How could Germany have realistically won WW1 after 1917?

I am planning on writing a timeline on Germany winning World War 1, but I'm not sure how that could happen. The PoD is there being no Easter Rising, so Lylod George goes to Russia with Kitchener and is blown up when the ship hits a mine. Could people give me some ideas about a plausiable Entente collapse in 1917/1918?

Thanks (sorry if this is considered a Sealion topic in these forums)

I'm not sure about your PoD, but a late CP victory is possible. Suppose the Zimmermann Telegram is never sent to Mexico or, if it's a British forgery like some claim, Germany has the brains to say it's a filthy lie. The US remain neutral so there's no hope for the French who needed relief in 1917/1918. There were already some mutinies in the French army in 1917 IIRC.

Germany, instead of wasting their resources on the original Spring Offensive which was anything but a strategic victory, they focus solely on capturing Amiens and Hazebrouck which were both major supply hubs (with Dunkirk and Calais as bonus targets). Considering how far the main advance went, they can fall if they are in the main thrust (which they weren't IOTL). The loss of Amiens and Hazebrouck wreaks havoc in the entire logistical situation on the Western Front. The loss of Dunkerque and/or Calais severely restricts the flow of supplies. Low on food, ammunition and so, the situation in France deteriorates and mutinies break out as does a general strike which cripples the country. The people want peace and food.

Perhaps some troops could be funnelled to the Alps to KO Italy although Austria-Hungary is likely beyond saving by now. There you go, armistice by summer 1918 and peace by early 1919. The postwar world will be hell though. All warring parties are indebted to the US which is now the sole holder of credit. Austria-Hungary is likely to fall apart anyway in 1919 or 1920 in civil strife as it was disintegrating by 1918. And Germany now has to police its gains from the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (Ukraine, Congress Poland, Baltic states etc). On the bright side, the Ottoman Empire might survive with modern day Turkey at the very least and probably Azerbaijan as the communists can't stop them from taking it.

Read a shift in priorities.

Onkel Willie said:

Perhaps some troops could be funnelled to the Alps to KO Italy although Austria-Hungary is likely beyond saving by now.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's fair to say. A strong argument could be made that the reason Austria-Hungary's various ethnicities (especially the Czechs, Southern Slavs, and Slovaks to a degree) began throwing off the Austro-Hungarian yoke before the war ended was because Wilson basically promised that, with American entry into the war, Austria-Hungary would be carved up into nation-states, something that the Entente never really pushed.

Also, no American entry probably means no Greek entrance into the war, therefore a much weaker Salonika Front so less pressure on Bulgaria and A-H. In fact, if things in the West start falling apart for France, you could see the Greeks eventually try and forcibly eject the Entente forces; the pro-German but ultimately neutral Greeks always resented their presence anyways.

I'm not sure about your PoD, but a late CP victory is possible. Suppose the Zimmermann Telegram is never sent to Mexico or, if it's a British forgery like some claim, Germany has the brains to say it's a filthy lie. The US remain neutral so there's no hope for the French who needed relief in 1917/1918. There were already some mutinies in the French army in 1917 IIRC.

Click to expand...

Llyod George was very significant, he was the one who got the convoy system past the admirality and as prime minister, he re-energized a crumbling Entente. To be honest, I couldn't think of a more subtle way of him being removed from the equation.
The Zimmermann Telegram is a good idea, but I think it should be 'sent', it just turns out the British forged the whole thing, which would infuriate pretty much everyone in the US (possibly leaving Wilson a lame duck). Neville trying to put down the French mutinies by force, I'm guessing would make them worse and probably knock France out of the war (I'm not sure how plausiable this is).
I was planning to have Tsar Nicholas II managing to put down the February Revolution, but he decides to withdraw from the conflict, once he sees France isn't going to last much longer.

teg said:

Llyod George was very significant, he was the one who got the convoy system past the admirality and as prime minister, he re-energized a crumbling Entente. To be honest, I couldn't think of a more subtle way of him being removed from the equation.
The Zimmermann Telegram is a good idea, but I think it should be 'sent', it just turns out the British forged the whole thing, which would infuriate pretty much everyone in the US (possibly leaving Wilson a lame duck). Neville trying to put down the French mutinies by force, I'm guessing would make them worse and probably knock France out of the war (I'm not sure how plausiable this is).
I was planning to have Tsar Nicholas II managing to put down the February Revolution, but he decides to withdraw from the conflict, once he sees France isn't going to last much longer.

