Effects on the US if there was a Franco-American War/Second Mexican-American War in 1865

[World Mapping]

Hi y'all.

I have a timeline in the works right now. TL;DR, earlier end to the ACW, and the US declares war on France and the "Second Mexican Empire", citing the Monroe Doctrine.

I believe the US would be able to win that conflict, which is what I have in the canon as of now. How would a successful "Second Mexican-American War" or "Franco-American War" affect the US? How does the US develop, having effectively obtained "great power" status 30 some years earlier?

 

[Corjomc]

Maybe Mexico is better off today as the U.S. sends more aid south to prevent more interventions from other great powers.

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

I don't think the US would see it as a second Mexican-American War. The Americans would see it as defending the sovereign government of Mexico, not warring against it. The Mexican Empire would just be seen as a French puppet state. Also it we're talking about effects on the US, well the effects of a different end to the ACW could be much larger than the effects of a Franco-American War.

 

[Teiresias]

I don't think the US would see it as a second Mexican-American War. The Americans would see it as defending the sovereign government of Mexico, not warring against it.

That does not, of course, mean that the Mexicans would necessarily see it that way. Certainly the Second Mexican Empire would do everything they can to portray the Republicans as American puppets.

And Mexicans would, IMO, be very unhappy about the idea of US soldiers setting foot on Mexican territory, given what happened last time. It's also not likely to be a walk in the park for the US.

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

That does not, of course, mean that the Mexicans would necessarily see it that way. Certainly the Second Mexican Empire would do everything they can to portray the Republicans as American puppets.

And Mexicans would, IMO, be very unhappy about the idea of US soldiers setting foot on Mexican territory, given what happened last time. It's also not likely to be a walk in the park for the US.

Anti-American sentiment is not going to make the Mexicans welcome a de facto French occupation or a monarchy with open arms.

Although Mexican-American relations played a huge role in shaping Mexican history, Mexican history does not revolve around tensions with the United States. Maximillian received some support from within Mexico but by an large the population opposed him. Mexican public opinion mostly favored republicanism and most Mexicans rightly saw Maximillian as a puppet of French imperialists. Mexico had already successfully rebelled against monarchy and Maximillian meant a return to that.

 

[Teiresias]

Anti-American sentiment is going to make the Mexicans welcome a de facto French occupation or a monarchy with open arms.

I think you're missing a 'not' there, and that's not my argument. All I'm saying is that the Mexicans are not, in any way, shape or form, going to want any foreign troops under the command of a foreign government on their soil. Much less troops of a government that only 20 years ago invaded them, killed their people, and stole their land.

They'd happily take gold, equipment, training, even volunteers as long as they're under the command of Mexican officers. But they'd be very, very reluctant to let actual US soldiers into Mexico.

 

[jmc247]

I believe the US would be able to win that conflict, which is what I have in the canon as of now. How would a successful "Second Mexican-American War" or "Franco-American War" affect the US? How does the US develop, having effectively obtained "great power" status 30 some years earlier?

The biggest impact is North-South relations in the US. Northern reporters were asking Lee if he wanted to lead troops into Mexico again already by May 1865. The Blair Plan for this war envisioned northern and southern troops on mass fighting side by side as one army.

Reconstruction ends up being a very quick affair. Probably over as soon as the southern states sign onto ending slavery. On paper it would seem worse for the freedmen, but I am not sure. Quick reconstruction means a lack of organized resistance to it meaning no Klan and greatly reduced worry of freedmen displacing white political power. That means slowly moving towards increasing political rights over time is easier without anywhere near as much organized resistance to it.

I would image it would have a similar impact to the Spanish American war of bringing Americans together and you might see America having its coming out as a true world power a few decades earlier.

 

[Slime_blob]

This might delegitimize Juarez abit. I suggest you might want Santa Anna or Santa Anna like figure to unite the republicans and Mezicans against le french

 

[kham_coc]

On that note, if there is a Franco-American war, would the US annex the French possessions in the new world? I would guess so?

 

[EnglishCanuck]

Anti-American sentiment is not going to make the Mexicans welcome a de facto French occupation or a monarchy with open arms.

