Bouvet Island (in South Atlantic close to Antarctica) not annexed by Norway in 1927

[dovibear]

In OTL, Bouvet Island was annexed by the Norwegians at the end of 1927 in the wake of the Norvegia expedition, which was the first to make an extended stay on the island. But until then, it was the British who had possessed that island, ever since George Norris (the captain of a whaling expedition) had claimed it for the British crown in 1825, naming it Liverpool Island; he had spotted what he thought was a second island and named it Thompson Island (but it turns out to be a phantom island).

As such, and using Norris's landing/takeover as a justification, the British initially protested the Norwegian takeover. Nonetheless, and I'm quoting from the Wikipedia page on Bouvet Island, "the British position was weakened by Norris's sighting of two islands and the uncertainty as to whether he had been on Thompson or Liverpool (i.e. Bouvet) Island. Norris's positioning deviating from the correct location combined with the island's small size and lack of a natural harbour made the UK accept the Norwegian claim. This resulted in diplomatic negotiations between the two countries, and in November 1929, Britain renounced its claim to the island."

If the British had managed to either wrestle possession of the island from the Norwegians, or the Norwegians had never been involved in the first place, would Bouvet Island these days be a possession of South Georgia/the South Sandwich Islands, of St. Helena/Ascension/Tristan da Cunha, or of South Africa?

 

[Ryker of Terra]

It's nice to see a fellow Bouvet Island enjoyer out in the wild! There seems to be so few of us in the world, willing to show love to that godforsaken piece of land in the middle of nowhere...

Good question, and one that had never crossed my mind before. Bouvet is extremely isolated from all of the options mentioned above. Here's a map I found on Reddit (distances are accurate, I double-checked on Google Maps):

Judging by distance alone, South Africa is unlikely. Their only overseas possession, the Prince Edward Islands, are only 1720 km away. The British transferred them to SA only because the South Africans bothered to sail out there and claim the place, and the Brits seemingly weren't too bothered by it. If SA cares enough, they could try a similar stunt with Bouvet, but the distance is much greater, meaning more chance of discovery, and London may be more vigilant after the first time. I don't think they'll try though, they didn't with the other British held islands in the Atlantic.

South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands are (relatively) closer, but they're also disputed with Argentina. It wasn't until after the Falklands War that SGSSI was split off from the Falklands and given its own administration, so I doubt London will want to add another island to the mix when it's in a legally grey area.

In the end, I think Bouvet would be joined to Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha. The distance between Tristan and Bouvet is about 2250 km, shorter than the 2420 km between Tristan and St. Helena, so there's precedent for it. Unless the South Africans do an adventure again and London chooses to be lenient a second time, there's nowhere else Bouvet could end up.

 

[dovibear]

Thank you very much for your input.

Assuming that there would be no Argentina-UK dispute over the Falklands and the SGSSI (which iOTL there is), and given that the POD in question is long before the SGSSI separate from the Falklands, which would matter more - Bouvet's distance from the nearest island(s) in question and from nearby bigger islands, or its distance from the main administrative centres of the groups of British dependency islands?

In other words, which would be more important - a. distance from the nearest S. Sandwich Island (1860 km) for the Falklands/SGSSI and from Gough Island (1850 km) for St. Helena/Ascension/Tristan da Cunha (hereafter, St. Helena etc.), b. distance from S. Georgia (about 2550 km) for the Falklands/SGSSI and from Tristan da Cunha (about 2250 km) for St. Helena etc., or c. distance from Stanley in the Falkland Islands (almost 4000 km) or from Jamestown in St. Helena (just over 4350 km)?

If a or b (as outlined in the paragraph right above) is more important, then St. Helena etc. wins out for sure, but if c is more important, then (barring any OTL-type Falklands dispute) the Falklands/SGSSI just might win out.

 

[Ryker of Terra]

I don't know, to be honest. With no Argentinian dispute, both administrations would be rather similar from London's perspective. If Bouvet had a permanent population, London would have to at least consider which administration the locals wish to join. As it will (realistically) still be uninhabited in this scenario, it's just lines in a folder in some colonial bureaucrat's office, and could go either way. No idea which.