Maximillian and Mexico

What if NapoleonIII'S Mexican adventure had suceeded in establising a mexican empire(perhaps Britain and France secure Confedrate independance in returne for C.S suport for the new world Hapsburgs)what are your thorts?
 
From the Confederate point of view, if one thinks that far ahead, the presence of Maximilian in Mexico presents and obstacle to you eventually annexing any significant portion of Mexico. Also, I think the Confederates also would be supporting the Monroe Doctrine.

Whatever everyone else is saying Maximilian is a liberal and his association with the Conservatives, who are the ones really oppressing the people, and the French, guilt by association. There is nothing the US could have done if there was a repeat of Iturbide's self declaration of empire and elevation to emperor, however it is another thing when it is done by an outside source - which the US had a real problem with. Once it becomes apparent what France is doing the British are going to pull out, they certainly didn't initially occupy Veracruz to put Maximilian on the throne.

The French and their allies never had any effective control over a near majority of Mexico. It would have been a very hard and long occupation which would just weaken Napoleon III's popularity at home. There is no way that the rebellion could have been put down since other Mexican leaders would have arisen to have taken Juarez's place. The US did support Juarez and shipped guns to him. Union General Lew Wallace was also involved in some efforts to help train anti-Maximilian forces.

The long term aspects are a draining unpopular war for the French in Mexico. Even with Confederate independence the United States will be friendly to anti-Maximilian forces and theres little the French or Imperial Mexican government can do.
 

Grey Wolf

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Many hands has Fate

I think that's an overly negative point of view - its certainly a valid possibility but I think it is pre-supposing quite a large degree of confluence.

The existence of an independent Confederacy cannot be overlooked in any considerations, not just on what it might do, but with regard to how other nations might readjust their priorities to take it into account.

I certainly do not see the CSA in the immediate term trying to tell Britain, France or Spain what they can or cannot do in the Caribbean - these powers have been there for centuries and in many ways the Monroe Doctrine is an attempt to impose upon their valid interests. Besides, in so far as it is a unilateral declaration of US policy it has no legal force, and in so far as Canning originally backed its spirit it is aimed at preventing Spanish recolonisation of the continent. The CSA will need to rely on Britain and France going forwards - they will be its creditors and source of imports etc. It has no real choice in this, and they can in turn apply pressure for the CSA to keep itself to itself where their Caribbean interests are concerned

Looking at the new strategic reality, it may well be far more in Britain's interests to back a French-supported Mexico than to let it fall into chaos. Britain is owed huge amounts of money by Mexico and if the alternative is to see a weak Mexico under French support continue but not be able to pay back the loans, then actively getting more involved may well make sense. It may also make sense for the Confederacy as Mexico is both a market and a potential source of destabilisation on its borders.

Grey Wolf

David S Poepoe said:
From the Confederate point of view, if one thinks that far ahead, the presence of Maximilian in Mexico presents and obstacle to you eventually annexing any significant portion of Mexico. Also, I think the Confederates also would be supporting the Monroe Doctrine.

Whatever everyone else is saying Maximilian is a liberal and his association with the Conservatives, who are the ones really oppressing the people, and the French, guilt by association. There is nothing the US could have done if there was a repeat of Iturbide's self declaration of empire and elevation to emperor, however it is another thing when it is done by an outside source - which the US had a real problem with. Once it becomes apparent what France is doing the British are going to pull out, they certainly didn't initially occupy Veracruz to put Maximilian on the throne.

The French and their allies never had any effective control over a near majority of Mexico. It would have been a very hard and long occupation which would just weaken Napoleon III's popularity at home. There is no way that the rebellion could have been put down since other Mexican leaders would have arisen to have taken Juarez's place. The US did support Juarez and shipped guns to him. Union General Lew Wallace was also involved in some efforts to help train anti-Maximilian forces.

The long term aspects are a draining unpopular war for the French in Mexico. Even with Confederate independence the United States will be friendly to anti-Maximilian forces and theres little the French or Imperial Mexican government can do.
 
I see the Confederates welcoming Maximillian because then they would probably make a deal with France that they will allow Maximillian in exchange for French help. Empire of Mexico will be a dominant force of Central and South America and the Confederates will be a dominant force in the Carribbean :)
 

Grey Wolf

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Test

Test post - the most recent post on this board is 8 hours old...is there a problem ?

Grey Wolf
 
I guess another question would be how long could the French and Austrian forces remain in Mexico, excluding the involvement of US forces. I would have to factor in French politics of the time, we know that the Mexican Adventure was unpopular with the French populace. Between 1861 and 1871 how easily was Napoleon III's grasp on power? Does he weaken his control with the more of the Army he sends overseas?

Personally, while liking Maximilian, or at least feeling really sorry for him, I don't think he's in a very good position. He's aligned with Conservatives, that the bulk of the populace don't like, he has liberal leanings which don't quite match those of his Conservative dominated Government and he's a foreigner being installed by force. I think there's plenty of examples that the war could have devolved into guerilla warfare and there were many to take up Juarez's mantle in case something happened to him.

Not to sound to cliche, but couldn't Mexico become France's Afghanistan? (with reference to the 19th century situation, not wishing to invoke 'Vietnam').
 

