I don't think anyone here disagrees with the notion that a Germany dominating most of Central and Eastern Europe is something Britain wouldn't want. More precisely it is something that the British Foreign Office feels would be catastrophic. However, I believe you're linking what Britain doesn't want or fears with something that is ultimately bad for Britain. This is a logical leap I think it is worth looking into somewhat.If you have anything approaching a Brest-Litovsk settlement in Germany's favour then that has just handed German dominance on the continent. Britain would not want that.
Now I'm not saying that the British Foreign Office is populated by backwards looking incompetents too busy worrying over the arrival of the next Napoleon to see the bigger picture but let's pan out the consequences.
I recognise that the situation in the East is a tad abstract so for the state of discussion let's give some context. An Independent Congress Poland which extends further East than the boundaries pre-war taking up more of the Pale and Belorussians. An Independent Lithuania and a United Baltic Duchy independent and linked in some way to the German Empire. All these states are puppets and hardly thrilled by their status. They are impoverished, decimated by war with weak infrastructure and largely rural. They certainly give Germany an advantage in a war against Russia, but we aren't seeing Polish brigades helping Comrade Germany on the shores of Dover.
But let's be maximally fair and also throw in an independent Ukraine which gives Germany access to a massive agricultural region as secures food supplies preventing a British blockade starving them out of the war. But such a state would lead to a much angrier Russia and would force Germany to focus far more of its time there. The crippled Russia required for such a state's existence will also divert German attention as they medal in it to prevent the rise of the reds and favours a Britain who is still concerned about the Great Game in the east and the British Control of the Raj. Long term, how much advantage do these states really give Germany in a war against Britain?
Britain is an international power, not a European power and this is not the turn of the 19th Century but the turn of the 20th Century where powers like the USA are on the rise, Japan is growing, China is where it is at, and India is the Jewel of the British Empire. Meanwhile Britain has the Dominions of Canada, Australia,New Zealand and South Africa. Full of immigrants loyal(-ish) to the Empire and a whole host of natural resources. The other European Empires pale in comparison. Interests between Britain and Germany don't have to overlap.
But let's be fair and say they do. Let's say that a greedy and angry Germany goes Versailles time 2 on the French and take significant chunks of French Empire, some kind of Mittle-Afrika and Indochina. Such a step would definitely require increasing the German fleet. But firstly let's realise that the British are in a much stronger place to keep ahead in any ship building race and the French territories are far less profitable than Britain's and German is massively overstretched.
A large Germany on the Continent dealing with all the madness there while trying to build an international empire when the world is losing sight of such an enterprise. The issue is, even if Britain begins to lose their empire and their control,thus weakening Britain, such events would plague a German empire too, more so in fact due to it's newness and less resource allocation potential. All it does is remove areas of tension between them.
But perhaps I can't see it. What are the treats to Britain of German control over Eastern and Central Europe?
Last edited: