I like this timeline for the fact that the last king of France wouldn't be Napoleon III but instead King George VI making Henry V's dream come true. I'd also imagine that in this timeline. The British would have kept Singapore because the failure of the British to protect Singapore was a major reason for independence.
I toyed with the idea of keeping Singapore, at the end I went with the half measure of letting Britain keep a military base there whilst granting Singapore independence in probably the 70's or the 80's but with no Japanese conquest them keeping it is certainly possible and indeed Henry V's dream did come true, just maybe not quite in the way he thought it would.
@muhammadrezatinambunan9903 They wouldn't want to be able to keep India or any of the African countries because 1. The British empire was unprofitable and 2. The USA and Soviets would push for self determination of the people. The problem is that the majority of the population in Singapore wanted independence until after the British failed to protect it in WW2. Without it, Singapore would likely not want the full independence they got IRL (they didn't even want full independence when Malya kicked them out of their federation and made them independent) It's much more likely that they are incorporated as an overseas territory of the United Kingdom.
I feel like this timeline would mix quite well with a federalized British empire timeline, as both of those alternate histories both have the theme of continued European imperialism in mind, anyways great video as always, cheers!
You’re back! Good to see you. Would you be interested in doing a scenario on if Britain’s Glorious Revolution either failed or didn’t happen? I’m curious how you think Britain would fare in the 18th Century with the House of Stuart still in control. Besides that, I’d also be curious about if the May 1968 riots in France turned into a full revolution, and what direction it may take the country.
Now imagine we do this before the start of napoleon era together we would rule the world without the British napoleon take Europe and the French won’t help American against British British take all of America
I agree with the more independent from the usa but i don't think the same about a more stable Africa Not that i do not want it but because it couldn't cus they would take advantage of it even more
A Britain that's more willingly involved with Europe instead of being the USA's neutered pet is honestly always a win in my books. It's just too bad that we'd end up trampling on the Algerians and Egyptians to get this though, because I'm not pro-colonial either.
@sovkhan4359 idk man, I would rather not have my nation be taken over and used only for resources while the population in that region ultimately starts losing their identity from the past country
This sure was a good timeline but I’m pretty sure if France kept part of its empire under its influence surly Britain would too in this timeline having its own version to what France has. Why let the French still have their empire and not the British your channel name is Patriotic British mapper those final British borders had so much potential yet some how looks nearly identical to our own timeline :( Still a great video and glad the legend has returned.
Glad you liked it. I'm not sure on Britain maintaining influence in it's colonies in the exact same way France did, I could see them maintaining preferential trade arrangements with some colonies though. Britain didn't have the same interest in Africa that France did, plus the only place (With the exception of South Africa) that they settled in relatively large numbers was Rhodesia, which itself wanted independence after 1960 (just on terms that OTL Britain could never accept.) To be fair in this world Britain keeps a lot more of the Caribbean, south Pacific and some key strategic posts like Malta. Speaking of, it's quite likely they'd have incorporated some of the colonies into the UK proper similar to the plans for Malta, I could totally see Gibraltar and maybe the Falklands being included if not more. Still, it's all alternate history in the end and we can't predict every detail with any certainty. Also thanks, it's nice to be back.
@@patrioticbritishmapper8352some reason your reply didn’t show up in my notifications so my apologies for my extremely extremely late response. I just simply doubt Britain would ever allow For France to be the only power with major influence in Africa, Despite being allies and even united for awhile in this scenario. Britain and France still have a very long history of competing for territories and influence and I simply doubt if France maintained that much dominance in their former colonies that a much stronger Britain in this timeline would ignore. It definitely would be different from France’s system but I definitely believe Britain would want to maintain some sort of dominance and influence over their former African colonies in order to maintain balance with France.
Thanks, glad to be back. Part of the French colonial empire survives in this world, granted I'm still planning on making a follow up to the Franco-Prussian war video.
This is a great one. Not some pie in the sky fantasy, well done. I’m not sure full control of Algeria is likely and not sure about half of Guinea remaining dutch, but why not it s the purpose of these ideas. Good work.
I also like the idea of France not following Britain's lead in the Sudeten deal and choosing to support the Czechs by themselves. Perhaps even with the other two Little Entente members joining in afterwards?
