How badly could the US lose the war against CSA and UK?
- Thread starter Pimli
- Start date
The absolute worst? Hmmmmm. On the part of the Confederacy: they states of Kentucky, Tennessee and the Arizona Territory (southern half of the New Mexico territory). If the CSA and Britain utterly shallacked the US, then possible Missouri or at least the southern half of the state. They would also work to the reannexation of West Virginia.
Britain would probably demand northern Main since they have claims on the territory. I could portentally see some adjustment to the border of Washington state as well. I also wonder if the Brits would push for British goods in Amercan ports not being subject to tarrifs - it would fit their ideology of free trade at the time, would open up the US to even more British goods, and might undercut a bit of the US' growing industrial weight.
I think that the 49th parallel will remain the border except possibly for reinstating the Columbia River as the boundary in Oregon. In Maine the border reverts to the maximum British claims before Webster-Ashburton. In a scenario based on intervention following Trent West Virgina never secedes from Virginia. I think the CSA gets KY, possibly the Missouri boot heel absorbed into Arkansas, and Arizona. Missouri is probably out of reach since the main secessionist centers were in central MO. I don't know about Indian territory although it may be likely given the pro-Confererate stance of some of the 5 Nations.
Paranoia USA, I can see Russia and USA going friendly due to their mutual hate for the UK, aside from that, what happens to Mexico? And central America as that can affects stuff greatly
I have thoughts on how the war may go.
Aside from that, the worst case scenario I can envision, similar to something that happens in my Wrapped in Flames TL, is that Britain enters the war because of the Trent Affair in 1862, when the US is least prepared to expand the war. This leads to a slogfest in Canada, New England, and the Union's historic front lines as the Confederacy gets a hell of a booster shot. The fronts waffle back and forth in 1862, but in 1863, after over a year of hesitation, the British finally decide to bite the bullet and launch a combined naval campaign with the Confederacy for an assault on Washington. In a daring invasion, Lee moves north while a portion of his army is shuttled by the British fleet to a point north of Washington and makes a naval landing. The fog of war sees the Army of the Potomac driven into the Washington defences just as Lee's other forces move in from - let's say Annapolis - while only a portion of the AotP escapes. After months of siege and a bloody and failed relief effort, the Army of the Potomac surrenders, leaving most of the Eastern seaboard open to joint Confederate/British attack.
With the surrender of the Union's largest field army and the fall of the capital, the Confederacy has in hand the ability to take maximalist gains at the peace table. They most likely get most of their territorial claims* from their Arizona to Kentucky, while Maryland might be allowed to launch a plebiscite on staying in the Union. You most likely get a very big, very mean, and very smug Confederacy.
Britain too will take her pound of flesh as they would view the war as being the US's fault. Most likely a strip of Maine is torn off to protect the overland route to Canada, maybe a chunk of northern New York if they feel vindictive (though this is less likely). On the Pacific coast the British settle the San Juan Islands dispute in their favor, and if a certain Hudson's Bay Company leader gets his way they may slice off the Oregon territory to boot. Though I personally doubt it would be that extreme. The other big demand would probably be financial recompense for damages suffered.
That's probably the worst case scenario.
*Though this is subject to military success on those fronts as well.
Aside from that, the worst case scenario I can envision, similar to something that happens in my Wrapped in Flames TL, is that Britain enters the war because of the Trent Affair in 1862, when the US is least prepared to expand the war. This leads to a slogfest in Canada, New England, and the Union's historic front lines as the Confederacy gets a hell of a booster shot. The fronts waffle back and forth in 1862, but in 1863, after over a year of hesitation, the British finally decide to bite the bullet and launch a combined naval campaign with the Confederacy for an assault on Washington. In a daring invasion, Lee moves north while a portion of his army is shuttled by the British fleet to a point north of Washington and makes a naval landing. The fog of war sees the Army of the Potomac driven into the Washington defences just as Lee's other forces move in from - let's say Annapolis - while only a portion of the AotP escapes. After months of siege and a bloody and failed relief effort, the Army of the Potomac surrenders, leaving most of the Eastern seaboard open to joint Confederate/British attack.
With the surrender of the Union's largest field army and the fall of the capital, the Confederacy has in hand the ability to take maximalist gains at the peace table. They most likely get most of their territorial claims* from their Arizona to Kentucky, while Maryland might be allowed to launch a plebiscite on staying in the Union. You most likely get a very big, very mean, and very smug Confederacy.
Britain too will take her pound of flesh as they would view the war as being the US's fault. Most likely a strip of Maine is torn off to protect the overland route to Canada, maybe a chunk of northern New York if they feel vindictive (though this is less likely). On the Pacific coast the British settle the San Juan Islands dispute in their favor, and if a certain Hudson's Bay Company leader gets his way they may slice off the Oregon territory to boot. Though I personally doubt it would be that extreme. The other big demand would probably be financial recompense for damages suffered.
