AHC: Have the US sponsor a coup in Canada

[Meshakhad]

I recently saw this map denoting all the countries in the Western Hemisphere that the US has sponsored coups in. However, there is one country that remains resolutely free of US political influence: Canada.

So, with a POD no earlier than 1932, can we have the US sponsor a coup in Canada?

 

[JesterBL]

Pre-1932 but it is too bad the Fenian Raids don't count.

 

[Post]

Isn't something missing on the map? The part of the US that staged a coup, i.e. the confederate states? A secession, especially if they're fighting a civil war about it, is kind of a coup.

 

[jessicajsscjs]

I recently saw this map denoting all the countries in the Western Hemisphere that the US has sponsored coups in. However, there is one country that remains resolutely free of US political influence: Canada.

So, with a POD no earlier than 1932, can we have the US sponsor a coup in Canada?

Make Edward VIII stay as King of Britain.

 

[Nenshou Yuuki]

Make Edward VIII stay as King of Britain.

Unlike what HoI4 may have led you to believe, him still being king isn't going to destabilize the British Empire.

 

[jessicajsscjs]

Unlike what HoI4 may have led you to believe, him still being king isn't going to destabilize the British Empire.

I find funny how referring to Hoi4 somehow became a special kind of passive-aggressive insult in this forum. Maybe its just laziness.

Edward VIII was a Nazi sympathizer, this isn't a game, its real life. I don't find keeping him on the throne per se likely to lead to a US sponsored coup in Ottawa, but I feel it's a good start for a particularly complicated AHC.

 

[Nenshou Yuuki]

I find funny how referring to Hoi4 somehow became a special kind of passive-aggressive insult in this forum. Maybe its just laziness.

Edward VIII was a Nazi sympathizer, this isn't a game, its real life. I don't find keeping him on the throne likely to lead to a US sponsored coup in Ottawa, but I feel it's a good start for a particularly complicated AHC.

I know he was a Nazi sympathizer. Monarchs in Britain don't have that much power, if he caused too much trouble he'd forced to abdicate, just later than he was iotl. You need a much bigger POD for America to want to coup Canada then just Eddy keeping his crown.

 

[Father Maryland]

Somehow have communists manage to take over in Canada? Though in that event the US would probably outright invade.

 

[Colonel Zoidberg]

Somehow have communists manage to take over in Canada? Though in that event the US would probably outright invade.

I was thinking a lesser degree of the same - the government gets a little too red for America’s liking; the US and Britain jointly sponsor a coup in Canada and install some right-wing asshole.

 

[Father Maryland]

I was thinking a lesser degree of the same - the government gets a little too red for America’s liking; the US and Britain jointly sponsor a coup in Canada and install some right-wing asshole.

I think for Canada you'd need an outright communist take over. As it was the Canadian gov was generally a good bit to the left of the US and the US/UK never tried anything like that.

 

[Mr_Fanboy]

Communist takeover of Canada would definitely prompt an invasion.

Now, maybe a scenario where some vaguely pro-Nazi government comes to power in the United Kingdom? Say, in the person of Edward VIII taking the throne, or however you think this is most likely to be accomplished. While no strong cassus belli will be offered, Washington decides to undertake some serious covert effort to get Canada to cut all remaining ties with the Commonwealth...

 

[YYJ]

However, there is one country that remains resolutely free of US political influence:

I would hardly say that Canada is free of US political influence. On the contrary, the country’s economies and militaries are so integrated that a coup is unnecessary. Pre-World War 2 is as early as one could construct such a scenario, when Canada looked more towards Great Britain. Even then it would be a great stretch. I think you would have to make the US and UK enemies first.

 

[The Byronic Hero]

Reciprocity Treaty passes followed by a later Canadian government trying to curtail American business in country.

 

[overoceans]

Some of the more hot-headed among Canadian nationalists argue that the 1963 election was a US-backed coup, as the US embassy made statements that seemed to deride the anti-nuclear Tory PM Diefenbaker, and Kennedy loaned a couple of his more competent pollsters to the pro-nuke Liberals.

I think the polling stuff is a little hyperbolic, since there was nothing illegal about hiring American pollsters(in fact, pollsters work internationally all the time). It is true that the wonks were given fake ID by the US State Department, so we can probably conclude that Kennedy wanted their activities to remain clandestine.

The Liberals won that election, but Canada stayed nuke-free anyway. Since then, the Tories and their successor parties have always been viewed as the more pro-American of the two major parties.

 

[GeographyDude]

I was thinking a lesser degree of the same - the government gets a little too red for America’s liking; the US and Britain jointly sponsor a coup in Canada and install some right-wing asshole.

I think for Canada you'd need an outright communist take over. . .

I know in reality you might need something more than just “a little too red . . ”, but as parody—

Well heck, we supported a lot of coups against merely left-wing governments like against Allende in Chile even though the resulting right-wing asshole nationalized more of the economy than the left-winger actually would have. And I think Pinochet did so if you count the bloated military.

