Political System in Mexico in case of total US victory in Mexican American war?

[AlternateEagle]

Read somewhere that one plan was to take ALL of Mexico for the U.S. in case of this what would such a Union look like? Would Mexico be one big territory? Perhaps a whole new type of state government is established for it?

Thoughts?

 

[GullibleCynic]

I think most people on this site will say that it is very unlikely that the US would actually end up annexing all of Mexico. Most Americans at the time would not want to share the country with a bunch of spanish speaking catholics. This usually results in the suggestion that the US would only take a few more of the northern Mexican states.

But, in a timeline where the US does take all of Mexico, it would likely divide up Mexico into quite a few territories. Some, like California, would be fast tracked to statehood due to valuable resources or sufficient Anglo-American settlers. In the remaining territories there remains some dark possibilities. Slavery would likely be spread so as to appease the south, but that might imply that some of the native groups might end up being subject to slavery. Assuming an Alt Civil War, this expanded South is in both a better and much worse situation: More resources and more spread out and occupying hostile territories

 

[Captain Jack]

While there was some political support for the idea, annexing the entirety of Mexico was never a realistic prospect, not least because US forces didn’t control the whole of the country. There was very little appetite for embarking on the kind of extended anti-guerilla war and occupation that would have entailed. The whole purpose of the Mexico City campaign was to strike at the Mexican heartland and force Mexico to negotiate peace from a position of American strength. My view is that the All of Mexico movement was basically just an inflated reaction to American success on the battlefield and a sort of victory fever rather than a serious political force.

There was serious political support for annexing more territory than was the case IOTL. Polk wanted greater annexations out of the treaty, but the US negotiator in Mexico more or less went rogue and ignored orders recalling him to Washington to negotiate the OTL treaty. Polk wasn’t exactly thrilled, but submitted the treaty to the Senate since it handily accomplished American pre-war aims and he was worried about the political consequences of further delay. A group of Senators tried to modify the treaty to annex additional territory when it was under consideration, but that effort failed.

Setting that aside, however, if the US had annexed all of Mexico it would not have been a single territory. I mean, technically it would have all been an unorganized territory in the window between formal cession and the establishment of territorial governments. But it would have been divided up into separate territories and states would eventually have been organized from them. Mexico would clearly not have been kept as a single territory, let alone admitted as a single state. Partly because it would be massively imbalanced, and partly because it would be administratively impractical. I don’t see why any of the states admitted from Mexican territory would necessarily organize their governments differently than most US states, given there is a decent range there.

 

[GunterW]

I agree with that All of Mexico was unlikely and brought very little benefits compared to the liabilities it generates. It’s a massive territory, the central and southern part are more densely populated and unruly, the infrastructure is severely damaged… I could go on; it costs too much to hold, and the US would need to invest heavily to make it profitable, setting aside any racial or religious bias the US had at that time. They could take a bigger chunk, maybe up until the Tropic of Cancer, which is roughly a line from Mazatlán to Tampico, it will add around 300,000 to 500,000 people depending on where the line is drawn, but it still manageable because it is spread out over hundreds of thousands of square kilometers.

OTL Mexican Cession had around 50,000 people (Mexican citizens only, this excludes native tribes and US immigrants).

An alternative solution would be to become a US protectorate. Scott was offered the presidency by a Mexican delegation during a meeting in the outskirts of Mexico City. This was not official; it only represented the wishes of a part of the political establishment and didn’t speak on behalf of the government. I don’t know much about him or any of his staff or peers to understand what their motivations could be to accept or decline, but it did happen in OTL. A protectorate provides more benefits and insulates the US from much of the trouble of holding the region provided they supply this new government with credit and guns.

 

[Nivek]

that would kill the USA and the slave power issue would explode early..killing gtwo birds with a stone and Mexico would free itself anyway

 

[Lalli]

Not plausible. Majority of Americans didn't want annex Catholic majority Spanish speaking country. And Mexicans don't want to be under Washington D.C. Even if USA decides to do something such idiotic, they would face long, brutal and costy guerilla war and finally USA has give up eventually probably by early stages of ACW.

 

[Brunaburh]

I think it would be similar to the political system of the UK in a situation where Hitler launched an invasion of the UK in 1941. He could maybe use, like, barges from the Rhine or something?

