German Politics in a Central Powers victorious World

[Sir John A.]

Would it lean to the left or right? Hawk or dove? What would be its domestic and foreign policies? What would happen to the monarchy and to the Prussian aristocracy? What role would the veterans of the war play and its military leaders, like Hindenburg and Ludendorff?

Also, is there some possibility of something like the Nazi Party taking power?

The victory could be before or during 1918.

[Max Sinister]

The rightwingers (Conservatives, Empire Party, antisemites, National Liberals) would get a boost, at least temporarily. The leftists who left the SPD won't have much to say in the next years. Since all parties supported the war, they might work together somewhat better. The rightists would be very proud of the won war, but the others would demand that the little people get their share. The three-class voting system in Prussia would continue, even if the left protests. Other European states (France, Belgium, A-H, Balcan states, new states in the east) would be forced to enter a kind of economical union with Germany, probably skewed in Germany's favor. The navy would be increased to defend the new colonies against Britain and the US. (Expect that Germany wants to be on par with both.)

[Homer]

I agree with that, besides that I think there might be a chance for reforms in the interior. The three-class-voting system was disputed before the war, and after it millions of soldiers would demand something.
The war required millions of soldiers, and thousands of officers. Therefore there had been thousands of officers who were not Junkers from the east or from the first prussian class. I think their demands for equality couldn't be ignored. This would make a significant change in the Reich, probably leading to an increase of power of the liberal parties and Zentrum.
When talking about the SPD, one has to temember that they supported the war, which would not be forgotten. They weren't "that bad"...

[Max Sinister]

The three-class system was just for Prussia. In Germany (the Reich) they had a two-round majority system. Which led to the problem that the Reich's chancellor (who often doubled as Prussian minister president) had to govern with a liberal Reichstag and a conservative Prussian parliament.

[Tom_B]

The answer is partially contingent of when victory is obtained. A late victory means the Third Military Council is charge and there is some thorny questions about to what degree the Dynamic Duo permit a return to civilian government.

An early victory and a more direct return to prewar structures would result in certain fault lines.

1] CP is unlikely to get a total win but rather a favorable negotiated settlements. One Faction emerging will be those who claim Germany could've gotten more. This could include some of the big Heavy Industrialists.

2] Was the Kaiser a help or a hindrance in the war? The move to let the Reichstag not the Kaiser pick the Chancellor is going to be revisited in not in the first 2 postwar years then soon afterwards.

3] Did the navy "carry its weight" in the war? This could have a huge impact on the political power of Tirpitz.

4] The Minority Socialists are politically marginalized for a decade--unless the Third Military Council somehow tries to indefitely postpone a return to postwar political structures then they could emerge as the core of resistance.

5] Catholic Center Party would remain an imprtant swing block

Tom

[Max Sinister]

Wilhelm II was quite old and more mellow during the war. Since 1916, Hindenburg and Ludendorff had the real power. Maybe they set up a de facto military dictatorship if the "reds" become too strong and keep him as a figurehead. It would make sense. I can imagine them yelling: "We won't let the lefts, liberals and Catholics waste what we conquered in four years of war!"

[Riain]

Germany would undergo a period of liberalisation in the wake of victory, how far is hard to say, perhaps the Chancellor being selcted by the Riechstag is the main change. However that would have large repercussions for German politics, the SDP and thus the people would get a burst of power which wouldn't be reversed. I don't think that with a burst of national pride and political gains the Germans would be clamouring for another war any time soon. Also the Kaiser is getting old and more mellowing with age, so his foreign policy won't be so bad/activist.

[HurganPL]

A military autocracy with facade of democratic system. Somewhat similar to today's Russia.
Military would be of enourmous importance as well as military-industrial complex. It would be that faction that de facto would own Mitteleuropa in Central Europe, draining it out of resources and using cheap and forced labour to fuel needs of German economy and to buy support of German society.
In the long run CP victory isn't stable. The constant rebelions in its protectorates and resurgent Russia combined with English support just like in Napoleon's War will mean new war and end of German rule. It is simply too small and two weak to dominate Europe or challenge England and Russia.
After that Germany will turn inward and socialist.

[Faeelin]

It would make sense. I can imagine them yelling: "We won't let the lefts, liberals and Catholics waste what we conquered in four years of war!"