Click to expand...

With regard to Russia, you can have the first (February revolution) still succeed & the Provisional Government come to an agreement with the Central Powers to return to Anti-Bellium borders.

With regard to Russia, you can have the first (February revolution) still succeed & the Provisional Government come to an agreement with the Central Powers to return to Anti-Bellium borders.

Click to expand...

That would be more plausiable. However, I think Germany would have disposed of the provisional government, just as it would disposed of the Soviet Union, once it's use was out.

What would have Japan done in this case? It's too far for the Germans to really want to invade, so I'm guessing Japan will 'purchase' Germany's Chinese and Pacific territories for a nominal sum, to give the impression that Germany wasn't run out of them.

A while ago, I started a tread fairly similar to this one. And I mostly got Entante ranting. Hope you get a better deal.

Teg,

Various and sundry comments:

The Zimmerman Telegram: Sadly, nearly a century after it was composed and dispatched, certain people still question whether it was actually a British forgery. And this despite Zimmerman himself proudly and repeatedly admitting he'd written the damn thing, despite the various Wilhelmine government records pertaining to it, and despite the cable company's own transmission records. People often forget the role of the cable company records in the affair.

Wilson wasn't just pissed because of the contents of the Telegram. He was also pissed because the herd of boobs running Germany had seen fit to dispatch an alliance proposal aimed against the US on US State Department telegraph cable which Wilson had personally made available for Germany's use over the protests of his Cabinet. He'd given them access to the cable so that they could directly discuss ceasefire and/or peace terms with him and they'd used it to propose starting a Mexican-American war.

If Britain somehow forged the Telegram, then Zimmerman, his staff who helped prepare it, the various government officials he showed it to before transmission, and the company officials controlling the US cable he dispatched it over were all British agents.

Scotch the Telegram and I think you've a very good chance of keeping the US out of the war and helping the Central Powers win.


Lloyd George and the Convoys: The claims George made in his autobiography about "forcing" the Admiralty to adopt convoying are nothing but lies. Numerous historians, biographers, and George's own son all say so. Furthermore, the Admiralty's own records and those of the War Cabinet all rebut George's claims. When the U-boat crisis hit in 1917, the RN had neither the escorts, antisubmarine weapons, or organization available to begin convoying on a huge scale. It's very telling that the first warships Britain asked the US to send to Europe were not battleships but destroyers, a type of ship the US was also short of.

As it was, the Admiralty organized convoys as the escorts for them became available. Lloyd George had little, if anything, to do with it at all.

Having the 1917 U-boat crisis hit earlier or harder before the escorts can be found is another way to help the Central Powers win.


America and the War: The US didn't win the war by 1918 or even substantially materially assist in helping winning the war by 1918. What the US did was ensure that the Entente could no longer lose the war. Access to US credit, food, and raw materials had kept the Entente in the war and access after April 6th 1917 to same as allies instead of customers allowed the Entente to prevail in 1918. All the Entente had to do was hold on until the US could play a role and the Entente proved to itself and it's enemies that it could hold when it stymied Germany's final offensives in the spring of 1918 with very little US help.

More importantly, the entry of the US brought with it the assumption that Wilson's sophomoric Fourteen Points were now the avowed war aims of the Entente. Nothing could have been further from the truth as Versailles would later prove, but various nationalist movements ranging from Slovakia to Vietnam all rejoiced and began planning. Within months of the US' entry, national councils in the Austria-Hungary were acting as de facto national governments complete with loyal troops and even their own foreign policy.

The entry of the US was a huge morale boost for the Entente and a spark for the disintegration of the second largest Central Power. Austria-Hungary was doomed the moment that the 14 Points were seen as it's enemies' war aims and Germany was doomed the moment Austria-Hungary began to fall apart.

If you can keep the lid on the various nationalist movements inside the Central Powers, you have a good chance of helping the Central Powers win.

Good luck.


