A few 1914 what-ifs

No way Léopold II accepts à German invasion. That is completely out of character.

The only reason I may find for the Belgians not resisting is if Britain lets them know they won't intervene and they are essentially on their own (like the Danish situation in WWII). Chances for doing that are quite limited barring a huge PoD IMHO
Belgian failure to defend her neutrality and allow the Germans through would have an impact on the ground war. The Schleiffen Plan's best case scenario was Belgium allowing German passage through to attack France. In that case, the British could conceivably also declare war on the Belgians in defense of the French.

German troops in Belgium, and if the Schleiffen Plan goes undisturbed as was plan "A", and the German army gains control of the French Normandy coast prior to turning eastward to capture Paris from the rear, this would all pretty much end the British army's ability to land forces in Western Europe.

Therefore, should Britain also declare war on Belgium, I see the Royal Navy concentrating on a major attempt to blockade Western Europe, and keep the German High Seas Fleet in port, which is actually what happened anyway. Then if there is going to be a major land war against Belgium and German forces, I see British sending large forces to possibly invade the Belgian Congo in Africa from either and or both the Sudan and Rhodesia. Germany would be forced to have to defend German East Africa, but with most of their forces needed to complete the Schleiffen Plan wth a long war in Eastern Europe against Russia, they would be out numbered.

The logistics would be hard, and the war would definitely be a long one in order for the British to plan and execute such a military plan, but I see few alternatives. If they sent a large number of land forces to the Eat the east to aid Russia against the Germans, Austro-Hungarians, and the Turks and Bulgarians, the Germans and Belgium would still have access to the the Belgian colonies for raw materials to supply their war machine. (Basically Germany's.)
 
Last edited:
I suspect his deep personal unpopularity would effect people's attitude towards his decision.
No way Léopold II accepts à German invasion. That is completely out of character.

The only reason I may find for the Belgians not resisting is if Britain lets them know they won't intervene and they are essentially on their own (like the Danish situation in WWII). Chances for doing that are quite limited barring a huge PoD IMHO


I doubt his personal popularity would play into it at all. The decisions are made in the cabinet and the public has no time to resist. The initial reaction of many might be to trust the King as the only rational course The King commanded the army, so he's likely to be obeyed. Any movement against him would need time to organize, remove him and form a government that had popular support to resist the Germans in 48 hours. Really don't see it happening

If he thinks the Germans will win anyway, then the King will likely agree to German terms. There would be no point to resisting and the only hope is to gamble on the Germans.
 
Therefore, should Britain also declare war on Belgium, I see the Royal Navy concentrating on a major attempt to blockade Western Europe, and keep the German High Seas Fleet in port, which is actually what happened anyway. Then if there is going to be a major land war against Belgium and German forces, I see British sending large forces to possibly invade the Belgian Congo in Africa from either and or both the Sudan and Rhodesia. Germany would be forced to have to defend German East Africa, but with most of their forces needed to complete the Schleiffen Plan wth a long war in Eastern Europe against Russia, they would be out numbered.

The alternate African theatre is something I almost mentioned on the last message and certainly worth a discussion. Providing a CP-Belgium, and regardless of the time of British entry, the first objective would be to blockade the Congo by sea and then take over the river. This would be part of a bloated version of the OTL Cameroon campaign, i.e. an "international" (Entente) campaign dominated by French troops. Another big difference with OTL is that the Germans in East Africa have one less enemy and an ally in the Force Publique, and can retreat west into the Congo to continue the fight there if they want to. Depending of how the Cameroon campaign plays out, maybe the Cameroon forces can also retreat into the Congo, rather than escape through Spanish Guinea as IOTL. Finally, I can also see Portugal joining the Entente earlier in order to pursue their past claims on the lower Congo river, in addition to the border disputes they had with the Germans in Angola and Mozambique. Presuming an Entente victory, I think we can expect the Congo to be partitioned, unless (and here is a wild thought) the victorious powers agree to keep it in one piece under joint "international" administration (see Tangiers, Shanghai and the New Hebrides for possible precedents).

Regarding the Ottomans, and as much as I think it would be best for them to remain neutral, I agree that the Ottoman government of the time makes entry of the CP side likely sooner or later. So at most, the change in British entry might change the date and casus belli of the Ottoman entry, but it would still begin with an Ottoman attack on Russia.
 
Top