It's 1918. The war is over; France has been smashed, and Russia's been run.

Yet people are still hungry; Soldiers are still dying in the east, and the Generals' clique isn't handing over power.

I'm not convinced this will chug along peacefully.

[Riain]

Outlasting the Entente is not a viable way for the Germans to win, their victory will have to come in 1917 or earlier, so they are not starving at all. An early victory would aviod much of the radicalism which lead to the Russian and German revolutions and harsh peace terms all 'round.

[Max Sinister]

@Faeelin: With Ukraine, they'll have enough grain to feed the population. The junkers will protest because it spoils the prices.

[Homer]

An early victory would aviod much of the radicalism which lead to the Russian and German revolutions and harsh peace terms all 'round.

You're right with the radicalism, I think, yet if Germany wins, there'd be harsh peace terms: Germany would dictate terms "to end all wars".

[Jared]

You're right with the radicalism, I think, yet if Germany wins, there'd be harsh peace terms: Germany would dictate terms "to end all wars".

One of the big arguments of this timeline would be "Would kinder terms at Frankfurt have avoided the Second Great War?"

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

With Ukraine, they'll have enough grain to feed the population.

To get the Ukraine they'd need a POD in late 1917 or early 1918, by which point the US had already entered the war.

Or are you one of those people who think the CP must automatically get the Ukraine?

[Max Sinister]

They "must" nothing. However, since they even got Ukraine ITTL, so it's not ASBish that in a "CPs win WW1" TL they gain at least this, if not more. And even if not, they could at least trade with Russia once it's out of the war.

[Riain]

Lets not get bogged down in who gets what exactly, if the CP win Germany will make sizable gains in some form or another and will be able to hold closer gains closer than more distant gains. If harsh terms were demanded how long would they last? Would the Entente default on their payments, would Germans appease resurgent Entnete powers in the 30s? At what point would German confront grabby, revisionist, defeated powers? Which defeated power would lead the charge for revisionism?

[Syphon]

Lets not get bogged down in who gets what exactly, if the CP win Germany will make sizable gains in some form or another and will be able to hold closer gains closer than more distant gains. If harsh terms were demanded how long would they last? Would the Entente default on their payments, would Germans appease resurgent Entnete powers in the 30s? At what point would German confront grabby, revisionist, defeated powers? Which defeated power would lead the charge for revisionism?

Over on the naval fiction board there are some interesting arguements going on over this very subject.

One point I'll make here is that Germany apparently didn't have any clear war goals.

To know what political ramification occur from a CP win we really need to know how and when.

If it is later then demans will be harsher as more men and money have been lost.

If earlier then maybe less so.

We also need to remember that GB literally gave the German colonies to Japan for their joining the war.
I can't see japan just giving them back too much loss of face.

But the same is true of the German they will have to be compensated most generously for the loss of their colonies or the war would continue.

Now that would be a strange TL the European war over but German and Japan have a phoney war much like Korea now.

The only problem I see is if Germany makes British empire assistance in retaking the colonies a condition on peace treaty.

This would be very nasty for Japan and might make them even more militant in the future.:D:D

[Homer]

We also need to remember that GB literally gave the German colonies to Japan for their joining the war.
I can't see japan just giving them back too much loss of face.


Peace terms would be negotiated between the European powers, hence mainly between France, Britain, AH and Germany, of who even France and AH may end as second-class participants. The other allies and CPs would have even less influence. So when the european powers decide that Japan gets nothing, then that's it. And I think the British and French would prefer Japan to gain nothing than themselves loosing colonies in exchange for the German colonies lost to Japan.

After all, we talk about a CP-win scenario, thus Japan lost as well in some sense.

[Grey Wolf]

Peace terms would be negotiated between the European powers, hence mainly between France, Britain, AH and Germany, of who even France and AH may end as second-class participants. The other allies and CPs would have even less influence. So when the european powers decide that Japan gets nothing, then that's it. And I think the British and French would prefer Japan to gain nothing than themselves loosing colonies in exchange for the German colonies lost to Japan.

After all, we talk about a CP-win scenario, thus Japan lost as well in some sense.

I don't agree with this at all. Nobody can FORCE Japan to give up what it has taken, and after Port Arthur in the late 1890s Japan is NOT going to be dictated to by a coalition of European powers.

