More Central Powers in WW1
- Thread starter nickjbor
- Start date
MrP
Banned
Well, there's Romania. Her Army was still asking A-H where to attack about a week before the war began. Fools had failed to check with their government what its position was. 
But fiddle about there and you've got a few divisions (I forget how many) to throw at the Russian covering force (4 Russian divisions, IIRC).
But fiddle about there and you've got a few divisions (I forget how many) to throw at the Russian covering force (4 Russian divisions, IIRC).Italy and Romania would both be fairly simple to make switch sides, as both of them were basically staying neutral until one side or the other was in a strong enough position and/or made them a good enough offer.
What about China? They would be anti-Japanese who are pro-British (atleast on the surface ) who are anti-German. Obviously the Germans would have to give up their treaty port, etc (which if I remember correctly was anyway captured by the Japanese). Obviously she are cut off from the rest of the Central Powers so it is essentially another Sino Japanese war. Still, is there anything in it for her?
) who are anti-German. Obviously the Germans would have to give up their treaty port, etc (which if I remember correctly was anyway captured by the Japanese). Obviously she are cut off from the rest of the Central Powers so it is essentially another Sino Japanese war. Still, is there anything in it for her?Well you mentioned Tsingtao... But other than that? I suppose they could hold out hope of getting Taiwan back.What about China? They would be anti-Japanese who are pro-British (atleast on the surface
The big issue is that this is the early Republic and isn't particularly stable.
boredatwork
Banned
US - With a different president you could have the US on the CP side, or at least neutral, favoring the CPs.
Not sure how much of a difference it would make, since I think we'd managed to start differentiating Canada and the BE as a whole by that point. Could throw a spanner in the works on some level, certainly, depending on whether the US was a defacto or merely dejure belligerent.
Japan - A more aggressive Japanese leadership could join the CP side (or at least, declare a separate war on Russia) in the belief that would enable it to snatch some of the Russian FE bits.
China - noted above, China, conversely, might have joined the CP in return for promises of assistance in regaining full sovreignty.
but the China/Japan bit is almost certainly an either/or situation.
Can't think of anyone else off hand.
Not sure how much of a difference it would make, since I think we'd managed to start differentiating Canada and the BE as a whole by that point. Could throw a spanner in the works on some level, certainly, depending on whether the US was a defacto or merely dejure belligerent.
Japan - A more aggressive Japanese leadership could join the CP side (or at least, declare a separate war on Russia) in the belief that would enable it to snatch some of the Russian FE bits.
China - noted above, China, conversely, might have joined the CP in return for promises of assistance in regaining full sovreignty.
but the China/Japan bit is almost certainly an either/or situation.
Can't think of anyone else off hand.
And three/four fronts is certainly too much for it. You'd need to bring it down to, oh, maybe one front to get China to join, I'd say.
There is a bit more Germany could offer. China had a number of, hm, limitations on their sovereignty at this point. Germany could tangle the chance to lift those, insofar as they applied to the Entente and the Alliance. There's those inland Concessions, I guess, too...
But, all in all, I don't think China is that likely without some major changes in the war prior to their entry (IE, cutting down on fronts for them if they enter on the CP side, or having things go better for them before the Great War, and I don't mean just Superpower Empire better).
Not necessarily... Japan, IIRC, was actually rather friendly with the early Republic. The 11 Demands soured things, but remove that...
Where can I find Operation Unicorn, by the way? It sounds very interesting!
http://alternatehistoryfictory.yuku.com/forums/2/t/Alternate-History-Fiction.html
Some of it is up at Changing the Times as well.
General Zod
Banned
Past Italy and Romania, the other neutral that is easiest to bring to the CP side is Sweden. It had a pro-German King and Army, even if the Social Democratic majority in the Legislature was pacifiist. There is a juicy potential PoD at the onset of the war, however: the gung-ho Commander of the Russian Baltic Fleet, acting on his own initiative, almost issued an ultimatum to the Swedish Fleet to vacate their bases and do not return. OTL he was discovered and blocked by his superiors in the nick of time. Had he gone, it is very likely that a naval battle would have ensued. Social Democratic doctrine of the time heartily endorsed defense warfare, so ti is exceedingly likely that in the face of this act of aggression the Swedish Diet would heed the King's advice and declare war on Russia in 1914.
Differently from Italy, a CP Sweden (or Romania) is not enough by itself to change the strategic balance of the war decisively, but it most likely does accelerate the collapse of Russia from Winter 1917 to Summer/Fall 1916. This may, or may not, change the outcome of the war, but most probably does. If Russia falls sooner, Germany will not be motivated to engage in unrestricted submarine warfare, so Wilson lacks a casus belli and USA stays neutral. Germany being able to redeploy most of her forces to France 3-6 months before, with less cumulative exaustion from a shorter blockde, could quite possibly have broken the back of the French manpower camel, with no US aid coming, and caused a strategic breakthrough.
In terms of relative tilt to the strategic balance in favor of the CPs, Italy ranks (well) before Sweden, and Sweden (significantly) before Romania. Italy by itself has the manpower, a good army, and the strategic position advantage to cause a fatal crisis in either France or Russia, either very soon in 1914 or over 1-2 years in 1915-16. Sweden has much less manpower, but has a decent army and good strategic position (threat to St. Petersburg) to accelerate Russian collapse significantly. Romania has not the manpower, a barely decent army (but terrible generalship), and the main effect of her switch is that Serbia falls in 1914, the CP can penetrate Western Ukraine too in 1915, and they can apply the effort they needed to crush Romania in late 1916 for added pressure to Russia, too. Again, this probably accelerates Russian collapse to 1916. No Entente USA, likely French collapse in 1917.
Of course, a CP USA would have been a massive tilt to the balance: suddenly the British blockade of Germany becomes a questionable thing and the vast majority of the British Army needs to be redeployed to canada. Adieu, France.
Of course, it would have needed a different president (Germanophile TR wins Republican nomination in 1912 and landslides Wilson ) and/or a rather more skillful German diplomacy. Of course, the latter also makes rather likely that Britain stays neutral or is allied to the CPs.