AHC: Create a larger African front in WWI

Color-Copycat

von Lettow-Vorbeck manages to get resupplied by zeppelin as was originally intended? I'm not sure it'll do much to expand the geographic scale of the conflict in East Africa, but it'll perhaps intensify it.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Read my TL.

You basically need Germany to add more forces to Africa prewar, mostly colonial native troops, to fortify the ports, and place light ships in the area. You also need to do this at a low enough level not to trigger a major UK or French response, at least disproportionally large response.

Three regiments, 1000 mines, 10-20 U-boats/torpedo boats, and some light coastal guns (15cm and below) would greatly expand the war. Some extra light cruisers help as would basic ship yards to do repairs and to modify merchants to AMC. A good aggressive commander also helps.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Have the Maritz Rebellion in South Africa be much more successful, with more Afrikanners joining the rebels and linking up with the Germans in Southwest Africa. The British could have a Third Boer War on their hands, with little in the way of resources to be able to deal with it.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Anaxagoras said:
Have the Maritz Rebellion in South Africa be much more successful, with more Afrikanners joining the rebels and linking up with the Germans in Southwest Africa. The British could have a Third Boer War on their hands, with little in the way of resources to be able to deal with it.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean by British. Loyal South Africans would be the only available resource, or Nigerian troops after Kamerun was taken. I can't see the UK cabinet using resources in South Africa when the Germans are so close to the channel, and in an Entente win, the UK could simply send down its army to retake the colony.

Now we know that all other things being equal, the UK might be too exhausted to retake a lost colony in 1919, but this would not be accepted at the time (1914-1916).
 

SPJ

Are there any good WWI ATLs that include alternate alliances that create interesting effects in Africa? Such as the British siding with the central powers and thus having to defend there African colonies against France, Belgium, and Portugal?
 

Emperor-of-New-Zealand

Kicked
SPJ said:
Are there any good WWI ATLs that include alternate alliances that create interesting effects in Africa? Such as the British siding with the central powers and thus having to defend there African colonies against France, Belgium, and Portugal?
Click to expand...

If Britain is with the CPs, Portugal will either also be with the CPs or won't enter the conflict at all. There's a chance Belgium will also side with Britain since the only one defending it will be France/if France takes the Belgium route to strike Germany first...
 

BlondieBC

Banned
whitecrow said:
Any way to have British/Ottomans front move into Egypt?
Click to expand...

Not really baring huge mistake by UK.

The Ottomans can't supply by sea. The Sinai is hard to travel across except in the winter, and water is an huge issue on anything over a division size force. So baring some epic win where an Ottoman divisions beats an UK corp, it is very hard to do. It is as difficult as what the Japanese did to Singapore, except imagine the Japanese could not use any ships for supply after the initial landings.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
whitecrow said:
Any way to have British/Ottomans front move into Egypt?
Click to expand...

The Turks tried to get the Suez a couple of time between 1914 and 1916, performing some pretty impressive logistical feats while doing so. IIRC, they reached the Canal and got a few troops the the west side for a very short time. But there never really was much of a chance of them gaining control of the Suez once the British decided to commit serious resources to the front.
 

anon_user

In principle, there could've been a Libyan front had Italy stuck with the Central Powers and declared war on France (which implies different Italian foreign policy in the run-up to war). Probably also an Eritrean front, and perhaps even an Abyssinian front, depending on how events pan out in East Africa.

If the Great War broke out not over Franz Ferdinand's assassination, but instead over the Moroccan crises (especially the first one), there'd probably be a Moroccan front, with the Germans potentially supporting either a rebel movement or a recalcitrant sultan. Of course, if it breaks out over either crisis, then the Kamerun front is rather smaller, due to the Treaty of Fez not occurring.
 

superkuf

Anaxagoras said:
The Turks tried to get the Suez a couple of time between 1914 and 1916, performing some pretty impressive logistical feats while doing so. IIRC, they reached the Canal and got a few troops the the west side for a very short time. But there never really was much of a chance of them gaining control of the Suez once the British decided to commit serious resources to the front.
Click to expand...

To be honest it was the German officers lent to the Ottoman empire that did the logistical feat.

Potential PODs: The Berlin-Baghdad railway is built before WW1 starts (clearly possible), including the part towards Suez. Thereby the Ottoman logistics would be far superior to IOTL, and a offensive into Egypt far easier.

Also, drop the Ottoman attack into Russia during winter 1914 that only killed ottoman soldiers without any gains (attacking Caucasus in winter? WTF?) and use the best troops to invade Egypt.

The Germans tried to start a jihad against the Entere (whom all had large muslim populations). It never worked out IOTL, but given some minor PODs it could create local unrest in parts of Africa.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
superkuf said:
To be honest it was the German officers lent to the Ottoman empire that did the logistical feat.

Potential PODs: The Berlin-Baghdad railway is built before WW1 starts (clearly possible), including the part towards Suez. Thereby the Ottoman logistics would be far superior to IOTL, and a offensive into Egypt far easier.

Also, drop the Ottoman attack into Russia during winter 1914 that only killed ottoman soldiers without any gains (attacking Caucasus in winter? WTF?) and use the best troops to invade Egypt.

The Germans tried to start a jihad against the Entere (whom all had large muslim populations). It never worked out IOTL, but given some minor PODs it could create local unrest in parts of Africa.
Click to expand...

The 1914/15 Suez attack was done with Ottoman resources, and the Germans do not deserve credit for the logistics.

The Berlin to Baghdad RR would have been a huge help, but in Mesopotamia, not the Sinai.

Yes, the Ottoman attack against Russia ended poorly, but the Ottomans could not have used the bulk of the forces in Egypt due to logistics.
 

Catspoke

After the start of the war PODs:

a) A bigger Boer revolt in 1914
b) A damaged Emden or Graf Spee squadron staggering into some African port and the Germans using the troops and guns.
c) Germans figure that there is going to be no neutrality in Africa possible and do things like defend Lome from the beginning in Togo
d) Instead of putting guns on some of liners at sea as commerce raiders, use these guns and crews to defend places like Doulea
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top