WI: Franz wasn't assassinated?

Joyeux · Mar 23, 2012

What happens to Austria-Hungary if Archduke Franz Ferdinand wasn't assassinated in 1914? Specifically, the driver doesn't take a wrong turn and Princip wallows in his failure. He and the rest of the assassins are still caught and dealt with, however and A-H does not deliver an ultimatum to Serbia.

So, what happens to Austria-Hungary?

Kevin Renner · Mar 23, 2012

WWI will happen eventually. A-H will fall to pieces at the end of said war.

eliphas8 · Mar 23, 2012

Kevin Renner said:
WWI will happen eventually. A-H will fall to pieces at the end of said war.

Actually if things remain stable until 1917 they reach a "deadline" by which point Germany will not be able to offer its support because that is when Russia would have completed a modernization of its military that would have forced Germany into a defensive posture.

Armored Diplomacy · Mar 26, 2012

At that point, Europe was so armed and tense that war was practically inevitable. All it would take was one act to spark a war and bring the system of alliances into play.

The fact remained: Germany was a new country in Europe that was very industrialized and economically dynamic, which enabled it to field a very modern and powerful military. To put it bluntly, it scared the living daylight out of France and Russia. The Germans knew perfectly well how much they scared their neighbors, and they dreaded a two-front war with France and Russia simultaneously. I could see them finding some excuse for war, therefore preempting before Russia finishes modernizing its military in 1917, because if they allowed that to happen and war later broke out, they would face a war they could not win, and essentially be trapped between their neighbors. Alternatively, they could seek to defuse tensions by proposing non-aggression treaties to the French and Russians. Like in modern times, when they allied with France and began working on the integration of Europe.

Seriously, if I was the Kaiser, I would have attempted to break the stranglehold and defuse tensions by signing a non-aggression pact with France, then focusing all my attention on the less-developed and militarily incompetent Russia.

DCC · Mar 26, 2012

Heck, there's a fair chance Austria-Hungary finds some other excuse to attack Serbia, which brings in Russia, which brings in Germany, which brings in France and the UK. Serbia had other terrorists. But more importantly, Austria had Balkan ambitions.

Most likely the Central Powers lose anyway--but who knows how a delay in WWI would affect Italian and/or US entry.

PoeFacedKilla · Mar 26, 2012

maybe one of the entente powers starts the war?
that could be interesting because then the allies cannot blame Germany for the war;

Daylight Savings · Mar 26, 2012

If it does get delayed, what would be the status of the High Seas Fleet come 1915 or 1916, would they ever have achieved parity with the Royal Navy? That would be an entirely different war.

Snake Featherston · Mar 26, 2012

Austria-Hungary causes World War I in 1917 when the combination of Franz Ferdinand's Magyarophobia and the Ausgleich in post-FJ Austria-Hungary causes the whole thing to start disintegrating and leading to an even bigger trainwreck in terms of the kind of trainwreck it'd be of a WWI than IOTL.

Snake Featherston · Mar 26, 2012

Peter Parker said:
At that point, Europe was so armed and tense that war was practically inevitable. All it would take was one act to spark a war and bring the system of alliances into play.

The fact remained: Germany was a new country in Europe that was very industrialized and economically dynamic, which enabled it to field a very modern and powerful military. To put it bluntly, it scared the living daylight out of France and Russia. The Germans knew perfectly well how much they scared their neighbors, and they dreaded a two-front war with France and Russia simultaneously. I could see them finding some excuse for war, therefore preempting before Russia finishes modernizing its military in 1917, because if they allowed that to happen and war later broke out, they would face a war they could not win, and essentially be trapped between their neighbors. Alternatively, they could seek to defuse tensions by proposing non-aggression treaties to the French and Russians. Like in modern times, when they allied with France and began working on the integration of Europe.

Seriously, if I was the Kaiser, I would have attempted to break the stranglehold and defuse tensions by signing a non-aggression pact with France, then focusing all my attention on the less-developed and militarily incompetent Russia.

If I were the Kaiser I'd just choose the simpler route of keeping the alliance with said militarily incompetent Russia, so I get the prospect of a "two front" war against only one enemy properly deserving the name and my biggest supposed "threats" are either Austria-Hungary or Italy. Alienate Russia and that leads to an encircling alliance that can only lead to a two-front war. Keep the DKB going and Russia will be too beholden to me to ever raise its hand in a war.....

Vingilótë · Mar 26, 2012

PoeFacedKilla said:
maybe one of the entente powers starts the war?
that could be interesting because then the allies cannot blame Germany for the war;

The OTL justification for the war is already incredibly dodgy; If the Allies blatantly start the war, and still win, I can easily see them blaming Germany for the war.

Snake Featherston · Mar 26, 2012

PoeFacedKilla said:
maybe one of the entente powers starts the war?
that could be interesting because then the allies cannot blame Germany for the war;

Technically speaking Germany didn't cause the war IOTL, if anyone deserves the blame it should be Austria-Hungary which chose the most idiotic and clumsy way possible to start a war and then had the most undistinguished military record of any of the belligerents, to boot (including being on the receiving end of all of Russia's big military successes). But Germany made a much simpler enemy to blame than the idiotic and feckless bunch that passed for Habsburg leadership at the time.

