tired at the moment. But what I'm referring to is a lack of legitimate social/political institutions in the wake of colonialism. Whereas indigenous monarchies provided the bedrocks of stability and legitimacy in many pre-colonial states, during the colonial period they were illegitimized by their collaboration with colonial powers and ultimately marginalized in the post-independence period (unless you're looking at Lesotho). But the nationalist governments that replaced the colonial powers were also often found lacking in legitimacy, either due to close neo-colonial collaboration or failed economic policies. The end result is that you have countries where the general sentiment is that no power bloc is actually "for the people." This concept is elaborated upon in The Black Man's Burden by historian Basil Davidson, for further reading.
Oh well, I don't know if I agree with that idea as a general concept, especially considering it looks like the Germans are indeed investing money in the region, so I don't see how the local government that would form/develop(I don't think the Germans would have kicked the Ethiopian empire's institutions out of the gate) shouldn't be despised in of themselves, although the fact this colony extends into ethnically and religiously different areas would make a stable government harder, but we will see.
Oh I understand that much. The infrastructure built will mostly be for resource extraction and other such exploitive pursuits. However I was just hoping that the Horn of Africa ends up better off than OTL, which again will not be too hard considering the disaster the region sadly became in the OTL 20th century (even by post-colonial standards).
There will be some changes in colonial policies compared to OTL a bit later.
This TL is excellent. Great work
I am eager to see how an alternate russo-japanese war is going to unfold, as well as I am curious about how the italian question will develop.
TTL 1900's Admiralty must wake up screaming every other night, about the fact that the Germans can close the Red Sea at will. OTL they weren't to happy about either French Djibouti or Italian Eritrea, but were comforted that the first was too small and the second was well the Italians. Now with a developed Greater Ethiopia the Germans should be able to hold out for years all the while shutting down any access to the Suez.
And no matter how friendly Germany and Great Britain ends up being this will seriously freak out the Lords of the Sea. ie You blockade Germany they blockade the Suez/India.
Pretty much this whole TL is one giant train wreck slowly getting closer from the UK’s perspective. The only thing that could make it worse at this point is a full-on French-German-Russian alliance against them.
True enough. On the other hand, Europe generally seems like a bit less of a powder-keg than IOTL. Russia and Austria don't have directly contradictory goals in the Balkans and France doesn't have any particular grievance against Germany (though the different population growth rates still probably causes them a lot of anxiety).
In this scenario, the biggest threat to European peace actually appears to be Britain, since it has an interest in propping up the Ottomans and generally containing Russia and Germany.
indeed, but the ottomans are too weak to pose a threat and in case of war they are just going to be screwed by the russians, with germans and french jumping in to get a share.
Yeah, Britain and the Ottomans are in a really bad place diplomatically. Developing closer ties with America might be their best bet at the moment.
also a blockade would be very less effective ittl...the british should blockade Germany, france and russia in order to stop shipping to germany, vut even in such an unlikely case Germany can effectively trade by land routes with its neoghbours. Actually ittl it us uk that can be easily cut off frpm trade.
True a full-fledged continental alliance is not in place, but as of now every country on the continent has reasons to harbor grievances against the uk, especially russia and france. It is increasingly likely that such an alliance will occur sooner or later, and i do not see how uk can drive a wedge between france and russia and/or germany
true...but america is the most dangerous long term threat to british hegemony, as after all was IOTL
Separate names with a comma.