Spanish-Confederate War

[Fenwick]

So this is mostly a plausibility notion but it is going towards a new story I am writing. As such some details are not as important as the story itself. Still I look for any ideas or areas to look into.

The CSA won the civil war in 1862. "Second Revolution."

1862 Jefferson Davis-> 1868 Alexander Stephens-> 1874 Wade Hampton III-> 1880 William "Extra Billy" Smith.

Smith decides to "expand" the CSA. His vision is to make a Caribbean empire. Cuba, Haiti, Puerto Rico, Dominica as a start before sweeping into Central America. Confederacy will take on Spain and gain the land and then continue. President Smith decides 1883 is the date to go. Spain is viewed as a weak power in Europe. The USA in 1882 almost went to war with the Empire of Mexico but France saying "we will defend our allies" made them step back. Add to this that President Smith got a "wink and a nod" from the UK should "war happen in America soon."

So Smith calls for an invasion of Spanish territory based on almost six months (late 82 to early 83) of Confederates breaking laws and pushing the limit of Spanish tolerance. Finally a group is arrested for "smuggling" and the CSA treats it like an attack on Confederate citizens. The war begins. The CSA does not have a huge navy but a modern one (and much of it British made) so they quickly secure a route to Cuba. Havana falls and the CSA moves troops in. The CSA has a fine army of volunteers, and great officers. Jackson mapped it out while Longstreet and J.E.B. Stuart are the men commanding in the field. Well Longstreet is commanding from his "command post" which looks an awful lot like a nice villa centered on the lone Cuban telegraph line. Stuart meanwhile... ugh... he took his army down and tried to cross the hills but quickly learned that Spanish have smokeless single shot rifles, volley guns, artillery and are not the "worthless" soldiers many expected. But still a solid "rebel yell" and the CSA will have victory!

What soon follows is the UK and France backing Spain. USA enjoys seeing the two powers fight. UK assumed war was with the USA not Cuba, and France is likewise concerned the CSA will disrupt the region. So any initial success is ended. There is a low key skirmish in Texas. New orleans and Mobile are raided. The CSA does stop a move upon Newport News. The CSA loses the war, must pay some money to Spain but for the most part it was a rapid little conflict.

 

[AltoRegnant]

The US would probably pop in to reclaim some land

 

[Fenwick]

The US would probably pop in to reclaim some land

It has been 20 years, what will they reclaim? Likewise, if the war is between Europeans and the CSA... why would the USA pick Europeans?

 

[Pelranius]

What's the border settlement in 1862?

 

[Insane Ranter]

This time period I'm not sure anyone in Europe would really care if the CSA or USA invade and take all of "Hispaniola" except the CSA or USA opposing each other. Wouldn't it just be easier to have the CSA buy Cuba and Puerto Rico from Spain than force a war?

 

[Fenwick]

This time period I'm not sure anyone in Europe would really care if the CSA or USA invade and take all of "Hispaniola" except the CSA or USA opposing each other. Wouldn't it just be easier to have the CSA buy Cuba and Puerto Rico from Spain than force a war?

Spain post 3rd carlist war promote nationalism with an imperial slant. The “colonies are Spain”.

So I think maybe an offer to, at least before turning to imperialism.

 

[Chris Triangle]

This time period I'm not sure anyone in Europe would really care if the CSA or USA invade and take all of "Hispaniola" except the CSA or USA opposing each other. Wouldn't it just be easier to have the CSA buy Cuba and Puerto Rico from Spain than force a war?

OTL, Spain occupied Santo Domingo during the American Civil War, then left when the Americans showed signs of enforcing the Monroe doctrine. If Spain feels that the US is distant enough from the island and unlikely to do anything, it might not leave and try to reincirporate it into its new empire centered on the Greater Antilles. If the US wants to stay firm on the Monroe doctrine and wants a foothold in the Caribbean, Spain will probably back down and leave under pressure rather than risk war with the USA that could cost it Cuba, which it considered vastly more important. Either way, the Confederates can't do anything about the fate of the island until they build a real navy, years later.

 

[Edwin Moore]

What will happen to the Spanish possessions in the Pacific?
Does either the US or CSA really have the ability to hold on to the Philippines?
I could see Japan casually joining to take some of the smaller Spanish islands like the ones off New Guinea, the Caroline Islands, or the Northern Mariana Islands.
IOTL many of these were sold to Germany in 1899 and then taken by Japan in 1914.

Is a Japanese-Confederate Alliance plausible?

 

[Fenwick]

The CSA is focused on the Caribbean. Philipines… that will be an aside at some point.

 

[History Learner]

I don't really see why the Anglo-French would involve themselves with a regional conflict between the CSA and Spanish?

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

The CSA would be partitioned between the US and Spain.

 

[Chris Triangle]

What will happen to the Spanish possessions in the Pacific?

Most likely nothing. The Confederates (who would have nowhere near the resources of OTL 1898 USA) cannot and will not send their ships to the Pacific, which they do not touch, until the main objective, which is Cuba, is achieved. If the Spanish lost Cuba, then both sides would negotiate to end the war before the Confederates even attempted to capture the Philippines.

Does either the US or CSA really have the ability to hold on to the Philippines?

The USA has the ability to. CSA? I'm not entirely sure. They'd be less welcome than the Americans and would have much more difficulty actually bringing forces there. I suppose it's possible if they're willing to convince the country to pay for an expensive, protracted war. The real question is whether the CSA has the ability and will to take the Philippines.
[/quote]

I could see Japan casually joining to take some of the smaller Spanish islands like the ones off New Guinea, the Caroline Islands, or the Northern Mariana Islands.

What Spanish islands off New Guinea?

IOTL many of these were sold to Germany in 1899 and then taken by Japan in 1914.

Because Spain had no use for them with the Philippines lost. Why the USA didn't take them I'm not entirely sure.

Is a Japanese-Confederate Alliance plausible?

If the Confederates somehow managed to take the Philippines, which is really unlikely, then this could happen, though the Japanese snatch the islands up and either annex them or put them into their sphere of influence the instant it was convenient. Otherwise, neither country would want to get entangled in the others affairs and quite frankly, the only enemy that the Confederates could and would likely assist Japan against would be the United States. It is very unlikely that the Confederacy would do that.

 

[Edwin Moore]

Most likely nothing. If the Spanish lost Cuba, which is what any such war would be fought over, then both sides would end the war before the Confederates even attempted to capture the Philippines.

USA has the ability to. CSA? I don't think so. They'd be less welcome than the Americans and would have much more difficulty actually bringing forces there. The real question is whether the CSA has the ability and will to take the Philippines.


What Spanish islands off New Guinea?

Because Spain had no use for them with the Philippines lost. Why the USA didn't take them I'm not entirely sure.

If the Confederates somehow managed to take the Philippines, which is really unlikely, then this could happen, though the Japanese snatch the islands up and either annex them or put them into their sphere of influence the instant it was convenient. Otherwise, neither country would want to get entangled in the others affairs and quite frankly, the only enemy that the Confederates could and would likely assist Japan against would be the United States. It is very unlikely that the Confederacy would do that.

I was thinking that the Phillipines would either be liberated or colonized by japan.

IDK the names of those specific Islands but if you look up the treaty where Spain sold them to Germany in 1899 there’s a map. (Sorry I’m phone posting rn I’ll look it up later)

 

[Chris Triangle]

Actually, Spain's navy was probably at an unusually weak point in 1881. It had been neglected due to the Carlist war and most of their newer generation of ships were not going to be comissioned until mid to late decade.

 

[Insane Ranter]

Because Spain had no use for them with the Philippines lost. Why the USA didn't take them I'm not entirely sure.

