Minor POD: Effect of Germany that reaches the Adriatic Sea

[TheNordicBrit]

Hey Guys,

This a small question on the subject of a larger Germany. In a few TLs after the Austro-Prussian War some people have Prussia expand so far that they absorb all of the German Confederation in Austria. Now I don't care whether this is ASB or anything to that affect, my main question here is what will the long and short term affect be on Germany/Prussia having a direct link to the Adriatic Sea (and thus the Mediterranean) be? Although the border along the Sea isn't large, it's substantial IMO. Also what would the foreign powers think of this link? Etc.

[I Blame Communism]

1866 isn't happening, but a scenario in which Austria-Hungary is eventually parcelled up by its neighbours and Germany takes the lion's share, which is by no means implausible, could very well mean German "Terst". Bismarck actually said "Trieste is Germany's only port on the southern seas", "Germany" then being understood as a transnational thing which existed in the German Empire, Austria-Hungary, and other countries ("Reichsdeutsch" and "Volksdeutsch" were established and pretty innocent concepts before Nazism hijacked them).

In that case, it rather depends on the actual scenario, but Germany probably takes over the Austro-Hungarian fleet and is unlikely to get on well with Italy.

[Susano]

Well, Triest was inside the borders of the German Confederation, so in that sense it was german. This also means that any Greater German Solution scenario will most likely have it as a German Adriatic port...

[Jimbrock]

Also, many Grossdeutchland scenarios have them take Fiume, which is given some complicated German name in the process. St something...
A related question, in the mid 1800s (with a PoD in the 1700s)with a Germany already having Istria, after a war against the Ottomans, could they annex Dalmatia?

[Riain]

It would mean a German Med fleet. Depending on how the German sattelites developed the German Med fleet cuold have a forward base further down the Adricatic and thus threaten the British Med shipping. I think that it would also make Germany a player in the Mid East in the 20th century via sea links from the Adriatic and Danube.

[Eurofed]

OK, assuming that Grossdeutchsland forms with a 1848 or 1866 PoD as the easiest options to implement...

Well, the main issue with Germany grabbing a Mediterranean port is that the only decent options are Trieste and Fiume. In order to do it, Germany needs to cavalierly step on the ethnic claims and economic interests of its own perspective main allies in the continent after the demise of Austria, namely Italy and Hungary-Croatia. Those nations otherwise would have no geopolitical quarrel with Germany and would be quite receptive to make up a stable Triple Alliance. All in all, Germany needs those alliances much more than it needs those ports, and it could always easily leverage Italy and Hungary to grant them free access for German trade and warships in their own ports.

In the case of Germany throwing the wiser course to the winds and insisting on getting a Mediterranean port, I think that quite likely they would get Fiume rather than Trieste. A stable alliance with Italy would be rather more useful to Germany and Hungary would be weaker, more needy of an alliance with Germany to help keep its own minorities inbto line and Russia at bay, and easier to cowe into submission even if its main natural port is "stolen" away.

As for the geopolitical effects, well of course a German fleet in the Mediterranean is an added challenge to Anglo-French supremacy in the theater. Germany can now leverage increased influence on the Ottomans, and if it can still bring Italy and Turkey under its influence, their combined naval power could really make a believable bid for naval supremacy in the Mediterranean. Perhaps the Suez Canal gets built by the CPs ?

[Thande]

I wonder if a Baltic-Adriatic Canal is possible. Very ambitious of course, but the Soviets pulled off the even more impressive White Sea-Black Sea route in OTL...

[Iori]

Originally Posted by Thande

I wonder if a Baltic-Adriatic Canal is possible. Very ambitious of course, but the Soviets pulled off the even more impressive White Sea-Black Sea route in OTL...

Would'nt that be something like 4 times longer though?

[Boto von Ageduch]

Of course they would build a significant navy base in this coast strip.
I suppose this would be the only difference.
So this changes the strategic situation in any bigger war whatsoever,
but I can't really see Germany pursuing a clear Mediterranean policy and, for instance, take an active role in the colonization of Tunis or Morocco (or an earlier Panther Sprung).

