US Civil War: Foreign Intervention

An alternate history of the US Civil War is obviously a common theme and there is debate over how the South could have improved their situation. One idea is that of foreign intervention; if foreign powers could have gained from the fall of the USA they may have joined the war on the Confederate side.


- 1861, Emperor Maximilian of Mexico realises he needs the support of Mexican landowners, gives them great privileges, allows them to form parliament and create Imperial Constitution.
- First act of parliament to expand Mexican Empire and take advantage of US Civil War to regain territory.
- Mexicans make a deal with France: French army will support Mexican invasion, in return Mexico will be loyal to French Empire and give them trading rights. French very supportive and agree to alliance.
- French/Mexicans need more support for invasion so make a deal with British: UK also invades, in return they can annex land from the USA, get trade rights with Southern states and the French will support British policies in Europe. British very supportive.
- Alliance formed: UK, France, Mexico and CSA, they invade USA from all sides and defeat them by 1865. Impose treaty.
- CSA independent, annexes Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and D.C.
- Mexico annexes California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Colorado.
- British annex Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Dakota and Wyoming.
- USA left with N.E. and Great Lakes.

1865-70

- CSA creates permanent government: similar to original US Constitution but more decentralised, slavery legal in every state but each with own laws to regulate. Society becomes more conservative Christian, with capitalist economy and minimal regulations. Loyal slaves rewarded with some freedoms, freed slaves receive some civil rights, white criminals reduced to slaves. Slavery becomes more of a hereditary class system rather than a purely race-based system.
- Mexican government forces most American colonists out of annexed territories, some richer settlers allowed to stay if they support the Empire economically. Seized land given to powerful Mexican landowners, they rent it out to Mexican settlers. Government allows middle class more freedoms, creates capitalist economy with few regulations, Mexican economy grows and society modernises.
- Lands annexed by the British are added to the Dominion of Canada, the small local populations become British citizens and are given same status as Canadians. British government encourages UK natives to emigrate to the new territories by giving them large amounts of land, these grants only apply to imperial subjects.
- USA’s industry suffers as CSA trades mostly with the British. Settlers from USA struggle to purchase land in British, Mexican and CSA territories. Population of USA increases due to immigration but demographic growth has slowed down as well as economic growth.
 
Personally, I am more interested in the less travelled path of someone actively supporting the Union. That however is a derail on your thread, sorry
 
Good idea.
I like the idea of a decentralised CSA.
The idea of criminal become slaves is interesting.
You repay the victim of the crime and if you cannot pay you become a slave until the debt is paid.
It gets rid of much of the need for prisons.
I think the Union should be left with a little more land.
Free market might be a better term for the CSA economy "laissez faire". The term Capitalist cover too much ground and of course no bail out of too big to fail. Regulation is provided by business being allowed to fail.
Welfare is provided by Church Charities or non religious groups.
Banks are full reserve and can only loan or money from depositors savings. Money is gold or silver coins.
 
Last edited:
An alternate history of the US Civil War is obviously a common theme and there is debate over how the South could have improved their situation. One idea is that of foreign intervention; if foreign powers could have gained from the fall of the USA they may have joined the war on the Confederate side.


- 1861, Emperor Maximilian of Mexico realises he needs the support of Mexican landowners, gives them great privileges, allows them to form parliament and create Imperial Constitution.
- First act of parliament to expand Mexican Empire and take advantage of US Civil War to regain territory.
- Mexicans make a deal with France: French army will support Mexican invasion, in return Mexico will be loyal to French Empire and give them trading rights. French very supportive and agree to alliance.
- French/Mexicans need more support for invasion so make a deal with British: UK also invades, in return they can annex land from the USA, get trade rights with Southern states and the French will support British policies in Europe. British very supportive.
- Alliance formed: UK, France, Mexico and CSA, they invade USA from all sides and defeat them by 1865. Impose treaty.
- CSA independent, annexes Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and D.C.
- Mexico annexes California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Colorado.
- British annex Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Dakota and Wyoming.
- USA left with N.E. and Great Lakes.

1865-70

- CSA creates permanent government: similar to original US Constitution but more decentralised, slavery legal in every state but each with own laws to regulate. Society becomes more conservative Christian, with capitalist economy and minimal regulations. Loyal slaves rewarded with some freedoms, freed slaves receive some civil rights, white criminals reduced to slaves. Slavery becomes more of a hereditary class system rather than a purely race-based system.
- Mexican government forces most American colonists out of annexed territories, some richer settlers allowed to stay if they support the Empire economically. Seized land given to powerful Mexican landowners, they rent it out to Mexican settlers. Government allows middle class more freedoms, creates capitalist economy with few regulations, Mexican economy grows and society modernises.
- Lands annexed by the British are added to the Dominion of Canada, the small local populations become British citizens and are given same status as Canadians. British government encourages UK natives to emigrate to the new territories by giving them large amounts of land, these grants only apply to imperial subjects.
- USA’s industry suffers as CSA trades mostly with the British. Settlers from USA struggle to purchase land in British, Mexican and CSA territories. Population of USA increases due to immigration but demographic growth has slowed down as well as economic growth.

