raharris1973
Well-known member
1. What if the Boer War started earlier? I mean the second Boer War, the famous one (11 October 1899 – 31 May 1902). Second Boer War - Wikipedia
It seems like it could have easily happened. Boer tensions with the Empire were long-standing, and had been been brewing throughout the 1890s with the increased exploitation of gold and diamonds in the republics, the attraction of non-Boer immigrants, Uitlanders, and arguments over their political and representational rights. The Boers felt increasingly besieged and in OTL Oct 1899 eventually attacked first, preemptively, from their point of view.
But, this really could have happened almost anytime since the failed Jameson raid of New Years weekend 1895-1896*, which the Boers defeated, to British embarrassment. Jameson Raid - Wikipedia
So if war breaks out, because Kruger attacks in 1896, 1897, or 1898, what goes differently in this early Boer War compared to OTL? Alternatively, over that time perhaps there is an Uitlander uprising and Britain intervenes against its suppression?
Would the war starting earlier put either the British or the Boers at a greater relative disadvantage compared to OTLs timing?
In OTL, throughout continental Europe, notably in Russia, Netherlands, France, and Germany, and in the United States as well, there was alot of pro-Boer, anti-British sentiment that had the Russians and French talking about mediation proposals unwelcome to the British.
Could unfortunate juxtapositions of timing, for example, the Boer War overlapping with the Fashoda Incident Fashoda Incident - Wikipedia on the Upper Nile in 1898 lead to entwinement of the crises and escalation of continental sympathy for the Boers to a continental League of the French, Germans, and Russians fighting the British at the same time as the Boer War is going on?
In the mid 1890s, Britain often found itself isolated from the continental powers. All European capitals, from St. Pete to Berlin to Paris were very cool to Britain's proposed intervention in 1896 in the Ottoman Empire to protect the Armenians and overthrow the Sultan Abdul Hamid.
And, for those who can only can only think of Franco-German relations in this era in terms of WWI, Alsace-Lorraine, revanche, and the Franco-Prussian War, continental cooperation by France-Germany-Russia had worked in 1895, in the form of the Triple Intervention, albeit against Japan.
---even if nothing so dramatic happens as third, fourth or fifth party intervention in an early Boer War, the effects of a differently timed war could be interesting all by itself. There would certainly be affects on on British domestic politics and Dominion politics. And, the war is not likely to be any more popular domestically or internationally, so Britain's quest to end its isolation may come sooner, possibly resulting in an earlier alliance with Japan (and possibly earlier Russo-Japanese war) and/or an earlier Entente with France (or Germany).
2. What if after OTL's Boer War started, Germany agreed to (Russian Foreign Minister) Muraviev, and (French Foreign Minister) Delcasse's proposal for a continental league against Britain, which would demand a mediated peace with the Boers and an internationalized Suez Canal? In OTL, Delcasse had to give up on this idea when the Germans in March 1900 insisted a preliminary perpetual guarantee of the Alsace-Lorraine border in advance of further negotiations.
What if the Germans instead entertain the notion of allying with the French and Russians,----without any preconditions on the frontiers--- and directing their aggression outward, figuring that at best, the coalition breaks Britain, and opens up the colonial world for redistribution and the ever-popular underdog Boers get help. At worst, Germany loses its fairly unimpressive overseas colonies, but at little cost, while France bears the brunt of fighting in Africa and the world's oceans, and Russia bears the brunt of the fighting around the Persian, Afghan, Indian frontiers, both end up weaker, less capable of fighting Germany, and develop a deeper intergenerational bitterness against Britain.
Preconditioning things on a guarantee of the frontiers of Alsace-Lorraine would be preferable of course, but with British currently unpopular and the Boers popular domestically in Germany at the moment, why hold things up, especially when the practicalities of the situation of a continental league, which encourages Franco-British hostility, will make it harder for France to practically ever do anything to try to take back Alsace-Lorraine in the future.
3.
What about going the other direction- how long could the war be delayed, and what would be the impact on the Boers and British, and knock-ons for global politics?
Without the Boer attack, were the British within a few months of issuing an ultimatum and launching an attack themselves? Would there have been any difference if the war started that way?
If the situation festered for a few more years, would Kruger keep his influence in Transvaal, or would more accommodationist leadership arise in Transvaal?
Assuming the war could be delayed a couple more years, and Kruger or Kruger-like Arikaner nationalists remained in charge, could the Boers come into the war better armed than OTL?
If the war starts with a Boer attack in 1901, 1902 or 1903 instead of 1899, what effects does this have? Does the country rally short-term in a khaki election, or are domestic issues more divisive by that time?
What about great power politics? - Without the Boer War, the Anglo-Japanese alliance and British military reforms are unlikely, so what are Russia, Japan, France, Germany doing differently in the early 1900s?
