The Republic of the Barbary Coast (Alternate Barbary War)

[GreaterMars8844]

History:

In 1801, Thomas Jefferson sent the Navy to deal with the Barbary pirate states that had been wreaking havoc on American ships. After 4 years of war, the pirates were defeated. To prevent them from causing any more trouble, the Americans reorganized the pirate states into a quasi-independent republic (Free to do it's own thing, but the US can intervine if it's doing something that the US doesn't approve of). This puppet republic was the Republic of the Barbary Coasts. It's capital was the City of Durna.
The United States still doesn't win the War of 1812.
The Mexican--American War ends mostly the same, except that the US also annexes Baja California, which becomes part of the state of California.
After the Civil War, the US sent Africans who wished to return to Africa to the Barbary Coast (slavery was also made illegal from a decree by Abraham Lincoln). (As a consequence of this, Liberia doesn't exist).
America ended up attending the Berlin Conference in 1884, and by the end of the negotiations, The Republic of the Barbary Coast had grown in size.

The Spanish-American War happens in 1898 and the US takes Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico. (Puerto Rico is annexed, while the Philippines and Cuba become Quadi-Independent).
During WW1, the Barbary Coasts joined the war alongside the US.
In WW2, Italy--dispite German objections--invaded the Barbary Coast in 1940, bringing America into WW2. The Allies still win, but they win in 1944.
The Republic of the Barbary Coasts became fully independent of the US on June 5, 1963, but kept close ties to the US (Along with Cuba a month later and the Philippines in the January of 1964) in the American International Commonwealth and even joined NATO in 1968.
In 1986, small nationalist groups popped up in the Barbary Coast, with the belief that their nation was a reborn Carthaginian Empire. Luckily, these groups remained small.
Culture:
Due to its long history with the US, the Barbary Coast has an interesting blend of American and Muslim values. They still use the imperial system of measure, but are working on switching to metric. The official languages are Engligh and Arabic.

Africa in the 21st Century:

(Thanks to the long history between the US and the Barbary Coast, the US is far more tolerant to Islam than it is in our timeline.)

 

[Nephi]

I can't imagine Africa would have borders like otl at all.

Not sure how the US then could have done anything like that then either. It sounds like the beginning of the American Empire if they did, which would mean a different America and world.

 

[CountDVB]

Not a bad idea, but I think it’s too big for it to be like that. My guess would be that instead, the US would use it’s close relations to Morocco to help creating some form of Berber state of the Atlas Mountains area.

 

[galanx]

The only reason the US defeated the Barbary pirates is that the pirates played the dominant British and French against each other. Nobody was the US enemy at the time, so the two sides were quite happy to see the nuisance slapped down. A US-aligned republic would be going much too far for either side. If the British won, you'd see an effort to deny the Americans what is essentially control of western Med- same with the French, who did in fact take over Algeria thirty years later. You'd have to have neither Britain nor France victors, and engage in a cold war in which each side sought control.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

The only reason the US defeated the Barbary pirates is that the pirates played the dominant British and French against each other. Nobody was the US enemy at the time, so the two sides were quite happy to see the nuisance slapped down. A US-aligned republic would be going much too far for either side. If the British won, you'd see an effort to deny the Americans what is essentially control of western Med- same with the French, who did in fact take over Algeria thirty years later. You'd have to have neither Britain nor France victors, and engage in a cold war in which each side sought control.

To say nothing of the fact that the locals aren't exactly going to be rolling over and accepting American rule, nor really desire a "Republic"in the kind of way the Americans could deem acceptable. To pacify them would require a large permenant naval-army military presence in the area... in an era where a professional standing military and the stomach for one were virtually non-existent in the US. Any party that suggested doing this gets slaughters in the ballot box and the new Congress immediately withdraws, especially if the disposed local pontifs end up in Constantinople and asking Big Daddy Sultan (Their suzerain who technically owned the territory before) to help put them back in power. Indeed, the Turks probably get the MOST benefit out of this whole silly affair, since it means they can impose a more direct hold over their North African holdings without doing much more than lifting and finger and waiting for American public opinion to do the job of sending off the "invader" for him.

 

[jerseyguy]

I can't imagine Africa would have borders like otl at all.

Not sure how the US then could have done anything like that then either. It sounds like the beginning of the American Empire if they did, which would mean a different America and world.

I can imagine an American-influenced city state in the North African coast, either as a close trading partner/ally or a destination for freed slaves.

