Historically Prussia formed the Empire of Germany and took Alsace-Lorraine from France during the peace settlement. I've been trying to think up some alternate peace deals that do not result in Alsace-Lorraine being ceded to Germany. Perhaps there are people better versed with the war and its peace that could help?
Alternative Franco-Prussian War peace deals
- Thread starter Boom22
- Start date
Have France cede Cochin-China,all their rights to the area around Indochina,and some other African clay.
Well, Bismark didn't want to take ANY land from France in fear of French revanchism. However, nationalistic sentiment made him concede to annex the German-speaking part of Alsace, and the Moselle area of Lorraine was a great strategic position, and also had a German plurality, so it was annexed as well, forming the Reichsland of Elsaß-Lotharingen. No idea how to stop nationalism here without going one step further and annexing the entirety of both Alsace and Lorraine, which is something that would never happen. So, the peace was going to take Alsace-Lorraine, only way to prevent that is if Prussia and the German states lose the war, and considering they were allied with Russia at this time, I doubt it would happen. Besides, to beat Prussia, they would have to march all they way to Berlin, which would be extremely slow, and by the time they are in the vicinity the Italians would have joined and started attacking in Savoy and Provence. So, Alsace Lorraine is going to Germany unless France SOMEHOW manages to win that war, which, as I said, is unlikely since they are at a MASSIVE disadvantage.
Bismark wouldn't want it.
His focus right now is in Europe and on Germany, territory across the world doesn't help that.
Or, more simply, the war could end in a stalemate and things could revert to the status quo antebellum.
Supposing that the peace restored the status quo would this have effected the creation of the German Empire?
Status Quo isn't really the correct word to use for that, isn't it? That would preclude the unification, which France wanted to prevent.
The best peace for France is an early peace.
Let's suppose that Napoleon III is convinced by his cousin Plon-Plon and gen. Trochu that the army of Metz cannot be relieved: no mad dash toward Sedan, no final defeat, no capture. Napoleon goes back to Paris, where he is needed to keep the situation under control, and MacMahon stays in Chalons with the last field army. The Bonapartist regime does not fall of a sudden as it happened IOTL after the defeat at Sedan and the capture of the emperor.
There is time to send some feelers to Prussia (possibly through the good offices of the Italian and Austrian ambassadors in Paris) to negotiate a cease-fire and subsequently a peace.
A peace treaty in October or November 1870 would probably be much more lenient than the one signed in Frankfurt in May 1871. No territorial annexation (but the French side of the border is demilitarized and the fortresses of Strasbourg and Metz are demolished), some reparations (lower than IOTL) and a French declaration that there are no claims in the Saarlands.
This is what Bismarck wanted out of the war, and it is in line with his behavior toward Austria after 1866. The North German Confederation is strengthened, and the king of Prussia might become the emperor of Northern Germany (but Bavaria, Baden and so on would not be included in it, although they would remain in the Zollverein and be tied to North Germany by a defensive alliance).
The Bonapartist regime is likely to survive (no Paris Commune ITTL for example), although the emperor is quite ill and most likely will die on schedule, opening the door for a regency in the name of the Prince Imperial.
There would still be a few bumpy years in France, and the reforms sponsored by the 3rd republique may be delayed by a decade or so. OTOH there should not be too much bad blood between France and Germany and over the years the two might even become allies.
Let's suppose that Napoleon III is convinced by his cousin Plon-Plon and gen. Trochu that the army of Metz cannot be relieved: no mad dash toward Sedan, no final defeat, no capture. Napoleon goes back to Paris, where he is needed to keep the situation under control, and MacMahon stays in Chalons with the last field army. The Bonapartist regime does not fall of a sudden as it happened IOTL after the defeat at Sedan and the capture of the emperor.
There is time to send some feelers to Prussia (possibly through the good offices of the Italian and Austrian ambassadors in Paris) to negotiate a cease-fire and subsequently a peace.
A peace treaty in October or November 1870 would probably be much more lenient than the one signed in Frankfurt in May 1871. No territorial annexation (but the French side of the border is demilitarized and the fortresses of Strasbourg and Metz are demolished), some reparations (lower than IOTL) and a French declaration that there are no claims in the Saarlands.