*Perhaps the start could be pushed even earlier, back to the time of the beginning of the 1890s to the time British ultimatum against Portugal's "pink map", or the few years after. 1890 British Ultimatum - Wikipedia. Pink Map - Wikipedia
It seems like it could have easily happened. Boer tensions with the Empire were long-standing, and had been been brewing throughout the 1890s with the increased exploitation of gold and diamonds in the republics, the attraction of non-Boer immigrants, Uitlanders, and arguments over their political and representational rights. The Boers felt increasingly besieged and in OTL Oct 1899 eventually attacked first, preemptively, from their point of view.
But, this really could have happened almost anytime since the failed Jameson raid of New Years weekend 1895-1896*, which the Boers defeated, to British embarrassment. Jameson Raid - Wikipedia
So if war breaks out, because Kruger attacks in 1896, 1897, or 1898, what goes differently in this early Boer War compared to OTL? Alternatively, over that time perhaps there is an Uitlander uprising and Britain intervenes against its suppression?
Would the war starting earlier put either the British or the Boers at a greater relative disadvantage compared to OTLs timing?
In OTL, throughout continental Europe, notably in Russia, Netherlands, France, and Germany, and in the United States as well, there was alot of pro-Boer, anti-British sentiment that had the Russians and French talking about mediation proposals unwelcome to the British.
Could unfortunate juxtapositions of timing, for example, the Boer War overlapping with the Fashoda Incident Fashoda Incident - Wikipedia on the Upper Nile in 1898 lead to entwinement of the crises and escalation of continental sympathy for the Boers to a continental League of the French, Germans, and Russians fighting the British at the same time as the Boer War is going on?
In the mid 1890s, Britain often found itself isolated from the continental powers. All European capitals, from St. Pete to Berlin to Paris were very cool to Britain's proposed intervention in 1896 in the Ottoman Empire to protect the Armenians and overthrow the Sultan Abdul Hamid.
And, for those who can only can only think of Franco-German relations in this era in terms of WWI, Alsace-Lorraine, revanche, and the Franco-Prussian War, continental cooperation by France-Germany-Russia had worked in 1895, in the form of the Triple Intervention, albeit against Japan.
---even if nothing so dramatic happens as third, fourth or fifth party intervention in an early Boer War, the effects of a differently timed war could be interesting all by itself. There would certainly be affects on on British domestic politics and Dominion politics. And, the war is not likely to be any more popular domestically or internationally, so Britain's quest to end its isolation may come sooner, possibly resulting in an earlier alliance with Japan (and possibly earlier Russo-Japanese war) and/or an earlier Entente with France (or Germany).
2. What if after OTL's Boer War started, Germany agreed to (Russian Foreign Minister) Muraviev, and (French Foreign Minister) Delcasse's proposal for a continental league against Britain, which would demand a mediated peace with the Boers and an internationalized Suez Canal? In OTL, Delcasse had to give up on this idea when the Germans in March 1900 insisted a preliminary perpetual guarantee of the Alsace-Lorraine border in advance of further negotiations.
What if the Germans instead entertain the notion of allying with the French and Russians,----without any preconditions on the frontiers--- and directing their aggression outward, figuring that at best, the coalition breaks Britain, and opens up the colonial world for redistribution and the ever-popular underdog Boers get help. At worst, Germany loses its fairly unimpressive overseas colonies, but at little cost, while France bears the brunt of fighting in Africa and the world's oceans, and Russia bears the brunt of the fighting around the Persian, Afghan, Indian frontiers, both end up weaker, less capable of fighting Germany, and develop a deeper intergenerational bitterness against Britain.
Preconditioning things on a guarantee of the frontiers of Alsace-Lorraine would be preferable of course, but with British currently unpopular and the Boers popular domestically in Germany at the moment, why hold things up, especially when the practicalities of the situation of a continental league, which encourages Franco-British hostility, will make it harder for France to practically ever do anything to try to take back Alsace-Lorraine in the future.
3.
What about going the other direction- how long could the war be delayed, and what would be the impact on the Boers and British, and knock-ons for global politics?
Without the Boer attack, were the British within a few months of issuing an ultimatum and launching an attack themselves? Would there have been any difference if the war started that way?
If the situation festered for a few more years, would Kruger keep his influence in Transvaal, or would more accommodationist leadership arise in Transvaal?
Assuming the war could be delayed a couple more years, and Kruger or Kruger-like Arikaner nationalists remained in charge, could the Boers come into the war better armed than OTL?
If the war starts with a Boer attack in 1901, 1902 or 1903 instead of 1899, what effects does this have? Does the country rally short-term in a khaki election, or are domestic issues more divisive by that time?
What about great power politics? - Without the Boer War, the Anglo-Japanese alliance and British military reforms are unlikely, so what are Russia, Japan, France, Germany doing differently in the early 1900s?
*Perhaps the start could be pushed even earlier, back to the time of the beginning of the 1890s to the time British ultimatum against Portugal's "pink map", or the few years after. 1890 British Ultimatum - Wikipedia. Pink Map - Wikipedia