There was a short discussion of this possibility in another thread some time back. What if Germany had allied with Russia rather than Austria-Hungary prior to WW1. I assume here that a war would be likely at some time even with another alliance system. I would argue that a German-Russian alliance would have been a likely alternative alliance. Britain and Russia had many conflicts, and it could be argued that Germany would have been a more natural ally for Russia. Russia was probably also a more powerful country than Austria-Hungary and therefore a more valuable ally for Germany. In this case I assume France and Britain would have allied with Austria-Hungary. I assume several factors could have triggered a war, either something on the Balkans like in OTL or maybe a conflict related to the colonies. For simplicity, let us assume that Franz Ferdinand also was assassinated in this time line. In this case of course, France and Britain was an ally of the Habsburgs, while Germany and Russia was allied with Serbia. How could such a war develop? How would the different alliance system influence the course of the war? Am I right to think that Russia was stronger than Austria-Hungary? After all Russia experienced revolution. What do you think?
Different alliances in WW1: Russia+Germany.
- Thread starter Eivind
- Start date
Yes, Russia was more powerful than Austria-Hungary (which isn't saying much at this point).
Bismarck's old rule was that there were five Great Powers, and that Germany needed to be on the side of three against two. The Germans thus tried things like the League of the Three Emperors (Germany-Russia-Austria-Hungary), but that fell over because of the Balkans. After Bismarck, France made a point of cuddling up to Russia, whereas Kaiser Willy pretty much dumped it. That left Germany with Austria-Hungary.
To pull this off, you need to get someone other than Willy on the German throne, someone capable of continuing Bismarckian foreign policy long-term.
Bismarck's old rule was that there were five Great Powers, and that Germany needed to be on the side of three against two. The Germans thus tried things like the League of the Three Emperors (Germany-Russia-Austria-Hungary), but that fell over because of the Balkans. After Bismarck, France made a point of cuddling up to Russia, whereas Kaiser Willy pretty much dumped it. That left Germany with Austria-Hungary.
To pull this off, you need to get someone other than Willy on the German throne, someone capable of continuing Bismarckian foreign policy long-term.
Austria-Hungary and Russia had a lot of conflicts on the Balkans and Russia was a friend of Serbia. In order to make both those powers allies, one would have to come up with an agreement on how to divide Balkan. I assume particularly Bosnia-Hercegovina would be a conflict area. I cannot really see how the Germans could ally with both Austria-Hungary and Russia at the same time. Both France and Britain saw Germany as a dangerous power. It was thefore probably totally unrealistic for Germany to become allied with more than one of the other big five. Only Russia and Austria-Hungary were possible allies and Germany could only pick one. So, the question is if they picked the right one. And how would an alliance with Russia have influenced the course of an alternate WW1? Who would have won and what would the post-war map have looked like? Would Russia have faced revolution also with this alliance?
You don't specifically need a different Kaiser. In 1914, while still having important power, the Kaiser is far from the deciding factor in foreign policy. What you would need is someone who is a.) able to take charge of foreign policy and b.) smart enough to play the european alliance system at a time when the odds are somewhat badly stacked against Germany.
The question is, what can Germany offer Russia in an alliance?
Eivind said:
That's not a necessity though. OTL Russia eventually choose Serbia as their Balkan "ally" over Bulgaria, but that might change.
Eivind said:
OTL, the Germans were reasonably close to getting into some kind of alliance with Britain (which of course would not have made any definitive commitments). It was torpedoed both by the influential germanophobe faction on the British side and the policy of the Germans to avoid a commitment that would constrain their freedom of movement, especially concerning colonies.
It is also not accurate to say that Britain and France were "afraid" of Germany. Britain, specifically, was more afraid of Russia and sought to avoid conflict with Russia by joining the Entente. France was not so much "afraid" as it was vengeful, though they of course realized they needed allies against Germany.
Eivind said:
The thing is Germany did not "pick" an alliance. It had an alliance with both A-H and Russia and Russia slipped away. It wasn't part of a conscious foreign policy so much as lack of one. We'd need to look at what Germany could have done to keep Russia in the alliance, but I am not sure the Germans have any good arguments outside of somehow giving Russia the Straits.