Japan 'losing' because its allies lost is not necessarily a useful hypothesis here. It may well be a highly unusual situation, but I still think Japan will view itself as a victor. Its most probable route would be to drop out of the war on its own back, declare its neutrality and then seek an alliance with the victors - on its own terms. Depending on what state the Russian Empire is in there may well be a lot of room for manoevre. In addition, if Lansing-Iichi has not happened, then Germany could give Japan that formal freedom to dominate China that Japan had been seeking but which the USA restricted in OTL.

In certain circumstances, Japan might agree to retrocede Kiaochau for gains in China and Siberia, but it may well be in the position of Germany leasing the territory from JAPAN rather than from China. I don't know if anyone would be that bothered about the N Pacific islands, one way or the other. We tend to think of them as important because we remember Yap and Truk from WW2 but looking at it from a WW1 perspective, they are only rocks with limited potential.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

[Riain]

I think Germany would have to cop it sweet in the Pacific. Any attempt to try to take the crappy territories from Australia and Japan would involve it in a blue water naval war with Britain, one which it would lose despite gains on land. But I think Germany would be compensated enough by Belgium and France not to worry.

[Tom_B]

Instead of an outright attempt to retake their colonial possessions in the Pacific I could see lingering German hostility to Japan resulting in them getting involved with China after the war. This may actually play well in the USA.

[Homer]

I don't agree with this at all. Nobody can FORCE Japan to give up what it has taken, and after Port Arthur in the late 1890s Japan is NOT going to be dictated to by a coalition of European powers.


Japan is still only a minro power. ITTL, there's a peace treaty negotiated between the european powers. If these powers decide that Germany should get its colonies back, and are willing to enforce this, then Japan must loose. However, this is of course unreasonable: Why going to war against Japan months after the great war just because some minor territories?

The question is whether the other powers, the true victors or true loosers, will accept that. Again: If France or Britain loose even minor colonies, why should Japan gain anything? There would be substantial pressure on Japan. Britain and France would prefer to give up Japanese territories rather than their own. Because of the same reason we'd probably see Belgian Kongo becoming German. The great powers would give up territories of the minor powers rather than their own.

In my opinion, Germany as the winner of the war is in a far better situation. They won't go to war with Japan over their east asian belongings, since they could get French or British ports instead of Kiautschou. I rather think the Allies, who lost the war, would be enraged to see a former minor ally getting away with territorial gains, but loosing their own ports. Britain would prefer to see the Japanese returning Kiautschou instead of, for example, ceding Hong Kong to Germany. Therefore I suppose that the former Japanese Allies would be pressuring for Japan to give back the German colonies, whereas Germany could sit back and wait what's coming. Maybe we see large parts of the former French fleet sailing to East Asia under the German imperial flag...:D


Its most probable route would be to drop out of the war on its own back, declare its neutrality and then seek an alliance with the victors - on its own terms.

True, this is the most probable outcome. Presumably, this may be a reason for a CP-victory: Germany "does better" in some way and several OTL-Allies don't get involved in the war or leave it. Japan might even change sides alltogether, with Germany voluntarily giving up its colonies and promising additional territories from the allies. The same may be true for Italy: Getting Istria and Brentino, and then, when Germany seems to win, fighting France for Nice, Savoy and Tunesia.


In certain circumstances, Japan might agree to retrocede Kiaochau for gains in China and Siberia, but it may well be in the position of Germany leasing the territory from JAPAN rather than from China.


True. That depends on how the war finishes and what the western powers will loose.


I don't know if anyone would be that bothered about the N Pacific islands, one way or the other. We tend to think of them as important because we remember Yap and Truk from WW2 but looking at it from a WW1 perspective, they are only rocks with limited potential.


Totally right. Kiautschou is the interesting part, Germany would try to secure an open gate to China. This may be Kiautschou, but also a port of some other european nation. But France and Britain would prefer it to be Kiautschou...

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

Again: If France or Britain loose even minor colonies, why should Japan gain anything?

I don't think France and Britain would be so petty as to let the Germans back in Kiaochow Bay just so they'll look a bit less like losers.

Britain would prefer to see the Japanese returning Kiautschou instead of, for example, ceding Hong Kong to Germany.

They could cede Weihaiwei (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weihai) instead; it's even close to Kiaochow Bay. But it would be easier to get France to give up Kwangchow Bay.