WI joint Anglo-French occupation of Egypt in 1880s?

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Do the two powers maintain a joint occupation for multiple generations?

Do they actually establish a settlement within 2-10 years of the occupation that restores Egyptian independence? If they do that, do they find themselves coming back for more rounds?

As a knock-on of this, does anything go differently with regard to French occupation of Tunis or northern Indochina? What about other colonial ventures in Africa and the Pacific, like the German move to establish colonies or protectorates in both areas?
 
That is indeed an interesting PoD. I unfortunately don't know the specific enough but even if there's an expedition, I could see the Brits scheming to get the French out at some point, India is just too strategic to the UK to let France have a hand in it.
 
I don't think any of the major powers of the time thought anything about "shareing" or helping anyone other then themself. So it could bring a conflict of diverging interests to play. That is more so, as France could see it as an in of the British into their revenge against Germany...
 
Thats very interesting. Lets say they maintain a joint occupation for decades. How would the entente agreements look like? OTL France got nearly the whole of Morocco in exchange that the british could make their de facto contol over Egypt more official. Now they could ask for even more - if the french are still willing to give up Egypt which i doubt. OTOH i think its far more likely that it comes to open conflict between them because of Egypt which either ends in a conference or war. I dont see them becoming friends and allies either way.
 

Ryan

Donor
well it's not unprecedented, the New Hebrides was jointly controlled by Britain and France.

New Hebrides flag:

320px-Flag_of_New_Hebrides.svg.png
 
well it's not unprecedented, the New Hebrides was jointly controlled by Britain and France.

New Hebrides flag:

320px-Flag_of_New_Hebrides.svg.png
The arrangement can be made, it's more that Egyptin that time period is perhaps THE single most important strategic point in the world, which goes double for the British who rely on India for their wealth.

Anyway, if such an event occured, which I find unlikely but very far from ASB, I imagine the French and British would force the Egyptian monarchy to sell their shares. Then using their reserves of capital, they would control the Egyptian economy and trade links with the rest of the world.

Mabe you'd get forts at the frontier and around the canal, in the name of World peace and for the protection of Egyptian prosperity. Beside that, it would probably be a fair and square protectorate that doesn't say its name. The king of Egypt would have an array of personal physicians and counsellors of European origin.

You'd probably have zones of influence: to the French Port Said, to the English Suez and the Southern Frontier.

Of course, an issue is the status of Soudan, let's not forget Fachoda is yet to come
 
I don't think any of the major powers of the time thought anything about "shareing" or helping anyone other then themself. So it could bring a conflict of diverging interests to play. That is more so, as France could see it as an in of the British into their revenge against Germany...
They actually did invite the French to join them OTL, but the French refused. As a matter of fact they also invited the Italians, who also refused.

Under either scenario the occupation was meant to be temporary, but so was the OTL British occupation. I think it's plausible that a joint occupation would be more likely to withdraw on schedule though, simply because coordinating a joint occupation would require negotiations over rules and adherence of those rules. OTOH I suppose there's nothing stopping them from continuously announcing joint agreements to extend the occupation...
 
Top