Why on God's green earth is the UK doing this? Why would they want to strengthen FRANCE of all countries? France has historically been one of the chief rivals of GB so why would they help?
Why would the Alliance help the CSA take ANY additional territory? What is in it for GB to have the CSA take Kansas and Nebraska and how in the Hell is the CSA going to hold it, particularly Kansas?

Your class based slave system would cause a massive revolt among Poor Whites who would perfectly well know WHO that is aimed at. It isn't the upper classes which will suddenly be enslaved as "criminals" but Poor Whites.
 
- 1861, Emperor Maximilian of Mexico realises he needs the support of Mexican landowners, gives them great privileges, allows them to form parliament and create Imperial Constitution.

Pardon taking this point by point, but it's easier to organize arguments this way.

And this helps his position when they do not want him in power, period, how?

- First act of parliament to expand Mexican Empire and take advantage of US Civil War to regain territory.
- Mexicans make a deal with France: French army will support Mexican invasion, in return Mexico will be loyal to French Empire and give them trading rights. French very supportive and agree to alliance.

This hardly seems to be something France is willing to shed blood over.

- French/Mexicans need more support for invasion so make a deal with British: UK also invades, in return they can annex land from the USA, get trade rights with Southern states and the French will support British policies in Europe. British very supportive.

As John noted, why on earth is Britain doing this?

- CSA creates permanent government: similar to original US Constitution but more decentralised, slavery legal in every state but each with own laws to regulate. Society becomes more conservative Christian, with capitalist economy and minimal regulations. Loyal slaves rewarded with some freedoms, freed slaves receive some civil rights, white criminals reduced to slaves. Slavery becomes more of a hereditary class system rather than a purely race-based system.

Despite that all the justifications for slavery rest on the idea of it being for, and only for, black slaves?

This isn't going to fly. This isn't even getting out of the hanger.

- Mexican government forces most American colonists out of annexed territories, some richer settlers allowed to stay if they support the Empire economically. Seized land given to powerful Mexican landowners, they rent it out to Mexican settlers. Government allows middle class more freedoms, creates capitalist economy with few regulations, Mexican economy grows and society modernises.

Why on earth is a government dominated by the conservative quasi-aristocracy granting the middle class more freedoms?
 

frlmerrin

Banned
Venator,
There are a great many plausible and credible ways in which one could create a time-line where due to European intervention in Mexico and the American Civil War the USA lost the CSA and then further territory to the British and French Empires, unfortunately the scenario you propose is really not one of them. Sorry.
In the first place in Maximillian did not accept the crown of Mexico until late 1863 and he did not get to Mexico until April 1864. On top of this despite being a senior aristocrat of Austria-Hungary he was very liberal and reform minded to make the sort of pact and alliance with the conservative land owning factions in Mexico he would have to have a completely different personality to that which he had historically.
On top of this in 1861 when you have Maximillian creating conservative parliaments in OTL the tripartite alliance of Britain, France and Spain was only talking about a punitive raid on the port of Vera Cruz. They did not get there until the spring of 1862 and it was after this that the French decided to occupy Mexico.
The other thing to remember is that during the French intervention Mexico was broke, had almost no military to talk about and it was busy having a civil war. The French had a modest professional army in Mexico which included Belgian, Austria-Hungarian and Egyptian elements but the Imperial Mexican army itself and for that matter the Juarista army too were weak. Maximillian is not in control of the French forces in his country. The French could invade the USA if they wanted to but Imperial Mexico is not going to do so. The only reason the French would invade the USA is to stop it supplying arms to the Juaristas and they didn’t really do that until 1865 OTL.
You have not demonstrated any reason for the British to support the French/CSA in a war with the USA. In OTL one of the main reasons the French had such trouble occupying the country is that they had to use disarmed French battleships as troopers and transports because the British refused to let them contract British merchant ships for the purpose. The British did this because they were less than thrilled to have the French expanding their empire in North America. It is true that the British and French were on friendly terms at this time and often found themselves allies in Europe and beyond but it was a fragile friendship. The British despite having the most powerful navy in the world was terrified by the prospect of a French invasion and this was exacerbated by the contemporaneous naval arms race over ironclads.
In OTL the British did not fight or even threaten to fight over the Oregon country during the 54 deg 40 min crisis. They ceded up the land to the USA as they knew it was too far away to defend properly and they could not stem the tide of American immigrants. Why then would they fight to regain this region when by 1865 it was still hard to defend long term and much of it was now full of American settlers?
I also suspect that your idea of convict slaves in the independent CSA would not be accepted by either poor whites or rich ones as it blurs the line between black and white.
 
This situation sounds like Francis Blair's wet dream. If anything could make Confederates forget their differences with the Union, it's the threat of invasion by Catholic powers bent on conquering them and carving up their land.
 
Top