AHC/WI: CSA-Mexican Empire Alliance

[Tom Colton]

As the title says, at the time of the American Civil War, Mexico was undergoing some regime change at the hands of Napoleon III and generally was on friendly-ish terms with their northern neighbours, being perfectly willing to sell Confederate cotton from Matamoros even if Maximilian wasn't too thrilled about their peculiar institution.

Now, this idea has a lot going against it (they'd just finished fighting each other) because much of the CSA comprised politicians who wanted even more of Mexico than the United States got in the previous war, but in theory it'd be one step towards the foreign recognition they craved so much (seeing as the conservative elites in Mexico were being supported by most of the continental Great Powers) and I guess they could try attacking California through Mexico if they really wanted to get all that gold and silver?

How and when could this happen, and how could it help the survivability of both regimes?

 

[Japhy]

A Franco-Mexican intervention is really limited in options. The Juarezista insurgency was strong across large swaths of Mexico but it was it's strongest in the Northwest. There's no way that any sort of Mexican-based invasion of California is managable. Imperial Mexico as a factor in the ACW is actually rather limited, a base for French troops and a supply corridor when needed but not much in the way of its own offensive projection.

That said there is something to be said about the ability of Mexican ports to serve as a launching point for a French effort to cripple the Confederate blockade (Newt Gingrich of all people explained this rather well in his Gettysburg trilogy) I'd question the ability of the French fleet to totally wipe out the Union Navy in such a campaign but French ships and troops from Mexico can certainly blast open the blockade in Texas, possibly using some Imperial Mexican troops in the process, and have a decent chance of rolling up the blockade all the way to Key West and maybe even Georgia. Which will have drastic impacts on the war.

The main impact in Mexico though would probably be outright Union intervention on the side of Juarez. There were a lot of Californian and Oregonian regiments just sitting around or worse at the time that can pretty easily be forwarded to El Paso del Norte. Not to mention guns, Naval landings on the Pacific Coast and probably a harder Union commitment to push into Texas.

Mind you I also have a book planned on this so I'm a bit set in my ways.

 

[Japhy]

On the issue of survivability: Foreign Intervention certainly has knock off effects on the Union War effort. The big question is does this include a British Invernention. If France and Mexico begets a British intervention and suddenly were at WWI, the unfortunate odds of a Confederate or Imperial Mexican victory do increase. If this is a war that the UK sits out of, then the dynamics of the election of 1864 chance, with a considerable chance that Lincoln or any other Republican nominee gets ousted in favor of peace but broadly speaking, I'd wager that either end of the alliance is screwed. Mexico is in flames and while the Confederacy will be better armed there's just so much stacked against it.

 

[Tom Colton]

If France and Mexico begets a British intervention and suddenly were at WWI, the unfortunate odds of a Confederate or Imperial Mexican victory do increase.

This line interests me. What would the sides be for an 1860+ conflict, and who'd a betting man put money on?

 

[MAC161]

This line interests me. What would the sides be for an 1860+ conflict, and who'd a betting man put money on?

Came across this series by Peter Tsouras with such a scenario (absent Mexico for some reason, however) a while back, and while I'm intrigued by the premise and the level of period technical knowledge the author has, my experience with Harrison's Stars and Stripes trilogy has made me hold back on reading it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_B...Britannia's_Fist:_From_Civil_War_to_World_War

 

[Japhy]

This line interests me. What would the sides be for an 1860+ conflict, and who'd a betting man put money on?

In the broadest terms if the UK is in and it's WWI a half century early I'd say in most cases the US is defeated.

In the broadest terms if it's WW Beta Test with the US fighting a French led alliance, I'd wager the US wins.

In either case its not a sure thing and in either case I have severe doubts about the Imperial chances of actual victory in Mexico.

 

[Tabac Iberez]

ut in theory it'd be one step towards the foreign recognition they craved so much (seeing as the conservative elites in Mexico were being supported by most of the continental Great Powers)

You're mistaking orders of magnitude here. The Mexican elites in Veracruz, District Federales, and the wealthy bits of the center don't have the sort of cachet that would get the Europeans to notice outside España, and even then it's very much a thin bloodline. Even with French ambitions and ties, you have to remember that the War of Independence is very much in living memory. Worse, it's the Confederates, who's opinion of the Mexican aristocratic class was so low that post-war OTL they moved to Brasil to form expatriate communities there.

and I guess they could try attacking California through Mexico if they really wanted to get all that gold and silver?