That's probably the worst case scenario.
*Though this is subject to military success on those fronts as well.
I expect the worst thing Britain could do would be continued support for the Confederacy and hostility towards the Union, rather than any territorial gains it's likely to enforce. Having large, hostile, well-armed powers to both north and south would be a severe constraint, and I expect that conciliating one or the other would be the Union's top diplomatic priority in the post-war years. (They could look for allies against Britain and go in for a round two, I suppose, but given that all the other great powers are on the other side of an ocean and the 1860s is peak Rule Britannia era, I don't think they'd be of much help.)
There are no allies for America to court. Russia is licking its wounds after Crimea and rebuilding, France has a vested interest in seeing America crash and burn for their Mexican adventure, ditto Spain due to their dabbling in Latin America. That leaves only Austria and Prussia, neither of which cares about the Americas or wants to raise Britain's ire for nothing to gain.
Also, for Russia, Austria and Prussia... Poland is just about to boil over.
As to OP, worst possible terms would be northern Maine, northern New York adjacent to St. Lawrence River, the Great Lakes islands, northern Minnesota along Lake Superior, the Red River Valley Basin in the Dakotas, and Oregon Territory north of the Columbia River. I'd consider that the most extreme version, and it's not the most likely, but depending on how the war goes they might get it. None of it is populated, and it's all stuff that's easy to defend.
Ah the American Civil War goes global. France joins the Union against the UK, Prussia joins in against France, Austria against Prussia, Italy against Austria, Mexico joins against the Confederacah, Spain against the Union, Russia joins in against Japan, China against the UK and everyone gets confused.
The worst terms for the US that remain sane would be for plebiscites in all border states, both Union and Confederate, but NOT at the state level but rather at the county level. Then the borders are redrawn accordingly, probably with a few modifiers to keep everything contiguous. That's the sort of terms that are most likely to NOT provoke another war within 10-15 years, which is worst case for the Union, because they'd almost certainly win that war.
A fair bit of Tennessee and Virginia go Union. Parts of KY and Missouri go Confederate, probably even a tiny bit of Illinois.
A fair bit of Tennessee and Virginia go Union. Parts of KY and Missouri go Confederate, probably even a tiny bit of Illinois.
I think both sides would be extremely resistant to the splitting up of states. I even think that the counter-secession of West Virginia would be called into question by a victorious Confederacy, assuming Britain backed them.
We should remember here that the USA can compete with the RN technically build alot more ships to defend themselves
There would be substantial resistance, but the facts on the ground are that some counties are pretty heavily secessionist even in Union states and some counties are unionist in Confederate states. Those disaffected counties are where the flashpoints of the next war between the CSA and USA are likely to crop up. If the peace negotiators are really good at Peace, they'll redraw the state boundaries. A bit of Southern California providing a port on the Pacific would probably sweeten things adequately for the CSA to accept that West Virginia isn't coming back, along with part of Tennessee, but parts of the Union Slave states are going to the CSA.
Counties are historically the most fundamental units in the US. At that time they even had suffrage in the upper houses of state legislatures (like the US Senate in miniature).
Dagoth Ur
Banned
Why not ally the Confederacy, after things have settled down? An unfortunate brothers' war that doesn't have to ruin the future. Their border is clearly delineated and without disputes, they both have areas of expansion against the UK (Canada and the Caribbean) and they both have almost the same heritage.
CSA gets the border states who still had slavery but sided with the Union. UK gets New England states and the Oregon Territory. Long term effect is that the USA is crippled by the war and collapses into several different smaller countries.
There's more New Englanders than there are Canadians, it would be a disaster. The things that Britain wanted were slices of border that they historic claims to or provided strategic depth, not huge chunks of heavily populated territory.
You'd likely see a Union that has French post Franco-Prussian war levels of anger, and WWI they go for it. Likely some sort of secret treaty with Germany, and Prussian influence in the US massively increases.
Why? Britain and America still have an enormous trading relationship, shared history and common language. Britain isn't being vindictive and probably normalized the relationship ASAP while blaming everything on the Republican administration for launching itself into a war it wasn't prepared for.
Nations don't just become perpetual enemies for kicks. Britain and France fought against each other for like two decades straight during the Napoleonic Wars and then fought the Russians during Crimea fifty years later.
Dagoth Ur
Banned
Why though? If Britain doesn't seek territory what's there to be mad about?
Exactly, and British rhetoric will be pretty common sense. "Hey jolly chap, we were just aiding some fellows in declaring their own independence, same as you did less than a hundred years ago. What's the harm in that?" Pretty hard to argue against that when it was the basis for the creation of the United States.