WI: Russia sold Alaska to Canada?

Why buy land from your enemy when you can just mug him for it? ;)
It's Alaska , cold wilderness any invasion would be risky and expensive
You could lose your entire invasion force before they
No, what if in an alternate timeline, Russia used the majority of that money to modernize, and completely buff the military.
Somebody is in for a rude surprise next time they decided to poke the bear
 
It's Alaska , cold wilderness any invasion would be risky and expensive
You could lose your entire invasion force before they

Somebody is in for a rude surprise next time they decided to poke the bear
However, it's useless for them to have a great army if they don't have the infrastructure to move it
 
Why would the Russians sell Alaska to the British? I doubt the Brits are going to want to give Russia money that would go towards her development and modernization, especially concerning military reforms that are after the Crimean War so this seems quite implausible. Not to mention, why can't the British/Canadians invade it in the Crimean War and annex it - I don't think the Russians would be able to stop it from any annexation.
 
If the sale occurs around an earlier Stickeen Gold Rush, the British could think that the territory might pay for itself in the long run.
Equally though, that would make Russia less willing to sell Alaska.
 
Why would the Russians sell Alaska to the British? I doubt the Brits are going to want to give Russia money that would go towards her development and modernization, especially concerning military reforms that are after the Crimean War so this seems quite implausible. Not to mention, why can't the British/Canadians invade it in the Crimean War and annex it - I don't think the Russians would be able to stop it from any annexation.

Why did you start your post with "Why would the Russians sell to the British" and follow with reasons for "Why would the British buy from the Russians"?
 
If the sale occurs around an earlier Stickeen Gold Rush, the British could think that the territory might pay for itself in the long run.
Equally though, that would make Russia less willing to sell Alaska.

It probably would not. Approximately at the same time the gold rush was going on in Siberia, which was making for the shorter and cheaper communications both for the diggers and for the gold. At the time in question carrying practically anything (short of the very big diamonds) from Alaska to the European Russia could not be and was not profitable: the Russian-American Trade company had been heavily subsidized by the government. The same goes for the possibility to supply the growing population with food and other necessities.
 
It probably would not. Approximately at the same time the gold rush was going on in Siberia, which was making for the shorter and cheaper communications both for the diggers and for the gold. At the time in question carrying practically anything (short of the very big diamonds) from Alaska to the European Russia could not be and was not profitable: the Russian-American Trade company had been heavily subsidized by the government. The same goes for the possibility to supply the growing population with food and other necessities.

Given that would Russia attempt to get a higher price for Alaska?
 
Given that would Russia attempt to get a higher price for Alaska?
Can not tell. As I understand, the whole thing had been triggered by a fear that Britain may just occupy Alaska: Russia simply did not have anything on the Pacific Coast capable to counteract such an action. Then, in the case of the gold discovery, Americans and Canadians would overwhelm the Russian presence there: by the time of the purchase approximately 700 Russians lived there and there was no chance for significant increase of the number, gold rush or not. Anyway, initially, Russian government was even considering just giving it up for free. American initial offer was $5M, Russia asked $10M and finally sold it for $7.2M. Probably they could get more if the gold was already discovered but how much more I have no idea.
 
American initial offer was $5M, Russia asked $10M and finally sold it for $7.2M. Probably they could get more if the gold was already discovered but how much more I have no idea.
I think Russia might ask for $12M at least in their initial offer. No particular reason except that this was the annual amount of gold extracted at the peak of the Klondike Gold Rush in 1903.
 
There are three circumstances in which I can see this taking place, all of which necessarily mean the US declines to purchase:

1) The most obvious is that the US declines to purchase Alaska in the 1860s, meaning that the Russians are looking to divest themselves of the territory on the cheap. I could easily see Disraeli offering to purchase it for a relative pittance, then spinning it as a victory by bloodlessly taking Russian territory in the 1870s

2) The Hudson's Bay Company begins more northward exploration, clashing with Russian claims in the 1840s, which leads to the British in an alternate war with Russia now having a commercial claim in the region and simply annexing it in some conflict.

3) The British, at some point, expand their influence in the Pacific. As par for the course in the Great Game they have paranoid delusions Russia will use Alaska as a base to invade British possessions and make plans to annex/purchase it.
 
There are three circumstances in which I can see this taking place, all of which necessarily mean the US declines to purchase:

1) The most obvious is that the US declines to purchase Alaska in the 1860s, meaning that the Russians are looking to divest themselves of the territory on the cheap. I could easily see Disraeli offering to purchase it for a relative pittance, then spinning it as a victory by bloodlessly taking Russian territory in the 1870s

While at some point even a proposal to give the territory for free to the Us had been floated (by Alexander's brother), there was no urgent need to get rid of it and there was some bargaining which raised initially proposed price. So I don't think that the "pittance" would work. Of course, Disraeli could declare a victory in any case and the British public would swallow this peace of propaganda just as it swallowed a lot of other nonsense but I doubt that this propaganda would work on the other side of the bargain. For one thing, because Alaska was not a part of the Russian Empire: formally, it was a territory governed by a trade company controlled by the Russian government (since 1818 management of the company had been turned to the Russian Navy). Second reason - by 1860's the only valuable (at that time) Alaska's "natural resource", the sea otters, became almost extinct and there was nothing else in that area which would warrant any serious interest of Russia (colonization amounting to 700 people is a clear indication).

2) The Hudson's Bay Company begins more northward exploration, clashing with Russian claims in the 1840s, which leads to the British in an alternate war with Russia now having a commercial claim in the region and simply annexing it in some conflict.

Wrong time frame :): Anglo-Russian Convention of 1825 already allowed British merchants to trade in Alaska (and defined most of the Alaska-Canadian border).

3) The British, at some point, expand their influence in the Pacific. As par for the course in the Great Game they have paranoid delusions Russia will use Alaska as a base to invade British possessions and make plans to annex/purchase it.

Few considerations. 1st, they already had access to the Pacific from Canada and Alaska was not adding anything significant. 2nd, the Great Game was, strictly speaking, about competition in the Central Asia. 3rd, while the Foreign Office was more than a little bit on a paranoid side as far as potential Russian invasion of India was involved, I suspect that their idiocy still did not reach the level allowing to imagine invasion of Canada by 700 Russians who lived in Alaska (an idea that the Russians would be willing to send there few thousands troops with a purpose to conquer thousands square miles of Canadian wilderness would belong to the same category: even employees of the Foreign Office had been at least remotely aware of the fact that Russia already has a lot of the wilderness in Siberia).:)
 
Top