Although Mexican-American relations played a huge role in shaping Mexican history, Mexican history does not revolve around tensions with the United States. Maximillian received some support from within Mexico but by an large the population opposed him. Mexican public opinion mostly favored republicanism and most Mexicans rightly saw Maximillian as a puppet of French imperialists. Mexico had already successfully rebelled against monarchy and Maximillian meant a return to that.

That does, depend on the manner of American intervention. Under no circumstances would Juarez accept an official American army on Mexican soil. The memories of the US invasion were too fresh and too bitter, and would probably have seen even devoted Republicans desert him because even Liberals and Conservatives had briefly set aside their differences to fight the US invasion of the 1840s. It really can't be understated how much of a national humiliation it was seen in Mexico and that such an intervention would probably be a godsend for Maximillian because even the threat of the US exacting concessions for it's involvement would be an enormous political problem for Juarez.

Historically the diplomatic pressure placed on France (and the US army just happening to lose thousands of rifles and crates of ammunition along the Rio Grande) was enough to topple Maximillian.

The domestic opposition to Maximillian is less clear cut than that. Max was, personally, probably very popular with many Mexicans because he bothered to treat them well, attempted to reign in corrupt officials, and worked hard to get decent relations with the Native peoples who provided support to his regime, and he was not an absolute monarchist. He royally screwed the pooch with the Black Decree of October 1865 because just as he was winning on a military level, he alienated numerous people who now faced a literal death sentence if he won, and truthfully, absent that, his carrot and stick style conservatism had failed to alienate the masses of Mexico. However this, coupled with the French decision to begin to withdraw French troops beginning in 1866, effectively doomed him.

That said, a naval mission to clear French warships from the Gulf of Mexico and Veracruz coupled with the historic "loss" of weapons along the Rio Grande would be all that would be needed to simultaneously put the fear of God into Napoleon and allow Juarez to win as he did historically.

Winning a naval struggle against the French (and effectively a very cheap war) would be a huge post Civil War boon to the national pysche that the US is now a player on the world stage. It would probably still have a larger army, larger navy, and the feeling of being able to make it's voice heard while showing that the Monroe Doctrine is not just a piece of paper enforced by the British as it had largely been perceived.

 

[raharris1973]

That said, a naval mission to clear French warships from the Gulf of Mexico and Veracruz coupled with the historic "loss" of weapons along the Rio Grande would be all that would be needed to simultaneously put the fear of God into Napoleon and allow Juarez to win as he did historically.

Winning a naval struggle against the French (and effectively a very cheap war) would be a huge post Civil War boon to the national pysche that the US is now a player on the world stage. It would probably still have a larger army, larger navy, and the feeling of being able to make it's voice heard while showing that the Monroe Doctrine is not just a piece of paper enforced by the British as it had largely been perceived.

What would the brown water naval fight on the Gulf of Mexico coastline look like? And what would blue water naval clashes in the Caribbean and beyond look like?

On that note, if there is a Franco-American war, would the US annex the French possessions in the new world? I would guess so?

Well, what was there to go after? Closest to the US mainland, and somewhat uncomfortably close to British Newfoundland are tiny St. Pierre and Miquelon. Would the USA send an expedition to seize them? Would it work. If so, could the US hold them against a French naval counter-attack?

The other locations would be Guadalupe, Martinique, Guiana, and possibly St. Lucia and Dominica. They are at a greater distance. Despite the temporarily large size of the Union Navy at this point, wouldn't its wartime monomaniacal focus on blockade, and heavy investment in monitors and river-craft leave France with an advantage in blue-water operations around those areas?

Would the objective be to permanently retain any French territory that can be taken and held, or to use them as hostages for French withdrawal from Mexico?

Under no circumstances would Juarez accept an official American army on Mexican soil.

Well that's limiting. And it scuppers speculations like this:

The biggest impact is North-South relations in the US. Northern reporters were asking Lee if he wanted to lead troops into Mexico again already by May 1865. The Blair Plan for this war envisioned northern and southern troops on mass fighting side by side as one army.

But I suppose we could ask just how large or a huge a volunteer force with how high-ranking Americans in the volunteer chain of command, would Juarez accept, before Mexican opinion regards it as the same thing as "an official American Army.

Like could Mexico only expect scattered soldiers and officers, below flag (general officer) rank? Or could they accept whole Division or Corps size units of "volunteers" with American general officers under the "command" of Mexican "Marshals" appointed by Juarez. Could Juaraze and his side accept an American volunteer force outnumbering his indigenous Mexican forces like say the North Koreans did with their acceptance of fraternal assistance from the Chinese People's Volunteer Army during the Korean War? That's technically "unofficial" while still packing a lot of French-killing power.

 

[mrmandias]

That does, depend on the manner of American intervention. Under no circumstances would Juarez accept an official American army on Mexican soil. The memories of the US invasion were too fresh and too bitter, and would probably have seen even devoted Republicans desert him because even Liberals and Conservatives had briefly set aside their differences to fight the US invasion of the 1840s. It really can't be understated how much of a national humiliation it was seen in Mexico and that such an intervention would probably be a godsend for Maximillian because even the threat of the US exacting concessions for it's involvement would be an enormous political problem for Juarez.

Historically the diplomatic pressure placed on France (and the US army just happening to lose thousands of rifles and crates of ammunition along the Rio Grande) was enough to topple Maximillian.

The domestic opposition to Maximillian is less clear cut than that. Max was, personally, probably very popular with many Mexicans because he bothered to treat them well, attempted to reign in corrupt officials, and worked hard to get decent relations with the Native peoples who provided support to his regime, and he was not an absolute monarchist. He royally screwed the pooch with the Black Decree of October 1865 because just as he was winning on a military level, he alienated numerous people who now faced a literal death sentence if he won, and truthfully, absent that, his carrot and stick style conservatism had failed to alienate the masses of Mexico. However this, coupled with the French decision to begin to withdraw French troops beginning in 1866, effectively doomed him.

That said, a naval mission to clear French warships from the Gulf of Mexico and Veracruz coupled with the historic "loss" of weapons along the Rio Grande would be all that would be needed to simultaneously put the fear of God into Napoleon and allow Juarez to win as he did historically.

Winning a naval struggle against the French (and effectively a very cheap war) would be a huge post Civil War boon to the national pysche that the US is now a player on the world stage. It would probably still have a larger army, larger navy, and the feeling of being able to make it's voice heard while showing that the Monroe Doctrine is not just a piece of paper enforced by the British as it had largely been perceived.

What about the scenario where the US does invade with infantry to the horror of the Juariztas? How do you think that plays out?

 

[mrmandias]

Losing a naval war would have be a big deal politically in France, but losing territory would be an earthquake. I don't think he could survive it politically. That has interesting knock on effects for the Franco Prussian war breaking out.

 

[kham_coc]

What about the scenario where the US does invade with infantry to the horror of the Juariztas? How do you think that plays out?

There would be some major irony if the US navy cuts France out of Mexico, but the US Army invasion solidifies support behind Max.

 

[World Mapping]

That has interesting knock on effects for the Franco Prussian war breaking out

Would/could the Franco-Prussian War be butterflied away entirely?

 

[EnglishCanuck]

What would the brown water naval fight on the Gulf of Mexico coastline look like? And what would blue water naval clashes in the Caribbean and beyond look like?

Off the top of my head can't quite say. The Union had some good ships at this point and a good deal of naval experience. I know that France had sent the ironclad Normandie into the Carribbean in 1862, but I'm not totally sure it stayed until 1866, and I don't know the exact dispositions of the French squadron at the time.

What about the scenario where the US does invade with infantry to the horror of the Juariztas? How do you think that plays out?

Juarez is disowned by more than a few generals who, assuming 1865 has gone reasonably similar to OTL, jump ship to the Imperial cause. The (somewhat unfair) assumption will be that he has promised the Americans something in exchange, and shows that he was not capable of fighting the war by himself and seriously dents his legitimacy.

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

That does, depend on the manner of American intervention. Under no circumstances would Juarez accept an official American army on Mexican soil. The memories of the US invasion were too fresh and too bitter, and would probably have seen even devoted Republicans desert him because even Liberals and Conservatives had briefly set aside their differences to fight the US invasion of the 1840s. It really can't be understated how much of a national humiliation it was seen in Mexico and that such an intervention would probably be a godsend for Maximillian because even the threat of the US exacting concessions for it's involvement would be an enormous political problem for Juarez.

Historically the diplomatic pressure placed on France (and the US army just happening to lose thousands of rifles and crates of ammunition along the Rio Grande) was enough to topple Maximillian.

The domestic opposition to Maximillian is less clear cut than that. Max was, personally, probably very popular with many Mexicans because he bothered to treat them well, attempted to reign in corrupt officials, and worked hard to get decent relations with the Native peoples who provided support to his regime, and he was not an absolute monarchist. He royally screwed the pooch with the Black Decree of October 1865 because just as he was winning on a military level, he alienated numerous people who now faced a literal death sentence if he won, and truthfully, absent that, his carrot and stick style conservatism had failed to alienate the masses of Mexico. However this, coupled with the French decision to begin to withdraw French troops beginning in 1866, effectively doomed him.

The French occupation of Mexico killed more than 30,000 Mexicans, far more than the Mexican-American War. In the modern day it's not seen as a humiliation the way the Mexican-American war is because it ended in a Mexican victory, but while the war is ongoing that's part is not going to be true.

On that note, if there is a Franco-American war, would the US annex the French possessions in the new world? I would guess so?

I don't think the US had that kind of naval power. French possessions in the New World at that point were limited to St Pierre and Miquelon off the coast of Newfoundland, the islands of the French West Indies, and French Guiana. There's obviously no land route to the French held islands and the land route to French Guiana would be utterly impractical. The US Navy obviously had a lot of ironclads from the ACW, but naval combat in the ACW was mostly in coastal waters and rivers. The US navy could probably hassle and disrupt French supply lines, but supporting a successful amphibious operation across the Caribbean (or to St Pierre and Miquelon) would be harder than that.

With that being said, this would be a decent POD for having an American seizure of the French possessions in the Americas somewhere later down the line.

 

[Teiresias]

But I suppose we could ask just how large or a huge a volunteer force with how high-ranking Americans in the volunteer chain of command, would Juarez accept, before Mexican opinion regards it as the same thing as "an official American Army.

Like could Mexico only expect scattered soldiers and officers, below flag (general officer) rank? Or could they accept whole Division or Corps size units of "volunteers" with American general officers under the "command" of Mexican "Marshals" appointed by Juarez. Could Juaraze and his side accept an American volunteer force outnumbering his indigenous Mexican forces like say the North Koreans did with their acceptance of fraternal assistance from the Chinese People's Volunteer Army during the Korean War? That's technically "unofficial" while still packing a lot of French-killing power.

Difficult to say for sure, but one thing they might consider is how Texas went independent - they let Americans settle there legally to the point that they outnumbered the Tejanos, and then the supposedly loyal settlers declared secession and joined the US.

So I don't think they'd want the volunteer forces to outnumber the indigenous Mexican forces. That could end in the tail wagging the dog. They also wouldn't want the volunteer forces to run around unsupervised. So probably no division or corps sized units.

 

[mrmandias]

Would/could the Franco-Prussian War be butterflied away entirely?

Yeah, I think it's possible. Bismarck was trying to engineer a war but without Napoleon 3 in charge there's no guarantee that it does happen

 

[raharris1973]

Yeah, I think it's possible. Bismarck was trying to engineer a war but without Napoleon 3 in charge there's no guarantee that it does happen

Louis Napoleon wasn't the only Frenchman whose status pride could be manipulated.

But it might be hard to do to any new French regime shortly after a recent lost war.

and the land route to French Guiana would be utterly impractical.

from the United States, but not...Brazil!....

There would be some major irony if the US navy cuts France out of Mexico, but the US Army invasion solidifies support behind Max.

I don't see how that could work, because the surge of support would protect the French Army on land, and destroying the local fleet just prevents the French from withdrawing while they send or build another.

Or, possibly the US forces destroy the French fleet in Mexican waters, and the French army on land, because they are concentrated forward against large American forces, but Juarista forces fall apart. American Forces smash and destroy many Imperial forces too, but they disperse and regroup, going guerrilla on the Americans, and the Americans begin to wonder, "hey wtf are we doing here," and the "Mexican ingrates didn't get what we're doing here" or, worst of all, "well we were trying to be a nice and helpful neighbor, but now that all the Mexican people and soldiers have gone bandit on us, you bet we are going to grab a hunk of land and mines for our trouble."

What was "good" becomes "bad" and "ugly". Waaaaaahh-wah-wah-wah. [my own sorry attempt at capturing Ennio Morricone's classic Spaghetti Western score in text]