No Schlieffen Plan = No War?

[fishingfred]

I have been reading up on the July crisis quit a bit.
Germany was really worried that British Empire would involve itself in a conflict between G + AH vs F+R. They even correctly assumed at that point in time that this could lead to Italy and Romania joining the Entente (leading to 4 Great Powers vs 2). Germany wanted to blame Russia for the war and provoke them into mobilizing. As is known here on this forum, Germany sought the war with Russia before 1916 and the German government (not so much the Kaiser who was on his boat tour) + the military managed to escalade the July crisis in what they thought were favourable terms for Germany, and the rest is history.

So now assuming two POD's:
The Kaiser and the British Foreign Secretary Grey both indepentenly offered AH the "Stop in Belgrade" solution. Meaning Occupation of Belgrade (which the Serbian Goverment had deserted) and then renegotiations of AH's terms. Grey wanted to hold a Conference between the 4 not involved GP (It, Fr, BE, Ger) and they would broker a deal between AH Russia and Serbia. This shows that there was somekind of acknowledgement of AH demands following the assassination of its heir to the throne. Germany even pushed AH to accept these terms when Grey told the german ambassador that they would go to war with Germany if it attacked France. That same day russia mobilized and Germany stopped pressuring AH because they felt they now could play the defender again and keep Britain neutral.

So assuming this talk between grey and the ambassador happens a bit sooner (first POD):
Germany successfully pressures AH to tell the british they will stop in Belgrade;
Russia still mobilizes because AH is still at war with Serbia and Russia mobilization is not stopped because AH says they will stop after taking the capital;
Germany mobilizes because Russia mobilized
France because of Germany

2nd PoD:
The Kaiser feeling that it now is even more important to not antagonize Britain decides to change mobilization and deploy his armies defensivly (How is for the sake of this discussion not important) and Germany does not declare war or violated belgian neutrality.

So what happens next? It is 2./3. of August, AH Invasion (now with at least 3 Armies) of Serbia starts on the 12th. Does Britain try to stop the invasion now that WW1 isn't already underway? And if how do they pressure AH?
With no GP declaring war will AH just occupy Belgrade after one or two months with russia just standing by? This would be a huge prestige win for AH IMO, and would reestablish somekind of dominance on the balkans.
Whats the danger of somekind of border incident?
Does feel anyone pressured to declare war frist if Germany without Schlieffen-Plan doesn't?

 

[David S Poepoe]

The Schlieffen Plan was laid out years in advance, tho Moltke the Younger made adjustments to it - at least that is what the conventional take on the matter goes. I believe that Moltke had totally switched to a 'France First' mode in updating schedules, etc. by 1912.

 

[Glenn239]

So what happens next?

Under the Franco-Russian military protocols, it was mandated that the invasion of Germany would commence on, I believe, M+12 (France) and M+17 (Russia).

So, what happens next is that on or about M+12 of the French mobilization (August 13th), the French army invades Germany. Then, a few days later, so does the Russian.

 

[Glenn239]

With no GP declaring war will AH just occupy Belgrade after one or two months with russia just standing by?

If Russia intended to "just stand by" while Austria entered Serbia, why did it mobilize in the first place?

 

[Catspoke]

(first POD):
Germany successfully pressures AH to tell the british they will stop in Belgrade;
Russia still mobilizes because AH is still at war with Serbia and Russia mobilization is not stopped because AH says they will stop after taking the capital;
Germany mobilizes because Russia mobilized
France because of Germany

2nd PoD:
The Kaiser feeling that it now is even more important to not antagonize Britain decides to change mobilization and deploy his armies defensivly (How is for the sake of this discussion not important) and Germany does not declare war or violated belgian neutrality.

So with the extra time Bethmann Hollweg and the Kaiser get nervous enough about war with all of Britain, France, Russia, Serbia, Montenegro to accept the "Stop at Belgrade" compromise. Seems probable.

Supposedly according to Conrad the Austrians couldn't actually attack anybody until the 12th of August. I have to believe the Austrians would stop if German support wasn't forthcoming. Especially with that long to think about it.

However, Moltke and Falkenhyn are going to be mad if they don't get their war. And their going to be really mad if the Russians continue to mobilize and the Germans lose their mobilization speed advantage. But they will obey orders.

