WI: Spain colonizes Indochina?

What if Spain took over Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos instead of France? What will it effect/affect? Can it use it as a base to increase Spanish influence in Southern China? (Guangxi, Guangdong, Fujian, Taiwan) Can it also convert Vietnamese people to Catholicism?
 
What if Spain took over Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos instead of France? What will it effect/affect? Can it use it as a base to increase Spanish influence in Southern China? (Guangxi, Guangdong, Fujian, Taiwan) Can it also convert Vietnamese people to Catholicism?

Just have some heirs of those countries want to pawn their lands to the spanish.
 
Spain has Cambodia (and some of OTL southern Vietnam) in my Spanish Intervention in the Imjin War timeline. It wasn't developed in as much detail as I would like, but I wrote some stuff up.
 
Spain has Cambodia (and some of OTL southern Vietnam) in my Spanish Intervention in the Imjin War timeline. It wasn't developed in as much detail as I would like, but I wrote some stuff up.

I don't think a country with a motivation to be independent would be colonized.
 
I don't think a country with a motivation to be independent would be colonized.

Korea, Nam Viet, the Maori, Aceh, all beg to differ. They're called 'colonial wars' because those being colonised have a motivation for being independent.

Spanish Indochina requires Spain to be at least a little better off after the Napoleanic Wars. Perhaps if the Spanish somehow manages to peacefully let go of their American colonies they can preserve their projection power - could result in more African colonies and some influence in Asia.

Edit: As for what it would affect, well Spain in this scenario would likely have the Philippines as well. This means that a Spanish navy could effectively hold power in the South China Sea, and it also diminishes French influence in the area too. In any case, Spain retains its Pacific Empire as well, which in turn causes the Germans (should they not be butterflied away) to lose power here as well.
 
Their was a chance that Spain could have starting in the 1590's, the King actually asked for Spanish protection, but the Spanish were to late, however if they'd shown more interest they could have started a gradual colonization from their.
 
Korea, Nam Viet, the Maori, Aceh, all beg to differ. They're called 'colonial wars' because those being colonised have a motivation for being independent.

Spanish Indochina requires Spain to be at least a little better off after the Napoleanic Wars. Perhaps if the Spanish somehow manages to peacefully let go of their American colonies they can preserve their projection power - could result in more African colonies and some influence in Asia.

Edit: As for what it would affect, well Spain in this scenario would likely have the Philippines as well. This means that a Spanish navy could effectively hold power in the South China Sea, and it also diminishes French influence in the area too. In any case, Spain retains its Pacific Empire as well, which in turn causes the Germans (should they not be butterflied away) to lose power here as well.
Nguyens pawned Vietnam to the French so their motivation was lost and Acheh even now is still fighting for indepence
 
Their was a chance that Spain could have starting in the 1590's, the King actually asked for Spanish protection, but the Spanish were to late, however if they'd shown more interest they could have started a gradual colonization from their.

Can you give me more info about this?
 
Nguyens pawned Vietnam to the French so their motivation was lost and Acheh even now is still fighting for indepence

This is what you said:

I don't think a country with a motivation to be independent would be colonized.

"A country with a motivation to be independent" describes basically every colonial territory ever. See my reasoning: The term 'colonial war' is used to define a war in which a colonial power fights against the natives of a country (or in some cases, such as the Maori, the natives of a region) which has a, in your words, motivation to be independent.

Your example of Aceh is a bad one. I'm pretty sure there was a stage during which Aceh could have become an Italian protectorate because the Acehsians didn't want to be colonised by the Dutch. To many native kingdoms, a protectorate meant they were still independent but under European protection. Becoming a protectorate shows a motivation to be independent, because the nation in question (such as Aceh) wants a European power to preserve its independence (this happened with the Maori as well).
 
This is what you said:



"A country with a motivation to be independent" describes basically every colonial territory ever. See my reasoning: The term 'colonial war' is used to define a war in which a colonial power fights against the natives of a country (or in some cases, such as the Maori, the natives of a region) which has a, in your words, motivation to be independent.

Your example of Aceh is a bad one. I'm pretty sure there was a stage during which Aceh could have become an Italian protectorate because the Acehsians didn't want to be colonised by the Dutch. To many native kingdoms, a protectorate meant they were still independent but under European protection. Becoming a protectorate shows a motivation to be independent, because the nation in question (such as Aceh) wants a European power to preserve its independence (this happened with the Maori as well).
Acheh is just a region in Sumatra, a united Sumatra would be independent, Acheh has no defensible border that is why it is colonized by the dutch the same is for the Maoris.
 

