WI Salta/Jujuy in Bolivia, not Argentina?

Suppose that Manuel Belgrano and his Army of the North (on behalf of the United Provinces of La Plata) had lost the Battle of Salta in early 1813 to the Royalists, such that the latter became the occupiers of what are now Salta and Jujuy provinces in northwestern-most Argentina. Thus, in that scenario, the Salta/Jujuy area becomes part of Bolivia, the southernmost part of Bolivia.

What would the consequences have been for Bolivia? Would the addition of that area have made Bolivia richer than IOTL? How would the War of the Confederation (1836-39) have played differently? How about the War of the Pacific (1879-83)?
 

Gian

Banned
Suppose that Manuel Belgrano and his Army of the North (on behalf of the United Provinces of La Plata) had lost the Battle of Salta in early 1813 to the Royalists, such that the latter became the occupiers of what are now Salta and Jujuy provinces in northwestern-most Argentina. Thus, in that scenario, the Salta/Jujuy area becomes part of Bolivia, the southernmost part of Bolivia.

What would the consequences have been for Bolivia? Would the addition of that area have made Bolivia richer than IOTL? How would the War of the Confederation (1836-39) have played differently? How about the War of the Pacific (1879-83)?

Well, without the sea, all their riches would be rather meaningless. And Bolivia's coasts already had rich saltpeter/nitrate deposits that Chile was willing to go to war over (to say nothing of the fact that the dispute also apparently was inherited from the colonial days as well)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atacama_border_dispute#Origins
 
What happens to the Formasa and Northern Chaco Provinces?
If Bolivia remains loyal to Spain (which is likely, assuming a scenario whereas neither Belgrano nor San Martin can invade Bolivia and impose their ideal of independence), and retains the two northernmost provinces of Argentina, then it's no stretch to think that the defensibility of Formosa, Chaco, and even Paraguay would be put into question.
 
Well, without the sea, all their riches would be rather meaningless. And Bolivia's coasts already had rich saltpeter/nitrate deposits that Chile was willing to go to war over (to say nothing of the fact that the dispute also apparently was inherited from the colonial days as well)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atacama_border_dispute#Origins

What I mean is, what if - throughout most of the 19th century - Bolivia had included not just OTL 19th-century Bolivia (including the nitrate-rich coastal area that Chile would eventually take over at least IOTL) but also Salta, Jujuy, Oran, etc.?
 
Bolivia gains a nice tourist destination which can't be exploited until the late 20th century, some iron depots which can't be exploited until the mid 20 century and even more lithium, which isn't worth much until the 21st century
 
Bolivia gains a nice tourist destination which can't be exploited until the late 20th century, some iron depots which can't be exploited until the mid 20 century and even more lithium, which isn't worth much until the 21st century

You're point, juanml82, is that with the addition of Salta/Jujuy, Bolivia wouldn't have had so much added wealth until at least the mid-to-late 20th century? And thus, the history of Bolivia and of its neighbours - in terms of, for example, the territorial changes as a result of the War of the Pacific - would have proceeded more or less as OTL because Bolivia wouldn't have been so much richer?
 
You're point, juanml82, is that with the addition of Salta/Jujuy, Bolivia wouldn't have had so much added wealth until at least the mid-to-late 20th century? And thus, the history of Bolivia and of its neighbours - in terms of, for example, the territorial changes as a result of the War of the Pacific - would have proceeded more or less as OTL because Bolivia wouldn't have been so much richer?
It wouldn't have added wealth, period. Jujuy and Salta are among the poorest Argentine provinces, and Salta in particular has the highest rape rates (per inhabitant) in the country. A significant part of the former, IMHO, it's logistics. I'm not even sure Bolivia would even exploit the iron, so realistically, it only adds a nice touristic region once commercial flight tickets get low enough that tourism to remote locations becomes affordable.

So no, assuming there is still a War of the Pacific with the same players, it would have proceeded more or less as OTL
 
Jujuy and Salta are among the poorest Argentine provinces

They may be among the poorest provinces in Argentina, but I'm not sure if they'd necessarily be the poorest regions of Bolivia, given that Bolivia has a much lower per capita GDP than Argentina. If they were in Bolivia, they might be among the wealthier Bolivian departments, for all I know.
 
Is Tucumán still Argentinean in this TL? I seem to rember that Belgrano was ordered to flee to Cordoba, but he stayed and defeated the royalists.

In any case, if Bolivia has Salta and Jujuy, and manages to keep the country united, it has greater chances to get the Paraguayan Chaco, and maybe a bit of Northeastern Argentina.

The war of 1836 would be buterflied away, but if such a conflict exist, ... I do not know: Bolivia defeated Argentina as in OTL, it might do the same ITTL, unless Argentina were so enraged by the loss of these provinces that it put more resources in this war (a war Argentina was not committed to IOTL). Concerning Chile, I do not how much advantage the control over these provinces give Bolivia in a war against Chile, be it in 1836-39 or in 1881, compared to OTL.
 
So no, assuming there is still a War of the Pacific with the same players, it would have proceeded more or less as OTL

Wouldn't it give Bolivia better logistics in order to face threats against the region of the Atacama and Antofagasta, though?
 
Top