WI: Civil War stalemate

Stalemate leading to negotiated peace was actually the confederate goal so this would constitute a victory for them.
 
Yeah, geographically, what are we looking at here? A possible third wave of secession perhaps? What could possibly get the Union to accept Confederate coexistence?
 

katchen

Banned
Lee sweeps around and takes Baltimore instead of having his plans discovered and being intercepted at Antietam. Congress panics and evacuates via Annapolis to Deleware and then New Jersey and orders negotiations, refusing to vote any more funds for hostilities once it reconvenes, probably in New York or Trenton.
 
Lee sweeps around and takes Baltimore instead of having his plans discovered and being intercepted at Antietam. Congress panics and evacuates via Annapolis to Deleware and then New Jersey and orders negotiations, refusing to vote any more funds for hostilities once it reconvenes, probably in New York or Trenton.

How exactly is Lee taking Baltimare? And why would Lee moving away from Washington make Congress panic?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
What if the war stalemated when war exhaustion was at its highest?

Then the Northern voters throw out the Lincoln administration in the 1864 election and a Democratic administration takes over in the White House. The Democrats probably get the House of Representatives, too. And if the war is at a stalemate, with no prospect of the Union forcibly subduing the Confederacy, there will be a negotiated peace in 1865 that grants the Confederacy its independence. The Northern people very nearly did this IOTL, after all.
 
Last edited:
yep, a CSA and a USA, living side by side is almost a foregone conclusion in the event of stalemate.

The question is what happens from there. Do we have enmity between the two states perpetuating on for all eternity, with likelihood of another war sometime down the road? or do we have enmity for a while with trade going on between the two and gradual movement toward acceptance/friendship? I vote for the latter. I believe both sides will remain in a military stance for a while, wary of the other, but the CSA was never about conquest of the North/USA, and the USA was all about there not being a CSA. Once they accept the existence of the CSA, I think dreams of a reconquest will slowly fade. The two make natural trade partners, so there will be economic intercourse between the two. As long as they remain wary of each other, both sides will maintain a military. It may not be as big a part of the GNP as the European states, but it won't be as small as the OTL USA of the late 1800's.

The north will likely rebound economically first. The south doesn't really have the resources to industrialize, at least not rapidly, so it's growth will be stunted. Slavery will inevitably hold the south back, economically, and sooner or later will come up as an issue again. This means the USA will be able to exploit a western expansion, while the CSA remains hemmed in it's 1/4 of the OTL USA. By the time the CSA has recovered and can think about expansion into the carribean, slavery is going to be on the decline (I think that movement is inevitable), so there won't be the incentive to build up a navy/army capable of expanding.

Bottom line, I think the North ends up as a powerful economic Big Brother to an inferior economic South, and depending on how things shake out, the border states may start thinking about reintegrating with the North. What will hold this back is the degree to which the North sticks with the OTL centralized national power at the expense of the states. While slavery was, bottom line the cause of the war, states rights were a very real issue, and OTL, states rights took a back seat. IF the CSA remains a confederation rather than a central gov't dominating, states may be happy being more independent rather than giving up their fiefdoms to reintegrate with the North. OR, the North may not stay with as powerful a central gov't. Having recognized the right of secession, they may have to recognize states rights to keep states from leaving, or to entice border states to come back. That whole dynamic may be the friction that leads to round two, and under my scenario, time is the friend of the North, militarily. The situation is similar to France/Germany of the same time period. France/CSA will grow, but lose ground to a faster growing North/Germany. Turtledove's vision is all wet, IMO, and was pretty unbelievable.
 
Sherman fails to take Atlanta in 1864. Lincoln loses to McClellen in the Presidential election and he accedes to a negotiated settement that leaves the South independent.

There may well be some border changes of course but the legacy of bitterness left by the war will likely cause tensions between the USA and CSA that may well lead to another war.

Slavery in the CSA will probably die a natural death but the lot of former slaves could well be worse, if anything, than in our timeline. Any Civil Rights movement that may eventually develop in the CSA will be bitterly resisted by the vested interests (the old southern aristocracy)
 
One thing that usually gets overlooked that in the time period when stalemate is most likely to happen is when the Union already controls the entire Mississippi River and occupies large territories in the West.

Any peace deal that causes the Union to accept the Confederacy as an independent state will also be one that allows it to retain Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, West Virginia, and possibly all or parts of Mississippi and Alabama.

Retention of any pro-Union territories already in Union hands (West Virginia, Eastern Tennessee, Northern Alabama, and much of Arkansas) and complete control of the Mississippi River will be non-negotiable. Any evacuation of Union troops from other parts of Confederate soil would only be done in exchange for keeping these territories, and probably for gaining Confederate evacuation of those parts of Arkansas and Louisiana not currently in US control.

This means Texas will be cut off from the Rump Confederacy and could very well become its own independent state.

Any peace will also mean that it will be far easier for slaves to escape their masters by crossing the international border. The CSA is likely unable to get any agreement from the USA to return such slaves. This will cause immense problems down the line.

Readmission to the Union by these former CSA states will likely be done only when they abolish slavery, following the example of Tennessee and West Virginia. If the CSA remains independent, there is no reason not to abolish slavery completely in USA. If Mississippi is held, it may become the unofficially designated "freedmen" state where most escaped blacks are resettled. I believe Mississippi was one of only two states that were majority black in 1860 (other being SC) so a desire to keep as many blacks there and not in other states would probably be high.

To be honest, any 1864-1865 stalemate with the military situation as we know it might result in the CSA agreeing to rejoin the Union as long as the institution of slavery is protected in at least those states not already in Union control (whose state constitutions written during this period might very well establish emancipation). Any deal that allows the USA to keep much of the South would doom the CSA in the long term, and they know it. This is probably the worst case scenario as it re-establishes the status-quo which was untenable, and fails to eliminate the root cause of the rebellion. Everyone loses.
 
If the CSA ever managed to gain de facto independence (though I doubt the North will ever acknowledge it's right to exsist) I can see it becoming something akin to Apartheid South Africa mixed in with North Korea: a backwards hermit kingdom with little industry known mostly for it's horrible civil rights abuses, being ruled over by an aristocratic WASP minority with all the power, and having extreme tensions with it's much more powerful neighbor.
 
Top