[The Sandman]

Originally Posted by Thande

I wonder if a Baltic-Adriatic Canal is possible. Very ambitious of course, but the Soviets pulled off the even more impressive White Sea-Black Sea route in OTL...

Maybe; given the existing canal network, all you really need to do is get a canal from the Adriatic to the Danube. Where you'd actually put the thing, I have no idea.

"Look to the West", perhaps?

[Big Tex]

Something about Warships crossing the Alps is utterly ASB and utterly awesome!

[The Sandman]

Originally Posted by Big Tex

Something about Warships crossing the Alps is utterly ASB and utterly awesome!

Warships, probably not. Not blue-water ships at least. Cargo barges, however...

[Big Tex]

And my brief take. Assuming Berlin decides to build up a Mediterranean fleet (take into account expenses, need, etc....it might not be worth it) then we would see less build up in the North Sea and a total revamping of power politics.

Germany and Italy likely wouldn't be friends but Germany-Russia might be assuming Germany eliminates the Austrians, leaves the Slavs/SE Europe largely alone and is focused north-south-west and everywhere but the east.

France and Germany are likely to still be antagonists and I have no idea about the British...but lets say with a Mediterranean fleet to threaten Egypt that they aren't friends either.

So you have a German-Russian alliance against UK-France-Italy.

Might make for an interesting and very different WWI...

[Big Tex]

Originally Posted by The Sandman

Warships, probably not. Not blue-water ships at least. Cargo barges, however...

Turn of the century powers probably won't be spending massive amounts of cash on canals and major projects unless its usefully militarily. Panama came down to the need for US warships to not circle South America to go from East Coast to West Coast. Suez is the same for the Brits but with Africa and the home islands to India.

If Berlin foots the bill for such a mammoth (and vulernable) project it will be to transfer warships from the Mediterranean to the Baltic/North Sea without dealing with the Royal Navy (and espcially Gibraltar). Any commerece benefits are a bonus.

[Riain]

A bigger Germany would have more resources to build a bigger fleet.

I think the Med could prove a far more fertile field for naval expansion than the North Sea, especially with the short ranges of ships prior to WW1. Germany may find naval allies and partners in the Med instead of finding 42 capital ships of the Grand Fleet like they did IOTL.

[I Blame Communism]

Originally Posted by Eurofed

OK, assuming that Grossdeutchsland forms with a 1848 or 1866 PoD as the easiest options to implement...

Well, the main issue with Germany grabbing a Mediterranean port is that the only decent options are Trieste and Fiume. In order to do it, Germany needs to cavalierly step on the ethnic claims and economic interests of its own perspective main allies in the continent after the demise of Austria, namely Italy and Hungary-Croatia. Those nations otherwise would have no geopolitical quarrel with Germany and would be quite receptive to make up a stable Triple Alliance. All in all, Germany needs those alliances much more than it needs those ports, and it could always easily leverage Italy and Hungary to grant them free access for German trade and warships in their own ports.

Of course, Greater Germany is very hard to achieve in 1848 and practicaly out of the question in 1866, which is why I think a much more likely scenario is a controlled, by-agreement running down of the Hapsburg state in the 20 in the absence of WW1 (why yes, I am a fan of FabR! How did you know), in which case Germany can do what it likes, take what port it likes, and may be on bad terms with Italy (after all, there's no reason it shouldn't have a better ally, like, say, Britain or Russia or even France).

Originally Posted by Eurofed

In the case of Germany throwing the wiser course to the winds and insisting on getting a Mediterranean port, I think that quite likely they would get Fiume rather than Trieste. A stable alliance with Italy would be rather more useful to Germany and Hungary would be weaker, more needy of an alliance with Germany to help keep its own minorities inbto line and Russia at bay, and easier to cowe into submission even if its main natural port is "stolen" away.

