WI: 1898 American Sahara

I'm all for interesting scenarios which might have expanded the reach of the United States, but this is too far and patently absurd. Were the U.S. to capture the region, one suspects it would be given to Morocco anyway. This would be more pointless than the U.S. taking Spanish Guinea, and even that is absurd.

See below:

Even though the OP asked to avoid discussing the why and how I'd like to point out the above as a good reason for annexing the Spanish Sahara.
Given the USA's history and good relations with Morroco a POD could be set up to have the USA take the Spanish Sahara away from Spain as a means to maintain Moroccon independence and American interests in Northwest Africa and the Strait of Gibraltar.

After taking the Spanish Sahara I'd imaging that it would be put into a similar position as Cuba, or the Phillipines. But eventually the USA may cede the territory to Morroco.

Wikipedia: Morocco-US Relations; Later 19th said:
At the end of the Civil War, the first international convention ever signed by the United States, the 1865 Spartel Lighthouse Treaty, dealt with a navigational aid erected on the Moroccan side of the Strait of Gibraltar. The Treaty, ratified by Morocco, President Andrew Johnson, and nine European heads of state, granted neutrality to the lighthouse, with the condition that the ten naval powers signing the agreement assumed responsibility for its maintenance.
Around the turn of the 20th century, as European colonizers gazed hungrily at Morocco’s resources and strategically located harbors, the United States strongly defended the Kingdom’s right to its continued sovereignty at the Conference of Madrid (1880), and again at the Algeciras Conference in 1906. In fact, the European powers were edging towards engaging in a continental war because of Morocco in 1905. President Theodore Roosevelt played an important role in settling the affair during the 1906 Algeciras Conference. President Roosevelt offered a compromise plan which the European powers accepted. The proposal granted Morocco a greater deal of autonomy and allowed for all European nations to trade with Morocco.[14]
In 1912, after Morocco became a protectorate of Spain and France because of Moroccan leadership mismanagement, American diplomats called upon the European powers to exercise colonial rule that guaranteed racial and religious tolerance: In short, the U.S. Consul in Tanger declared,” fair play is what the United States asks for Morocco and all interested parties.
 
I saw that post, and was responding to it. Those are insufficient reasons.

Maybe it would be more productive if you stated why they are insignificant reasons? Otherwise I don't understand why you responded with what you did, given that the PoD is discussing the effects "What If" this happened.
 
Maybe it would be more productive if you stated why they are insignificant reasons? Otherwise I don't understand why you responded with what you did, given that the PoD is discussing the effects "What If" this happened.

Others have already addressed this better than I could. The United States at this time was concerned with the Caribbean and the Pacific, not seeking to be a world power. Thus, there is no point in taking over land in Africa, particularly a desert region.
 
Top