Grey Wolf

Gone Fishin'
Donor
I guess there's a problem trying to work out what France's position is in the 1860s in the event of Confederate independence, which I am assuming is the main POD here - otherwise we are in to 'How does France retain its position in Mexico all else being as in OTL' which is far more difficult. In the latter, the Union victory was a very definite spur to France to disengage, just as it was for Spain to disengage from Santo Domingo. But with an independent CSA, France's position may well be strengthened in the region. The CSA are not going to be making any demands on France, or on Britain, certainly in the immediate period as their credit and markets are vital for the stabilisation of the Confederate economy. The Union is not in a position to start shouting about the Monroe Doctrine when it has just been slashed in size by half (as far as state/land goes) and its nearest port to the Caribbean is on the Potomac (at best).

We mustn't assume that France is going to head down the same road within Europe as in OTL. The attempted manoevrings regarding Luxembourg in 1868 and the whole Hohenzollern candidacy thing may be of far less importance to French politics if it can 'match' Prussia's victories in Europe, with its own successful policies overseas. Supporting the CSA and having a presence there, it may not actually need VICTORY in Mexico to seem as if things are going well for the Empire. Without the perceived rebuff over Luxembourg and the perceived threat over Spain, war between France and Prussia becomes less certain

Spain however is also less certain. The failure of the New Imperialism was symbolised by the embarassing withdrawal from Santo Domingo. With a Confederate victory and thus without any restating of the Monroe Doctrine it is possible that Spain may endeavour to remain there, push the war of reconquest harder etc - this could lead to an earlier disaster (!) or a better longer-term position.

Grey Wolf


David S Poepoe said:
I guess another question would be how long could the French and Austrian forces remain in Mexico, excluding the involvement of US forces. I would have to factor in French politics of the time, we know that the Mexican Adventure was unpopular with the French populace. Between 1861 and 1871 how easily was Napoleon III's grasp on power? Does he weaken his control with the more of the Army he sends overseas?

Personally, while liking Maximilian, or at least feeling really sorry for him, I don't think he's in a very good position. He's aligned with Conservatives, that the bulk of the populace don't like, he has liberal leanings which don't quite match those of his Conservative dominated Government and he's a foreigner being installed by force. I think there's plenty of examples that the war could have devolved into guerilla warfare and there were many to take up Juarez's mantle in case something happened to him.

Not to sound to cliche, but couldn't Mexico become France's Afghanistan? (with reference to the 19th century situation, not wishing to invoke 'Vietnam').
 
How would a Confederate, French and Empire of Mexico alliance be on the world stage? I think France would support the Confederacy because France would want the Confederacy to not interfrere in Frances adventure in Mexico
 
How would a Confederate, French and Empire of Mexico alliance be on the world stage? I think France would support the Confederacy because France would want the Confederacy to not interfrere in Frances adventure in Mexico
 

Grey Wolf

Gone Fishin'
Donor
The European Dimension

ConfederateFly said:
How would a Confederate, French and Empire of Mexico alliance be on the world stage? I think France would support the Confederacy because France would want the Confederacy to not interfrere in Frances adventure in Mexico

I think in order to answer this we have to assume that in Europe things remain in the post-1866 position. By 1870 after several years of trying to manoevre to gain some advantage to offset Prussia's rise, Napoleon III's France was ready for war and eager to win. If France's attention remains firmly in the Americas then it may well simply accept the change of European balance without pushing for compensating gains.

Spain therefore becomes the key, and would also be an important aspect of affairs in the Americas. Without a Union victory does Spain disengage from Santo Domingo or do they redouble their efforts there ? Do we see the overthrow of Isabella, or is her position strengthened ? If she is overthrown we may not be able to avoid a clash of interests.

For whatever reason, it was decided to offer the crown to Leopold of Hohenzoller-Sigmaringen (junior and Catholic branch to the Hohenzollerns in Berlin). Would a France heavily engaged in Mexico, and allied to the Confederacy, be so quick to rise to the bait ? They probably have a better relationship with Britain than OTL as there have been manoevrings over Luxembourg or Belgium, so the fear of being surrounded should be less.

So, what if Leopold accepts the Spanish crown ? Is his government going to be any more stable than Amedeo's proved to be ? Or will we see the same Second Carlist War ? If he is faced with civil war would Prussia support him militarily ? Would France back the Carlists or Isabella's son Alphonso ?

I don't think that until you have answers to these questions you can look further afield into world affairs

Grey Wolf
 
1 Spain will redouble thier efforts because the United States will be trying to fix their economy and watch their Southern Borders in the first few years so they may not worry about enforcing the Monroe Doctrine.
2 She will probably be overthrown
3 If Mexico is offered to Leopold and France is heavily engaged in Mexico and allied to the Confederacy then they will think more of the decision about taking the bait
4 If Leopold accepts the Spanish Crown then his goverment would be more stable and there might be a Civil War with Prussia backing Leopold and France backing Alphonso

Now how would a French, Confederate, and Empire of Mexico alliance work on the world stage?
 
If we have a French, Mexican, CSA Alliance, according to the balancing threories of diplomancy so prevelent then, do we have a Prussian, USA Alliance?

If so, what about the Franco-Prussian War?
 
If there is a Franco-Prussian War then the C.S. would start propping up Maximillian after France starts pulling troops out to serve in Europe.
 

Grey Wolf

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Norman said:
If we have a French, Mexican, CSA Alliance, according to the balancing threories of diplomancy so prevelent then, do we have a Prussian, USA Alliance?

If so, what about the Franco-Prussian War?

I don't think the idea of balance of power was so strong then, it was more a residual of the concert of europe - the balance of power idea came later, after 1878

Grey Wolf
 
Top