The USA more than likely did not want to spend more money than they did on some "worthless" islands. The US, after all, gave 20 million to Spain for the Philippines. German gave Spain another large amount of money for the islands like ~17 million Marks. Might have even been a situation if they added the islands than the treaty would not have passed the Senate. The Philippines was the gateway to China hence their value.

 

[DG Valdron]

Hmmm.

Well, with twenty years give or take, it's difficult to assess how far the Confederacy would come or what it's reasonable military prospects would be. You would have to make a set of assumptions, which may or may not be likely, to get the Confederacy to a point where it would amount to a challenge. I see two major issues you'd have to deal with:

* Logistics and Power Projection - it is not easy, cheap or simple to maintain an army in the field outside your own or adjacent territory. It's just not. The countries that have done it and done it regularly are very few and they are very very well practiced at it. It's an incremental skill, which is built up with investment in complex supply trains, quartermasters, and skilled personnel. In the 1860's, the Confederacy simply did not have this, they had very very little power projection or logistics capacity outside their borders. And I don't see the incentive for them to invest in building that capacity over the next decade or so. My best guess is that military procurement and strategic and tactical doctrine would probably be rooted in the civil war successes, and would probably be oriented towards domestic (slave) suppression and defense from the United States. Military doctrines tend to get fixed in place, generals and procurement officers are always fixed on and fighting the last war, and have a terrible time adapting to new wars. For the Confederacy, I suspect that their doctrines may well be driven by arrogance and racism... both of which would be bad precepts to go into the Caribbean with.

So, while they might somehow place an Army on Cuba, Hispanolia or Puerto Rico, I think that they'd have monstrous problems keeping that army supplied and reinforced, and might well end up rapidly on the back foot. The proposition would be incredibly expensive and difficult, and likely made more so by indigenous resistance.

* Blue Water Navy - again, it's not something you just pop into existence overnight or with a wave of the hand. Rather, these things evolve from and derive from a long seagoing tradition, which the Confederacy simply doesn't have. And it seems to run counter to the likely military priorities of the Confederacy and Confederate Doctrine.

With sufficient investment and commitment, the Confederacy might acquire a blue water navy that could at least dog paddle around the Caribbean. It's not clear that such a navy would be a challenge for Britain or France or the United States... Actually, amend that - it wouldn't. The question would be whether it would be a challenge for lesser powers in the region, namely Spain and the Netherlands.

I am assuming that if you go down this route, you would need the Confederacy to acquire not just a naval capacity, but a 'marines' capacity - the ability to land and supply armies. I suspect that you'd get apples and oranges procurement strategies, and the result would be a blue water navy much weaker than Confederate optimum, in order to maintain a 'marines' capacity, also weaker than optimum - basically, doing two things badly.

The other side of the coin is Spain. Spain in 1880 may not be the same Spain in 1898. Historically, Spain in the 19th century, was still a potent force with a blue collar navy. And the Spanish navy of that era was still worldwide, capable of fighting wars (albeit not successfully) in the Caribbean, the Phillipines, the Andean coast, etc. There's a serious chance that straight up naval capacity, ship for ship, the Spanish might be capable of sending the Confederate fleet to the bottom. So you'd want some detailed assessment of the Spanish navy during this period.

And generally, some assessment of Spain itself, and how significant or insignificant, Spanish organisation and infrastructure, Spanish military power and Spanish society was during this period, and the period leading up. Were the Spaniards disorganized and ineffective, or within their political upheavals, were they battle hardened and waiting for a foreign enemy to unify them.

There's also the local conditions - Haiti was probably at its strongest during this period, a wealthy and productive society. The Dominican Republic, either as a stand alone or as a part of Spain was quite robust. Cuba as a Spanish possession still had its own aspirations. None of these societies may be pushovers.

A Spanish Confederate War in 1880 is not likely to be a rollover, but a protracted and messy conflict.

Good luck, have fun.

