WI: Prussia keeps the Danish West Indies from the 1700s

In OTL Prussia owned several islands in what are now the US Virgin Islands during the 1670s to 1720s, and were then known as Danish West Indies; and also one island that is now under Puerto Rico's jurisdiction. What would the consequences be if Prussia, then Germany, keeps those West Indies islands and WWI goes on schedule (consider that Prussia doesn't trade it to Austria for Schleswig, or back to the Danes or sell it to the British for Heligoland, or trade it to France for whatever reason; and therefore very little butterflies). How would America relate to a German occupation of territory so close to the trade routes from/to the Panama Canal?

In OTL the US bought the islands from the Danes because of fear of German use of the islands for U-boats and their strategic location. If Germany uses it in this ATL for U boats that attack US shipping would this drag the US into WWI earlier? The US, specifically under Wilson's direction, did not agree to any territorial "winnings", protectorates or mandates, that were offered in many of the post WWI treaties that went through 1918 to 1921. Would the US change that position in order to annex those islands? Would it be a League of Nations mandate or straight annexation? A purchase in place of forgiveness of some of the reparations? I don't see that the US would just allow it to be returned to the Danish after 200 years and even being a friendly nation it is too strategic.
 
Last edited:

TFSmith121

Banned
The obvious analogue would be the German colonial empire as it was

In OTL Prussia owned several islands in what are now the US Virgin Islands during the 1670s to 1720s, and were then known as Danish West Indies; and also one island that is now under Puerto Rico's jurisdiction. What would the consequences be if Prussia, then Germany, keeps those West Indies islands and WWI goes on schedule (consider that Prussia doesn't trade it to Austria for Schleswig, or back to the Danes or sell it to the British for Heligoland, or trade it to France for whatever reason; and therefore very little butterflies). How would America relate to a German occupation of territory so close to the trade routes from/to the Panama Canal?

In OTL the US bought the islands from the Danes because of fear of German use of the islands for U-boats and their strategic location. If Germany uses it in this ATL for U boats that attack US shipping would this drag the US into WWI earlier? The US, specifically under Wilson's direction, did not agree to any territorial "winnings", protectorates or mandates, that were offered in many of the post WWI treaties that went through 1918 to 1921. Would the US change that position in order to annex those islands? Would it be a League of Nations mandate or straight annexation? A purchase in place of forgiveness of some of the reparations? I don't see that the US would just allow it to be returned to the Danish after 200 years and even being a friendly nation it is too strategic.

The obvious analogue would be the German colonial empire as it was (German New Guinea, Samoa, Kamerun, Southwest Africa, Southeast Africa, Chinese concessions, etc.); the Allies (as in 1914) didn't have much trouble a) running the German overseas squadrons down, and b) occupying enough of the above territories.

The realities of the strategic balance are such the British and French presumably could mount expeditionary forces substantial enough to take care of whatever German West Indian empire there might be, and fairly quickly. One possibility is a joint expeditionary force, of Canadian, British West Indian, and French West Indian forces, supported by the RN.

The US, given the general policy on territorial changes in the Western Hemisphere, presumably would come to some sort of understanding, public or otherwise, with the British or French, about the future of such territories; given the role of US economic assistance for the Allies, it is only in their interests.

The alternative would be the Germans realizing anything in the West Indies is indefensible and coming to an agreement with the US beforehand that the colonies would be sold, neutral, or even placed under US supervision in the event of a European war. That's not impossible, obviously; the Germans were willing to embrance realpolitik, even in the Wilhelmine era, when it suited them.

If the 1898 S-A war comes about as it did historically, it's pretty obvious the Americans can pick up whatever they wish in the Western Hemisphere from a European power that is otherwise engaged...

Best,
 
Last edited:
In OTL Prussia owned several islands in what are now the US Virgin Islands during the 1670s to 1720s, and were then known as Danish West Indies; and also one island that is now under Puerto Rico's jurisdiction. What would the consequences be if Prussia, then Germany, keeps those West Indies islands and WWI goes on schedule (consider that Prussia doesn't trade it to Austria for Schleswig, or back to the Danes or sell it to the British for Heligoland, or trade it to France for whatever reason; and therefore very little butterflies). How would America relate to a German occupation of territory so close to the trade routes from/to the Panama Canal?

I have a problem seeing Prussia maintain control of those islands during the Napoleonic Wars. Britain is not going to want to see the Prussian West Indies effectively under Napoleonic control, which quite possibly leads to Britain seizing control of the islands following the War of the Fourth Coalition. At that point, it's questionable whether or not Prussia would want the islands back in 1815 or the British would want to give them back.
 
The obvious analogue would be the German colonial empire as it was (German New Guinea, Samoa, Kamerun, Southwest Africa, Southeast Africa, Chinese concessions, etc.); the Allies (as in 1914) didn't have much trouble a) running the German overseas squadrons down, and b) occupying enough of the above territories.