Regarding WW1: If Russia is allied with Germany, there is no WW 1 as we know it. It only started OTL because everyone thought they could maybe win it. If Germany allies with Russia, everyone will see them as an unstoppable juggernaut. France in this scenario cannot afford to let a conflict with Germany escalate, and Germany itself isn't likely to start a war either, as they aren't concerned about being surrounded and the Russian buildup ITTL. That leaves us with an A-H without allies and more concerned with internal reform, and Britain which, as always, tries to stay out of trouble on the continent. Under these conditions, it's unlikely that an actual world war breaks out.
LordKalvert
Banned
Assuming that such an alliance is possible (and it is somewhat) then-
Germany and Russia would partition Austria, the Russians then head for Constantinople
Meanwhile the Germans march into Paris in about 30 days
I suppose the two would either have fleets of their own or can use the captured Continental fleets but bye bye Britain
Seriously- Germany and Russia were by far the two most powerful continental states. There is no alliance available that could stop them
Germany and Russia would partition Austria, the Russians then head for Constantinople
Meanwhile the Germans march into Paris in about 30 days
I suppose the two would either have fleets of their own or can use the captured Continental fleets but bye bye Britain
Seriously- Germany and Russia were by far the two most powerful continental states. There is no alliance available that could stop them
Germany was getting increasingly powerful at the time. I believe I read somewhere, I cannot remember where, that Germany would have become the strongest power if they had not become involved in WW1. They might even have been more powerful than Britain in 1914.
Seems like there are different opinions here about the result of a German-Russian alliance. Anyone else who have any comments?
Seems like there are different opinions here about the result of a German-Russian alliance. Anyone else who have any comments?
Ok, nice of you to paint a map, but, how do these alliances even come to pass?
How does A-H ally with France and Britain? Why is Turkey allied with them? Belgium is neutral, it's neutrality was guaranteed by an international treaty.
Do you have any reasoning for why and how Germany and Russia ally ITTL? Are the Balkan states actual allies or are those just spheres of influence? Does Germany still somewhat back A-H and if not, why?
That's an interesting concept, but the map itself is more or less impossible. It would mean the world politics stayed the same until 1913 and then somehow turned upside down in just two or three years.
Any kind of a realistic development of such a system of alliances needs to start earlier, and means the map is going to be much different not just in colors but in borders, too.
Why would the map mean that world politics stayed the same until 1913? In OTL Germany and Austria-Hungary became allied as early as 1879. I assume that an alternate alliance between Germany and Russia would have been in place well before 1900.
About why Germany and Russia would become allied, I explained this in the first post. When it comes to why France and Britain would ally with Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, the answer is simply traditional balance of power politics.
As the map implies, Germany and Austria-Hungary are enemies in this alternate alliance system and also enemies after war breaks out. I do not necessarily imply a war in 1914, it could be earlier or later. About the smaller states, the colours show which side they join when the war breaks out.
About why Germany and Russia would become allied, I explained this in the first post. When it comes to why France and Britain would ally with Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, the answer is simply traditional balance of power politics.
As the map implies, Germany and Austria-Hungary are enemies in this alternate alliance system and also enemies after war breaks out. I do not necessarily imply a war in 1914, it could be earlier or later. About the smaller states, the colours show which side they join when the war breaks out.
One way to get a Russo-German alliance is for Bismarck to side more openly with Russia in the aftermath of the 1878 Russo-Turkish War. IOTL Bismarck tried to play the neutral mediator, but if he has an epiphany and realizes that Russia is a more useful ally than this is entirely possible. The alliance with Austria-Hungary, however, is likely to fall apart if Germany favours Russian interest in the Balkans. Given that in 1878 Germany won't risk a war, Russia will not get what it wants and it will find that Germany is the only country they can turn to.
As for how such a war would develop, I imagine Germany, unless they're stupid, will go on the defence in Alsace-Lorraine and dog pile on A-H together with the Russians, the Serbs and the Romanians (and likely the Italians once its clear the Habsburgs will lose). The Austrians have to defend such a long border that it's just impractical IMHO.
Then Germany can deal with the French without an Eastern Front to worry about while the Italians attack in the Alps. Italian offensives there likely won't be anymore successful than the OTL Isonzo battles, at least not with someone as inept as Cadorna in charge, but it will syphon off troops that could have been used to hold off the Germans (and a possible Russian Expeditionary Force). By 1915, only Britain and Japan will be in the war methinks, assuming Japan declares war at all. I could see the Japanese bailing out with their gains, after a financial compensation to the Central Powers.
