Absent WWI, when would Tsarist Russia have surpassed Imperial Germany as a Power?

Absent WWI, when would Tsarist Russia have surpassed Imperial Germany as a Power?

  • By 1917

    Votes: 3 1.4%
  • By 1920

    Votes: 15 6.8%
  • By 1925

    Votes: 29 13.1%
  • By 1930

    Votes: 52 23.5%
  • By 1935

    Votes: 15 6.8%
  • By 1940

    Votes: 12 5.4%
  • By 1950

    Votes: 15 6.8%
  • By 1960

    Votes: 6 2.7%
  • After 1960

    Votes: 8 3.6%
  • Never

    Votes: 66 29.9%

  • Total voters
    221
Invading India from Russia was a technical/geographic impossibility and eventually this was acknowledged by the British politicians (and ended the Great Game). To be fair, until quite late in the XIX the region in between was not researched well enough to recognize this reality on the British side. Russians had been quite busy with the conquest of the CA and by the time it was over, there was the whole Afghanistan between them and India and the whole idea of conquest was quite absurd.
But most British positions never relised that tho, brition never felt comfortable whith Russian expansion in central Asia, everything iv read has brition being very woride about this, they never relised that an invation of indea was implosable.
 
But most British positions never relised that tho, brition never felt comfortable whith Russian expansion in central Asia, everything iv read has brition being very woride about this, they never relised that an invation of indea was implosable.

Paranoia - an unrealistic distrust of others.
 
I voted 1917 because of the following excerpt from the diary of Kurt Riezler, the secretary of German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg, on July 7, 1914, recording something Bethmann had said:

“’Russia grows and grows. She has become a nightmare’. The generals, says Bethmann-Hollweg, all say that there must be a war before it is too late. Now, there is a good chance that it will all work out. By 1917, Germany has no hope. Therefore, now: if the Russians go to war, better 1914 than later.”

If the German generals felt that Russia would surpass them by 1917, who am I to argue?
 

Deleted member 94680

I voted 1917 because of the following excerpt from the diary of Kurt Riezler, the secretary of German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg, on July 7, 1914, recording something Bethmann had said:

“’Russia grows and grows. She has become a nightmare’. The generals, says Bethmann-Hollweg, all say that there must be a war before it is too late. Now, there is a good chance that it will all work out. By 1917, Germany has no hope. Therefore, now: if the Russians go to war, better 1914 than later.”

If the German generals felt that Russia would surpass them by 1917, who am I to argue?

Not the most reliable of sources, though is it? That's probably a healthy dose of justification and paranoia. That and it's referring to the military situation (rail networks and troop numbers) rather than Russia as an economic concern.


Paul I after which the Brits financed his assassination

Allegedly
 
Not the most reliable of sources, though is it? That's probably a healthy dose of justification and paranoia. That and it's referring to the military situation (rail networks and troop numbers) rather than Russia as an economic concern.




Allegedly

AFAIK, nobody questioned Whitworth’s relations with Zerebtsova and his involvement in the plot. Of course, there were rumors that Zerebtsova “appropriated” all money and you can say that he was acting on his own initiative but he was British ambassador and even if by the time of assassination he was transferred to Copenhagen, he maintained communications with Zerebtsova and her brothers.

Edit: Actually, situation looks like a quotation from Hugo’s play: “I did not touch Carlos, just was helping with an advice” :)
 
Last edited:
Theoretically, if Russia were to surpass Germany, what would Germany need to do in order to beat Russia?

If Russia keeps growing in power there's likely to be a shift in alliances as Britain backs away from the Entente and towards Germany. If a war does break out, a Germany that has access to foreign markets is in far better shape than OTL Germany which was slowly strangled by the blockade.
 

BooNZ

Banned
As for your other question (it is not addressed to me and I’m not a specialist), just a general consideration: during the reign of Alexander II Russia maintained low import tariffs and its industries practically did not grow being killed by a foreign competition. During the reign of Alexander III tariffs had been raised and Russian industries started growing in a fast rate. Similarly, between Tilsit Treaty and 1812 Russian manufacturing saw a considerable growth due to an absence of the British imports.
Thanks.

My understanding was from late 19th century onward, railways and the construction thereof dominated Russian heavy industry and this constant improvement to infrastructure not only propped up Russian industry, but generated significant revenues to the state and opened up access to further Russian resources. My understanding was the Russian economy continued to be woefully non-competitive in most categories of production, except perhaps for agriculture.

A previous poster had suggested the Germans were on a sweetheart deal to the extent it stifled the overall Russian economy, which sounded bogus. At best, a trade agreement negotiated during a time of Russian weakness might have been overly protective of German agriculture, which overall would arguably be more detrimental to Germany than Russia - IMHO.
 
Thanks.

My understanding was from late 19th century onward, railways and the construction thereof dominated Russian heavy industry and this constant improvement to infrastructure not only propped up Russian industry, but generated significant revenues to the state and opened up access to further Russian resources. My understanding was the Russian economy continued to be woefully non-competitive in most categories of production, except perhaps for agriculture.

A previous poster had suggested the Germans were on a sweetheart deal to the extent it stifled the overall Russian economy, which sounded bogus. At best, a trade agreement negotiated during a time of Russian weakness might have been overly protective of German agriculture, which overall would arguably be more detrimental to Germany than Russia - IMHO.


The railroads were, indeed, practically the 1st area of post-CW development but during the reign of AII they were not just unprofitable but cost state a lot of money. Profitability started only when AIII put In charge Witte who conducted sweeping reforms of their organization and financing.

Russian economy was by the early XX a major exporter of the natural resources (oil being one of them) but in the industrial area it was, indeed, lagging behind the more developed countries (one of the reasons why the markets of Asia were important) mostly due to the shortage of capital. In his memorandum to NII (1899) Witte characterized Russia as semi-colonial country supplying Western Europe with cheap raw materials and agricultural products while not having ability to use its natural materials to develop its own industry. As a result, the cornerstone of his system was attraction of the foreign capital. High import tariffs, gold standard and development of the railroads were among his main tools for attracting foreign investments.
 
Paranoia - an unrealistic distrust of others.
Exactly, not totally wrong tho, Russia did want the streates and purssia and China, just to open Russian trade in the Mediterranean, create a more defencable border, and to open markets in Asia for its growing industry, not to attack indea like most british politicians did.
 
Tzarist Russia had some interesting potential, especially as her untapped manpower resources could easily have led to accelerated developments in aeronautics (Sikorsky et al), rocketry (Tsilokovsky, likely to gain more recognition the heavier-than-air craft he predicted in the early 1890s become more numerous), and heavy industry. 25k miles of railroad tracks in 25 years is impressive by itself. Telephony was only just starting to make an impact (Russia had one telephone per 1000 people, France one per 150, Germany one per 60) and at leas comparable length of telegraph wire was laid between 1904 and 1914 as from 1864 to 1904. Technical academy attendance had tripled in twenty years - give Russia the means to produce her own machine tools, electrical components, and heavy industrial machinery and she's at least a peer to Germany at some point between 1930 and 1935.
 
Why would it? Brazil or Mexico are both significantly more populous than Germany, but well Germany gets to go to the G8/G20 meetings.
The Russian Empire had a population of 160 million at the start of WWI while Mexico was at 15 million and Brazil 23 million. I believe Russia also had them beat in GDP per capita and literacy. In spite of this Mexico and Brazil are both G20 as said above.
 
I would say the Russian Empire would surpass the German Empire probably militarily around 1925-1930

economically though I would say 1940 - 1950 would be when Russia finally surpass Germany there.
 
Top