David S Poepoe · Mar 26, 2012

Daylight Savings said:
If it does get delayed, what would be the status of the High Seas Fleet come 1915 or 1916, would they ever have achieved parity with the Royal Navy? That would be an entirely different war.

Tirpitz recognized that his gamble with the creation and expansion of the High Seas Fleet had failed by 1913/14. There were a few in the cabinet that directly blamed him for the growing gulf between Britain and Germany. The German Navy would never had achieved parity with the Royal Navy because its size is legislatively set, one knows that the fleet will be in a few years. The British pretty much laid down dreadnoughts at will. The growing expense of warships also ate into the navy's finances and just before the outbreak of the war the navy was lossing ground to the army in financial matters.

Anaxagoras · Mar 26, 2012

I think the First World War is one of those historical events that even we here at AH.com are inclined to view as inevitable because it so altered history that it's difficult to imagine a 20th Century without it. Truth be told, though, it was no more inevitable than any other event.

Cook · Mar 26, 2012

Anaxagoras said:
I think the First World War is one of those historical events that even we here at AH.com are inclined to view as inevitable because it so altered history that it's difficult to imagine a 20th Century without it. Truth be told, though, it was no more inevitable than anything other event.

Yes. The presumption of World War One’s inevitability by some people is the combination of lack of in depth knowledge of the period and a failure of imagination.

DCC · Mar 29, 2012

Snake Featherston said:
But Germany made a much simpler enemy to blame than the idiotic and feckless bunch that passed for Habsburg leadership at the time.

Not least of the reasons being Austria-Hungary had already disintegrated. Not even much dead horse left to flog there.

DCC · Mar 29, 2012

OK, how about this: No Ferdinand assassination. Austria-Hungary comes up with a much better excuse to annex Serbia--maybe even Serbia goes completely nuts and DOWs Austria. Russia declines to intervene, so none of the rest of the dominoes fall. No Great War for now.

Then what?

Germania09 · Mar 29, 2012

DCC said:
OK, how about this: No Ferdinand assassination. Austria-Hungary comes up with a much better excuse to annex Serbia--maybe even Serbia goes completely nuts and DOWs Austria. Russia declines to intervene, so none of the rest of the dominoes fall. No Great War for now.

Then what?

Bad situation in the Balkans for years probably decades

Vingilótë · Mar 29, 2012

DCC said:
OK, how about this: No Ferdinand assassination. Austria-Hungary comes up with a much better excuse to annex Serbia--maybe even Serbia goes completely nuts and DOWs Austria. Russia declines to intervene, so none of the rest of the dominoes fall. No Great War for now.

Then what?

You would need more than a Serbian DOW to get Russia to sit on their hands.

BlondieBC · Mar 29, 2012

Joyeux said:
What happens to Austria-Hungary if Archduke Franz Ferdinand wasn't assassinated in 1914? Specifically, the driver doesn't take a wrong turn and Princip wallows in his failure. He and the rest of the assassins are still caught and dealt with, however and A-H does not deliver an ultimatum to Serbia.

So, what happens to Austria-Hungary?

A-H could be anywhere from a surviving democracy that is the core of an European trade/security zone to broken into many piece as OTL. A-H had to renew the Dual Monarchy in 1917, and this will be a pivotal point of history. It could easily become two or more separate countries or it could be revitalized. There are just too many variables to say.

Kevin Renner said:
WWI will happen eventually. A-H will fall to pieces at the end of said war.

Yes, there will be a major war in Europe at some point, but not necessarily soon. Europe had been having crisis for more than a decade without major war, so it could be delayed.

And a losing A-h does likely break apart, but a winning A-H could easily be helped by a short, victorious war. People like to be on the winning team.

Falecius · Mar 29, 2012

Peter Parker said:
At that point, Europe was so armed and tense that war was practically inevitable. All it would take was one act to spark a war and bring the system of alliances into play.

The fact remained: Germany was a new country in Europe that was very industrialized and economically dynamic, which enabled it to field a very modern and powerful military. To put it bluntly, it scared the living daylight out of France and Russia. The Germans knew perfectly well how much they scared their neighbors, and they dreaded a two-front war with France and Russia simultaneously. I could see them finding some excuse for war, therefore preempting before Russia finishes modernizing its military in 1917, because if they allowed that to happen and war later broke out, they would face a war they could not win, and essentially be trapped between their neighbors. Alternatively, they could seek to defuse tensions by proposing non-aggression treaties to the French and Russians. Like in modern times, when they allied with France and began working on the integration of Europe.

Seriously, if I was the Kaiser, I would have attempted to break the stranglehold and defuse tensions by signing a non-aggression pact with France, then focusing all my attention on the less-developed and militarily incompetent Russia.

France wouldn't agreee. Alsace-Lorraine, first and foremost. OTOH, Germany and Russia were perfectly happy with their border. The sticking point, for them, could have been the Straits, but at a far later date.