Why British did not take over and colonized Patagonia ?

Nov 2010
102
The British weren't interested in outright taking over Patagonia even in the 1830s, just after it had been explored by the likes of Darwin, both because it had been deemed not to be of economic interest (after all, being a desolate land) and because the British failed to take over the Rio de la Plata in 1806-07 due to the failure to definitively capture Buenos Aires. The British did colonize the Falklands/Malvinas, though, because those islands were a refueling centre and they had already been colonized by the British for a few years in the later 18th century.

And yes, a British Patagonia would absolutely have been a wealthy country!
 

Lee-Sensei

Ad Honorem
Aug 2012
2,116


The climate was similar, land was planty, greek, cold, mountainousetc with low % of Natives so why British nevertried tl colonized it as a "Us/canada of South America" ?


Off topic : what if brits Completed invasions from Plata and took over Patagonia and colonized it with European people ? Do you think this country can be a 1st world country ?
The Argentinian’s probably would have resisted that. Why would they provoke a war when they could just expand their influence through trade?