 

[Chris Triangle]

There are some other concerns here. The ten years war in Cuba has ended and Spain has won it. If the Confederates had simply wanted Cuban independence, as opposed to dominating it themselves, they could have sent guns over when they had the chance or declined to interdict gun runners. Either way, if Spain has control of Cuba, it probably has more secure control of the island than it did in 1898.

With the Confederate stance on Slavery, the slaves Spain liberated in the last war (as a reward for loyalty) are going to be hostile to the Confederates. The slaveowners may or may not be more positive. Either way, the Confederates aren't necessarily going to be seen as liberators for too long once they actually arrive and they'll have far less food and wealth to provide the Cubans there than the Americans of 1898. Logistical strains would force the Confderates to start foraging, possibly at bayonet point. If things go badly, then Cuban partisans might split over whether to support or oppose the invaders.

Big concern here is how seriously the Spanish take the Confederate aggression. If the Confederates show signs of wanting to invade Cuba, the Spanish might ready their forces somewhat better. If the war comes as a surprise, the navy is likely to be in a poor state of readiness because they didn't want to spend much more than the minimum in peacetime.

Disease favors neither the Confederates nor the Spaniards for neither are well accustomed to these tropical environments. Yellow fever, of course, is the deadliest of these.

If the conflict bogs down and gets really bloody, then other powers might intervene to end the whole thing, namely, the United States, which had commercial interests in Cuba and though sympathetic with the Anglo-American Confederates to an extent, would prefer to avoid expanding slavery and to maybe put the brakes on this whole interventionist trend among the Confederates before it got out of hand.

Even if the Confederates lose, many rebels in Cuba will probably rise up immediately once they hear that foreign armies are landing. They will do so knowing that these foreigners will provide them with contraband guns and ammunition. Unless they utterly crush the Confederates very quickly, it is likely that the Spanish will get stuck in yet another war of independence there that will continue even if the CSA departs.

 

[EnglishCanuck]

So, my own speculation is that if the Confederacy had gained independence, they would probably have ended up at war with Spain in the 1870s for the same reason that the United States almost ended up at war with them OTL. The Ten Years War had begun in earnest in 1868, and by that point you'll have had your first election in the Confederacy, coming up on your second. In OTL the Confederate forces had some Cuban exiles fighting for them, and the slave plantation system in Cuba was remarkably similar to that which existed in the Confederate states. The slave owners were again jealous of their wealth and property *cough, slaves, cough* and any threat to that would be seen as existential. It isn't particularly hard to see factions in Western Cuba (where the slave owners were the strongest) seeing rule by a much closer slave owning republic to be preferential to rule by at that point an unstable monarchy across the ocean. With civil war in Cuba, Spain being sucked into a civil war of its own in the 1870s and other kerfuffles, the island would look ripe for plucking by the various expansionists in the Confederacy.

Let it be remembered too that Cuba was not just seen as necessary because it would add more states to the Union, but there was a real perception among the Fire Eaters that if slavery did not expand it would die. Even Jefferson Davis believed that Cuba ought to be acquired by an independent South because it would "secure their back door" in the Caribbean. If pro-annexationists were shipping men and material to rebels in the west of Cuba and they were caught and executed by the Spanish, the Confederacy would be clamoring for war and no matter who was president, they would be compelled to react in some fashion. Nations like Great Britain, France and the United States are unlikely to intervene in that case IMO, as they would effectively be sanctioning Spanish actions. None of them like slavery, and its probably a case of two evils really.

The question of course, is whether the Confederacy would actually be in a position to pull off an invasion of Cuba. It's a sticky one, as it depends on the Confederacy being able to project power and have the forces capable of doing so. They would probably have 200,000+ combat veterans sitting around after the war and many, even a decade removed from service, would still be prime for fighting. If they had built up a naval squadron with the intent of projecting power in the Caribbean could they effectively project power into Cuba?

The flip side of course, is could Spain effectively defend Cuba from a foreign invasion in the 1870s? With most of their navy tied up at home, civil war on the Spanish mainland, and potentially a two front war in Cuba, could Spain effectively split her attention between the various fires she would be putting out on either side of the Atlantic? Arguably, even an incompetent Confederate invasion of Cuba might make headway against a power as distracted as Spain was in the 1870s.

