WI: Katakazi isn't Russian plenipotentiary to the USA

Konstantin Katakazi was a Russian diplomat with some experience in Balkan affairs and no experience in great power diplomacy who managed to really annoy the US government during his time there (late 1869 to late 1871) by plotting and scheming as if the US were a small Balkan country. Such was the displeasure that the US had towards him, that it cast a pall over Grand Duke Alexei's visit to the United States in November 1871 - so much so that it may even have stopped the two countries signing an alliance.

So WI the Russians keep Katakazi in the Balkans and send someone more suitable to the US in 1869? Might we end up with a formal Russo-American alliance?

And even if it didn't do so, would Grand Duke Alexei spending more than a single day in Washington DC have any long term impacts?

fasquardon
 
I somewhat doubt that an alliance proper would be in the cards, but then of course the Entente Cordiale wasn't an alliance either. Look how that turned out. One thing tends to lead to another, or at least it tended to in that era.

If the two do come to an agreement, that would likely alter or even avert the Anglo-Japanese Alliance and/or Russia's relationship with France. And if France, Japan, and/or Great Britain are feeling outmatched by potential enemies, that will greatly affect the way the threat of war plays out in their local politics.

Down the road, the Russo-American sticking point will be China. Russia will either get on board with the American desire for an open and unified Chinese market, or it will stick to it's OTL prerogatives and precipitate and end to close relations with the US. In the latter case, the end of an entangling alliance would probably result in a search for an alternative, rather than a retreat into OTL's pseudo-isolationism.
 
I somewhat doubt that an alliance proper would be in the cards, but then of course the Entente Cordiale wasn't an alliance either. Look how that turned out. One thing tends to lead to another, or at least it tended to in that era.

An excellent point there.

Down the road, the Russo-American sticking point will be China. Russia will either get on board with the American desire for an open and unified Chinese market, or it will stick to it's OTL prerogatives and precipitate and end to close relations with the US. In the latter case, the end of an entangling alliance would probably result in a search for an alternative, rather than a retreat into OTL's pseudo-isolationism.

I suspect as long as Russia could establish a sphere of influence over the northern barbarian areas, they'd be happy enough. Still, China did split the alliance and both sought other allies, that could be very interesting in its own right. The US being more involved in things before WW1 could get really interesting.

If the two do come to an agreement, that would likely alter or even avert the Anglo-Japanese Alliance and/or Russia's relationship with France. And if France, Japan, and/or Great Britain are feeling outmatched by potential enemies, that will greatly affect the way the threat of war plays out in their local politics.

I kinda doubt that the entente with France would be derailed by an alliance with the US. Being friends with France is still as attractive to Russia, since the US wasn't a big exporter of capital yet by 1890, so buttering the French up to access French loans is still very attractive. For France, I suspect that a close Russian-American relationship would make Russia even more attractive to the French. I wonder if the French might also woo America directly? The strength of the American fleet makes her a great ally for France in this period...

fasquardon
 
Top