This author elected to delete this, on the grounds of possible fears of regional law violations in the wake of rapidly changed circumstances with regards to East Asia in general.
Last edited:
(Thread deleted)
- Thread starter SpaceMarathon
- Start date
-
- Tags
- taiwan
This is very interesting. Taiwan would have become sort of an American version of Macau and Hong Kong.
Now, how would this affect Japanese expansionism? With Taiwan taken, I imagine their first annexation would be Korea, which means they wouldn't get the chance to play colonialism in a Pacific Island before they face the real challenge of being an Empire. I wonder if they would have tried to make Korea their model colony ITTL. IOTL the Taiwanese greatly benifited from that.
Also, what effect could a stronger US in the Pacific have on China? Maybe the republic manages to stabilize early if it doesn't get butterflied...
Now, how would this affect Japanese expansionism? With Taiwan taken, I imagine their first annexation would be Korea, which means they wouldn't get the chance to play colonialism in a Pacific Island before they face the real challenge of being an Empire. I wonder if they would have tried to make Korea their model colony ITTL. IOTL the Taiwanese greatly benifited from that.
Also, what effect could a stronger US in the Pacific have on China? Maybe the republic manages to stabilize early if it doesn't get butterflied...
Driftless
Donor
IF the US had purchased Taiwan AND retains it to the end of the 19th Century: does that create any impact on the 1898 US v Spain in the Philippines? And the subsequent US v Philippines?
Another point, IF the purchase precedes the American Civil War, any impact on US v CSA naval commerce raiders?
Another point, IF the purchase precedes the American Civil War, any impact on US v CSA naval commerce raiders?
As to the Spanish-American War, the US has a ready-made base of operations to cause the Spanish trouble in the Philippines and elsewhere. In OTL Dewey's squadron set off from Hong Kong, so he is closer to the Philippines than he was before, but that would require the US to build a naval base on the island, preferably on the southern end of it. The other thing that needs to be accounted for is the distance between Taiwan and the continental US. Prior to and following the ACW, the US gobbled up several of the Pacific islands to secure coaling stations. With the purchase of Taiwan, the US is likely going to be much more aggressive in this, seeking to create a supply line between Taiwan and the West Coast.
As I've noted elsewhere, Perry's suggestion of a US protectorate over Okinawa was rejected by even as expansionist-minded a president as Pierce, https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/us-occupies-okinawa-in-1854.424585/ and the same thing would be true about a purchase of Taiwan, even if China agreed to it. It's not surprising that Harris got nowhere with his idea. The Alaska analogy is faulty because Alaska was on the North American continent, and it was hoped that acquiring it would "cage the British Lion on the Pacific Coast." https://books.google.com/books?id=Z_3wbwj4OjsC&pg=PA85 Formosa was far away, and the idea of buying it simply could not be sold to the Senate.
Remember that even with Mexico, in the end the US acquired only relatively sparsely populated areas, in part because of the concern about what to do with a large and culturally alien "non-white" population that were not African American slaves. All those objections would go doubly for Taiwan (the Mexicans were at least Christians--even if Catholics...).
Remember that even with Mexico, in the end the US acquired only relatively sparsely populated areas, in part because of the concern about what to do with a large and culturally alien "non-white" population that were not African American slaves. All those objections would go doubly for Taiwan (the Mexicans were at least Christians--even if Catholics...).
I don't want to overestimate the zeal or importance of the "Missionary Lobby" in the US, I am left wondering however if their involvement early on would have tipped the scales towards the US buying the island. Enough fervor early on could swing senators towards acceptance of such a purchase, with the added benefit of commerce. As most ship owners will be from New England states, the opening of trade in Asia with purchase of Taiwan could be viewed favorably.
Even the bargain purchase of Alaska (on the North American continent) from a friendly Russia was controversial, and had to wait until after the ACW. Even the annexation of Hawaii, with all its missionary and commercial ties to the US had to wait until the 1890's.
One should also note that the constitutionality of acquiring territories not intended for eventual statehood was doubted in the 1850's: indeed, Taney specifically said in *Dred Scott* "There is certainly no power given by the Constitution to the Federal Government to establish or maintain Colonies bordering on the United States or at a distance, to be ruled and governed at its own pleasure; nor to enlarge its territorial limits in any way. except by the admission of new States. That power is plainly given; and if a new is admitted it needs no further legislation by Congress, because the Constitution itself defines the relative rights and powers and duties of the State, and the citizens of the State, and the Federal Government. But no power is given to acquire a Territory to be held and governed permanently in that character." https://books.google.com/books?pg=P...JX9l61LNdMdwV0&id=_5MDAAAAQAAJ&ots=pAA_iLP7hG
Please remember also that we are talking about acquiring an island with about two million people as of 1850. https://books.google.com/books?id=qXeL6tUjygkC&pg=PA79 This utterly dwarfs the populations of the Mexican Cession, Alaska, the Louisiana Purchase territory, or any other territory acquired by the United States until the end of the nineteenth century.
It is just not politically possible in the 1850's. (And this is even assuming a willingness of China to sell--without the US going to war, which after all is how the British got Hong Kong.)
And *please* move this to pre-1900.
One should also note that the constitutionality of acquiring territories not intended for eventual statehood was doubted in the 1850's: indeed, Taney specifically said in *Dred Scott* "There is certainly no power given by the Constitution to the Federal Government to establish or maintain Colonies bordering on the United States or at a distance, to be ruled and governed at its own pleasure; nor to enlarge its territorial limits in any way. except by the admission of new States. That power is plainly given; and if a new is admitted it needs no further legislation by Congress, because the Constitution itself defines the relative rights and powers and duties of the State, and the citizens of the State, and the Federal Government. But no power is given to acquire a Territory to be held and governed permanently in that character." https://books.google.com/books?pg=P...JX9l61LNdMdwV0&id=_5MDAAAAQAAJ&ots=pAA_iLP7hG
Please remember also that we are talking about acquiring an island with about two million people as of 1850. https://books.google.com/books?id=qXeL6tUjygkC&pg=PA79 This utterly dwarfs the populations of the Mexican Cession, Alaska, the Louisiana Purchase territory, or any other territory acquired by the United States until the end of the nineteenth century.
It is just not politically possible in the 1850's. (And this is even assuming a willingness of China to sell--without the US going to war, which after all is how the British got Hong Kong.)
And *please* move this to pre-1900.
Ironically, Harris himself told the King of Siam, ""The United States does not hold any possessions in the East, nor does it desire any. The form of government forbids the holding of colonies. The United States therefore cannot be an object of jealousy to any Eastern Power. Peaceful commercial relations, which give as well as receive benefits, is what the President wishes to establish with Siam, and such is the object of my mission." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Townsend_Harris