Vietnam Avoids Colonialism

The easiest way would be to butterfly colonialism altogether through a stronger rest of the world or a weaker Europe. What time frame are you looking at having a PoD?

I would imagine a stronger rest of the world is more difficult than changing the political or economic situation in Europe and would thus require an earlier PoD. What do you think?
 
You should make Vietnam much stronger. Perhaps it could conquer more South East Asia. And rulers should be modernisation mind enough.
 
Seeing as pretty much everything except China and Japan got colonised, either China needs to conquer Vietnam or some disaster would need to occur in Europe around the 15th century that massively weakens them - a second-major-outbreak-of-the-Black-Death-sized disaster.

Following that, Vietnam needs to manage somehow to avoid being colonised until the attraction of empire wears off in the 20th century. By which point, either Europe has basically never been able to colonise anything and simply doesn't consider it, or Vietnam has become too much a part of China for it to still be 'Vietnam'

Unfortunately I don't see much of a better option.

- BNC
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Without drastic changes Vietnam won't escape a minimum level of European economic and naval domination (like China, Japan and Siam) involving treaty ports and extraterritoriality for Europeans.

However, PoDs need not be so drastic to prevent Vietnam from becoming an exclusive territorial protectorate or appendage of France, Britain, Germany, Italu or Japan.

For example, if the British had participated in the French expeditions in the 1850s and 1860s that opened up Vietnam, there might be a multilateral settlement opening up treaty ports like China, and, with the British insisting on equal (but not exclusive) access, Vietnam, like China might fall under an "open door" policy where there is an international consensus to keep the Imperial government and territory of the state intact, even while instituting an internationally administered Vietnamese (or Dainam-ese) Customs Service.

Thoughts? Would the type of regime I described count towards satisfying the OP?

The China takeover idea is also interesting, although not in line with the OP:

It was discussed 13 years ago on SHWI:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!s.../soc.history.what-if/88eRoq98kNU/TOYRtTMwkzAJ

"Hm. People are forgetting about the nearest imperial power on the
spot, and one with a prior claim to the area as a tributary state:
China.

While China was declining economically -- GDP per capita dropped
about a third from 1800 to 1850 -- and was wracked by British opium
and societal breakdown, its military picked up the pace against non-
Westernized armies rather well. We commemorate this increase in
Chinese military capability every time we eat General Tso's Chicken;
after kicking Taiping ass, General Zuo also put down Muslim revolts
in China's far northwest, and the Nien rebellion, sort of a proto-
banditti state.

By the time of the Sino-French war, the Chinese were even able to
fight the French to a standstill on the Vietnamese border (though
they were hopelessly outclassed in the naval battles; Taiwan was
completely blockaded)."


----

By the way, something other than a permanent French colonial establishment in Indochina is plausible, from the same thread cited above:

upload_2016-8-21_9-19-59.png

"French Withdraw from Indochina Early
9/12/03
Really early. 1861, to be specific.
Napoleon III almost did it; he wanted to have troops available for the
Mexico thing, and because there was discontent in Paris about the
costs of the pacification of Cochin China. Various interest
groups--the church, the Bordeaux shippers--pressured him into staying
in. But I think even jlk7e would agree that it's not too implausible
to have Napoleon III make a different decision (about anything).
So, French go home in 1861. Whither Indochina?

Ivan Hodes"
 
The China takeover idea is also interesting, although not in line with the OP:

It was discussed 13 years ago on SHWI:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!s.../soc.history.what-if/88eRoq98kNU/TOYRtTMwkzAJ

"Hm. People are forgetting about the nearest imperial power on the
spot, and one with a prior claim to the area as a tributary state:
China.

While China was declining economically -- GDP per capita dropped
about a third from 1800 to 1850 -- and was wracked by British opium
and societal breakdown, its military picked up the pace against non-
Westernized armies rather well. We commemorate this increase in
Chinese military capability every time we eat General Tso's Chicken;
after kicking Taiping ass, General Zuo also put down Muslim revolts
in China's far northwest, and the Nien rebellion, sort of a proto-
banditti state.

By the time of the Sino-French war, the Chinese were even able to
fight the French to a standstill on the Vietnamese border (though
they were hopelessly outclassed in the naval battles; Taiwan was
completely blockaded)."

China didn't necessarily need to takeover Vietnam, tributary state status alone would be enough for China to fight a war to defend Vietnam (and Korea) against Western colonizers.

If the Qing's provincial armies did better than they did IOTL, this could be done.

It only derails from my line if China was tempeted to turn her traditional tributary states into western-style colonies (we saw signs of that when the Qing forced a Unequal Treaty upon the Koreans and opened a Qing Treaty Port in Korea) or even Chinese provinces (Yuan Shikai planned just that). Both could happen if the Chinese Empire was in a stronger military position ITTL.
 