War won't happen and Bethmann is forced to resign.

 

[Catspoke]

Once the Austrians accept the stop at Belgrade order there is no need for the Russians to continue to mobilize, especially if the Austrians are sticking to 8 corps only.

 

[katchen]

As it turns out, a DEFENSIVE posture in the West is exactly the strategy that Germany needs ITTL to win this conflict with Russia and France. By all means, go after Russia and let France make the first move in the West. Germany can afford to do so.
We are used to thinking of Germany's border with France as the Rhine River because that is what it is now. But in 1914, Alsace-Lorraine was German. The Germans, by controlling the Vosges Mountains and entrenching across the Belfort Gap can force the French to come to them and still hold them off if they attack across their common border.
In this case, it is France which would be giving Belgium ultimatums about needing to cross Belgium unopposed to get to Germany. If the Belgians acquiesce--or mobilize--then Belgium is a co-belligerent with France and Germany can, once that message sinks in, counterattack across Belgium and meet the French somewhere in the middle near Brussels or Leuven. Lord Asquith and Lloyd George would be hard put to make a case to Parliament that Great Britain should get involved in what would be a war of choice against Germany alongside France. And unbeknownst to the Germans AND the French, the Irish home rule question is on it's way to debate in a way that, according to McMeekin, would have divided Great Britain if even a few more days or weeks had elapsed from the time Germany mobilized against France IOTL.
So let France be the belligerent and keep Great Britain---and the United States out of this war while concentrating on Russia even if Russia IS vast . Germany avoids a blockade and starvation and the UK and US continue to trade with Germany. Eventually, Germany will prevail in the West against France alone. And France likely WILL violate Belgian neutrality since that's the only practical way to reach the German Ruhr.

 

[fishingfred]

The Schlieffen Plan was laid out years in advance, tho Moltke the Younger made adjustments to it - at least that is what the conventional take on the matter goes. I believe that Moltke had totally switched to a 'France First' mode in updating schedules, etc. by 1912.

As I said for the sake of my question; > If Germany doesn't declare war who would? < i have chosen to ignore the fact that Germany OTL didn't have another warplan ready in 1914.

Under the Franco-Russian military protocols, it was mandated that the invasion of Germany would commence on, I believe, M+12 (France) and M+17 (Russia).

So, what happens next is that on or about M+12 of the French mobilization (August 13th), the French army invades Germany. Then, a few days later, so does the Russian.

I disagree, both Russia and France were not ready for war in 1914. Especially France would hesitate if it seems like Britain would remain neutral. Also after reading their cables during the July Crisis it seems to me like both were trying to avoid war in 1914.
http://www.gwpda.org/1914.html

If Russia intended to "just stand by" while Austria entered Serbia, why did it mobilize in the first place?

OTL the Zar was pressured (not unlike the Kaiser) into mobilizing because russian military leadership was very aware of their slow mobilization speed compared to Germany. If Russia is fully mobilized without beeing declared war on they are probably the strongest land power in any european conflict, this gives them a strong negotiation position.

So with the extra time Bethmann Hollweg and the Kaiser get nervous enough about war with all of Britain, France, Russia, Serbia, Montenegro to accept the "Stop at Belgrade" compromise. Seems probable.

Supposedly according to Conrad the Austrians couldn't actually attack anybody until the 12th of August. I have to believe the Austrians would stop if German support wasn't forthcoming. Especially with that long to think about it.

However, Moltke and Falkenhyn are going to be mad if they don't get their war. And their going to be really mad if the Russians continue to mobilize and the Germans lose their mobilization speed advantage. But they will obey orders.

War won't happen and Bethmann is forced to resign.

I'am inclined to agree, though what does December 1914 look like with AH occupying Belgrade and Germany maybe with support from Italy blocking anything but the harshest terms on Serbia in a GP-Conference?

Once the Austrians accept the stop at Belgrade order there is no need for the Russians to continue to mobilize, especially if the Austrians are sticking to 8 corps only.

In my view Russia wont stop just because AH agrees to some vauge agreement with Britain. And with Russia mobilizing and Germany more defensive (So 2-3 Armies in the East) I can see AH going for Warplan B(alkan): 3 Armies into Serbia, 3 defensively in Galizia.

