What if Russian never sold Alaska to America?

[LuckySevens]

What could be some potential problems that could have arisen out of the cold war?

What was the political climate like when the land was sold?

[KGS]

The Alaska Purchase took place in 1867, and I doubt anyone was thinking "Russia" and "global superpower" in the same breath at that time. The purchase was called "Seward's Folly" (after William Seward, then Secretary of State) because everyone perceived the territory as a vast and useless wasteland. But then gold was discovered, and later oil...

As for cold war implications...dunno. Certainly, the placement of Soviet nuclear missiles would have been cause for consternation, but probably not as serious as the Cuban Missile Crisis -- Alaska's several thousand miles away from the rest of the U.S., as opposed to a mere 90.

I guess the Alaska Highway would never have been built to protect our interests during WWII. That's all I got.

[Chefguy]

A very thought-provoking question, and probably one destined for IMHO or GD. It would be conceivable that Russia might have allied itself with Hitler and Tojo, since it would have been able to strategically locate armies and a naval force in Alaska to push south. The US at that time was recovering economically and may have looked attractive as a takeover target.

Barring that, as a cold war threat the danger would have been very real. There is extensive land for airfields here and lots of room to hide missiles. The coastline lends itself to hiding submarines, as well.

[Gorsnak]

This is a rather interesting question. It seems to me that there's three significant areas in which history might have turned out rather differently: the gold rush, WWII, and the Cold War.

I think we should assume that the gold rush still occurs - after all, a good deal of the gold was found on the Yukon side of the border. However, with a Russian Alaska, how might it have unfolded differently? I presume the Tsar would have been interested in the gold, and of course the socio-economic structure of Russia in the late 19th century was not particularly compatible with type of society spawned in the gold rush. I don't really have sufficient expertise to predict how this might have turned out differently.

In WWII, the possession of Alaska by the Soviets might have embroiled them in the Pacific war to a much greater degree than they were. Granted, their focus still would have had to have been the Eastern Front - the Wehrmacht was not something that could be ignored to any degree whatsoever. However, assuming that the Soviets saw Alaska as an important strategic asset - which, I think, they would have - the Japanese would have posed a much greater threat to them than they did. Perhaps earlier involvement in the Pacific theatre, resulting in an all-communist Korea, and hence no Korean War?

The Cold War is where it gets even more interesting. Missile batteries south of Juneau might not be as close as Cuba, but they are close. And of course there's the threat of conventional forces moving south overland as well - though I freely grant that the terrain isn't well suited for an offensive strike. Still, I would think should expect to have seen a very substantial US military presence in northern BC and the Yukon, a much greater integration of Canadian and US militaries, and some really nice roads between Prince George and Dawson City.

[Enola Straight]

If Russia never sold it tho the USA, they probably would've sold it to Canada, making it a Province, instead of a State.

[ElvisL1ves]

Not at the time, Enola. Russia and Britain were competing major powers in the 19th century (this was not long after the Crimean War, remember). The Tsar would not have considered a deal which would have enhanced his rival's strength. The deal with the US was part of a Russian buffer strategy of sorts, aimed in part at keeping Britain from threatening Russia from across the Bering Strait and in part at strengthening another, still-growing rival of Britain.

Maybe it could have happened in the aftermath of the Revolution (but before the WW1 Armistice), when Lenin was willing to give up substantial territory in exchange for peace (cf. the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, superseded after the German surrender).

[Neurotik]

I highly doubt Alaska would have survived the Bolshevik Revolution as a part of the USSR to be a threat during the Cold War. Remember that the Allies landed troops in Russia to aid the Whites so I find it highly unlikely that Canad and the US would not have made Alaska their first priority in stemming the communist tide in the early 1920s.

[Northern Piper]

Canada might have ended up with the panhandle, though. It's believed that the British member on the bilateral commission voted for the U.S. position as part of the geo-politics between the U.K. and the U.S. at the time. Britain probably would have pushed harder for the panhandle if the choice had been between Canada and Russia getting it.

[BobT]

Forget the Russian Revolution, I don't think Alaska could have survived in Russian hands through the late 1890s when the United States decided to join the world of imperialist powers.

I can't believe Theodore Roosevelt would have been too enamored of the Russians keeping Alaska.