However, what is the net drain of Cuba on a victorious Confederacy in this scenario? A slave uprising would still be raging across eastern Cuba, necessitating a large garrison, most likely many of the profitable areas will have to be rebuilt, and numerous slaves will have to be executed for insurrection. Could the Confederacy end up being seen as the Turks in the Balkans by the world if they go too far to put the revolt down?

It's an interesting scenario whether they win or lose.

 

[DG Valdron]

The Confederacy would have a large number of veterans. But... the political culture of individual states and veterans would probably be different. The Confederacy sold itself as defending its homes and soil. I'm not sure that there's giant piles of recruits signing up to invade a Spanish island. The self defense argument is pretty far fetched if you're proposing to send and keep an army overseas.

 

[GOU Limiting Factor]

Let it be remembered too that Cuba was not just seen as necessary because it would add more states to the Union, but there was a real perception among the Fire Eaters that if slavery did not expand it would die. Even Jefferson Davis believed that Cuba ought to be acquired by an independent South because it would "secure their back door" in the Caribbean. If pro-annexationists were shipping men and material to rebels in the west of Cuba and they were caught and executed by the Spanish, the Confederacy would be clamoring for war and no matter who was president, they would be compelled to react in some fashion. Nations like Great Britain, France and the United States are unlikely to intervene in that case IMO, as they would effectively be sanctioning Spanish actions. None of them like slavery, and its probably a case of two evils really.

That's the rub, isn't it; there's likely to be some kind of filibuster activity from a victorious CSA, and it's as politically dangerous to disavow it as it would be to sanction it. Clever opportunists will see the Third Carlist War as the best chance to grab Cuba; dumb opportunists will see the Civil War as proof that one Confederate soldier is equal to ten of any other country and a rich colony ripe for the plucking. And no few people are going to want a war simply to distract from internal trouble, which by the 1870s a successful Confederacy is going to have.

The question of course, is whether the Confederacy would actually be in a position to pull off an invasion of Cuba. It's a sticky one, as it depends on the Confederacy being able to project power and have the forces capable of doing so. They would probably have 200,000+ combat veterans sitting around after the war and many, even a decade removed from service, would still be prime for fighting. If they had built up a naval squadron with the intent of projecting power in the Caribbean could they effectively project power into Cuba?

The flip side of course, is could Spain effectively defend Cuba from a foreign invasion in the 1870s? With most of their navy tied up at home, civil war on the Spanish mainland, and potentially a two front war in Cuba, could Spain effectively split her attention between the various fires she would be putting out on either side of the Atlantic? Arguably, even an incompetent Confederate invasion of Cuba might make headway against a power as distracted as Spain was in the 1870s.

This is where the war is going to look like two drunks chained just close enough to one another to slap-fight. Neither really has enough legitimacy with enough of Cuba's population; Spain can't concentrate force very effectively and the CSA can't project it effectively, so a lot of it is going to come down to random chance and the initiative or sloth of individual commanders. Some of that initiative will be commended and some of it will be punished after the fact by higher-ups, (and by precarious supplies and lack of follow-through, too), which means that as the war grinds on, career-minded officers will get more cautious.

(Assuming the Confederates get enough men ashore early enough, I could see them taking and holding the island at least for a while. But do they keep it in the peace settlement? A partial conquest might be the best they could manage, which could mean partition or a running sore of insurgency for the rest of the century. Territory gained... at the price of a long-term drain on the army and treasury.)

...It's an interesting scenario whether they win or lose.

It's probably a disaster for both countries, win or lose. Men and treasure expended for status quo antebellum would be the worst possible outcome; nothing changes except that everything in both nations gets a little more precarious, and nobody has much that can be spun as a win for their side; no Confederate territorial gains and further destabilization of Spain's rotting empire.