 

[Brunaburh]

They could take a bigger chunk, maybe up until the Tropic of Cancer, which is roughly a line from Mazatlán to Tampico, it will add around 300,000 to 500,000 people depending on where the line is drawn, but it still manageable because it is spread out over hundreds of thousands of square kilometers.

OTL Mexican Cession had around 50,000 people (Mexican citizens only, this excludes native tribes and US immigrants).

Even that is too much to be plausible. They could culturally absorb Baja California and a few bits of Sonora and Chihuahua, you know, stuff nobody would want.

The total size of the regular US army was 30k, and they had 70k plus volunteers who engaged for the conflict. To occupy the area you are talking about, you need to double the size of the US standing army and invest in a massive network of forts. Then prepare for the inevitable war with Mexico in which you have a Mexican guerrilla force behind your lines and native Americans fighting you separately all along your supply lines.

And the US at this point did not have the governmental sophistication to run a colony of this size.

The US wasn't capable of doing this and it didn't want to.

 

[cloistered scholar]

What if Mexico balkanized? The US recognizes individual Mexican provinces as states. This puts the Caudillos and local conservatives in power. The US retains the right to intervene if needed.

 

[dfl_90]

I suspect this would have resulted in a few more states being annexed into the US and the remainder of Mexico being organized into some sort of "associated republic" under American protection. Given that American diplomacy with Mexico in this period was quite blundering, I wouldn't be surprised if they attempt to implement a secular, federal republican structure modeled after the US, ignorant that the Mexicans have differing preferences, especially on religion. I feel quite certain that this entity would be highly unstable and collapse the minute American forces weren't there to police it. The Civil War probably comes along sooner rather than later in this scenario, at which time soldiers will be called away and Mexico will regain its independence in short order. Unlike OTL, I could see there being some push in Mexico to reclaim some of the captured territories from the Americans, although that probably doesn't end well for them in the long run.

 

[GunterW]

Even that is too much to be plausible. They could culturally absorb Baja California and a few bits of Sonora and Chihuahua, you know, stuff nobody would want.

The total size of the regular US army was 30k, and they had 70k plus volunteers who engaged for the conflict. To occupy the area you are talking about, you need to double the size of the US standing army and invest in a massive network of forts. Then prepare for the inevitable war with Mexico in which you have a Mexican guerrilla force behind your lines and native Americans fighting you separately all along your supply lines.

And the US at this point did not have the governmental sophistication to run a colony of this size.

The US wasn't capable of doing this and it didn't want to.

Yes, though there was a proposal 10 years after, during the Civil War between the Conservative and Liberal factions in Mexico, in the negotiations for the Treaty of McLane-Ocampo that more or less stipulated that Mexico would become a de facto US protectorate and was to give right of passage over certain stretches of Mexico, namely Sonora, Tehuantepec and a corridor across the northern part of the country.

From what I’ve read, there were even proposals to sell all lands north of a Mazatlán-Tampico line in the same treaty. Some Liberals thought the land was useless, and it was like that at least until the end of the 1800s, being mostly empty desert with few spread out small towns.

Also to note, the northern states were not happy being neglected by Mexico City, they rebelled a few times such as the short lived Rio Grande Republic. Even if they take a bit more this time, they could pull a Texas and carve out “independent” republics in the northern states and then a few years later admitting them into the Union. For example the state of Sonora had roughly 150,000 inhabitants, that's 3x more than OTL Mexican Cession, but hardly unmanageable.

In summary, Mexico got off the war losing a lot of prestige and empty land which it barely controlled, but it could have ended up way worse. It was still independent.

 

[wcv215]

There was serious political support for annexing more territory than was the case IOTL.

There was also a LOT of support for annexing no territory. The Treaty came within 2 votes of being rejected outright.

 

[Enigmajones]

IIRC the plan was to establish slave states in the former Mexico. Don’t know if that would happen, but it’s what I’ve heard.

 

[Raferty]

Yucatan was a real option as the region had split off from the central Mexican gvt at the time of the war and was dealing with a nasty fight for survival against the Mayans - I know there was some interest in bringing in American aid, or British support if needed