Spain keeps Santo Domingo

[Ricardolindo]

What if Spain had not lost Santo Domingo, which is the modern Dominican Republic, in 1821? Could Spain keep Santo Domingo for decades more than mainland Latin America like Cuba and Puerto Rico? What would relations with Haiti look like?
@Gary Oswald

 

[raharris1973]

What is remarkable is the Dominicans took a chance on independence, with Haiti next door, and Gran Colombia ignoring their appeals for help. What is even more surprising is that in 1822 Dominican elites and Dominican towns willingly submitted to Haitian rule, despite massacres of whites 20 years earlier. I guess it was the more palatable Boyer regime, rather than the scary Dessalines/Christophe Empire.

 

[Ricardolindo]

What is remarkable is the Dominicans took a chance on independence, with Haiti next door, and Gran Colombia ignoring their appeals for help. What is even more surprising is that in 1822 Dominican elites and Dominican towns willingly submitted to Haitian rule, despite massacres of whites 20 years earlier. I guess it was the more palatable Boyer regime, rather than the scary Dessalines/Christophe Empire.

Spanish rule in Santo Domingo during the restoration was weak.
The coup led by the lieutenant governort that led to the brief independence as Spanish Haiti was actually because of the rising pro-Haiti movement, read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/España_Boba#Ephemeral_independence.

 

[raharris1973]

It is rather surprising that Spain did not succeed in suppressing first the independence of Spanish Haiti and then preventing the unification under Haiti in 1821 and 1822, especially considering Spain was able to hold on to Cuba and Puerto Rico, and Spain still contested independence of some other parts of the Americas until later in the 1820s.

Do you have any theories why Spain didn't fight harder to hold it? Were Cuba, and other places on the mainland, like Peru, Upper Peru and Veracruz, Mexico higher priorities for economic reasons, with Santo Domingo considered being not worth much? It seems Spanish operations to reclaim Santo Domingo would have been relatively easily supportable from bases in nearby Cuba.

 

[Ricardolindo]

It is rather surprising that Spain did not succeed in suppressing first the independence of Spanish Haiti and then preventing the unification under Haiti in 1821 and 1822, especially considering Spain was able to hold on to Cuba and Puerto Rico, and Spain still contested independence of some other parts of the Americas until later in the 1820s.

Do you have any theories why Spain didn't fight harder to hold it? Were Cuba, and other places on the mainland, like Peru, Upper Peru and Veracruz, Mexico higher priorities for economic reasons, with Santo Domingo considered being not worth much? It seems Spanish operations to reclaim Santo Domingo would have been relatively easily supportable from bases in nearby Cuba.

I know very little but I would indeed guess Spain was far more concerned with other matters. Santo Domingo was one of Spain's least relevant colonies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/España_Boba says of the Spanish restoration in Santo Domingo: "the Spanish government exercised minimal powers because its resources were attenuated by the Peninsular War and the various Spanish American wars of independence.".

 

[raharris1973]

Thanks

 

[rfmcdonald]

The problem with Spanish Santo Domingo is that of Haiti. How do you overcome Haitian opposition to a European imperialist restoration on Hispaniola? Even France was not able to do it.

 

[Gary Oswald]

The problem with Spanish Santo Domingo is that of Haiti. How do you overcome Haitian opposition to a European imperialist restoration on Hispaniola? Even France was not able to do it.

Keep the post Dessalines partition of Haiti, so that they're weaker. I don't ultimately think Haiti is the problem, the problem is Spain's lack of loyal local support and their inability to convince the Dominicans that Spanish rule was effective.

But ultimately, I do not think it is that hard to remove the threat of Haitian intervention by keeping them at each other's throat.

 

[Ricardolindo]

The problem with Spanish Santo Domingo is that of Haiti. How do you overcome Haitian opposition to a European imperialist restoration on Hispaniola? Even France was not able to do it.

This is about the modern Dominican Republic, not modern Haiti. Santo Domingo had been restored to Spanish rule in 1807 though it was weak because of the problems Spain was facing at the time.

 

[raharris1973]

The problem with Spanish Santo Domingo is that of Haiti. How do you overcome Haitian opposition to a European imperialist restoration on Hispaniola? Even France was not able to do it.

The thing is, the Haitians never had quite the home field advantage in the Dominican Republic side of the island. They were able to occupy and rule the eastern two-thirds of the island with the initial acquiescence of the hispanophone Dominicans. The, Haitian route of the French in Haiti in 1804, did not extend to Santo Domingo, where French garrisons remained in charged until ousted by the Spanish several years later in 1807. When the Dominicans had gotten sick of Haitian rule for over a decade, they successfully rebelled for independence, and kicked out the Haitians in 1844, inflicting lopsided casualty ratios.

 

[raharris1973]

@Ricardolindo - I've got an idea, not necessarily to keep Spain in charge continuously, but for an early successful Spanish reconquest.

