American Siberia

Tucker Dwynn

Tucker Dwynn

At one point I belive Seward wanted to buy Siberia up to the 135th longitude. Say the Russian accepted with the provisio that the line would cut back to the east at the closetest approach to the Sea of Okhotsk, leaving Russia it's Pacific Seaports.

How would this area develop? How would having "Americans" have a legitamite claim in Asia affect future developments?

(This was done quick and dirty, please ignore 'Click to Zoom', and map is from MS Encarta...)

SewardPurchase2.JPG
 

Nicole

Does Russia keep Sakhalin as well?

It probably means lower settlement rates for Alaska, as the "people wanting to move to frigid lands" is split up more- most likely alot of it would still be territories today, as could part of Alaska...
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
I'm not sure what effect it would have on the events of 1917. It's likely to butterfly them away entirely, it almost certainly would have a profound effect for the Americans would be right there, almost certainly on the White side

And if the Americans save Tsarist Russia there goes WWII. In the first place Russia keeps fighting Germany, Germany surrenders earlier, fewer Frenchmen dead and a stronger France in the new Europe. In the second place there's no Communism for Naziism to be a counterweight against, no excuse for France and England to tolerate Hitler and no profit in it for anybody. Germany is reoccupied by 1934 at the latest and Hitler back in prison, probably forever. The Japanese also don't become militaristic, something they did partially to counter what they saw as a western trend.

Most profound though would be the effect on America, Russia, China and Japan, which by 1940 would all be allies and the most powerful nations in the Pacific rim.
 

Nicole

Tucker Dwynn said:
I think that those islands were Japanese territory. Russi didnt invade and take them over until 1945.
Click to expand...
No, Northern Sakhalin had always been Russian, and southern Sakhalin (Karafuto) was mostly disputed (as was the rest of the island, but Russia had the upper hand in the north) until the Russo-Japanese War.
 
Tucker Dwynn

Tucker Dwynn

Imajin said:
No, Northern Sakhalin had always been Russian, and southern Sakhalin (Karafuto) was mostly disputed (as was the rest of the island, but Russia had the upper hand in the north) until the Russo-Japanese War.
Click to expand...


True. I remember now from my old High School map. How Japan claimed southern islands, but there occupied by USSR in 1945. Thanks for the correction.

But yes. The majority of those islands are south of the "Bay Line" and therefore, part of Russia.
 

David S Poepoe

Banned
Is there any actual proof, rather than hearsay, that Seward had made an offer, or was contemplating an offer, for Siberia?
 

Wendell

NapoleonXIV said:
I'm not sure what effect it would have on the events of 1917. It's likely to butterfly them away entirely, it almost certainly would have a profound effect for the Americans would be right there, almost certainly on the White side

And if the Americans save Tsarist Russia there goes WWII. In the first place Russia keeps fighting Germany, Germany surrenders earlier, fewer Frenchmen dead and a stronger France in the new Europe. In the second place there's no Communism for Naziism to be a counterweight against, no excuse for France and England to tolerate Hitler and no profit in it for anybody. Germany is reoccupied by 1934 at the latest and Hitler back in prison, probably forever. The Japanese also don't become militaristic, something they did partially to counter what they saw as a western trend.

Most profound though would be the effect on America, Russia, China and Japan, which by 1940 would all be allies and the most powerful nations in the Pacific rim.
Click to expand...
Germany might also be left in a stronger position after this alternate Great War as well.
 

Ruschurch

One thing to consider: The purchase of Alaska occured OTL in 1867. The Gold Rush didn't occur until the 1890's. If the purchase of Siberia was to occur at the same time, imagine the political bashing of Steward, and by extension, President Johnson, for the US to spend 20 million total (estimated, at same price per Acre) for the entire territory. If we wait until the purchase of Alaska becomes profitable and the US may be encourage to purchase additional territory, does Russia still have the same money woes?

Plus, more than half the reason they sold the land was fear of aggression by the US or UK, and losing the land without much a chance of a fight. I can't imagine the same fears would be in place for the Siberian Far East.

Without significant infrastructure development, I can't imagine the US being a real force in the Siberian region, maybe outside of the coast.

Although thinking about having control over those natural gas fields and oil reserves in modern day makes me very, very, very excited.
 

Sir Isaac Brock

Here's an idea:
If the US already has Alaska, getting the Siberian Far East doesn't seem to exciting. But what if the US had hesitated over Alaska and it was sold instead to the Dominion of Canada? Canada was expanding rapidly in that area, purchasing the Hudson's Bay Lands in 1870 and annexing British Columbia in 1871. When gold is later discovered in the Alaskan Territory, the US will have realised they were missing out. At that point, a bid could be made to buy the Siberian Far East from Russia.
 

Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy

Banned
Sir Isaac Brock said:
Here's an idea:
If the US already has Alaska, getting the Siberian Far East doesn't seem to exciting. But what if the US had hesitated over Alaska and it was sold instead to the Dominion of Canada? Canada was expanding rapidly in that area, purchasing the Hudson's Bay Lands in 1870 and annexing British Columbia in 1871. When gold is later discovered in the Alaskan Territory, the US will have realised they were missing out. At that point, a bid could be made to buy the Siberian Far East from Russia.
Click to expand...

Except by this point the region will be more economically important (oil and natural gas becoming useful) and Russia will be too worried about Japan to just sacrifice a strategic position like that.
 

Wendell

Ruschurch said:
One thing to consider: The purchase of Alaska occured OTL in 1867. The Gold Rush didn't occur until the 1890's. If the purchase of Siberia was to occur at the same time, imagine the political bashing of Steward, and by extension, President Johnson, for the US to spend 20 million total (estimated, at same price per Acre) for the entire territory. If we wait until the purchase of Alaska becomes profitable and the US may be encourage to purchase additional territory, does Russia still have the same money woes?

Plus, more than half the reason they sold the land was fear of aggression by the US or UK, and losing the land without much a chance of a fight. I can't imagine the same fears would be in place for the Siberian Far East.

Without significant infrastructure development, I can't imagine the US being a real force in the Siberian region, maybe outside of the coast.

Although thinking about having control over those natural gas fields and oil reserves in modern day makes me very, very, very excited.
Click to expand...
I largely agree, but I think the U.S. would take an interest in the hinterland, if just to ensure their title and keep order.
 
Last edited:

Nicole

Probably Petropavlosk-Kamchatsky (With a different name- cities like New Archanglesk were renamed, after all) would be the center of the territory for quite some time, and the first area I can see being admitted as a state would be Kamchatka (or it could all come in as the super-state of Siberia, most likely with a whopping 1 representative :p )
 

Wendell

Imajin said:
Probably Petropavlosk-Kamchatsky (With a different name- cities like New Archanglesk were renamed, after all) would be the center of the territory for quite some time, and the first area I can see being admitted as a state would be Kamchatka (or it could all come in as the super-state of Siberia, most likely with a whopping 1 representative :p )
Click to expand...
Chukot, Magadan, and Kamchatka could each possibly be states...Then again, all of American Siberia could be a single state (Beringia?)
 

oberdada

But then it wouldn't be the USA any more,
more likely, the United States of America and Asia (USAaA)
Maibe Japan would joined after WWII and Taiwan after the Chinese Civil War.

All in all, very unlikely
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top