Alternatively, such a state could play off the influence of multiple western powers in the fashion that Thailand avoided colonization, or become a blend of American culture and Ottoman or French or Italian culture in the way that Singapore functions as a unique blend of the Indian and Chinese diasporas.

 

[water123]

I can see the US basically offering Morocco land or power in the Barbary States in exchange for helping it fight the pirates, and then a coastal Barbary Coast Republic being set up that slowly expanded south. The Scramble for Africa is gonna be really different, though.

 

[Arkenfolm]

Britain and France would never let the US become that powerful in the Mediterranean. Any Barbary Republic would have spheres of influence between the various powers. I'm sure Spain, Russia, and the Ottomans might also have somethn

Not a bad idea, but I think it’s too big for it to be like that. My guess would be that instead, the US would use it’s close relations to Morocco to help creating some form of Berber state of the Atlas Mountains area.

The same Berbers which were mostly out of the control of the Moroccan government? And for that matter out of the control of the governments in Algeria and Tunisia?

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

View attachment 389819
History:
View attachment 389820
In 1801, Thomas Jefferson sent the Navy to deal with the Barbary pirate states that had been wreaking havoc on American ships. After 4 years of war, the pirates were defeated. To prevent them from causing any more trouble, the Americans reorganized the pirate states into a quasi-independent republic (Free to do it's own thing, but the US can intervine if it's doing something that the US doesn't approve of). This puppet republic was the Republic of the Barbary Coasts. It's capital was the City of Durna.
The United States still doesn't win the War of 1812.
The Mexican--American War ends mostly the same, except that the US also annexes Baja California, which becomes part of the state of California.
After the Civil War, the US sent Africans who wished to return to Africa to the Barbary Coast (slavery was also made illegal from a decree by Abraham Lincoln). (As a consequence of this, Liberia doesn't exist).
America ended up attending the Berlin Conference in 1884, and by the end of the negotiations, The Republic of the Barbary Coast had grown in size.
View attachment 389821
View attachment 389822
The Spanish-American War happens in 1898 and the US takes Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico. (Puerto Rico is annexed, while the Philippines and Cuba become Quadi-Independent).
During WW1, the Barbary Coasts joined the war alongside the US.
In WW2, Italy--dispite German objections--invaded the Barbary Coast in 1940, bringing America into WW2. The Allies still win, but they win in 1944.
The Republic of the Barbary Coasts became fully independent of the US on June 5, 1963, but kept close ties to the US (Along with Cuba a month later and the Philippines in the January of 1964) in the American International Commonwealth and even joined NATO in 1968.
In 1986, small nationalist groups popped up in the Barbary Coast, with the belief that their nation was a reborn Carthaginian Empire. Luckily, these groups remained small.
Culture:
Due to its long history with the US, the Barbary Coast has an interesting blend of American and Muslim values. They still use the imperial system of measure, but are working on switching to metric. The official languages are Engligh and Arabic.

Africa in the 21st Century:
View attachment 389841
(Thanks to the long history between the US and the Barbary Coast, the US is far more tolerant to Islam than it is in our timeline.)

The idea isn't too bad but there are some flaws.

- What makes the US invest time and money on North Africa instead on North America?

- Does the USA disregard the sovereignty of the Ottoman Sultan by reorganising the States? If so, if Mehmed Ali Pasha invaded all the way to Tunis lets say, what will the USA do? Fight for North Africa? I doubt it.

- What will Britain do with sudden increase of US influence in the Maghreb? I highly doubt Britain will agree to see markets of North Africa getting closed/losing Privileges.

-Why is Morocco included when Morocco wasn't even hostile to the USA?

 

[raharris1973]

The idea is really out of character for the early US and beyond its power projection league, as interesting as it is.

- Does the USA disregard the sovereignty of the Ottoman Sultan by reorganising the States? If so, if Mehmed Ali Pasha invaded all the way to Tunis lets say, what will the USA do? Fight for North Africa? I doubt it.

This is interesting to think about, the U.S. gets precociously into overseas imperialism and gets spanked down....and not even by France or Britain, but by Turks or Egyptians or natives.

Maybe there would be convergent evolution of US foreign policy thereafter, where it prefers continentalism for the next 100 years, and then reconsiders broader interventions after that.

Or maybe "isolationism" is even more enduring for 20th century America.

Or, maybe the US takes just a 50 year or 75 year from these enterprises, consider the them folly, but then with a change of generation, a revisionist view decides to "get it right this time".