WI: British Withdraw From Buganda in 1891?

The Imperial British East Africa Company (IBEAC) became increasingly involved in Buganda in the late 1880's culminating when it took the country under its protection in late 1890. However, this takeover was soon followed by civil wars involving Protestants, Catholics and Muslims and being unable to make any profit, the Company decided to withdraw from Buganda in 1891. At this point the Church Missionary Society (CMS) back in Britain become worried about the fate of protestants in the area and promised to pay to the Company if it remained in the region. The CMS was able to gather money from its supporters and the IBEAC stayed in the region and give the government time to act. This was followed by public campaigns for the keeping of the region and political infighting in the British government. Eventually this led the government to make Uganda the protectorate of Britain.

However, what if for a reason or another, the CMS was unable to get enough money to support the IBEAC and the company was forced to leave Buganda? Germans were also showing great interest towards the region and especially Catholics had aligned themselves with Germany. Even IOTL Catholics were doing very well against Protestants until the British started to give protestants weapons, including Maxim guns. It seems very possible indeed that Catholics could have won in Buganda in the early 1890's if it wasn't for British support. Germans weren't necessarily planning to annex the region but neither were the British so something like that could very well still happen. There are also Muslims who might do better in a scenario where European support for Christians has diminished, even if just momentarily.

How would this change affect the development of Uganda? Would there be any sort of wider effects outside the country? Any other thoughts?
 
Last edited:
This is probably somewhat lesser-known topic so maybe I'll BUMP this thread once. :p Please feel free to correct me if there was any mistakes in the OP.
 
Wouldn't this be post 1990 Heligoland Treaty where Germany had already agreed to all the boundaries of most African places including Tanganyika boundaries.

I suppose if that treaty was delayed and the British were less interested and the Germans more interested then they could get the region in exchange for something else.

The Heligoland treaty despite its reputation was a pretty good deal for Germany, getting its colonial boundaries guaranteed by the only power (Britain) that could do anything about it. More poor colonies really weren't worth ruining relations with Britain. Britain would still wan't at least paper control of the region once they though about it, even if they were unmotivated to secure the area right away. The lakes area being the source of the Nile. Cape to Cairo railway dreams etc. I can't see 1891 Germany trying to take advantage of any situations (maybe 1901 or 1911 Germany would).
 

SunDeep

Banned
So, could we potentially see Buganda maintaining its independence in a manner akin to Ethiopia ITTL?
 
Wouldn't this be post 1990 Heligoland Treaty where Germany had already agreed to all the boundaries of most African places including Tanganyika boundaries.

I suppose if that treaty was delayed and the British were less interested and the Germans more interested then they could get the region in exchange for something else.

My understanding was that treaties between Germany and Britain had left territories west of Lake Victoria somewhat ill-defined and that was the reason for continued German activities in the region.

The Heligoland treaty despite its reputation was a pretty good deal for Germany, getting its colonial boundaries guaranteed by the only power (Britain) that could do anything about it. More poor colonies really weren't worth ruining relations with Britain. Britain would still wan't at least paper control of the region once they though about it, even if they were unmotivated to secure the area right away. The lakes area being the source of the Nile. Cape to Cairo railway dreams etc. I can't see 1891 Germany trying to take advantage of any situations (maybe 1901 or 1911 Germany would).

It's good to keep in mind that Buganda didn't cover all territories which belong to modern Uganda. Even if Buganda become a German colony/stays independent/something else, north-western parts of the country could still go to Britain.

Karte_Buganda.GIF


So, could we potentially see Buganda maintaining its independence in a manner akin to Ethiopia ITTL?

While that would be certainly an interesting scenario, Buganda was terribly unstable in the 1890's which will pose great difficulties to its continued existence. OTOH even IOTL the British seem to have been actually quite reluctant to take the final step to annex the area. If Protestants start losing, that might cause Germans spring into action and try to prevent the growth of British influence in the region. This might lead a solution where Buganda stays as a buffer stays between two nations' colonies.
 
Last edited:
So, could we potentially see Buganda maintaining its independence in a manner akin to Ethiopia ITTL?

They could, at least potentially, do even better than that. There was a good deal of local empire-building in Africa during the mid-late 19th century, with African warlords using European weapons to establish themselves as regional powers. In OTL, all these states were eventually absorbed into European colonies. But if the Buganda kingdom stays independent for a while, then it might use the hardware obtained during the period of British engagement to subdue its neighbors (as it did in OTL under British patronage).

On the other hand, Buganda was very unstable at this time, the religious groups were at each others' throats, and court politics was toxic. So a British withdrawal could just as easily lead to civil war and collapse of the kingdom, with the pieces being hoovered up by neighboring kingdoms or taken over by Germany or Belgium a couple of decades later.
 
Top