What would South East Asia look like without European imperialism?

How different would South East Asia including Maritime South East Asia look if Europe never conquered the any of the area? Would those areas be more prosperous today, having borders that go along the areas tribal territory?
 
Last edited:

PhilippeO

Banned
having borders that go along the areas tribal territory ?
This is certainly not true, even now Thailand have large non-Thai minority. nation states centered on river valley controlling many minorities is more likely to happen.


I think Sumatra, western borneo and Malay penissula will ended-up single states. possibly dominated by Atjeh or Malacca.


Makassar possibly unify entire Celebes/Sulawesi.
 
Papua New Guinea and many of Indonesia's Eastern islands might still be without states, unless a Java-based country decides to expand into and colonize them.
 
Small but very economically powerful Chinese minorities would still appear in most kingdoms. It's plausible that one or more Chinese majority states like OTL Lanfang or Singapore would form. If their ancestral homeland is more open to trade and begins its industrial revolution, Southeast Asia would become to China what Latin America was to the US IOTL.
 
Small but very economically powerful Chinese minorities would still appear in most kingdoms. It's plausible that one or more Chinese majority states like OTL Lanfang or Singapore would form. If their ancestral homeland is more open to trade and begins its industrial revolution, Southeast Asia would become to China what Latin America was to the US IOTL.

There was also japanese adventurers in places like Thailand, there is the tale of one samurai who became a lord there. Maybe in modern Taiwan too...
 
Native kingdoms similar to Thailand would have developed in South East Asia. Most probably the number of states could have been higher unless some empires come up in the place of OTL Indonesia and Malaysia. The larger islands like Sumatra, Java, Borneo, Celebes etc. might have developed their own native kingdoms.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Ironically, the post-colonial borders

in mainland Southeast Asia look remarkably close to the immediate pre-colonial borders.

The European drawing of odd, straight lines separating tribes was much less pronounced here than in Africa.

To the extent many tribes were separated, it was by local kingdoms in the region, not the Europeans.

Now one thing that the European presence probably did do was slow down the rate of change or borders. For instance, Laos and Cambodia, while they existed as native kingdoms, probably would have been completely partitioned between Siam and Vietnam without French intervention.

The Sino-Vietnamese border probably would not have changed at all, its been remarkably stable for 600 or so years. Interesting book on this by David C. Kang that I recommend, "East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute"


insular Southeast Asia is a whole other ball of wax of course.
 
in mainland Southeast Asia look remarkably close to the immediate pre-colonial borders.

The European drawing of odd, straight lines separating tribes was much less pronounced here than in Africa.

To the extent many tribes were separated, it was by local kingdoms in the region, not the Europeans.

Now one thing that the European presence probably did do was slow down the rate of change or borders. For instance, Laos and Cambodia, while they existed as native kingdoms, probably would have been completely partitioned between Siam and Vietnam without French intervention.

The Sino-Vietnamese border probably would not have changed at all, its been remarkably stable for 600 or so years. Interesting book on this by David C. Kang that I recommend, "East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute"


insular Southeast Asia is a whole other ball of wax of course.

Actually, if the Europeans did not arrive, the Cambodians would be under the Viets, the Cambodians were obviously next after the Viets assimilated or expelled the Chams so they were quite thankful of the French.
 
Actually, if the Europeans did not arrive, the Cambodians would be under the Viets, the Cambodians were obviously next after the Viets assimilated or expelled the Chams so they were quite thankful of the French.

They did do that OTL.

Look what happened to Krong Prey Nokor and Lower Cambodia.

As has been said, the Europeans didn't change many borders and alter population locations. What they did do, was check the territorial ambitions of several states; like Brunei, Siam and Annam.
 
They did do that OTL.

Look what happened to Krong Prey Nokor and Lower Cambodia.

As has been said, the Europeans didn't change many borders and alter population locations. What they did do, was check the territorial ambitions of several states; like Brunei, Siam and Annam.
Prey Nokor became Vietnamese even before the French arrived.

But at least the French prevented Siam and Vietnam from possibly partitioning Cambodia completely.
 
They did do that OTL.

Look what happened to Krong Prey Nokor and Lower Cambodia.

As has been said, the Europeans didn't change many borders and alter population locations. What they did do, was check the territorial ambitions of several states; like Brunei, Siam and Annam.

I really loathe the artificial borders in Africa and Maritime South East Asia imposed by the colonizers, this caused the people in them to be confused of their identity so I prefer a TL where they are left alone by Europeans.
 
Last edited:
Top