Larger British Empire Possible?

[Pikers3]

With a POD after 1901, how big could the British Empire get?
I know OTL is basically a Britwank but could it have been bigger?

 

[corditeman]

We-ell....

In Africa, Abyssinia. Cape to Cairo Railway actually is built. ('Rah, 'Rah, Cecil Rhodes!)

In Europe, if Britain had killed Hitler, Goering and Himmler at the right time, we could have seen Germany surrender to Britain and become the Dominion of Germany.

In Asia, Persia and Iraq very nearly became British dependencies in the 1930s and 1940s. The same with Siam, for its King was afraid of a French takeover. Britain SHOULD have secured the New Territories permanently for Hong Kong.

In the 1870s, Britain handed strategic Heligoland back to Germany (hands up the number of people who really know Britain held Heligoland - and that there was a colonial flag.)

If we had really put our foot down with the Argentinians, as late as the 1920s we might have seized the place. A lot of British investment went into the development of the meat packing industry and the railways. If we and the Chileans had grabbed Tierra del Fuego or part of Patagoonia - goodbye Malvinas claims and let's drill for oil...

More regrets over Antarctica (at one time we claimed roughly 40% of it).

We should have held the Suez Canal and the Sinai to stop squabbling in the Near East. Allenby only needed a little more support to have grabbed the whole Levant up to the Turkish border.

Instead, in 1953, we took possession of Rockall.

 

[I Blame Communism]

It could have gottenn bigger, but this PoD isn't ideal. It's reaching the point where the world is pretty much parcelled up and the forces of decline are setting in on the European colonial empires. The last set of colonies Britain's acquiring will be those of the loser in any European war, and that's unlikley to be much.

A bit earlier gives the possibility of a *Fashoda War with France in the 1890s and the acquisition of bigger chunks of Africa and Asia (see FabR).

Going back to the Napoleonic Wars, we could potentially have bloodied America's nose (enlarging Canada) and grabbed a few more Caribbean islands and, more importantly, the bulk of Indonesia. Have everything go our way subsequently and you could get a BE csubstantially bigger than that of OTL.

 

[Alratan]

With the right PoDs leading to an alt-Great War, that somehow leads to a rapid and total Entente victory over the Central Powers, British annexation of the German African colonies is possible, along with annexation of a larger proportion of a partitioned Ottoman Empire.

If Chinese collapse goes on schedule, then non-exhausted colonial powers could well lead to de facto partition of China and an extension of the informal British Empire there. Similarly, without the British having to sell of their south American assets at fire sale prices, the southern cone would remain with the British economic hegemony, which could be formalised in some way if trade blocs start forming.

 

[Tyr]

The British government always far preferred indirect rule to direct rule where possible.
If they didn't have to have anything to do with running the country but could still have British industry freely trade with it (where the money was. Not at all in direct taxes) then they were happy.
For this reason the British empire was actually quite a bit bigger than maps typically show if you include such indirectly ruled areas- Argentina, the USA, Persia, etc....

When Britain did get involved in full on imperialism it was usually because it felt it didn't have a choice.
In India the EIC fell apart and the place was a mess, in Africa there was a big paranoia that if they didn't others would and with protectionalism coming into fashion this would not be good, especially given the way the world political scene was upset at the time, etc...
Off the top of my head its just Australia which comes to mind as somewhere Britain just decided to go imperialist without much outside pressure and purely for the sake of it.

So, to get on topic, I'd think you'd need to change the British mindset. Have a rather nasty right wing government big on prestige in power.
Or maybe give Britain a serious rival early on; a Germany rising early enough the world wasn't already largely parcelled out maybe. Then you could get a scramble for Africa type situation earlier when Britain wouldn't have so many strong competitors.

 

[Whanztastic]

A bit earlier gives the possibility of a *Fashoda War with France in the 1890s and the acquisition of bigger chunks of Africa and Asia (see FabR).

This I would like to see. Steal away some Caribbean, French Guiana, Eritrea, North and West African territory. Madagascar maybe ending up in the Union of South Africa?

 

[I Blame Communism]

This I would like to see. Steal away some Caribbean, French Guiana, Eritrea, North and West African territory. Madagascar maybe ending up in the Union of South Africa?

French control of the Malagasy kingdom was very fragile at that point, so Ed Thomas has it taking advantage of the war to chuck them out and thus end up as a British protectorate which evades direct colonialism until after it goes out of fashion ala Afghanistan.

But as well as the other places you mention, the whole French Empire in the Indian-Pacific ocean regions could be in jeopardy in such a scenario. Anglo-French tensions ran high over Siam at times, and FabR has this as a secondary cause of the war, hence Britain could take over French Indochina and reduce Siam to complete dependency, and also grab France's smattering of Pacifc and Indian ocean islands and Indian ports.

French control of the Gabon-Congo region was trading posts and coaling stations at the time as well, and could easily flip to Britain along with other parts of the French empire in Africa further northwest.