On the other hand, Trieste is right there as far Greater Germany, which is going to include Slovenia if formed at any point before like 1916, is concerned. Fiume would require slashing across Istria, which will not please the Croats one whit.

Hungary would certainly be pissed at losing Fiume. Croatia would, for that reason, also be pissed, since it's by no means inevitable that the rather bizarre contrivance of "Hungary-Croatia" should necesarily exist when Germany can divide and rule Hapsburgpedlandia at its leisure.

Italy would be pissed at not getting Trieste, but again, this whole affair is not necessarily carried out with Italy's agreement. If it is, Germany probably doesn't get a port, so I think it's safe to say it probably isn't, in which case Germany eats Trieste without a qualm.

Also not Bismarck's quote: it's clear that Trieste had a significance to Germans that Fiume did not. There was actually a considerable German administrative class in "Terst" and the place was joine don to the whole German railway system. It is a "natural port" for Germany.

Originally Posted by Eurofed

As for the geopolitical effects, well of course a German fleet in the Mediterranean is an added challenge to Anglo-French supremacy in the theater. Germany can now leverage increased influence on the Ottomans, and if it can still bring Italy and Turkey under its influence, their combined naval power could really make a believable bid for naval supremacy in the Mediterranean. Perhaps the Suez Canal gets built by the CPs ?

Whuh? We have a PoD which is supposedly in 1848 or 1866 and yet there are still "Central Powers", an Anglo-French friendship, overwheening Germany influence in the Ottoman Empire... these didn't even really exist in 1900.

[Monty Burns]

Originally Posted by Riain

Germany may find naval allies and partners in the Med instead of finding 42 capital ships of the Grand Fleet like they did IOTL.

Well, the best naval partner in the med would be Britain...

Next we'd have Italy - which is crucially dependent on what Germany exactly got. German Triest likely results in Italy not being a potential ally.

Then France...

So only the Ottomans remain.

[mailinutile2]

Having a foot in Italy, I would be quite surprise if the kaiser would not "remember" about the Ist Reich (nominally Holy Roman -german- Empire) and try to put some claims on norhern Italy (nominally part of the Empire).
And of course, with Austria out of the game, there is not anybody to contest the claim.
though beans for Vittorio Emanuele II

[Big Tex]

Originally Posted by mailinutile2

Having a foot in Italy, I would be quite surprise if the kaiser would not "remember" about the Ist Reich (nominally Holy Roman -german- Empire) and try to put some claims on norhern Italy (nominally part of the Empire).
And of course, with Austria out of the game, there is not anybody to contest the claim.
though beans for Vittorio Emanuele II

What would the Germans gain by trying to take over northern Italy? A rebellious population and a European wide war against Germany? Germanyws focused only on taking hold of areas with significant Germanic populations, of which north Italy is very much an Italian stronghold. Any dreams of establishing a German Italy would be merely the whims of extreme nationalists and wouldn’t be heard in Berlin seriously.

And just because Austria is out of the game doesn’t mean German expansion would be uncontested. Italy would put up a hell of a fight and would surely be supported by the French (who have just as much a vested interest in that region as the Germans) and almost certainly be supported by the British (who need to maintain a balance of power on the continent that a unified, no matter how forced, Holy Roman German country would shatter). Heck, the aspect of a Germany gone insane and looking to restore the HRE and being surrounded would probably even bring the Swiss in as well.

[Big Tex]

Originally Posted by Monty Burns

Well, the best naval partner in the med would be Britain...

Next we'd have Italy - which is crucially dependent on what Germany exactly got. German Triest likely results in Italy not being a potential ally.

Then France...

So only the Ottomans remain.

I have a hard time seeing the Germans and British as friends with German naval power in the Mediterranean Sea. British foreign policy for about 300 years was dictated by two things; keeping the home islands secure and maintaining access to India. German build up in the north sea in OTL violated one of those principles and thus Germany was seen as an enemy when historically/culturally at the time they should have been an ally. Now you have a German fleet within two days steam of the Suez Canal. London is not gonna be happy with either aspect.