Bill

Lloyd George and the Convoys: The claims George made in his autobiography about "forcing" the Admiralty to adopt convoying are nothing but lies. Numerous historians, biographers, and George's own son all say so. Furthermore, the Admiralty's own records and those of the War Cabinet all rebut George's claims. When the U-boat crisis hit in 1917, the RN had neither the escorts, antisubmarine weapons, or organization available to begin convoying on a huge scale. It's very telling that the first warships Britain asked the US to send to Europe were not battleships but destroyers, a type of ship the US was also short of.

Click to expand...

Thanks for telling me that. I was thinking that a later U-boat campaign, when France and the other continental Entente members had collapsed would be best for Germany, for starters it would give Germany High Seas Fleet open access to the Atlantic (the French ports). Secondly, the US would no longer be in a position to challenge Germany, leaving Britain isolated.

The Zimmerman Telegram: Sadly, nearly a century after it was composed and dispatched, certain people still question whether it was actually a British forgery. And this despite Zimmerman himself proudly and repeatedly admitting he'd written the damn thing, despite the various Wilhelmine government records pertaining to it, and despite the cable company's own transmission records. People often forget the role of the cable company records in the affair.

Click to expand...

The real telegram, of course, couldn't have been a forgery, but I'm wondering if it should be in this TL. I've not been able to gauge how determined to fight Germany the USA was in 1917, if it was only a matter of time, then something fairly big thing would have had to happen between Britain and the US, to keep them neutral. If things were still uncertain, the combination of a delayed U-boat campaign and no Zimmerman Telegram, would be enough.

Another thing I'm uncertain about, is how serious the mutinies in the French army would have to be to remove them from the war. Another tipping point, could be Spain joining the war on the Central Power's side, I think the idea of grabbing Portugal's African and Chinese territories, as well as French West Africa and Gibraltier, would be pretty hard to resist (the Spanish-American War would be a pretty raw memory then), whatever the state of German-Spanish relations in 1917.

Also, no American entry probably means no Greek entrance into the war, therefore a much weaker Salonika Front so less pressure on Bulgaria and A-H. In fact, if things in the West start falling apart for France, you could see the Greeks eventually try and forcibly eject the Entente forces; the pro-German but ultimately neutral Greeks always resented their presence anyways.

Click to expand...

That's a very good idea.

What about:

Italy panics after Caporetto in Oct/Nov 1917 (some FUBAR staff work at the reforming at Piave is all that is needed) and signs a humilating armistice. That leaves the Central Powers with a great number of Divisions, many of excellent quality, to be deployed in the 1918 Spring offensive.

So instead of loosing momentum as the intital attack Divisions are becomming spent balls, a new echelon lead by Austro-Hungarian Kaiser Jägers leap frogs over the first wave and have the British 5th Army vaporise. The other British armies wheel towards the channel ports as the French furiously accuse them of incompetence, cowardice and for having lost it all.

On reports of increased communist activity in the army and all over France the French hurriedly seek an armistice with Germany and gets it on humilating terms while the remnants of the BEF is evacuated from Channel ports.

The still limited US forces in France ( a few 100.000) are suddenly caught in an impossible situation, but are offered to march off into German internment with colours flying, under own command and with arms (but no ammo). Pershing accept and soon a US-CP armistice is negotiated. This again has the fraction in the British Government wanting to continue the war give up.

In not-occupied France widespread riots by disappointed and disaffected soldiers and citizens soon errupt into firefights as communist agitators organise soldiers and workers councils to take over power. Casualties are heavy but by early 1919 the French Army is in control in the not-CP occupied areas.

In GB and many other places in Europe strikes and riots increase, here and there people are killed, but never on the same scale as in France.

In the 1919 elections the Socialdemocrats win a majority in Germany, but in France the last democratic varnish disappear as the army takes over all power...

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

Redbeard said:

What about:

Italy panics after Caporetto in Oct/Nov 1917 (some FUBAR staff work at the reforming at Piave is all that is needed) and signs a humilating armistice. That leaves the Central Powers with a great number of Divisions, many of excellent quality, to be deployed in the 1918 Spring offensive.

So instead of loosing momentum as the intital attack Divisions are becomming spent balls, a new echelon lead by Austro-Hungarian Kaiser Jägers leap frogs over the first wave and have the British 5th Army vaporise. The other British armies wheel towards the channel ports as the French furiously accuse them of incompetence, cowardice and for having lost it all.

