WI/AHC: The Netherlands Remains a World Power?

As the title says. The Dutch retain most of their overseas/colonial empire (perhaps even expand it) instead of losing most of it in the 18th/19th centuries. By 2018 they should be on the same power level as say Britain (who took more than a few of the Dutch colonies). That when you speak of the Netherlands, the first thing people think of isn't tulips or cheese or windmills or whatever else.

Hoping @pompejus, @Janprimus and some other Netherlanders can help here.
 

TruthfulPanda

Gone Fishin'
Possible changes, mix and match to your heart's content :)
1 - Netherlands retains Brazil and Angola (maybe no Portuguese restoration?) - in the XVIIIth century the Portuguese Crown received on average about 8,5 tons of gold from Brazil - every year ...
2 - different Anglo-Dutch War(s) results - Netherlands keeps/expands into New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania
3 - different outcome of War of Spanish Succession - North Netherlands gain South Netherlands (and other places?)
4 - Napoleonic Wars - Netherlands retain the Cape (Ceylon?) - or get something substantial in return for the Cape and/or other possessions when doing a swap with the British. New Zaeland, future State of Victoria, Oregon ...
5 - no Belgian Seccession - in 1913 OTL "United Netherlands" had a GDP equal to about 2/5th that of France (Metropole) or A-H. Maybe, if these had stayed united, they'd be even richer? And to that add colonies ...
 
A main problem for the Netherlands is, obviously, that it is a lot smaller than Britain (or even England), France or several other competitors. It can remain an important country. It will never to completely outclass England, France, Germany, Russia, China, the USA, etc. In the end, the base of the Netherlands is simply too small. Even if it were able to absorb all of Belgium, or parts of western Germany or Nothern France (like Dunkirk).

Could it maintain it relatively large colonial empire?* Mind you, the Netherlands did had a pretty good colonial Empire with Indonesia. Indonesia probably was the best colony any country could have, together with India. But, I would say that a POD in the late 18th century would be able to accomplish the Dutch keeping (former British) Guyana, the Cape Colony, Sri Lanka, Malaysia and the Dutch Gold Coast. Even a POD during the French revolutionary road could be able to accomplish it. If the Dutch East India gets its act together again, I would say that a significant Dutch Southern India is even possible. It is even possible for them in theory to gain some more colonies. I think a Dutch Western Australian settlement colony is possible, if you can get a reason for a Dutch settlement colony.

With an earlier POD even more is possible. There are several Carribean islands that could have been Dutch, like the Virgin Islands.A more competent WIC could mean that the Dutch could even keep some of Brasil and I think that in theory even a Dutch New York is possible, if you would realy want to.

In the end I would say that simply put the Dutch economy and politics (which were closely connected) became stagnant and corrupt. It needed something, maybe someone to make some major changes. Maybe of Johan Friso hadn't died, or Willem IV remained tadholder for longer, or even if Willem V would have been competent it might have changed a lot. In my opinion the key lies at the stadholders, because it were the regents who were corrupt and rich and relativwely satisfied with the current situation. They would never change anything. A stadholder might have.

Mind you, it might have helped if the Dutch cared a bit more of expansion into the Southern Netherlands and maybe expand their influence into NW Germany (like East-Frisia,Bentheim, Cleves). It would have given the Dutch a larger population base, something they needed. Especialy in the 19th century.

*Well, no. In the end nobody can. Obviously.
 
1 - Netherlands retains Brazil and Angola (maybe no Portuguese restoration?) - in the XVIIIth century the Portuguese Crown received on average about 8,5 tons of gold from Brazil - every year ...
The Dutch only ruled the Northeastern part of Brazil (and only in a loose way) with no sign they were going to the South where the gold is.
 

Lusitania

Donor
The Dutch suffered from the same problems that Portuguese did in the 16th century. They were overextended and their size is a limiting factor in their ability to become world power during the 19thcentury. I read that Their limited resources and personnel made them reliant on Norwegian sailors and great part of their history. Plus they were defeated by British who overtook a big part of their colonial empire in the 18 th century. By time Napoleon comes to power they are in cross hairs and stuck between two great powers.
 

TruthfulPanda

Gone Fishin'
The Dutch suffered from the same problems that Portuguese did in the 16th century. They were overextended and their size is a limiting factor in their ability to become world power during the 19thcentury.
Adding the South would double if not triple their manpower ...
 