As it turns out, a DEFENSIVE posture in the West is exactly the strategy that Germany needs ITTL to win this conflict with Russia and France. By all means, go after Russia and let France make the first move in the West. Germany can afford to do so.
We are used to thinking of Germany's border with France as the Rhine River because that is what it is now. But in 1914, Alsace-Lorraine was German. The Germans, by controlling the Vosges Mountains and entrenching across the Belfort Gap can force the French to come to them and still hold them off if they attack across their common border.
In this case, it is France which would be giving Belgium ultimatums about needing to cross Belgium unopposed to get to Germany. If the Belgians acquiesce--or mobilize--then Belgium is a co-belligerent with France and Germany can, once that message sinks in, counterattack across Belgium and meet the French somewhere in the middle near Brussels or Leuven. Lord Asquith and Lloyd George would be hard put to make a case to Parliament that Great Britain should get involved in what would be a war of choice against Germany alongside France. And unbeknownst to the Germans AND the French, the Irish home rule question is on it's way to debate in a way that, according to McMeekin, would have divided Great Britain if even a few more days or weeks had elapsed from the time Germany mobilized against France IOTL.
So let France be the belligerent and keep Great Britain---and the United States out of this war while concentrating on Russia even if Russia IS vast . Germany avoids a blockade and starvation and the UK and US continue to trade with Germany. Eventually, Germany will prevail in the West against France alone. And France likely WILL violate Belgian neutrality since that's the only practical way to reach the German Ruhr.

Britian had alot of aligned interests with the Entente, as seen in OTL a victorious France does not become too powerful, Germany probably would. So I agree with everyone that says that without any futher changes just not violating Belgium would still not keep Britain out of the war.
I agree with you that a defensiv action on the western front would have been better in hindsight but ... hindsight is a bitch
On the point of a French violation of Belgium, I doubt they would risk a major violation like Germany OTL since they will still depend on goods, resourcess and money from the british empire, but a minor violation (aka just straight through the ardennes forrest) is always a possibility.

 

[katchen]

As I said for the sake of my question; > If Germany doesn't declare war who would? < i have chosen to ignore the fact that Germany OTL didn't have another warplan ready in 1914.



I disagree, both Russia and France were not ready for war in 1914. Especially France would hesitate if it seems like Britain would remain neutral. Also after reading their cables during the July Crisis it seems to me like both were trying to avoid war in 1914.
http://www.gwpda.org/1914.html



OTL the Zar was pressured (not unlike the Kaiser) into mobilizing because russian military leadership was very aware of their slow mobilization speed compared to Germany. If Russia is fully mobilized without beeing declared war on they are probably the strongest land power in any european conflict, this gives them a strong negotiation position.



I'am inclined to agree, though what does December 1914 look like with AH occupying Belgrade and Germany maybe with support from Italy blocking anything but the harshest terms on Serbia in a GP-Conference?



In my view Russia wont stop just because AH agrees to some vauge agreement with Britain. And with Russia mobilizing and Germany more defensive (So 2-3 Armies in the East) I can see AH going for Warplan B(alkan): 3 Armies into Serbia, 3 defensively in Galizia.



Britian had alot of aligned interests with the Entente, as seen in OTL a victorious France does not become too powerful, Germany probably would. So I agree with everyone that says that without any futher changes just not violating Belgium would still not keep Britain out of the war.
I agree with you that a defensiv action on the western front would have been better in hindsight but ... hindsight is a bitch
On the point of a French violation of Belgium, I doubt they would risk a major violation like Germany OTL since they will still depend on goods, resourcess and money from the british empire, but a minor violation (aka just straight through the ardennes forrest) is always a possibility.

Perhaps if nothing else was going on with Britain you might be right. But the Irish Home Rule Question is heating up and within a few weeks of Germany and France's move, Ireland will be monopolizing the Government's attention; that and keeping the Government from falling over Ireland. It's Sean McKeekin's opinion ( "August 1914") that Great Britain had a very narrow window in which to commit to war with Germany. If Germany had gone for a defensive strategy instead of invading Belgium, they would have unwittingly played for enough time for that window to close.

