alternatehistory.com

Please refer to the following link for more details about this border clash.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Cuevas_War

This event was initiated by a group of Texan Rangers who decided to initiate a raid over the Mexican border to reclaim cattle stolen from Texas. During the process, the detachment of Texan Rangers ended up clashing with the local Mexican militia forces under Juan Flores Salinas (who would be killed in the clash). The Texans were outnumbered, and decided to retreat to a defensive position along a river on the Mexican side.

The Texan Ranger forces was saved by Gatling Gun assistance from a Regular US Army Unit on the US side of the river. Later on, higher US Army command asked the leadership of the Texan Ranger detachment to cross over to the US side, and ordered the nearby US Army unit to provide no fire support if the Texan Rangers refused. The Texan Rangers did not initially comply with the US Army, and only snuck back into Texas with other plans to try to retake the cattle.

The second invasion consisted of a much smaller group of Texan Rangers, who were a little less easier to detect. They managed to capture a Mexican captain, snuck him across the border, and demanded that all stolen cattle be returned or else the Mexican captain would be killed. The Mexicans decided to comply.

It is easy to see how this could have escalated into a larger war. This is a rare case of a state/province within a country initiating a war of its own against another country. The big question is what would have happened if this war, initiated by the State of Texas, led to a second Mexican war?

The US Army at the time was
fairly demobilized, much smaller in size than it was while fighting the Civil War. It was really only strong enough to deal with Indian disturbances. I do not think the US Army at the time would have been ready to carry out another invasion of Mexico. The two advantages the US Army had was much better technological ability, developed during the Civil War, and perhaps better transportation, as the US was rapidly developing its western railways after the Civil War.

However, the Mexicans themselves had plenty of battle experience from the Reform Wars of the the 1850's and the anti-French campaign of the 1860's. Though the US would have been able to mobile move in quicker, they would have been unable to control Mexico, and the war would become very unpopular.

It is possible that such a war would have given the US a collective scare to the point where it could have changed the outcome of Reconstruction. During the time, the US was still bitterly divided, with many localized conflicts such as the Kirk-Holden War of 1870 in North Carolina. An impending invasion from Mexico would have perhaps brought brief unity to the American people, who were pre-occupied by Reconstruction related violence.

However, as stated, this war would inevitably resulted in a long war of attrition, and demands for it to end would end up becoming louder and louder. The only Americans who would support it would probably have been those who saw it as an opportunity to reinstate the practice of slavery somewhere else.

As for Mexico, they would have lost control of the regions of Sonora that were exposed to the Yaqui rebellion. It would have likely ended up becoming the problem of US invading forces, which would probably have not be able to handle it while facing simultaneous partisan resistance from Mexican militia. The Yaquis could have split in the situation. One faction would think that the (now expanded) US is not much better to live under as well. They would first ask for independence, then follow up with a war against the other occupier once the US refused. The other faction may consider fighting along with the Mexicans, hoping that they would be 'rewarded' for fighting along with Mexico.

The Mexican government could have also extend its partisan warfare into the southern border regions in response to this invasion. This is not too far fetched, as Mexicans residing around the border city of El Paso, Texas, and who crossed the border into Mexico freely, later took up arms against the Texas rangers in 1877 after monopolistic interests tried to privatize a region of salt beds used by peasants communally for personal needs. This was known as the El Paso Salt War.

The Texan Rangers who were sent to respond to this disturbance in 1877 could have found themselves in a similar situation that their brothers in arms faced in 1875, under intense pressure from superior numbers coming from Mexico. The only difference is that the El Paso Salt War event happened *inside* the US, with overwhelming numbers were still coming from Mexico. Like the Las Cuevas War of 1875, the US Army ended up bailing out the Texas Rangers dealing with this social crisis. Two years later they build Fort Worth nearby.

If the Las Cuevas war escalated into all out war in 1875, it would be safe to guess that disturbances around the El Paso salt flats could have happened a little sooner. Also, the various Native American groups that the US Cavalry was dealing with in the Southwest would have found themselves in a more complex operational environment. Most US forces dealing with militant Indians would have been diverted toward Mexico, giving them more operational mobility. However, militant Indians fleeing the US Cavalry by crossing the Mexican border would have gotten no mercy.

It is possible that the Mexican government could have supported US Southwestern tribes as a proxy force to harass and slow down US troops arriving into Mexico. But they probably would have been mindful of the fact that once the war was over, they would have to disarm their newly found proxy friends , whichever side really "won".

Would outside powers intervene? That is a good question. I do not think the European powers would have seen much to gain by direct intervention in a distant country that could lead to a wider war with the US. Addiotnally, it would have provided an another rally cry, based on the Monroe Doctrine, that could be used in the face of popular dissent against this hypothetical war. European nations would have probably supported a war of attrition instead, perhaps looking the other way if volunteer brigades decided to help the Mexicans out.

If this European intervention happen, no matter the form or outcome, I do not think the US would have been too keen to intervene in WWI, preferring to see their potential threats kill each other off.

Brian Ghilliotti
Top