WI/PC: No Race for Africa

What is the plausibility of averting the Race for Africa and what would the impact of that be on the late 19th and early 20th century?
 

TFSmith121

Banned
From what date?

What is the plausibility of averting the Race for Africa and what would the impact of that be on the late 19th and early 20th century?

From what date?

I mean, the "scramble" famously is dated as beginning in 1884, with the Berlin Conference, but the UK, France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, and the Ottoman empires all had claims or outright colonies at various points along the coasts and (depending on how ones views Egypt, as a British protectorate or not, as well as the South African and Orange River republics) pretty far inland. There is also a limited Arab/Ottoman presence, at least in merchantile terms, in East Africa.

The Germans and Belgians hadn't yet really shown up, and the Dutch claims were long gone, but the US sort of paid attention to Liberia...

There are probably various decision points prior to 1884, but my point is that as autonomous much of Africa was before the European powers came on strong, the continent had already become an arena for various powers...

Best,
 
Well, I would say that the traditional opinion of European colonies pre-Scramble is vastly overstated:

France- a few forts in West Africa, Algeria, some outposts up river in Senegal, Réunion.

Spain- Fernando Poo, claims to Annobón and the coast of the Gulf of Guinea but no actual control.

Portugal- Loanda, Benguela and Namibe in Angola (along with some forts near Loanda and possibly some influence in the interior). Delaoga Bay, Inhambane (probably) Sofala-Beira, the Isle of Mozambique and control over a semi-independent zone stretching up the Zambezi to Tete.

Britain- outside of the Cape and the protectorate over Egypt, a few forts in West Africa.

Really, the Cape was the only area of European penetration to any great degree (Algeria and Egypt saw French/British residents near the Med but not really getting much beyond that), and that was because it had the right sort of climate for a settler colony. For the rest of the continent, you had a few scattered outposts along the coasts, but nothing at all otherwise. Considering most of the native states were in the interior, that's a pretty significant lack of control.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Power abhors a vacumn, true?

Well, I would say that the traditional opinion of European colonies pre-Scramble is vastly overstated.

Power abhors a vacumn, true?

I think even the Italians had claimed Eritrea before the Berlin conference, and it is worth pointing out that if the Europeans controlled the littoral, there wasn't much chance of the inland "native" states developing much in the way of trade or technology that was not overseen by the Europeans...

The OP or someone else interested needs to suggest a date as the depature point...

Best,
 
Top