 

[anotherlurker]

if the military doesnt have a plan for a potential war it's not doing its job. if there's no schlieffen plan there would be another plan, maybe the go-east plan.

the usa had all kinds of war plans, against japan, canada, germany, france and so on.

 

[fishingfred]

if the military doesnt have a plan for a potential war it's not doing its job. if there's no schlieffen plan there would be another plan, maybe the go-east plan.

the usa had all kinds of war plans, against japan, canada, germany, france and so on.

But it was the Schlieffen-Plan which demaned that Germany strikes at France as soon and as powerful as possible. My point is I don't doubt there were other plans or that with such a PoD, which does eliminate the Schlieffen-Plan, other plans would have been created. I just want to assume a different plan and then ask:
So without the Schlieffen-Plan would Germany still declare war first? Or would anyone else want to be the first to declare war over Serbia?

 

[wietze]

So let France be the belligerent and keep Great Britain---and the United States out of this war while concentrating on Russia even if Russia IS vast . Germany avoids a blockade and starvation and the UK and US continue to trade with Germany. Eventually, Germany will prevail in the West against France alone. And France likely WILL violate Belgian neutrality since that's the only practical way to reach the German Ruhr.

as the shortest way to the ruhr is also through the netherlands, would the french make the mistake of also violating dutch neutrality? after all this is before the world wars, and when they decide to violate one country, they might decide it is easier to go straight through dutch limburg.

 

[fishingfred]

So far I have few ideas what could happen:
1) Russia declares war on AH
The only one with a good casus belli is Russia. But from my perspective of the July Crisis France wanted to stop Russia from beeing the obvious agressor.

2) Germany declares war on Russia with an east first plan.
Russian mobilization on the 30.July was a big threat to Germany. Question is, in an assumed PoD were Germany is wary of British neutrality would they strike first with the cassus belli being: You mobilized first!?

3) France and Russia follow their original plan of 1912 (I believe)
Russia has to attack M +15 and France M+12 (just have weak sources on those numbers). Is this viable? These promised attack were designed to counter a Germany already at war not realy starting a war.... or do I've got the wrong impression?

4) Germany attacks France on their common border.
Germany offered Britian OTL guarantees (for their neutrality) that european France would not be changed. Such guarantees are easy to give at the beginning of the war and they did not include french colonies, britian understood that and didn't accept.
With talks beeing promised over Serbia, everyone mobilized German generals feeling surrounded they propose a attack on Briey-Longwy and Belfort&Montebeliard.
What would Britian do? They said in july 1914 messages they would defend france from German agression, but how fast would they join? Homerule is only little more than a month away.

I want to say thank you to everyone who gave me some input here every post helps me get my head arround this

 

[Simon]

But it was the Schlieffen-Plan which demaned that Germany strikes at France as soon and as powerful as possible. My point is I don't doubt there were other plans or that with such a PoD, which does eliminate the Schlieffen-Plan, other plans would have been created. I just want to assume a different plan and then ask: So without the Schlieffen-Plan would Germany still declare war first? Or would anyone else want to be the first to declare war over Serbia?

Well the plan that Schlieffen created, and which was in turn somewhat modified somewhat by Helmuth von Moltke the Younger after him, was a mirror image of the previous main plan created by his predecessor Helmuth von Moltke the Elder that said to go on the defensive against the French and concentrate on the Russians first. Now there are some good arguments for a France first strategy but that aside if there's no Schlieffen Plan then I'd say that it was a fifty-fifty chance that they stayed with Moltke the Elder's plan or went with something completely different.

Getting to your question of would Germany declare war first that depends on what their actual plan is, you can't really separate that from when or if they plan on declaring war. Assuming for the moment that they go with Moltke the Elder's Russia first plan then I think that Germany would either not declare war on anyone or just give their demand that Russia de-mobilise or face war as in our timeline. In the former with no need to violate Luxembourgian and Belgian territorial sovereignty they can simply fully mobilise and dig in defensively on the border when Russia declares war on Austria-Hungary over Serbia they have their excuse, in the latter they declare war against Russia when they only offer to negotiate a de-mobilisation and no-one else.