No way on earth or in hell. Any sort of overland evolution would require going through the Grand Desert and or the Rocky Mountains, and I doubt seriously you could support one regiment going through there, much less multiple. Water is nearly nonexistent, and the terrain is hot, rocky, and poorly mapped at best. An over water trip, meanwhile, will run afoul of the Pacific Squadron, and with Mexico's navy based entirely in the Gulf this is the worst sort of fantasy.

 

[Fenwick]

To me if the CSA exists then it somewhat has to be on solid terms in Europe. Either UK or France. France via Mexico would hold a vested interest in the CSA being friendly.

So to me a CSA-Mexico Alliance hinges on how they view France.

 

[Tabac Iberez]

To me if the CSA exists then it somewhat has to be on solid terms in Europe. Either UK or France. France via Mexico would hold a vested interest in the CSA being friendly.

So to me a CSA-Mexico Alliance hinges on how they view France.

In which case, the answer is "badly" for France or "very badly" for UK in terms of Mexican-European relations. France is still a negative since, y'know, Maximilian III debacle (which is fading, but doesn't have any good things to replace it) and the UK will be on the Mexican shitlist as long as Belize has independance since it's a giant no-touch zone when it comes to handling the ten thousand little Mayan troublemakers that come up.

Plus, there's always the stereotypical "boarder tensions" to harp on, along with the fact that Mexico can probably roll up the CSA without a huge amount of work. Considering the nonexistant institutional depth they'd have, along with the equally shitty army, I can see a reasonably trained Mestizo army just waltzing in and reclaiming Texas yelling "Vivamos no esclavutid! Se unen con la Ejército de mexico, por libertad y respeto!"

Which at that point everyone gets to start putting down slave revolts because y'all know the Union is gonna be running full revaunchism and is fully willing to throw Texas and the old boarder (sin California) back at the Mexicans since they can annul that secret treaty by asking how fucked they want to get by the war loans.

 

[Charles EP M.]

Mexico can probably roll up the CSA without a huge amount of work. Considering the nonexistant institutional depth they'd have, along with the equally shitty army, I can see a reasonably trained Mestizo army just waltzing in and reclaiming Texas yelling "Vivamos no esclavutid! Se unen con la Ejército de mexico, por libertad y respeto!"

There's a lot of "successful CSA goes and conquers down south" stories and timelines, I don't think I've ever heard of a "CSA wins and then Mexico beats them up" one, and now you've made me really, really want one.

 

[Tom Colton]

In which case, the answer is "badly" for France or "very badly" for UK in terms of Mexican-European relations. France is still a negative since, y'know, Maximilian III debacle (which is fading, but doesn't have any good things to replace it) and the UK will be on the Mexican shitlist as long as Belize has independance since it's a giant no-touch zone when it comes to handling the ten thousand little Mayan troublemakers that come up.

Plus, there's always the stereotypical "boarder tensions" to harp on, along with the fact that Mexico can probably roll up the CSA without a huge amount of work. Considering the nonexistant institutional depth they'd have, along with the equally shitty army, I can see a reasonably trained Mestizo army just waltzing in and reclaiming Texas yelling "Vivamos no esclavutid! Se unen con la Ejército de mexico, por libertad y respeto!"

Which at that point everyone gets to start putting down slave revolts because y'all know the Union is gonna be running full revaunchism and is fully willing to throw Texas and the old boarder (sin California) back at the Mexicans since they can annul that secret treaty by asking how fucked they want to get by the war loans.

Odds on a CSA + Mexico + France vs. USA + UK face-off? Franco-British relations were kind of weird in the middle of the century, from them being BFFs in Crimea to the Brits supplying hospital cars to both the French and Prussians ten years later.

 

[Tabac Iberez]

Odds on a CSA + Mexico + France vs. USA + UK face-off? Franco-British relations were kind of weird in the middle of the century, from them being BFFs in Crimea to the Brits supplying hospital cars to both the French and Prussians ten years later.

Very low: you'd need a third order conflict to drag the CSA and Mexico into cooperating, which means figuring out somewhere that Mexico and the CSA actually have aligned interests that would make both of them then work with France. Unless you make up some quality spicy memes in Africa, there's nothing to get the job done there- and even then I'd still bet on a Mexican stab in the back.

There's a lot of "successful CSA goes and conquers down south" stories and timelines, I don't think I've ever heard of a "CSA wins and then Mexico beats them up" one, and now you've made me really, really want one.

If by "timeline" you mean "one year war" then yeah. Fact is, the name of the game in the CSA is Dutch Disease, so when the Egyptian plantations come online and or the boil weevil epidemic hit, the Southern economy is going to fall harder than Black Monday and that's the end of any sort of cohernent CSA as it is. The end result is probably balkanizing, followed by the boarder states engaging in some sweet sweet second order colonialism to deal with the massively exploding problems that result.