WI: Mexican Tejas, American California

So, I had an interesting (if short) discussion with my Spanish teacher (who was born and raised in Mexico) today about the Mexican-American War. He basically summed it up as the biggest embarrassment in Mexican history because they lost half of their land... which of course got me thinking about the war and the events leading up to it.

There are plenty of scenarios where the US gets Texas but not Alta California and Nuevo Mexico. But what if we reversed that? What if Texas stays firmly within Mexico, and in the Mexican-American War the United States instead takes on Alta California, Baja California, and maybe Sonora and part/all of Chihuahua? How would the debate over slavery evolve in America without the plantation-worthy soil of eastern Texas? With a longer land border between Mexico and the US, and with America leaving them arguably better land than IOTL, could we see a greater Mexican-American friendship form?

Interested in what you think.
 
Last edited:
So, I had an interesting (if short) discussion with my Spanish teacher today about the Mexican-American War. He basically summed it up as the biggest embarrassment in Mexican history because they lost half of their land... which of course got me thinking about the war and the events leading up to it.

There are plenty of scenarios where the US gets Texas but not Alta California and Nuevo Mexico. But what if we reversed that? What if Texas stays firmly within Mexico, and in the Mexican-American War the United States instead takes on Alta California, Baja California, and maybe Sonora and part/all of Chihuahua? How would the debate over slavery evolve in America without the plantation-worthy soil of eastern Texas? With a longer land border between Mexico and the US, and with America leaving them arguably better land than IOTL, could we see a greater Mexican-American friendship form?

Interested in what you think.
The opposite can happen, California was not attractive till gold and they wanted texas cotton belt, well manage the war, santa ana could loss texas but keep everything else(utah might be loss, but colorado and nevada stay mexican)
 
The biggest problem really is that America would have absolutely no reason to take California, New Mexico, and Sonora but not Texas. Remember the justification Polk used for the war was the territorial dispute between Mexico and Texas over the land by the Rio, and that Texas had already been annexed and granted statehood before the war even started. Even if they don’t annex Texas before the war, there’s no way there could be an American Victory and have it remain part of Mexico, it would either be annexed later or just left as an American client state. And honestly just from a geographic perspective it would make no sense for America not to take it in any war/purchase. Control over it allows a southern rail line and a more defensible border, plus all of the desirable land within the territory.

If there was more Mexicans living in Texas maybe you could get an America unwilling to annex it, but if they’re taking Sonora and Chihuahua in the same scenario I doubt they’d really care about a few more Mexicans.
 
If there was more Mexicans living in Texas maybe you could get an America unwilling to annex it, but if they’re taking Sonora and Chihuahua in the same scenario I doubt they’d really care about a few more Mexicans.
I mean, Sonora and Chihuahua aren't necessary. Really, I think just the Californias, Nuevo Mexico, and enough land to give OTL Arizona a port is all that America would really want if Texas is to heavily populated with Mexicans. I can see this working better if the US negotiates for all or more of Oregon Country, too, to counterbalance that.
 
I mean, Sonora and Chihuahua aren't necessary. Really, I think just the Californias, Nuevo Mexico, and enough land to give OTL Arizona a port is all that America would really want if Texas is to heavily populated with Mexicans. I can see this working better if the US negotiates for all or more of Oregon Country, too, to counterbalance that.
https://www.deviantart.com/mdc01957/art/New-Austria-and-the-Upheaval-RDNA-verse-539589796 this pulled what you wanted but ASB AS HELL
 
...Not really, that's only got about the upper half of Alta California, far less territory than what I specified in the OP.

Perhaps this would work better if the US doesn't go to war, but instead purchases the land (pre-Gold Rush) largely for the Pacific coastline and San Francisco. Baja California gets thrown in because it's more hassle than it's worth to keep ahold of (something Mexico almost did at the end of the Mexican-American War IOTL), especially with Tejas still there.
 
Perhaps this would work better if the US doesn't go to war, but instead purchases the land (pre-Gold Rush) largely for the Pacific coastline and San Francisco. Baja California gets thrown in because it's more hassle than it's worth to keep ahold of (something Mexico almost did at the end of the Mexican-American War IOTL), especially with Tejas still there.
There was a nation Mexico was to sell california, but was not USA...WAS PRUSSIA.
 
You have to keep Americans out of all the territories you want Mexico to keep. One problem is all those illegal American immigrants to Mexican Texas and how to keep them out. (Don't forget Mexico invited immigrants into Texas in order to have more population and they kept coming!). Americans are trouble for Mexico anywhere in the west that they settle.
 
Top