President Boyer of Haiti defies French demands for an indemnity in 1825, and thus affronted, the French Bourbon regime invades Haiti, which at the time, ruled over Santo-Domingo/Dominican Republic also. While seeking to punish and reconquer Haiti (the western third of the island) for tactical reasons the French operate on all parts of the island. Being Bourbon legitimists, who helped restore conservative Bourbon rule in Spain in 1823, they recognize and support Spanish Bourbon rule for the eastern section of the island and hold it pending the arrival of Spanish reinforcements, which they encourage to come. The Spanish do take advantage of the opportunity to reinforce with soldiers and administrators. This way, Spain gets to use the occasion of French ops in 1820s Haiti (and larger Hispaniola) to regain control of Santo Domingo for a substantial period of time, at least several decades, regardless of whether the French invaders ultimately succeed (and for how long) or fail in subjugating Haiti. On the Haitian side, results can vary- from possible successful reconquest, to quick failure, to apparent conquest, but with ongoing insurgency and high cost and attrition on occupation forces, such that the French pull out at their next regime change in 1830.

 

[Gary Oswald]

The, Haitian route of the French in Haiti in 1804, did not extend to Santo Domingo, where French garrisons remained in charged until ousted by the Spanish several years later in 1807.

Yes but Dessalines did invade in 1805 and laid siege to the city of Santo Domingo, it was the arrival of gunships from the French Navy who drove him off from there not the army. Which doesn't speak much to their ability to fight in the area and by 1844 the Haitian Army was in far worse condition.

@Ricardolindo - I've got an idea, not necessarily to keep Spain in charge continuously, but for an early successful Spanish reconquest.

President Boyer of Haiti defies French demands for an indemnity in 1825, and thus affronted, the French Bourbon regime invades Haiti, which at the time, ruled over Santo-Domingo/Dominican Republic also.

I don't really buy this, the French had been turned down their previous request for an indemnity ten years earlier and hadn't invaded. The French were happy to threaten a naval blockade, naval bombardment and the like but an actual invasion after their memory of the revolution, is super risky. Nobody legitimately thought that was on the table.

You'd need a very very reckless French leadership.

 

[raharris1973]

I don't really buy this, the French had been turned down their previous request for an indemnity ten years earlier and hadn't invaded. The French were happy to threaten a naval blockade, naval bombardment and the like but an actual invasion after their memory of the revolution, is super risky. Nobody legitimately thought that was on the table.

You'd need a very very reckless French leadership.

So President Boyer was an idiot to accept the indemnity ultimatum?

 

[Gary Oswald]

So President Boyer was an idiot to accept the indemnity ultimatum?

Yes, undoubtedly. His own commission had rejected it and then he overruled them.

But the threat wasn't 'we will invade', it was 'we will cut you off from external trade'. Boyer's government was very poor and very reliant on export tax.

Petion had removed all tax on produce kept in Haiti. Food made in farms and sold in the cities wouldn’t be taxed at all, only products sold at ports (at this point primarily coffee thanks to the decline of the sugar plantations) to go abroad would be. This was a very popular policy at the time as it reduced food shortages, though it had unforeseen effects in terms of forcing the government to be reliant on an export model in order to fund anything.

Boyer needed to increase the number of exports to increase his government's revenues. And to do that he needed recognition. It must be remembered that by this point, no other government in the world recognised the Haitians as independent and their desperation for that recognition fueled a lot of their mistakes.

France were saying a) if you pay this, we will recognise your independence and encourage an increase in trade (which did happen) and b) if you do not, you will never get that recognition and France would declare war and blockade the country, meaning external trade would only happen through smugglers.

France had no intention of landing troops, by all accounts, but they could still do damage economically.

Just much less than the economic damage of the actual indemnity.

 

[raharris1973]

Maybe we can try something earlier than, to make the Dominicans feel less neglected in the Espana Boba, and the era preceding it.

In OTL, the Spaniards ceded Santo-Domingo and the adjoining two-thirds of Hispaniola to France in the Treaty of Basel in 1795 ending the war of the Pyrenees. However, the French were also demanding the retrocession of Spanish Louisiana at that time, which the Spanish, at that time, managed to successfully refuse. What if the Spanish decided they valued their longstanding Santo Domingo settlements and Hispaniola hinterland more than their newer, less assimilated and less loyal Louisiana territory, and offered to cede Louisiana while firmly refusing to cede Hispaniola land? Maybe the French let them get away with it, focus on trying to control Haiti proper (the western third of Hispaniola) and Louisiana from 1795 on, and Spain not only continuously controls Santo Domingo from 1795-1807 instead of France, without the exile of many Dominicans, but in the years 1795-1801, spends the resources it spent on OTL Louisiana on the island?

 

[Ricardolindo]

Yes, undoubtedly. His own commission had rejected it and then he overruled them.

But the threat wasn't 'we will invade', it was 'we will cut you off from external trade'. Boyer's government was very poor and very reliant on export tax.

Petion had removed all tax on produce kept in Haiti. Food made in farms and sold in the cities wouldn’t be taxed at all, only products sold at ports (at this point primarily coffee thanks to the decline of the sugar plantations) to go abroad would be. This was a very popular policy at the time as it reduced food shortages, though it had unforeseen effects in terms of forcing the government to be reliant on an export model in order to fund anything.

Boyer needed to increase the number of exports to increase his government's revenues. And to do that he needed recognition. It must be remembered that by this point, no other government in the world recognised the Haitians as independent and their desperation for that recognition fueled a lot of their mistakes.

France were saying a) if you pay this, we will recognise your independence and encourage an increase in trade (which did happen) and b) if you do not, you will never get that recognition and France would declare war and blockade the country, meaning external trade would only happen through smugglers.

France had no intention of landing troops, by all accounts, but they could still do damage economically.

Just much less than the economic damage of the actual indemnity.

Thanks for this, it's very interesting. I had no idea.