This is what Bismarck wanted out of the war, and it is in line with his behavior toward Austria after 1866. The North German Confederation is strengthened, and the king of Prussia might become the emperor of Northern Germany (but Bavaria, Baden and so on would not be included in it, although they would remain in the Zollverein and be tied to North Germany by a defensive alliance).
The Bonapartist regime is likely to survive (no Paris Commune ITTL for example), although the emperor is quite ill and most likely will die on schedule, opening the door for a regency in the name of the Prince Imperial.
There would still be a few bumpy years in France, and the reforms sponsored by the 3rd republique may be delayed by a decade or so. OTOH there should not be too much bad blood between France and Germany and over the years the two might even become allies.
Luxembourg was neutralized under the guarantee of the Powers in 1867: it's off the table.
IIRC Baden wanted Alsace and maybe an elevation to kingdom (instead of grand duchy). Maybe that, plus very minor annexations of some border towns to the Prussian Rheinprovinz and the demolition of the fortress at Metz would make for a good alternative. Because really, the only alternative would either be status quo ante bellum or a serious(ly unlikely) North German loss (or in case of a different chancellor: annexations even more extensive than OTL).
Last edited:
I don't think anyone but someone as good at realpolitik as Bismarck could manipulate the situation as well as he did to make France attempt to invade.
I'd agree. But if, for instance, the Franco-Prussian War breaks out like OTL but in the very early days Bismarck somehow is dismissed (unlikely) or dies, his successor wouldn't be so moderate when it comes to territorial demands.
What would be some of the harsher deals that's realistic and possible?
If they had treated Alsace-Lorraine better after the war, French revanchism would still be there - but face the problem of the Alsaciennes prefering to stay German, or rather to stay Alsaciennes in a federal system that grants them a lot of local autonomy. giving the territory to the rather small and liberal state of Badenia would also work - Alsaciennes would immediately make up quite a significant minority in the state, and they are culturally close anyway - or were.
I always thought that if Alsace-Lorraine would have been made a full member state in 1871 with a decent sovereign prince and one of the more liberal southern German constitutions then only a small minority would call for a return to France. A centralist state like France does not fit well with such border people that have their own identity.
If you wanted to butterfly away French revanchism for a timeline, one idea would be to set up a new state in Alsace at the Congress of Vienna. Might end up independent or a founding member of the Reich then, but wouldn't be French and wouldn't be the cause for revanchism after a lost war.
Seems like the most reasonable alternate peace. Bismarck seriously didn't want a long war, and if he can get a peace on advantageous terms (the uninterrupted string of victories would help) he could easily sell this peace.
There'd still be some bad blood I think, France would have been humbled, but its possible the intense Franco-German rivalry then lead up to OTL's WWI is abated.
Depends; Germany and France are always going to be the big boys in western Europe, tends to lead to rivalry. The only alternative is a Franco-German alliance against someone, but that can only be Britain (in which case it sucks for France, since they are more easily harmed by Britain).
The Franco-German rivalry leading up to OTL WW1 is a bit of a legend: the only two flare-ups were the Moroccan crisises of 1905 and 1911, and both of them were solved by diplomatic agreement. Tellingly, there were no significant incidents in the more than 40 years during which Alsace was part of the German empire (and please don't mention the so-called Zabern affaire). In 1914 neither the German people nor the French one (with the possible exception of a limited number of rabid nationalists on either side) truly believed there would be a war between the two nations. You should read "Dance of the Furies" by Michael S. Neiberg, who researched a huge number of diaries, letters and memoirs written by normal people all over Europe.
A "friendly" rivalry might be more the case but that has been true even since Germany and France were among the founder of the EEC.
I'd go even further to say that sometimes in the late 1870s-early 1880s France might enter the Zollverein and this might truly be a game changer.
Obviously better diplomatic relations between France and Germany (in particular if boosted by growing and mutually-beneficial economic interests) would butterfly away the Franco-Russian alliance of the 1890s (and put a damper on French investment in Russia). A strong Franco-German economic block would also exert an attraction over Belgium and the Netherlands, and probably Italy and Austria-Hungary too might be co-opted into it.
It may look a bit like a Mary-Sue book, but I'm reasonably convinced that there are real possibilities it may become true.