The realities of the strategic balance are such the British and French presumably could mount expeditionary forces substantial enough to take care of whatever German West Indian empire there might be, and fairly quickly. One possibility is a joint expeditionary force, of Canadian, British West Indian, and French West Indian forces, supported by the RN.

The US, given the general policy on territorial changes in the western hemisphere, presumably would come to some sort of understanding, public or otherwise, with the British or French, about the future of such territories; given the role of US economic assistance for the Allies, it is only in their interests.

The alternative would be the Germans realizing anything in the West Indies is indefensible and coming to an agreement with the US beforehand that the colonies would be sold, neutral, or even placed under US supervision in the event of a European war. That's not impossible, obviously; the Germans were willing to embrance realpolitik, even in the Wilhelmine era, when it suited them.

If the 1898 S-A war comes about as it did historically, it's pretty obvious the Americans can pick up whatever they wish in the western hemisphere from a European power that is otherwise engaged...

Best,

Very good things for me to consider in my timeline. I had hoped to keep it German through to WWI but a conquest during the SPanish-American War (or soon after like Hawai'i) or under Teddy Roosevelt might be more realistic. I wonder if Britain and France would take it from Germany and then in a version of lend-lease sell it to the US in return for those war loans.

Would you view it as possible (though highly unlikely) that it could be realistic to have Germany sell the Virgin Islands to the US in return for American Samoa, which the two nations almost went to war over? Or was Samoa that important to US Pacific commerce?
 

TFSmith121

Banned
That's a possible swap; the Samoas (sort of) make sense

Very good things for me to consider in my timeline. I had hoped to keep it German through to WWI but a conquest during the SPanish-American War (or soon after like Hawai'i) or under Teddy Roosevelt might be more realistic. I wonder if Britain and France would take it from Germany and then in a version of lend-lease sell it to the US in return for those war loans.

Would you view it as possible (though highly unlikely) that it could be realistic to have Germany sell the Virgin Islands to the US in return for American Samoa, which the two nations almost went to war over? Or was Samoa that important to US Pacific commerce?

That's a possible swap; the Samoas (sort of) make sense in terms of a coaling station in the Southeast Pacific, but that's marginal, and once the Canal is built, pretty much a backwater.

Best,
 
Samoan crisis

The dispute over the Samoan Islands would VERY quickly see an American fleet either conducting exercises, or making a courtesy call, off the islands. If you really want to make things messy, an American ship blows up while visiting...battleships of the time did that--Maine, Vanguard, Mutsu, and others that I can't recall off the top of my head.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Um, that's 45 years...

The dispute over the Samoan Islands would VERY quickly see an American fleet either conducting exercises, or making a courtesy call, off the islands. If you really want to make things messy, an American ship blows up while visiting...battleships of the time did that--Maine, Vanguard, Mutsu, and others that I can't recall off the top of my head.

Um, that's 45 years.

Kind of a long time...;)

But sure, a marine casualty could increase tensions.

Best,
 
Brandenburg keeping the Virgin islands is only plausible if theyy keep the other parts of their Liliput colonial empire as well - so at least Großfriedrichsbrug on the Gold Coast to buy slaves in addition to the Caribbean places to have plantations.

And those places are expensive to run, so if they don't trun a decent profit rather soon, the next elector/king will sell them.

Of all ~1700 powers in Europe, Brandenburg-Prussia is among the least plausible too keep overseas colonies just for prestige when they turn out to eat up your budget.
 
In OTL Prussia owned several islands in what are now the US Virgin Islands during the 1670s to 1720s, and were then known as Danish West Indies; and also one island that is now under Puerto Rico's jurisdiction. What would the consequences be if Prussia, then Germany, keeps those West Indies islands
???
When did Prussia ever own/control the Danish West Indies? They can't 'keep' something they never owned.
 

Tyr Anazasi

Banned
Although it was never a part of Brandenburg a half of St. Thomas was leased by the Great Elector for 30 years. However, in 1693 the Danes recaptured it without a fight.
 
???
When did Prussia ever own/control the Danish West Indies? They can't 'keep' something they never owned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_former_German_colonies Brandenburg and Prussia are basically indistinguishable, Brandenburg took Prussia so the elector could have a way to become a king, since Prussia had the right (being outside the HRE, to have a kingship but Brandenburg could never gain that title on its own; here is a Wikipedia article that can lead you to more information regarding Brandenburg's colonial empire and that of Prussia prior to unification.
 
Although it was never a part of Brandenburg a half of St. Thomas was leased by the Great Elector for 30 years. However, in 1693 the Danes recaptured it without a fight.

There was more than just the lease, there were occupation of two other islands. Crab and Tertholen.
 
Top