Alternately, if it was a Japanese penal colony, they eventually strike out on their own and secede from the Japanese Empire, assisting the Allies in exchange for recognition of sovereignty.
Who buys Alaska if not the USA? (Is it guaranteed to be Britain?)
- Thread starter Višeslav
- Start date
Alternately, if it was a Japanese penal colony, they eventually strike out on their own and secede from the Japanese Empire, assisting the Allies in exchange for recognition of sovereignty.
Maybe Napoleon Lite could scrounge another superfluous Habsburg and stand up another "Empire".Believe it or not there were French(wo)men who did just that back in the 17th and 18th centuries. (Well, not quite tundra, but it might as well have been.)To replicate that in the 19th century would probably need convincing a few Métis people to come further north to "settle down".
In any case, to get back to reality, I don't think Alaska would be Japanese. This is still a country that's still in shock after the forced opening by the Black Ships and is still very largely feudal, and thus at the time it would have been more likely for Japan to be seen in the same manner as Qing dynasty China during this time. Don't forget that the Meiji Emperor's ascension happen just merely a couple of years after Seward's purchase IOTL, and at the time Japan would not be taken seriously as a potential buyer even by St. Petersburg. That narrows the options considerably and thus, apart from the US, the only other buyers Russia would be considering in selling off Alaska would be European.
I think they mean Russia keeps it and then lost it to Japan in the 1905 war.
Even then, with such a late date, I'm not sure that アラスカ would be as Japanese as some would assume. Forget about the natural resources and all that for a minute, because unlike Manchuria and Korea they are all located in remote, inhospitable locations. Alaska is also unlike Korea, which Japan had a vested interest in, and also unlike Taiwan, the model colony. The climate is also much worse than Hokkaido and Karafuto and is not that easy to defend from the Home Islands (which was an advantage for Karafuto). Even if the only means of getting Japanese settlers into the area would be as a penal colony (since no sane Japanese person at the time would willingly want to go there anyway), I doubt that it would be much of a success even as an overstretch. (Even then, this is also around the time period when Japan was still debating whether or not it should actually have colonies in the first place, and even considered selling off Taiwan, too.) Thus, if Japan gained Alaska as a result of war I'd figure that they would try to sell it immediately, seeing it as of no value - and Canada would be waiting.
Yeah. See Grey Worm and Missanndi's expressions on riding into Winterfell in latest Game of Thrones: "We went through all that to invade this frozen craphole?"
I'm thinking it would remain Russian, because if the Americans don't want it and the Brits can't be bothered, no one else will part with even a small amount of cash for the place.
In 1867 Alaska was worthless, remote, and inhospitable. The Russians colonized it in order to harvest furs, and they did such a good job the fur bearing marine mammals they depended upon were driven to near extinction. It was indefensible for anyone other than the British or the Americans, and it was too remote for other powers to even harvest the fish there.
A similar situation existed with Florida prior to the US annexing it by force under Gen. Andrew Jackson. In the opening of the 19th century, Florida was worthless, remote, inhospitable, and ruled by the Spanish who could not be bothered to actually govern it. Florida became a haven for pirates, bandits, escaped slaves, and other outcasts and undesirables of the SE US and the Caribbean colonies of the European powers, and cleaning it up is why Gen. Jackson invaded (against his instructions from Washington DC --- the US government did not want the place).
So, I would think Alaska would become a neglected Russian colony, governing itself because no one else is interested in the place, being populated by Alaskan Natives, Inuits, a few residual Russians, and a motley crew of outlaws and pirates fleeing the law in their home countries.
In 1867 Alaska was worthless, remote, and inhospitable. The Russians colonized it in order to harvest furs, and they did such a good job the fur bearing marine mammals they depended upon were driven to near extinction. It was indefensible for anyone other than the British or the Americans, and it was too remote for other powers to even harvest the fish there.
A similar situation existed with Florida prior to the US annexing it by force under Gen. Andrew Jackson. In the opening of the 19th century, Florida was worthless, remote, inhospitable, and ruled by the Spanish who could not be bothered to actually govern it. Florida became a haven for pirates, bandits, escaped slaves, and other outcasts and undesirables of the SE US and the Caribbean colonies of the European powers, and cleaning it up is why Gen. Jackson invaded (against his instructions from Washington DC --- the US government did not want the place).
So, I would think Alaska would become a neglected Russian colony, governing itself because no one else is interested in the place, being populated by Alaskan Natives, Inuits, a few residual Russians, and a motley crew of outlaws and pirates fleeing the law in their home countries.
If they can't sell Alaska to anybody they'd be willing to sell it to, they might just keep it themselfes.
They could: not that there was some practical sense (at the time of selling) in keeping it but the whole action was triggered by a fear of something that may happen (or may not because of an absence of a practical sense). After all, a very big part of the Russian territory had, as Alaska, a tiny population, practically no communications and no economic reasons for keep it.
Now I’m picturing the House of Romanov being exiled to Alaska alongside with a lot of the royalists after World War 1
Is not Alaska becoming a home to White Russian emigres a topic of several threads over the years? It's possible and by "a lot" it could be hundreds of thousands or even millions considering how many were killed in the Russian Civil War and how many White (Russians) there were. Sitka might become one of the major cites in North America if that happens.
And if OTL Russian Revolution still happens and Alaska was still Russian there is no chance the British/Canadians or the US is going to let the Soviets take it (Canada might just annex it in that case or make it a protectorate).
Last edited: