WI: The British tried to pull a Maximilian on Mexico?

Deleted member 97083

As I understand it, the French intervention in Mexico was initially supported by Britain and Spain as well. It seems plausible that alternate circumstances could have led the British attempting a similar invasion, even if it was a rather unique occurrence due to the reign of Emperor Napoleon III.

If the British did the same thing the French did in Mexico, supporting a puppet emperor to dominate the country, what would happen? Who would the emperor candidate be? And would the British succeed or fail at overthrowing the Mexican government?
 

UCB79

Achaemenid Rome said:
As I understand it, the French intervention in Mexico was initially supported by Britain and Spain as well. It seems plausible that alternate circumstances could have led the British attempting a similar invasion, even if it was a rather unique occurrence due to the reign of Emperor Napoleon III.

If the British did the same thing the French did in Mexico, supporting a puppet emperor to dominate the country, what would happen? Who would the emperor candidate be? And would the British succeed or fail at overthrowing the Mexican government?
Click to expand...

It might well touch off a 3rd American-
English war(yes I know the British are
doing here ITTL what the French did IOTL &
that did NOT result in war but IOTL the
British in mid-19th century America were so
disliked-even hated- that the American
public would be up in arms & screaming
with all their might)
 
Last edited:

Kellan Sullivan

In the way of candidates Britain would either attempt to send a non-dynast royal - like Sussex's kids or William IV's kids by Mrs Jordan. Although the religious difference would be a major headache (Protestant ruler of a Catholic people).

Or, option 2: A Coburg-Kohary (which almost every non-Coburg in Europe will reject), who has ties to Belgium (uncle/cousin), Portugal (brother), Orléans France (wife/sister), who's at least Catholic.

Neither seems likely, IMHO
 
Clandango

Clandango

The British already had plenty of influence in the area and trying to set up an Autocrat would just piss off the Americans, Central Americans, and their own Parliment. Britain called Canada a Dominion instead of a Kingdom partially so as to not upset the Americans. Who, we should recall, started sending an army over to the Mexican border as soon as the Civil War started to wind down. You can bet if the British try to set up a monarch that they start selling massive amounts of guns to the Mexicans, who will become a bit more pro-American after this. They were already a little fond of Lincoln due to his speeches during during the Mexican-American War denouncing it as landgrabbed based upon expanding slavery.
 
EnglishCanuck

EnglishCanuck

Achaemenid Rome said:
As I understand it, the French intervention in Mexico was initially supported by Britain and Spain as well. It seems plausible that alternate circumstances could have led the British attempting a similar invasion, even if it was a rather unique occurrence due to the reign of Emperor Napoleon III.

If the British did the same thing the French did in Mexico, supporting a puppet emperor to dominate the country, what would happen? Who would the emperor candidate be? And would the British succeed or fail at overthrowing the Mexican government?
Click to expand...

The British and Spanish supported the French in that they had all signed The Treaty of London (1862) which was a multinational goal to force the government of Benito Juarez to pay the debts off that he owed foreign governments. He had canceled them in the aftermath of the Reform War, and in doing so angered his European creditors. The three aforementioned countries decided they were going to recoup their losses by force. When it became obvious that France wanted more than a simple loan repayment the other powers all rapidly backed out.

Installing new monarchs in the New World wasn't really the British modus-operandi, and I can't see them going through with this kind of thing (what with more than a few painful memories from the Napoleonic Wars and the ARW). If they did though, they'd probably cast around for a German prince to occupy the throne of Mexico, or at the very least support the Mexican Conservatives in an effort to oust Juarez.
 

LDLF

I think Robert Tombs' 'The English and their History' includes Mexico in the list of countries whose inhabitants expressed an interest in being part of the British Empire, which the British firmly turned down.
It seems quite difficult to create sufficient support for this either in Mexico or Britain. The UK would surely much rather have had as much access to Mexico's markets as possible without the cost of defending it from its powerful neighbour, one who would be uncomfortable about being surrounded North and South by the British. It may require a significantly different USA history up until this point for the British even to consider it as feasible.
But, then again, obviously Napoleon III must have seen it as possible.
 

eltf177

EnglishCanuck said:
The British and Spanish supported the French in that they had all signed The Treaty of London (1862) which was a multinational goal to force the government of Benito Juarez to pay the debts off that he owed foreign governments. He had canceled them in the aftermath of the Reform War, and in doing so angered his European creditors. The three aforementioned countries decided they were going to recoup their losses by force. When it became obvious that France wanted more than a simple loan repayment the other powers all rapidly backed out.
Click to expand...

This. The UK had no interest in who was running Mexico, just so long as they paid their debt...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top