Cook

Banned
Acheh is just a region in Sumatra, a united Sumatra would be independent, Acheh has no defensible border that is why it is colonized by the dutch the same is for the Maoris.

The Sultanate of Aceh was an independent state larger than Holland, which was another country owned by the Spanish for a while. Travel in North West Europe was considerably easier than in Sumatra where even now roads are limited and adversely affected by the Monsoons.
 
Acheh is just a region in Sumatra, a united Sumatra would be independent, Acheh has no defensible border that is why it is colonized by the dutch the same is for the Maoris.

Erm no, again wrong. Aceh was not a region in Sumatra it was an independent Sultanate which the British claimed they owned. When the British sold their Sumatran possessions to the Dutch (Anglo-Dutch Treaty 1824) the Sultanate of Aceh was 'sold' with them. The Dutch respected Aceh's independence due to British opposition to their annexation. But this opposition was dropped in 1871 for fear that the French or Americans might annex Aceh.

In 1873 the Dutch declared war on Aceh. The Acehsians managed to gain military aid from Italy and possibly Britain (Singapore), but in any case their army was rapidly modernised and they managed to kill the leader of the Dutch invasion force, Major General Johan Harmen Rudolf Kohler.

Initially the Dutch intended on turning Aceh into a colony without any self-governance, but they settled for a protectorate. This was what we call a colonial war, where a nation with a motivation for independence was colonised.

----

As for the Maori (you don't add an 's' to the end to pluralise this word in New Zealand English), they too were not subjugated with ease as you seem to think. It was a massive campaign that took over three decades to complete, and a lot of cheating and lying. The Maori put up a better fight than any other native the British had come across yet, because the Maori knew the land. This was a true example of home field advantage.

In other words, the Maori didn't have any borders at all, which made them harder to defeat, not easier, because the British didn't have any borders either, just towns, settlements and forts.
 
Erm no, again wrong. Aceh was not a region in Sumatra it was an independent Sultanate which the British claimed they owned. When the British sold their Sumatran possessions to the Dutch (Anglo-Dutch Treaty 1824) the Sultanate of Aceh was 'sold' with them. The Dutch respected Aceh's independence due to British opposition to their annexation. But this opposition was dropped in 1871 for fear that the French or Americans might annex Aceh.

In 1873 the Dutch declared war on Aceh. The Acehsians managed to gain military aid from Italy and possibly Britain (Singapore), but in any case their army was rapidly modernised and they managed to kill the leader of the Dutch invasion force, Major General Johan Harmen Rudolf Kohler.

Initially the Dutch intended on turning Aceh into a colony without any self-governance, but they settled for a protectorate. This was what we call a colonial war, where a nation with a motivation for independence was colonised.
But still Acheh is in Sumatra, most of Sumatra was under the dutch so it is difficult or ASB for them to be independent from the dutch.
 
First of all, I agree with those who point out, colonization is colonization, make no mistake about that. There are different kinds and degrees of it; given that a people observes they are surrounded by territories being grabbed by greedy foreigners who appear to be unstoppable they might well prefer to offer one set of these marauders a deal more tolerable to them then they are likely to get from the most ruthless of the lot, but that's making the best of a bad situation. I think we can take it as given that all peoples of whatever level of development prefer to be independent, if they judge they can.

Now, given that the Spanish were at large all over the world from the early 1500s on, the reason they did not attempt to gain footholds in East Asia or Indonesia was the Treaty of Tordesillas, which was between them and Portugal. It was mediated by the Pope and from the point of view of the Papacy, the Spanish, and Portuguese, it excluded every other power from any territory outside of Europe. Thus the Spanish and Portuguese abided by it, though not without haggling. The Spanish colonized the Philippines in technical violation because that archipelago was clearly in Portugal's alloted sector, which however was by supplementary agreement larger than Spain's. From it they could hope to develop trade with China--which they did to some extent. But while intruding into Portugal's alloted sector they were clearly a good distance back from either the spice islands or the actual trade routes the Portuguese valued, and by being both generally scrupulous and specifically tolerant of specific deviations (such as Portugal's expansion of Brazil well past the original treaty line, or Spain's possessions of a few bases on the African coast) both sides could generally rely on the other leaving their central concerns--the Spanish American colonies; the Portuguese trade monopolies--alone.