I feel like Italy would of held on to Libya for a few years as Germany would of still seized most of the French fleet and would of been able to reinforce Italy, thus I don't think Yugoslavia or Greece would of been invaded in this timeline In our timeline Roosevelt and the French prime minister supported dday and Churchill supported the invasion of Italy happening first but since the French prime minister would be in a more powerful situation in this timeline dday would likely happen first and then the invasion of Italy so the war would likely end in 1943 with the allies taking all of modern day Germany before the Soviets Japan only surrendered because of the Soviet invasion of Manchukuo so Japan would probably surrender without the nukes as the Soviets would of invaded earlier I feel like the Franco British union could of survived up until the 90s however would break up once the Soviets collapse Anyways still a good video
I doubt Germany gets the French fleet, the French probably hold out for about a month longer in this world, thus they'd either keep most of their fleet or if they're unable to do that they'd just destroy it so Germany couldn't have it. Considering how poorly the Italians did in Libya throughout 1940 against just the British, throw the French in and it's curtains after 6 months. As for Greece, its possible that it doesn't get invaded but this is Mussolini we're talking about, common sense doesn't really apply when he's involved lol. Also Japan's surrender was due to the bombs, Manchukuo was just an added reason to put on the surrender sheet, though as you pointed out the Soviets would've invaded earlier so maybe... and this is a maybe, we see them try invade Japan, or at the very least take all of Korea. And a breakup after the collapse of the USSR does seem plausible, the 1990's did seem to be the decade of multi ethnic states collapsing.
@@FlaviusConstantinus306 yeah that would be a good scenario but be good to have British empire and French but don’t trust the Germans though but good scenario though
Yeah I can do that, granted it would probably require the Union to exist before the Suez Crisis (ideally in WW2) since from what I've read the proposal made in 1956 would've been considered treason under the French constitution (I'm not an expert so maybe there's a way round that)
@@patrioticbritishmapper8352 maybe Anthony Eden stays as prime minister because he preferred the French to the Americans and the French president was all for the union as well so it can be a 3rd power in the Cold War as well
@@patrioticbritishmapper8352 also how the Cold War would be impacted with the Franco British union such as would the Soviet Union fall earlier and how the relationship between francobritan and the US as well and the impact it would have in the world today
Sure, that's definitely a timeline I'll make, I kinda made that before with the "Mussolini remakes the Roman Empire" video, but that vid was a borderline parody so I'd like to make a more serious one which also covers the cold war, thanks for the suggestion.
I like the dynamic from your "What if Turkey joined the Axis" video where the Turks and the Italians are postwar rivals. Cold War era coverage of an Axis victory scenario is interesting.
You should make another version of what if France won the Franco Prussian war in which Austria Hungary joins world war 1 on the side of France and Russia
Have you thought of making a timeline was where the Empire of Brazil exists to this day. For I very much like to see the Memory of Dom Pedro II live on and how would the United states reaction to a Empire to its southern border?.
Can someone tell me why it would be the franco-british union and not the french- british union. I mean the former sounds better but I doubt that's the reason
@@patrioticbritishmapper8352yeah the Franco British Union definitely sounds better to the French - British Union. I will say tho a slightly better alternative title for the union to that would be the Anglo French Union.
the 2 changes to history are these. 1 Right after the dissolution of Vichy France Charles de Gaulle reforms the French government to function the way the 5th French republic does to distance itself from the 3rd republic (due to it's embarrassing defeat to the Germans) and gives equal rights to the Algerians. But to make him not seen as too sympathetic to the Muslims, he bans first cousin marriages, but to prevent Algerian rebellions from getting too out of control he makes exceptions for 1st cousins related via the half siblings of parents 2 Leclerc survives the accident that killed him in OTL and he goes on to put down Algerian rebellions more swiftly and humanely My goal isn't to keep Algeria a part of France forever, but I'm curious as to how it would develop anthropologically with the ban on 1st cousin marriages and how it would develop economically, being a full blown part of a well functioning first world country (and not a colony) for a while and how France would develop leaving ww2 as functional country (ofc Charles de Gaulle would be forced to be president again when the time eventually comes to give Algeria it's independence) So, What if these 2 things happened?
@@JustinianG they are pretty unrealastic i would say the reason is because reforms actually happened but it was the need for an independent state that drove the algerian revolution so if what you are saying happened i would imagine that they will be free in like 1970 anyway thats my opinion as an algerian who was just revising his greater colonial plans lesson pray for me to pass the exam tommorow
@@achour.falestine I will pray for you to pass your exam tomorrow. But how would Algeria have developed if it was a part of a well functioning 1st world country (the french 5th republic, and not the french 4th republic which was very dysfunctional) for 26 years and having cousin marriages banned during this period (and possibly afterwards)?
Why isn't Sinai under Israeli control in this reality? It makes no sense. The population of the region is very small and Israel has important historical, military and demographic justifications for keeping it.
