So, I think nose of us on here know how the Mexican-American War started. Texas had been admitted into the US as a State, after winning a revolution in Mexico only 10 years prior. This was considered an act of war by Mexico, who never recognized the Texan claim to the land. Couple this with the discovery of gold in California meant the US wanted Mexico's northern territories, too, but Mexico didn't want to give them up, and war happened. However, I think I also read somewhere on this forum that there was a planned attempt by the US to buy California for $300 million, and Nuevo Mexico for $20 million. Now, Mexico was in debt from the war with Texas, and going to war with the US only compounded that problem, with Mexico having to spend even more money just to lose even worse to America, losing the same northern Territories for $15 million when they could have gained $320 million. So, what if Mexico agreed to the deal, with the government severely needing the money, and all this happens without the US annexing Texas, leading to no Mexican-American War. What happens to Texas? Are relations better between Mexico and the US. Are they possibly even allies? Was I wrong in the first place and this deal was never proposed? I dunno, you guys can tell me in the comments.
WI: Mexico Sold California to the United States, Instead of refusing.
- Thread starter TunguskaStorm
- Start date
IIRC, the gold in CA was discovered right after the war, not before it. Gold was suspected to exist in a lot of places in the desert SW, mainly because of old reports of mines by Spanish explorers. TX is very likely to join the US sooner or later; a lot of people wanted it to happen, and it was mainly the slavery issue stymying it. If Polk had managed to get both the OR territory and the SW without war, he'd be remembered as the best one term president ever....
Skallagrim
Banned
Best case scenario for Mexico would actually be to show willingness to accept Texan independence within its de facto borders (but not its far more expansive claimed borders), and to get the USA to back Mexico in this regard as part of the deal. That, combined with a sale of the land that the USA actually wants, would solve Mexico's problems handily. Mexico could include vital parts of the area claimed by Texas in the sale to the USA, thus effectively killing the Texan claim.
There's absolutely no rule that says Mexico has to sell everything that the USA took in OTL. I think the sale could look something like this:
(That southernmost, angular bit could be offered to Texas by the USA, in a "we'll add that to the state of Texas, if you join the Union" kind of deal.)
All in all, Mexico would come out of this with its diplomatic disputes resolved, its finances well in order, its political situation improved and more of its land retained. I doubt whether the USA would try to start a war to get even more of Mexico, since a peaceful solution worked out so well here. If anything, the USA might later offer to buy more of Mexico, but even that seems doubtful.
Polk would be remembered as an awesome guy with brilliant instincts.
There's absolutely no rule that says Mexico has to sell everything that the USA took in OTL. I think the sale could look something like this:
(That southernmost, angular bit could be offered to Texas by the USA, in a "we'll add that to the state of Texas, if you join the Union" kind of deal.)
All in all, Mexico would come out of this with its diplomatic disputes resolved, its finances well in order, its political situation improved and more of its land retained. I doubt whether the USA would try to start a war to get even more of Mexico, since a peaceful solution worked out so well here. If anything, the USA might later offer to buy more of Mexico, but even that seems doubtful.
Polk would be remembered as an awesome guy with brilliant instincts.
Deleted member 109224
President Herrera proposed prior to the Mexican-American war a boundary that amounted to Texas's claimed territories minus the nueces strip but including the lands from the Rio Bravo to the Pacific north of the 37th parallel.
The Mexicans were aware of the Missouri Compromise and did not want to cede lands that slavery could extend into (ergo, south of parallel 36-30). They also didn't want to give up the Nueces Strip because three Mexican states claimed its territory. It's one thing to cede territorial lands and another to cede state lands.
Plus, a 37th parallel boundary gives the US San Francisco Bay but deprives the Americans of Monterrey and San Diego.
I think a Nueces-Pecos-37th parallel boundary could work decently well for Mexican purposes.
Or, here's another possible take on it:
Nueces-Pecos-Sixth Principal Meridian - Canadian River - 37th Parallel
The Mexicans were aware of the Missouri Compromise and did not want to cede lands that slavery could extend into (ergo, south of parallel 36-30). They also didn't want to give up the Nueces Strip because three Mexican states claimed its territory. It's one thing to cede territorial lands and another to cede state lands.
Plus, a 37th parallel boundary gives the US San Francisco Bay but deprives the Americans of Monterrey and San Diego.
I think a Nueces-Pecos-37th parallel boundary could work decently well for Mexican purposes.
Or, here's another possible take on it:
Nueces-Pecos-Sixth Principal Meridian - Canadian River - 37th Parallel
Last edited by a moderator:
I really like these. Such an arrangement would probably have made San Diego and Matamoros Major Mexican ports; Los Angeles would not have developed the same way, either.
Marc
Donor
Sadly, we were particularly fond of war back then, to say the least. Particularly against folk we thought we had a good chance of beating: note how Polk resolved the Oregon issue with Great Britain as opposed to the Texas dispute.
Now if you want a creative alternate, suppose Polk doesn't get the Democratic nomination, Martin Van Buren winning instead. Then I can see a possible deal being done in lieu of the American Intervention - as Mexicanos refer to it.
Now if you want a creative alternate, suppose Polk doesn't get the Democratic nomination, Martin Van Buren winning instead. Then I can see a possible deal being done in lieu of the American Intervention - as Mexicanos refer to it.
but the US did make a good faith attempt to buy the lands they wanted, and if Mexico had agreed, there wouldn't have been war. As pointed out above, there might have been different borders though. I've wondered if the experience with buying the LA territory gave DC the idea that they could buy much of what they wanted.... did they ever try to buy parts/all of Canada?
Marc
Donor
The issue really wasn't the far northern provinces of Mexico, but the Texas question - which in the minds of Mexico wasn't yet resolved.
