Yep, London and Berlin. Shouldn't do comment responses before dinner when I'm famished.You mean London and Berlin?
The British-owned fields are untouched.Treaty looks pretty good. The one question I have is in regards to the US claiming control over the oil fields in Tamaulipas. British oil companies had a substantial presence in the Tamaulipas oil fields. Is the US claiming ownership of the British owned oil fields as well? (Which will definitely further damage US-British relations if it happens.)
Otherwise it's interesting that Hughes didn't require the Mexicans to abolish the various anti-clerical provisions in the 1917 Constitution as part of the treaty. I can certainly understand why he wouldn't want to touch Mexican religious politics with a ten foot pole, but it will likely cost him with Catholic voters come 1920.
Eh, Hughes is a Protestant... I don't see why he'd care about anticlericalism. I'm hesitant to say one way or the other about the Catholic vote, though- New York, with its Irish and Italian populations, went for Hughes in '16 and was a pretty solid Republican state. Same goes for all the Irishmen in Boston. Now, Mexican-Americans will certainly vote Democrat in '20, but that's for bigger reasons than Hughes' position on anticlericalism.
I considered that but felt it was too cliche. Second Mexican Wars seem a common trope in CP Victory TLs and while I think mine's decent, changing the border just seems like something pulled out of Kaiserreich. Besides, the USA has enough empty desert in the West that I can't see them wanting more... and Southern Democrats would've been furious at the idea of incorporating non-white people into the country. That was sarcasm, by the way- not trying to make a statement there.I'm surprised the US didn't annex any territory. I'd have expected them to demand at least Baja California given how perfect it's situated to facilitate blockading the Mexican West Coast or to interfere with such a one depending on who owns it.