At this point, winning the war will be a monumental task for the British, even if the US somehow enter the war early (which they don't have to because I don't see unrestricted submarine warfare happening with the CP triumphant on the continent).
It uses the 1913-1914 borders. For example, with such a huge geopolitical change the Balkan wars might happen in a different way. They might even be the same thing as WWI if Austria-Hungary and the Ottomans decide on joint military action.
There was a policy of detente between Russia and Austria-Hungary between 1897 and 1907 so I don't wee why that could not have resulted in a revival of the Three Emperor's League.
All three powers would have to agree to a Greater Bulgaria which boasts a healthy Aegean coast and the whole of Macedonia and a Russian domination of the Straits. In return, Austria-Hungary is to be preserved and allowed influence in the western Balkans: annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, client states in Serbia, Montenegro, Albania.
Austria-Hungary doesn't perish in this scenario, it exists as a valuable buffer state between Russia and Germany. Prussian-led Germany does not want millions of Austrians upsetting the balance of domestic politics and Russia doesn't want or need poverty-stricken Galicia.
All three powers would have to agree to a Greater Bulgaria which boasts a healthy Aegean coast and the whole of Macedonia and a Russian domination of the Straits. In return, Austria-Hungary is to be preserved and allowed influence in the western Balkans: annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, client states in Serbia, Montenegro, Albania.
Austria-Hungary doesn't perish in this scenario, it exists as a valuable buffer state between Russia and Germany. Prussian-led Germany does not want millions of Austrians upsetting the balance of domestic politics and Russia doesn't want or need poverty-stricken Galicia.
How long would the alliance stay together after Germany and Russia have overrun Austria-Hungary? Even in the worst case scenario Britain is going to have naval supremacy.
Not long. They would fall out over the spoils, especially, I think, the status of Romania and which sphere of influence it falls into.
Austria-Hungary would be relegated to an honorary junior partner in a German/Russian alliance. it can't ally with France and Britain when it is surrounded on all sides by enemies. It must submit to the 3 way alliance.
That's not all bad. it would prosper economically and have time for its nationalities issues to evolve.
Grey Wolf
Donor
Hmmm, looking at the map
YES Romania and Russia were v close, and it was hoped to have a dynastic marriage between them, IIRC the Romanovs holidayed in Romania in early 1914
NOT SURE Why is Albania not on the same side as Germany? I'm not sure how an Austrian-French-British grouping is to take power in Romania? Yes, it was a battleground of interests between the powers, but the king was a German by birth, and Italy and Austria were at each other's throats there. Greece is a wildcard but "Southern Epirus" was not much more of a realistic idea than Smyrna at this point.
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
YES Romania and Russia were v close, and it was hoped to have a dynastic marriage between them, IIRC the Romanovs holidayed in Romania in early 1914
NOT SURE Why is Albania not on the same side as Germany? I'm not sure how an Austrian-French-British grouping is to take power in Romania? Yes, it was a battleground of interests between the powers, but the king was a German by birth, and Italy and Austria were at each other's throats there. Greece is a wildcard but "Southern Epirus" was not much more of a realistic idea than Smyrna at this point.
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Why would Albania necessarily be on the same side as Germany? If this scenario is anything like OTL, then Austria has been their chief protector and backer of their independence; also, Serbia, Montenegro and Greece are already on that side...Albania might not want to stir the hornets nest, but on the other hand it might also jump at (what it sees as) the only chance to keep these states from dismembering it later.
But Romania is on the German-Russian side...which makes sense, like you pointed out earlier in that post.
Northern Epirus is a significantly easier target for Greece than Smyrna, or pretty much anything else.
Using 1913-1914 borders doesn´t rule out that the alliances might be older.
Italy's Industrial economy was 90% dependant on British coal imports. In this configuration, cut off from any support, her warmaking capacity will be reduced to that of Ethiopia in about a month. Italy may sign such an alliance, but if the UK comes in, she will never, ever, honour it.
Grey Wolf
Donor
If Germany - Italy can slice across Austria, take control over the Tyrol in the first weeks of the war, then won't Italy be able to get hold of German coal?
Best Regards
Grey Wolf