They were overextended and their size is a limiting factor in their ability to become world power during the 19thcentury. I read that Their limited resources and personnel made them reliant on Norwegian sailors and great part of their history.
I don't think this is a big problem, using other nationalities as sailors or soldiers. As long as you have the money and pay them, they remain loyal. And I think foreigners might have been cheaper than Dutch sailors. Actualy using mercenary troops was pretty common in the early modern age. I think basicly everyone did it.

So, as long as money comes in from the colonies (and other places like the Baltic and such), hiring foreigners is not a problem. Actualy even useful and smart. It might give them an edge in foreign markets. I think trading in Norway, while having some Norwegians aboard, could be a good thing.
 
What I heard is that it became too entangled in fights with the British.
GB had an hinterland, a good enough economy that meant that even if its fleet sunk, it could still survive as a state through taxes and domestic consumption
On the other hand, the Dutch were a navy with some land. If the navy is sunk or if commerce is interrupted, the country has nothing to fall back on
 
What I heard is that it became too entangled in fights with the British.
That is simply not true. The fights with the British were at the hight of the Dutch power and the Dutch managed to defeat the British in the second and third Anglo-Dutch war, while not losing anything to the British during the first Anglo-Dutch war. The decline of the Netherlands happened later, when the Dutch were allied to the British.
 
The Dutch were broken by the wars with Loius XIV
Even that is not entirely true. Although it cost the Dutch some. Most wars weren't fought on Dutch soil. And it wasn't solely the Dutch that fought him. I think that Britain payed far more than the Dutch, probably even proportionaly. Although it is true that the Dutch gained the least of the wars. The wars with France made Britain the main power, since it got so much in the peace treaty (North America, India), while the Dutch barely got anything at all.
 

Lusitania

Donor
That is simply not true. The fights with the British were at the hight of the Dutch power and the Dutch managed to defeat the British in the second and third Anglo-Dutch war, while not losing anything to the British during the first Anglo-Dutch war. The decline of the Netherlands happened later, when the Dutch were allied to the British.

I do not agree. Starting in the war of American independence and continuing to the Napoleónic Wars the Dutch lost their territory in Africa, India and were forced to cede huge trading concessions to British in the remaining Dutch crown jewel “Dutch East Indies”.

The rise of Napoleon sealed the Dutch decline. Want Dutch “super power” prevent Napoleon rise to power. Once he and France bring European continent to flames Dutch Hope of maintaining their colonial holding are wiped.
 
I do not agree. Starting in the war of American independence and continuing to the Napoleónic Wars the Dutch lost their territory in Africa, India and were forced to cede huge trading concessions to British in the remaining Dutch crown jewel “Dutch East Indies”.

The rise of Napoleon sealed the Dutch decline. Want Dutch “super power” prevent Napoleon rise to power. Once he and France bring European continent to flames Dutch Hope of maintaining their colonial holding are wiped.
I disagree that this was because the Dutch started fighting with the British. First of all during the fourth Anglo-Dutch war, the Dutch barely lost anything, only some small part of Dutch India. I do agree that it was the occupation by the French (including turning the Republic into a French vasal state) that caused the Dutch to lose the Cape colony and Sri Lanka. The thing is, at that point the Dutch decline already happened. I would say that the Dutch decline started at the beginning of the 18th century and at the end of it, it was barely a major power at all. I would say that it was the corruption and stagnation of the economic system because of the complacency of the Dutch ruling class and merchants was the cause of the Dutch decline. France overrunning the Netherlands and Britain taking its colonies was merely the result.

That said, avoid Napoleon/French revolution and it is certainly possible that the Duch manage to get over it and become a great power again. Although, it did lack the resources needed for the industrial revolution. That alone wouldmake it harder for the Dutch. Although,with a disunited Germany, The Netherlands could take advantage of the Ruhr area.
 
They have to actually integrate the south, though. How accommodating would the largely Calvinist northerners be towards a massive increase in the Catholic population?

That might also depend on when this happens. If for instance all the XVII Netherlands manage to break away from Spain, this will be easier, since Protestants from the Southern Netherlands will stay there and will be put in a position of power, even when, just as in the North, they weren't always the majority. A side effect will be a less dominant Holland, with places like Flanders and Brabant being intact and full members of the same Republic.
If it happens later, than yes, it will be more difficult, especially after a successful Counter-Reformation. Controlling the Generality Lands was one thing, the entire county of Flanders or duchy of Brabant would have to be accepted as province of the Republic. Partially that prospect, especially when religiously, the (elites in the) North and South had drifted apart, including those form the Northern elite from Southern descent.
OTL the clash and distrust between those elites was even a problem for later the kingdom of the United Netherlands.
 
Top