Would almost any nation who controlled the continental US area have emerged a great power?

What I'm referring to is if instead of the British setting up a break-away colony that would become the United States. It was the french or spanish or chinese etc. who would have have controlled what is considered the contiguous US? Due to the size and arable land, natural resources, comfortable weather and overall habitability, location in the globe, would this hypothetical nation have risen to a great power just based on those factors alone?

2000px-Usa_edcp_location_map.svg.png
 
No not necesarily. All those factors have of course helped shape the US into a great power, but so has humans factors, and while we can't change the natural resources we can change the people living there.

Great powers have risen in some very resource-poor areas, like the deserts of Arabia or the swamps of the Netherlands. Likewise some very fertile and resource rich lands have been repeatedly conquered and never emerged as great powers, India is one, incredibly resource rich but most empire's there didn't reach "great power" levels of power because of mainly human factors.
 
There is no specific reason why not, but certainly just as OTL it's not guaranteed. A US without the immigration of OTL would resemble more a larger modern European country than the global power it became in the 20th century. Similarly one which had a political history similar to OTL Russia would struggle to maintain its power.
 
What I'm referring to is if instead of the British setting up a break-away colony that would become the United States. It was the french or spanish or chinese etc. who would have have controlled what is considered the contiguous US? Due to the size and arable land, natural resources, comfortable weather and overall habitability, location in the globe, would this hypothetical nation have risen to a great power just based on those factors alone?
80% of the time yes. But Enlightenment-inspired democratic institutions, being extremely connected to Britain economically and socially, and the timing of particular inventions did have a big impact on the OTL United States.
 
Any government competent enough to hold the continental United States (or a nation that's roughly the same, IE, Greater Mexico might see New England as part of Canada) is competent enough to at least be a great power.
 
This:

Any government competent enough to hold the continental United States (or a nation that's roughly the same, IE, Greater Mexico might see New England as part of Canada) is competent enough to at least be a great power.

Odds are low for scenarios where a marginal state or empire retains control of this much area. Even Spain will have the character of its policies changed from retaining control. A Portugal scenario where a geographically large empire becomes a minor player politically & militarily is a outlier.
 
Absolutely, it's only a matter of how great a power. At worst, it would be like late 20th century PR China or maybe 20th century Brazil, at best, somehow stronger than the actual United States at it's peak relative to the rest of the world (the early 50s).
 
Agree with what was said above. I suspect a French or Spanish US would fall to separatism and break-up. What held the US together was mass democracy, constitutionalism, federalism and an independent judiciary. The only countries in Europe going down that route during the period of settlement were England, Scotland and the Netherlands.
 
Top