France does not invade Algiers in 1830 or at least does a limited incursion and then withdraws

[WolfBear]

What if France does not invade Algiers in 1830 or at least does a limited incursion and then withdraws? I suspect that this would be much better for the Algerian people, who are going to avoid getting outright annexed by France in this TL. Instead, Algeria's fate in this TL might resemble that of Tunisia and Morocco, with a later but more humane French colonization and an easier French departure later on due to it not officially being a part of France and thus having a smaller pied-noir settler population than it had in real life. That would be wonderful news since this would mean that there would be no hundreds of thousands of Algerians as well as tens of thousands of Frenchmen who would be killed in Algeria's War of Independence, since this war wouldn't occur in this TL and, again, Algeria would eventually get its independence without too much difficulty just like Tunisia and Morocco both did. So, you'd see the positives of French rule, such as greater development, industrialization, et cetera, without as much of the downsides, such as quite the severe level of oppression that existed against Algerian Muslims in French Algeria in real life. You could, of course, also see much more of the pre-colonial Algerian elite survive in this TL as opposed to going into exile. Tunisia's and Morocco's pre-colonial elite survived colonial rule, but AFAIK, Algeria had to build a new elite after colonialism in real life because their old elite went into exile--or, alternatively, got killed fighting French colonialists.

Anyway, what additional effects would this have?

 

[raharris1973]

What if France does not invade Algiers in 1830 or at least does a limited incursion and then withdraws? I suspect that this would be much better for the Algerian people, who are going to avoid getting outright annexed by France in this TL. Instead, Algeria's fate in this TL might resemble that of Tunisia and Morocco, with a later but more humane French colonization and an easier French departure later on due to it not officially being a part of France and thus having a smaller pied-noir settler population than it had in real life. That would be wonderful news since this would mean that there would be no hundreds of thousands of Algerians as well as tens of thousands of Frenchmen who would be killed in Algeria's War of Independence, since this war wouldn't occur in this TL and, again, Algeria would eventually get its independence without too much difficulty just like Tunisia and Morocco both did. So, you'd see the positives of French rule, such as greater development, industrialization, et cetera, without as much of the downsides, such as quite the severe level of oppression that existed against Algerian Muslims in French Algeria in real life. You could, of course, also see much more of the pre-colonial Algerian elite survive in this TL as opposed to going into exile. Tunisia's and Morocco's pre-colonial elite survived colonial rule, but AFAIK, Algeria had to build a new elite after colonialism in real life because their old elite went into exile--or, alternatively, got killed fighting French colonialists.

Anyway, what additional effects would this have?

I agree that the broad outlines you describe here of a later, lighter colonization would be fairly probable. I would add that with a later start in Algeria, there's more of a chance that Italy is the first mover in Tunis as well. There is a chance Spain gets the whole of Morocco. Or that France avoids Maghreb colonization altogether.

I don't know quite what it was that made France's 1830 conquest of Algeria become a settlement exercise, whereas the 1881 takeover of Tunisia merely became a protectorate exercise, like the post 1900 takeover of Morocco.

In theory, it is not impossible for the 1830 takeover to merely result in establishment of an unincorporated French protectorate over Algeria, with French governing officials and a garrison, but no real settlement/colonization attempts. It just happened to work out otherwise in OTL.

 

[WolfBear]

I agree that the broad outlines you describe here of a later, lighter colonization would be fairly probable. I would add that with a later start in Algeria, there's more of a chance that Italy is the first mover in Tunis as well. There is a chance Spain gets the whole of Morocco. Or that France avoids Maghreb colonization altogether.

I don't know quite what it was that made France's 1830 conquest of Algeria become a settlement exercise, whereas the 1881 takeover of Tunisia merely became a protectorate exercise, like the post 1900 takeover of Morocco.

In theory, it is not impossible for the 1830 takeover to merely result in establishment of an unincorporated French protectorate over Algeria, with French governing officials and a garrison, but no real settlement/colonization attempts. It just happened to work out otherwise in OTL.

I think that the search for colonial prestige might compel France to engage in some colonization, whether in the Maghreb or somewhere else. If France won't be interested in colonizing Algeria, though, then maybe the Italians will be. A lot of pieds-noirs were of Italian descent anyway, so it won't be a huge change. One of the best filmmakers about the Algerian War of Independence was also an Italian in real life:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillo_Pontecorvo

I think that it's the fact that France simply had more time to colonize Algeria relative to Tunisia and Morocco. And the fact that France moved relatively quickly to outright annex Algeria in 1848, which then increased the incentive for France to colonize it and to permanently hold onto it. Seemed like a smart move when there were only two million Muslims in Algeria. But once Algeria began its demographic transition, De Gaulle said "We're out!" Smart man!

