PC: Would it make sense for the British to build the Panama Canal?

Hello there. This is my first thread ever and I want to ask about an idea for a TL I had in my head recently:
What if, for whatever reason, the US didn't build the Panama Canal and instead the UK steps in and builds it? Would this be plausible in the eyes of the British government?

I was thinking about some benefits of course and the only one, that comes to my mind is, that the route from Eastern to Western Canada would probably be easier to navigate than the Northwest Passage. I also thought about some reason, why the US decided against it: Maybe they favored a canal through Nicaragua.

What are your thoughts about this? Do you see any other benefits? If it makes sense, I would make my first TL out of this. I'm open for feedback :)
 

kham_coc

Banned
If they lost control (or never had any) control over suez. So if the Ottomans have a better 19th century, and or the Dutch keep SA.
 
Hello there. This is my first thread ever and I want to ask about an idea for a TL I had in my head recently:
What if, for whatever reason, the US didn't build the Panama Canal and instead the UK steps in and builds it? Would this be plausible in the eyes of the British government?

I was thinking about some benefits of course and the only one, that comes to my mind is, that the route from Eastern to Western Canada would probably be easier to navigate than the Northwest Passage. I also thought about some reason, why the US decided against it: Maybe they favored a canal through Nicaragua.

What are your thoughts about this? Do you see any other benefits? If it makes sense, I would make my first TL out of this. I'm open for feedback :)
Panama is not part of their strategic needs. Their lifeline is from London to Bombay and Panama is not part of that.
 
Maybe if a strategic rival was building it (1860's to 1890's France, then Germany?) Or rather at the stage of gathering finance to build it, London might sweep in with better terms. But the strategic needs of the US for building it don't really match the British needs.
 
Consider the source of building supplies. I believe the concrete came downriver from Missouri into the Gulf. Any builder would need to get supplies from North America; Europe might be too costly.
 
I've only ever seen a British Suez in one timeline.

It was a Timeline where Britain had won the war of 1812 and North America was somewhat balkanised.

Britain has no major need for a panama canal. That said I could see a British company choosing to build a canal at some point. The French company sold their partially constructed canal for $40 million after spending more than $300 million. Perhaps a British company could get involved at this point. It would seem like a bargain.
 
It could be a scheme to swindle investors and deny the US the opportunity by only pretending to build a canal.

Few people will just drop in and look.
 

Grey Wolf

Donor
If it looks profitable why wouldn't Britain in some slightly alternate world consider it?

The abandoned Nicaraguan route as an aside better matches the Suez experience. It would make even more sense, especially if Britain still owned Miskitia
 
If it looks profitable why wouldn't Britain in some slightly alternate world consider it?

The abandoned Nicaraguan route as an aside better matches the Suez experience. It would make even more sense, especially if Britain still owned Miskitia
I don't think a Canal would be profitable. American built it so it could move navies around, the commercial aspects were secondary at best. It cost a ton to build.
 
If it looks profitable why wouldn't Britain in some slightly alternate world consider it?

The abandoned Nicaraguan route as an aside better matches the Suez experience. It would make even more sense, especially if Britain still owned Miskitia
Perhaps because British capital is most likely going to be finite and there would likely be other projects that were more aligned with the strategic interests of Britain competing for the same capital ? Maybe a POD might be an alternate Canada that doesn't have a plausible land route to connect the West Coast to Ontario and the Atlantic and having a shorter sea route from the UK to the Canadian West Coast that was under British control might be sufficiently important in such an alternate world to prompt the British to invest the necessary capital.
 

Grey Wolf

Donor
Perhaps because British capital is most likely going to be finite and there would likely be other projects that were more aligned with the strategic interests of Britain competing for the same capital ? Maybe a POD might be an alternate Canada that doesn't have a plausible land route to connect the West Coast to Ontario and the Atlantic and having a shorter sea route from the UK to the Canadian West Coast that was under British control might be sufficiently important in such an alternate world to prompt the British to invest the necessary capital.
Britain kept hoping to find the North-West Passage. A Central American Canal would provide that linkage, and probably at an easier premium - ships use well-travelled routes. Whether we are talking Miskitia or Panama, Jamaica basically covers the Eastern end.
 
Those are some fair points. I think I've read on Wikipedia that there was a British company trying to continue building the canal, but the plan was never realized. However even for such a plan, it would be incredibly risky, I agree with that. Seeing that strategical value of the project wouldn't be that big, it probably wouldn't be profitable.
 
The British were apparently eager to fund a canal in Colombia (panama when it was a part of Colombia) in the 1870s, but didn't largely due to the leadup of the political instability of the Colombian Civil War of 1876
 
Top