French Panama Canal?

[Earling]

I suspect the US would just purchase some sort of join administration rights and some form of naval base in close proximity. Theres gun boat diplomacy and then theirs petty blackmail. Turning up and demanding the Canal "or else" is hardly effective politics with a state with who you are hardly hostile.

France would almost certainly back down if such were the case, but it would set a rather bad precedent. Don't invest in the Western Hemisphere because the US government shall come along and steal it from you.

 

[Phoenix]

The Brits might have something to say if the Americans gained control of the canal from the French.

 

[Eusabian]

The Brits might have something to say if the Americans gained control of the canal from the French.

Indeed they may. GB was already unhappy with Roosevelt's naval expansion policy, they saw it as a challenge to their hegemony of naval power. If they allied themselves with France, perhaps America could start talks with the Kaiser. He had a fresh new battle fleet and was pining for an overseas empire of his own. In fact, Germany and the US nearly went to war over the Philipines. There was a large German fleet there when the US destroyed the Spanish fleet and captured Manila, and they felt the Americans didn't deserve to have an overseas possesion when the mighty German Reich didn't have one. So a deal between the US and Germany, keep the Home Fleet occupied in exchange for maybe Guam or something. That would be very plausible because Germany needed more coaling stations in the Pacific, they had to buy their coal from Spain, France and, later, the US.

To Earling: I didn't mean that it would be outright theft. Just a closing of the canal to all traffic until a treaty is negotiated. If that included the purchase of the canal from France by the US, then that would be fine. I merely try too look for plausible ways for POD. If France decided to fight, with their shiny new battleships, I think it would be, well, really cool. Dreadnought type battleships were never actually tested against one another during nearly their entire existance. It wasn't until a battle in the Solomon Islands, I believe, between Japan and America during WWII, that a battleship ever fired directly on another battleship. All other battles were cruiser on battleship contests. Even Jutland in WWI.

So to see these million pound, mark, franc and dollar machines actually test thier mettle against one another would be to see which theory of naval ship building was better.

Plus, I really like Sims and would like to see his ideas succeed.

 

[Earling]

I didn't mean that it would be outright theft. Just a closing of the canal to all traffic until a treaty is negotiated.

Isn't such a blockade effectively a declaration of war in these times?

I suspect from the perspective of imagination a naval war with various engagements would certainly be interesting, but difficult to calculate and unlikely to occur. Primarilly this is because France has that rather more threatening prospect next door rather than half way around the world.

 

[Shadow Knight]

The US might have countered by building another canal in Nicaragua if it appears the French Columbian canal is too much of a risk to depend on it time of war.

On the bright side a canal in Nicaragua might be wider than the one in the Isthmus because it is mainly at sea level where the one in Panama is in mountainous terrain dependent on huge locks (difficult to build or expand) allowing for even larger ships (a limitation on ship size is whether they can fit through the Panama or Suez canals).

 

[David S Poepoe]

The US might have countered by building another canal in Nicaragua if it appears the French Columbian canal is too much of a risk to depend on it time of war.

On the bright side a canal in Nicaragua might be wider than the one in the Isthmus because it is mainly at sea level where the one in Panama is in mountainous terrain dependent on huge locks (difficult to build or expand) allowing for even larger ships (a limitation on ship size is whether they can fit through the Panama or Suez canals).

This appears to me to be the most realistic of American responses. However, between the two routes the Panama Canal will be the easier of the two. I think its also questionable if the French canal would have been built with locks, since I think the original design called for it being at sea level.

 

[Shadow Knight]

This appears to me to be the most realistic of American responses. However, between the two routes the Panama Canal will be the easier of the two. I think its also questionable if the French canal would have been built with locks, since I think the original design called for it being at sea level.

It would of had to have been a lock and damn style of canal. The terrain just could not be shaped (not without a massive movement of Earth that would dwarf what was moved in OTL on an exponential scale).

The Nicaraguan canal might have been longer but it could have been easier considering that most of it would have been built over pre-existing water ways (lakes, and rivers). The only sticking point might have been that Costa Rica shares a border with Nicaragua along the Pacific end that the canal would have had to gone through. Expect some 'gunboat diplomacy' if Costa Rica thinks they can stop TR from completing the canal (or any US president if enough money was spent).

 

[Othniel]

Rights to the Panama Canal would not be considered a violation of the Monroe Doctrine. The Monroe Doctrine forbid the transpher of lands from one European Power to anouther, or the reconquest of any part of their former empires once they had independance. The Panama Canal was but one option, but I'd take it that this has more unfortunate (or Fortunate, depending on your view on Nicaragauan Exspansionialism, and whom should have been in power there) circumstances for Nicaragau than France. It might cost a bit more for the US intially, but it provides a shorter route.

On anouther point if the US waits long enough they could just chose a central American country and build a railway across it...

In this case it is built under the Presidency of McKinley, who was goaded into Cuba by Congress and Yellow Journalism.. He isn't exactly one to warmong. Outright annex, and take advantage of a situation he didn't want to be in? Sure. Warmongering? Not a Chance.
(BTW a POD of the French discovering that misquitos are the case of yellow fever would probably send a few butterflies in the medical field, though only by a few years...)

OCC: Ubergeek, what your thinking of is Manifest Destiny and the Dominio Therory as Imperialism, not the Monroe Doctrine. Not at least until the Roosevelt Collary was put into use. Heck other nations have used the Monroe Doctrine, most notably, Venezulea, and Argentina. Though I would say that the Monroe Doctrine was specficially aimed at Spain than any other European Power..