On reports of increased communist activity in the army and all over France the French hurriedly seek an armistice with Germany and gets it on humilating terms while the remnants of the BEF is evacuated from Channel ports.

The still limited US forces in France ( a few 100.000) are suddenly caught in an impossible situation, but are offered to march off into German internment with colours flying, under own command and with arms (but no ammo). Pershing accept and soon a US-CP armistice is negotiated. This again has the fraction in the British Government wanting to continue the war give up.

In not-occupied France widespread riots by disappointed and disaffected soldiers and citizens soon errupt into firefights as communist agitators organise soldiers and workers councils to take over power. Casualties are heavy but by early 1919 the French Army is in control in the not-CP occupied areas.

In GB and many other places in Europe strikes and riots increase, here and there people are killed, but never on the same scale as in France.

In the 1919 elections the Socialdemocrats win a majority in Germany, but in France the last democratic varnish disappear as the army takes over all power...

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

Click to expand...

Ooh. nice! just one Question. What happens to the US Navy vessels in the UK and Anglo-American Grand Fleet at the Armistice?

Here's a thought Germany offers Russia a Peace with no territory change and no financial demands. The Provisional Russian government is forced by popular opinion to accept it.

No unrestricted submarine warfare for once. That's the only way to keep the Yanks out. If Russia and France could be knocked out, (Russia as OTL, France in 1918 perhaps) Britain might sign a white peace. The real challenge is to avoid starvation in Germany due to the North Sea blockade (that blockade could be enough to break Germany, unfortunately).

NothingNow said:

Ooh. nice! just one Question. What happens to the US Navy vessels in the UK and Anglo-American Grand Fleet at the Armistice?

Click to expand...

I doubt we will see anything resembling OTL Mers-el-Kebir, as there isn't any realistic risk of the US ships being taken over by Germany. I guess the US ships are allowed to quietly leave for home, and USA sink back into a strictly isolationist stance (towards Europe). The Grand Fleet will still have more than enough strength to keep the Germans (or anyone else) away from the high seas, but I could imagine the new socialdemocratic government in Germany soon proposing a naval disarmament and renouncing German claims for overseas territorial gains.

The German army will probably be kept big, not only to keep the generals happy and quiet, but basically because Germany still is squeezed between a Russia/Soviet Union, who nobody really knows what can/will do, and a as unpredictable France with increasing revanchist tendencies. Given a few years to "forget" the massacres on communist revolters in France, I think we could see the French ATL answer to Ribbentrop make a deal with the Soviets.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

Redbeard said:

So instead of loosing momentum as the intital attack Divisions are becomming spent balls, a new echelon lead by Austro-Hungarian Kaiser Jägers leap frogs over the first wave and have the British 5th Army vaporise.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, but you must consider logistics here. A large factor in the collapse of numerous offensive operations during WWI was the great difficulty in keeping the advancing units supplied with ammunition, food and all the other stuff they needed. The nature of WWI attacks usually left the ground pulverized, making it almost impossible to move the supplies across in the numbers and at the speed necessary. The farther they moved from their railroads, the more difficult keeping the armies supplied became.

Therefore, if you want to take the armies that would have fought in Italy in 1918 and relocate them to France, you increase the logistical nightmare facing the Germans by a considerable margin. Yes, additional troops are nice, but the offensives could still slow down and eventually collapse because you have also massively increased the logistical effort needed.

How about something really simple, like good summer weather, followed by good potato harvests in 1917 and 1918? Less hardship at home, less suffering from the Allied blockade, no domestic unrest, no Navy mutiny, and German engineers, taking advantage of favorable conditions, are able to keep the Ludendorf Offensive in supply.

Here is a provisional timeline for the last few months of the First World War in this timeline:

February 1917:
The German high command takes the decision not to resume unrestricted submarine warfare at the moment, due to crumbling relations between the USA and the Central Powers.