Obviously as other European powers, mostly but not all Protestant, asserted their own interests in defiance of this Treaty they were never party to, eventually that became a dead letter. Soon the Dutch and others were well established in Southeast Asia, and meanwhile Spain as a world power was weakening compared to Britain and France.

But still, the French didn't get around to establishing their foothold in Indochina until the nineteenth century, and in the interim there were periods (at least one anyway) where the crowns of Portugal and Spain were united, so I suppose there might have been opportunities for the Spanish, based in the Philippines, to get to somewhere in Indochina first; they certainly had a much bigger population base than Portugal for colonial purposes.

To get into the question of just what opportunities might have come up you'd have to look closely at the detailed evolution of the Spanish imperial system, and meanwhile at the drama of Indochinese politics, and ask yourself just how intrusive a Spanish venture might get away with being, bearing in mind that not only were the native polities not completely helpless themselves, they could also take the risks of bringing in rival European interests to check or oust the Spanish. So I'd guess if they were going to come and stay, even in a limited territory, they'd better be very astute about it, especially as their power projection was constantly weakening relative to not just the English and French but also the Dutch, who soon had their own strong base in the region. By the time the French were interested and capable of their own strong-arm ventures in Cochin, the English were I believe strongly based in Malaysia and eventually Singapore, and had in fact at one time or another seized control of parts of the Philippines themselves for a while.

So unless one has a POD that involves the Spanish Empire having a strong comeback for other reasons, or the Indochinese venture proves a strong base for them, they'd always be at risk.

I don't see why the Spanish would be any better liked in Indochina than the French were; conceivably they might be more politic and accommodating considering their basically weak position but that doesn't sound like the Spain one knows from general history! If anything one has to anticipate they'd be more dogmatic and obstinate in trying to Christianize the population than the French were and I don't see any reason to think they'd be more successful at winning them over by sweet reason! Probably just as the French did, they'd successfully cultivate a limited number of converts to Catholicism, deemed with justice in many cases anyway by the Buddhist general populace to be mere cynical traitors to the proper local traditions, and favored by the Spanish as much for their dependency precisely because they were despised by the general populace as out of appreciation for their finding the true religion as Spain saw it. I don't see any reason to expect that the Spanish would respect and value these converts any more than the French did theirs, and even if Catholic, Hispanicized Indochinese did enjoy a better status among Spaniards than OTL Vietnamese Catholics did among the French, they'd still be a comprador minority along with the colonizers against a hostile majority.

The alternatives are either that the Spanish would enjoy a success that eluded the French in bringing the whole populace more fully into their system--and aside from the strength and dignity of local tradition I think all colonial powers more or less "failed" in this because none felt really motivated to try, enjoying both psychosocial and material advantages as they did by lording it over the natives as a "master race." By the time a liberal and humane conscience was reinforced by the pragmatic fear of losing control completely and enlightened colonialists might have sincerely hoped to fully integrate the societies, the colonized peoples had had quite enough of European hypocrisy and foresaw the prospect of gaining full freedom on their own terms. Again, I hardly think that an early and sincere feeling of ecumenism and restraint in enlightened self-interest was more likely to develop among Spanish colonialists than any other Europeans!

Or that the Spanish would rule with a very light and judicious, discreet hand. That seems scarcely likely either, and if they did, it isn't clear how it would bring profit to the Spanish, and the Spanish badly needed some kind of profit to enable themselves to protect their possessions. Without credible power to protect Indochina, the territory would at very best enjoy being sheltered from the rough and tumble of colonization by sheer diplomatic brilliance--and enjoy being left backward (if less run into the ground) as its more harshly colonized neighbors were perforce gifted with the vestments of 20th century industrial society.

The best case I can conceive would be if the Spanish protectorate somehow enjoyed a Meiji-like renaissance of industrialization on its own terms. But if they could do that, they'd hardly need Spanish protection, and they did need it early on, there is hardly any guarantee they'd keep to the Spanish orbit in gratitude! Nor is this a likely outcome by any means--and it hardly seems conceivable the Spanish would refrain from meddling in such central matters as local religion! A light Spanish hand would hardly be recognizable as Spanish!
 
But still Acheh is in Sumatra, most of Sumatra was under the dutch so it is difficult or ASB for them to be independent from the dutch.

Not at all. If Aceh had garnered support from another power, say the British or Italians, then they may have pulled through with a sphere of influence over them that would prevent the Dutch from doing anything at all. It isn't ASB for the British to protect Aceh - it would be in their interest to fully control the access to the Straits of Malacca.
 
Top