Most of this was against non-white nations, and that’s the part which becomes serious, as well as both sad and infuriating . . .

 

[Father Maryland]

Some of the more hot-headed among Canadian nationalists argue that the 1963 election was a US-backed coup, as the US embassy made statements that seemed to deride the anti-nuclear Tory PM Diefenbaker, and Kennedy loaned a couple of his more competent pollsters to the pro-nuke Liberals.

I think the polling stuff is a little hyperbolic, since there was nothing illegal about hiring American pollsters(in fact, pollsters work internationally all the time). It is true that the wonks were given fake ID by the US State Department, so we can probably conclude that Kennedy wanted their activities to remain clandestine.

The Liberals won that election, but Canada stayed nuke-free anyway. Since then, the Tories and their successor parties have always been viewed as the more pro-American of the two major parties.

Sort of like the same sort turning the cancelation of the Avro Arrow into some giant US conspiracy to make Canada a puppet. Instead of the reality of the Arrow falling victim to more general economic/ industrial/ defense tides and pressures. And more generally the Arrow being a Bridge Too Far for Canada at the time.

 

[overoceans]

Sort of like the same sort turning the cancelation of the Avro Arrow into some giant US conspiracy to make Canada a puppet. Instead of the reality of the Arrow falling victim to more general economic/ industrial/ defense tides and pressures. And more generally the Arrow being a Bridge Too Far for Canada at the time.

You know, there was a time when it seemed like at least twice a year I would encounter a total stranger who'd randomly start complaining about the Arrow.

At one time, I think it was sort of thought that most of the people upset by the cancellation were left-leaning central Canadians("Laurentians", in the contemporary parlance), but nowadays the story is simply that it was a big affront to the whole nation, everyone was equally outraged from coast to coast.

Apparently, when that CBC docudrama about the Arrow ran a decade or so ago, security guards were sent to protect the statue of Diefenbaker in Prince Albert. IOW, even in his hometown, they worried people would go on a rampage.

 

[Father Maryland]

You know, there was a time when it seemed like at least twice a year I would encounter a total stranger who'd randomly start complaining about the Arrow.

At one time, I think it was sort of thought that most of the people upset by the cancellation were left-leaning central Canadians("Laurentians", in the contemporary parlance), but nowadays the story is simply that it was a big affront to the whole nation, everyone was equally outraged from coast to coast.

Apparently, when that CBC docudrama about the Arrow ran a decade or so ago, security guards were sent to protect the statue of Diefenbaker in Prince Albert. IOW, even in his hometown, they worried people would go on a rampage.

I mean it was a really cool looking airplane but their were some real problems in terms of the economic, industrial, and financial problems with actually putting them into full scale production. And from what I understand the design was somewhat limited to being a decent interceptor. But with the rapid maturation of SAMs and Canada's generally limited budget, industrial resources, and the like (compared to say the US, USSR, France, even the UK at the moment) would make building enough a tough issue. And the limitation of the design towards being a high flying fast interceptor designed to deal with large number of Soviet bombers flying from across the Pole would limit exports since even then countries generally wanted more multi role jets and other nations could thanks to their Economies of scale likely offer their aircraft a good bit cheaper.

I have thought a bit about the Arrow and it occurred to me that the only other allied force that was interested at the time in spending a bunch of money on a large twin engine high capability long range interceptor was the USN. Ironically for the "Canadian Arrow" to succeed I think it has to be a good bit different from the actual Arrow and be from the start a joint project between an American defense contractor and Canada with the aim of both the Canadian airforce and the USN buying it. Basically end up with something like a combination Arrow and F14. A Twin Engine long range interceptor capable of carrying a large number of air to air missiles (including long range BVR missiles like the Phoenix) with a powerful radar. I'm figuring their would be two variants from the start. A carrier variant for the USN with tail hooks, strengthened under carriage, catapult usability, and presumably folding wings. I'm thinking for the Canadians either a purpose built land version or a alteration of the USN version to delete the tailhook and other carrier stuff but retain the strengthened undercarriage. I'm figuring that could come in useful if the Canadians built a number of short emergency dispersal fields across the North each with runways and the capability of having the various support services needed to run a airbase flown in an installed. A number of bare bones fields where the strengthened undercarriage could come in handy and the dispersal fields are built in such a way that they can be rapidly brought into at least limited services (think of the nations like Sweden and Finland that have policies of dispersing their aircraft across numerous smaller airfields and have built sections of their highways to allow them to serve and impromptu airbases during war.).

I just don't think Canada could actually build the arrow in large enough quantities on her own with her budget. She needs a partner to eat a lot of the expenses and difficulty. And the USN at the time is the only real service I can think of that would be interested in a similar aircraft.