March 1917:
Under strain from the losing war, the Russian army and people turn against the tsar, forcing Nicholas II to abdicate. His brother, Michael suceeds to throne, to shore up support for the crumbling regieme, he asks Germany, Austro-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire for an armistice.
Germany accepts, despite the punitive terms, the loss of the Ukraine, Baltic states, Finland, Poland, Belyorussia and the Casacus and heavy reperations, the Tsar Mikhal has no choice but to accept the agreement. Germany can now turn it's full attention against Britain, France and Italy, the Central Powers begin planning what they hope will be a decisive offensive.

April 1917:
Germany begins shifting it's forces onto the Italian and Western front, the lessons learnt at Verdun allow the German army to disguise it's movements effectively and build up several powerful forces at Ypres, the Hindenburg Line and Verdun.
The French army launches a renewed assault on Germany on the Aisne, which fails. Mutinies spread through the French army.
Faced with the collapse of it's most vital ally, Rumania panics and asks for a peace with the Central Powers.

May 1917:
Neville attempts to put down the mutinies in the French army by force, turning industrial and military unrest into a full scale revolution.
In late May, the German and Austrian army launch the Caparetto Offensive, which takes them from the Iszno to the Piave in a few weeks and breaks the Italian army's back.

June 1917:
Faced with the disintergrating French army, Germany launches Operation Michael. Neville is sacked and replaced by Petain, but by this point, the French army is in too much disorder to hold the Germans.
With the Austrians on the Piave and neither Britain or France able to provide reinforcements, the Italian government asks the Central Powers for an armistice.

July 1917:
German troops reach the Marne and capture Dunkirk. Faced with a worsening internal situation, the French government asks for an armistice. This gives the German High Seas Fleet safe ports on the Channel and Atlantic Coast, flanking the British blockade. Britain and Portugal are now the only major members of the Entente left in the fight against Germany and the Central Powers.
Germany resumes unrestricted submarine warfare, backed up by cruisers and destroyers. President Wilson protests furiously, but the USA is no longer in a position to challenge Germany.

August 1917:
Smelling blood and hoping to exploit an Entente defeat for it's own ends, Spain declares war on Britain and Portugal. The German High Seas Fleet anchors at Santander.
Faced with combat on it's eastern border, Portugal sends out peace feelers to the Central Powers. A British fleet sails south in an attempt to save the wavering Portugese, but the British government capitulates while they are at sea, removing the need for a final destructive naval battle.
---

Please provide feedback on this. Sorry that the final part is very similar to HT's Breakthroughs.

A few things immediately stand out:

1. Why would the Romanovs retain the throne, especially since Mikhail didn't want to be Tsar unless he had the support of a majority of the population? Things would probably for the most part gone the same in Russia as in OTL, with the Bolsheviks seizing power.
2. Why is Russia being forced to give up the same things as in OTL's Treaty of Brest-Litvosk? In 1917, only Poland, and parts of Lithuania and Latvia were in CP hands. It was the chaos surrounding the Revolution that allowed the Austro-Germans to gobble up Estonia, Belarus, and the Ukraine as well.
3. Why would Spain declare war? There's nothing in it for them.

Why would the Romanovs retain the throne, especially since Mikhail didn't want to be Tsar unless he had the support of a majority of the population? Things would probably for the most part gone the same in Russia as in OTL, with the Bolsheviks seizing power.

Click to expand...

A fair point, I'll probably change that. If the Provisional Government was stronger, would a Soviet-Provisional Civil War be likely? I think an extremist government taking over Russia is pretty much inevitable, after such as a crushing defeat.

Why is Russia being forced to give up the same things as in OTL's Treaty of Brest-Litvosk? In 1917, only Poland, and parts of Lithuania and Latvia were in CP hands. It was the chaos surrounding the Revolution that allowed the Austro-Germans to gobble up Estonia, Belarus, and the Ukraine as well.

Click to expand...

Germany's war aims wouldn't have changed in this timeline, the Provisional government realizing how much trouble they were in is the key difference, if he'd taken power in February 1917, Lenin would have accepted these terms, he had the sense to realize Russia couldn't keep fighting.

Why would Spain declare war? There's nothing in it for them.

Click to expand...

After losing the Spanish-American War only 19 years before, Spain probably wouldn't pass up a chance to humilate or even annexe Portugal and grab some territory in Africa. Also, by this point, the Entente's defeat is all but inevitable, so although the gains are fairly minimal in value (except prestige perhaps), there isn't much risk either.