WI: Russian Hawaii

[Overzealous Admin]

Here's an idea that's been bouncing around in my head for a while:

Beginning in the early 19th century, the Russian Empire took interest in Hawaii, for trade and scientific reasons at first before eyeing them up as a potential territory; they went as far as establishing a fort on Kauai in 1817. There were a variety of factors keeping Russia from establishing a protectorate in Hawaii - American/British influence, tribal disunity, sheer remoteness - but assume these can be overcome and Russia is able to add Hawaii to its empire. What is the destiny of Hawaii? Things to consider:

•Could Russian Hawaii help supply Russian America and keep Russia's presence in Alaska for longer?
•How will Hawaii resist American and British might? (If at all)
•How would the colony fare in the Crimean War? (I'm inclined to think Britain will certainly snatch it up, but maybe you think otherwise)
•If Russian Hawaii lasts to the 20th century, will Japan be able to subdue it in the Russo-Japanese War? (or the in-universe equivalent)
•What happens to Hawaii after the Bolsheviks take power?

 

[Retarded_Rankean]

The issue with Russia in the Pacific is that modern Vladivostok is already pretty much the end of tenable supply lines (at least pre trans Siberian railway).
Yet another pacific colony would require even more of the sparse local resources.
The Russians sold Alaska because it really was not possible to adequately defend it against British and american encroachment.
I guess Hawaii would be the same.
I really do not think the Russians can hold Hawaii against their enemies of the 19th and 20 centuries.
Either France, Japan, Britain take it or the US buys it.

Honestly if they manage to keep it and the Bolshevik revolution still happens I can see it become a tsarist exile state.

 

[EnochPowell]

I had a look at your idea and I'll throw some possibilities back:

- The Russian schooner Nikolai visits Hawaii around the time of its OTL visit of Oregon in 1808. Lets say that they see the islands and drafts a recommendation for colonisation.
- The Russians establish a fort in Hawaii at the same time as California's Fort Ross in 1812.
- Napoleonic Wars end, Russian-American Company gains prestige with Nikolai Rezanov succeeding in creating a plantation of settlers on Hawaii. Some colonists can be from the OTL Russian colony at Sitka (where they suffered scurvy in 1806).

Alexander I might see the benefits in ATL say 1816 or 1817, where a colony in Hawaii would have 600+ persons due to the better climate and no disputes with the Spanish (Mexicans would boot out Russian colonists) or with Alaskan natives (Russians numbered only 500 or so at its peak as a colony).

Combined with the purchase of serfs from Russian nobles and it would create an avenue for a viable colony that could repel any attacks by the native Hawaiians.

Britain would be most likely to interfere, but probably in the Oregon territory during the ATL War of 1812. The Tsar of Russia's arbitration would also include clauses to allow the British to settle in the Oregon lands (in a secret exchange for Hawaii being a Russian colony).

By the 1820s, you would have an America wanting to move west, a British colony (Cascadia/Colombia/New Hanover) and then a self-sufficient Russian Hawaii. The "Scramble for the Pacific" would be between UK, ATL-Russia and France.

Japan in this ATL might be introduced to the world by either the UK or the Dutch, while Russia may be pushing south into making a chain of islands under St. Petersburg's rule.

That's as far as I will go, I'll throw it back to you.

 

[Skellycow]

I wonder if Russia might only end up securing Kauai (Niihau might come along too) and the rest of Hawaii ends up in the hands of another power such as Britain. As noted, Hawaii is basically at the end of the Russian's reach and due to its strategic position, other powers are likely to take it at the first opportunity. But, if most of Hawaii was already secured by other powers and Russia only possessed the a comparatively less strategic island, it might remain in Russian hands through the conflicts of the 1800s as taking it would be comparatively less important.

And if the minor butterflies don't prevent the Russian Revolution, a Russo-Hawaiian Tsarist/White Russian state would be quite funny. Exiles would be able to dine on coconut and pineapple while plotting how to return. I suspect such a regime would play seriously heavily in Soviet propaganda as being the source of many of the "wreckers" who supposedly plagued the Soviet state. I think there'd also be a lot to be said about the question of what Russo-Hawaii would do after the fall of the Bolsheviks. Does it rejoin the now reduced Russia? Or do they try to claim legitimacy over all Russia still?

 

[EnochPowell]

Depend on how hard Britain concentrates on containing US expansion. I mean, if Russia's only taking Hawaii, it would be paltry compared to Britain seizing lands around the Colombia River.

Assuming it doesn't prevent the Russian Revolution, the US might welcome and escort the Tsarist regime to Hawaii. Unlike that of Taiwan, there would be a lot more international sentiment towards dismantling the Soviet Regime. That means no recognition of Lenin/Stalin as legitimate leaders, either by the powers in the West or by Germany after WW2.

Hawaii would most likely be recognised as the legitimate Russian government. Any other colonial ventures that Russia had would most likely come under the Tsarist sphere instead of Moscow. We would see the Soviet Union falling earlier, perhaps 60s or 70s due to the presence of the Tsars being so close to America and anti-communism being linked with the Tsar's regime (Tsarist atrocities would be ignored given that the Soviet Union would have been responsible for over 50 million deaths between 1917-1957)

The Tsars would make themselves willing to Western interests and that would mean possibly conceding to Russia only, not the breakaway republics.