A Vietnam under Qing direct control could still very much maintain a unique identity. For the Qing to counter European colonialism, the Qing has to first be strong. Being strong also means that the Qing systems established by previous emperors could survive. The Qing practiced the separation of the "peripheral peoples" from the Han in OTL. Since the Viets are different enough from Southwestern tribes like the Zhuang(who were not prevented from intermarrying Han people), they could be treated like the peripheral peoples and have laws that prevent han-viet marriage and cultural exchange. Basically, Vietnam becomes Mongolia.
 
Last edited:
French Vietnam was basically a ssrie of incident and rash decisions. I can't give the answer this deserves as I'm not on a computer but still.

The Emperor Tu Duc was asked repeatedly by Napoleon III to stop persecuting Christians who were a large minority at the time, Roman Catholic mostly.
After a while the French staged an expedition with the Spanish in the late 1850's to take Danang/Tourane, a major port. This was a failure. They tried to take Saigon as a diversion but it didn't oo much good.
They were only saved by the apparition of the massive french fleet that had participated in the 2nd Opium war. That gave the French Cochinchina.

Twenty years later, Tonkin was turned into a protectorate after the Vietnamese kept persecuting Christians and didn't respect trade treaties.

Lots of pods there. Have the emperors be more concilient toward Christians and there's no casus belli for colonisation
 
French Vietnam was basically a ssrie of incident and rash decisions. I can't give the answer this deserves as I'm not on a computer but still.

The Emperor Tu Duc was asked repeatedly by Napoleon III to stop persecuting Christians who were a large minority at the time, Roman Catholic mostly.
After a while the French staged an expedition with the Spanish in the late 1850's to take Danang/Tourane, a major port. This was a failure. They tried to take Saigon as a diversion but it didn't oo much good.
They were only saved by the apparition of the massive french fleet that had participated in the 2nd Opium war. That gave the French Cochinchina.

Twenty years later, Tonkin was turned into a protectorate after the Vietnamese kept persecuting Christians and didn't respect trade treaties.

Lots of pods there. Have the emperors be more concilient toward Christians and there's no casus belli for colonisation
The removal of a casus belli doesn't mean no colonisation.
 
The removal of a casus belli doesn't mean no colonisation.
Certainly does not but colonialism has a limited lifespan and this was a casus belli for the French.
Vietnam was not a great market at the time and would need to be developed. The Brits have their hands full in India and the Spanish can't oo it.
Even ten years after, China star to crumble and you can get t in China proper rather than trying to go roundabout through the Hanoi delta
 
Well, OTL Siam avoided colonization because it could act as a buffer between the British and French territories. Could things unfold differently so that Siam is colonized and Vietnam becomes the buffer state between Siam and China?
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Well, OTL Siam avoided colonization because it could act as a buffer between the British and French territories. Could things unfold differently so that Siam is colonized and Vietnam becomes the buffer state between Siam and China?

That's an interesting idea that has some geopolitical logic to it, so maybe yeah.

Looking at things from the British end, with the Siamese trying to accommodate and survive as in OTL, but without the French being a countervailing power projecting power via Indochina, would British "men on the spot" or the London government finally decide it wants a direct protectorate or annexation of Siam to gain a wider tax base and food source, while also neatly creating a land link between British India and Malaya? At least once we get to the peak colonialism era of the 1890s?

A Vietnam under Qing direct control could still very much maintain a unique identity. For the Qing to counter European colonialism, the Qing has to first be strong. Being strong also means that the Qing systems established by previous emperors could survive. The Qing practiced the separation of the "peripheral peoples" from the Han in OTL. Since the Viets are different enough from Southwestern tribes like the Zhuang(who were not prevented from intermarrying Han people), they could be treated like the peripheral peoples and have laws that prevent han-viet marriage and cultural exchange. Basically, Vietnam becomes Mongolia.

Agreed, probably only a PoD even before 1100 AD could turn Vietnamese identity into a local Chinese identity. Mongol or Qing dynasties probably would have treated them separately from the Han. So if they follow the Mongolia model, while 20th century China may feel entitled to rule it, Vietnam stands a greater than 50% chance of establishing effective independence from China, particularly any Republic of China.
 
particularly any Republic of China.
Not really. IOTL, the Republic of China claims much more land than the PRC. (See: Mongolia, Tannu Tuva, North Burma etc.) But hey, butterflies. However, looking at it from another way, if the Qing manages to be strong enough to conquer Vietnam and hold it (which probably means it has westernized) there might not be a Republic, communist or democratic. Since this Qing dynasty would separate the Viets and Han, I don't think the Viets would resist.
My inner Qing restorationist is laughing maniacally
 
Last edited:
Top