Yeah, I really do wonder which factors motivated the French to outright annex Algeria so quickly (less than 20 years) after conquering it in real life. Though maybe the French decided to follow Napoleon's example in regards to this, simply in a different continent. Napoleon quickly annexed a lot of European territories after conquering them, so the French a couple of decades later might have thought "Why not do the same thing in North Africa?" And of course memories of Napoleon had significantly faded by the 1880s, when Tunisia was conquered, so maybe that also helped contribute to a change of attitudes in regards to this?

 

[Cherico]

It either gets colonized by some one else or it remains a pirate haven that regularly raids other lands and enslaves people.

The Barbary pirates were massive assholes, and pretty much attacked european shipping when ever possible, this was a collection of people who were pretty much just looking to be crushed by any one with the power and a vendeta, and the number of both was pretty large.

 

[WolfBear]

It either gets colonized by some one else or it remains a pirate haven that regularly raids other lands and enslaves people.

The Barbary pirates were massive assholes, and pretty much attacked european shipping when ever possible, this was a collection of people who were pretty much just looking to be crushed by any one with the power and a vendeta, and the number of both was pretty large.

They didn't deserve 132 years of settler colonialism and a subsequent extremely brutal war of independence, though.

 

[Cherico]

They didn't deserve 132 years of settler colonialism and a subsequent extremely brutal war of independence, though.

In 1198 the problem of Barbary piracy and slave-taking was so great that the Trinitarians were created to collect ransoms.

This is a group of people who attacked, enslaved , murdered and raped and pillaged for hundreds upon hundreds of years. If any one deserved that fate it was the barbary pirates. In all honesty compared to the shit they did to any european who got in their cross hairs how the french treated them was freaking merciful.

Sooner or later some one was going to wreak their shit and when it happened they would firmly deserve it.

 

[WolfBear]

In 1198 the problem of Barbary piracy and slave-taking was so great that the Trinitarians were created to collect ransoms.

This is a group of people who attacked, enslaved , murdered and raped and pillaged for hundreds upon hundreds of years. If any one deserved that fate it was the barbary pirates. In all honesty compared to the shit they did to any european who got in their cross hairs how the french treated them was freaking merciful.

Sooner or later some one was going to wreak their shit and when it happened they would firmly deserve it.

Well, IMHO, Algeria should have gotten the Tunisia/Morocco treatment.

 

[Cherico]

Well, IMHO, Algeria should have gotten the Tunisia/Morocco treatment.

Morocco was smart enough to see where the wind was going and could keep their heads down, make deals and over all were smarter then the bunch along the Algerian cost. Remember this is centuries worth of bullshit and they kept it up to the very end.

And once again France was a lot nicer to the Algerian muslums then they were to any one else. The babary pirates were massive assholes.

 

[WolfBear]

Morocco was smart enough to see where the wind was going and could keep their heads down, make deals and over all were smarter then the bunch along the Algerian cost. Remember this is centuries worth of bullshit and they kept it up to the very end.

And once again France was a lot nicer to the Algerian muslums then they were to any one else. The babary pirates were massive assholes.

Morocco got the luxury of getting independence from France peacefully, as did Tunisia. Algeria did not because France (in hindsight) foolishly annexed it back in 1848 and thus couldn't afford to let Algeria go without an extremely bloody war.

I applaud JFK for supporting Algerian independence back in 1957 as a US Senator:

Remarks of Senator John F. Kennedy in the Senate, Washington, D.C., July 2, 1957

Mr. President, the most powerful single force in the world today is neither communism nor capitalism, neither the H-bomb nor the guided missile – it is man's eternal desire to be free and independent. The great enemy of that tremendous force of freedom is called, for want of a more precise term...

www.jfklibrary.org

 

[raharris1973]

Morocco was smart enough to see where the wind was going and could keep their heads down, make deals and over all were smarter then the bunch along the Algerian cost. Remember this is centuries worth of bullshit and they kept it up to the very end.

And once again France was a lot nicer to the Algerian muslums then they were to any one else. The babary pirates were massive assholes.

Did they keep it up to the very end? Didn’t they bow to superior force and hang up the cutlass, Jolly Roger, and eye patch after serial bombardments in 1815, by the British, Dutch, and continental, and once again, American fleets? France didn’t invade them over slavery, but over a verbal altercation that got slappy.

 

[WolfBear]

France didn’t invade them over slavery, but over a verbal altercation that got slappy.

Which shows just how much of a moron the Algerian Dey was.