AHC: Fastest Allied Victory in WW1?

The territorial losses should be minimal and limited to the east because Italy would be unable to jump in.

But the whole Imperial structure may be in line for changes, and Franz Josef's death may provide the necessary spark. Dissolution isn't the only possible outcome though.

I was thinking that they lose Galicia and Bosnia at the peace table, but then could have a civil war in/after 1917 that results in the formation of a Greater Germany one neighboring states start to intervene. Thus, Germany will not recover the lands lost in the last war, but it might get much or all of Cisleithania, excluding Dalmatia and some/all of the Italian areas once the dust settles.
 
I'm not sure whether Germany would loose all its colonies. After all, in a quick war the Allies might not had enough time to conquer them all? At least Tansania is still around.

I'd expect Tansania to Britain (Cape-Kairo), parts of Cameroon to France. Maybe the pacific islands also to Britain/Australia. they'd also loose Kiautschou, thus Germany gets out of asia. France gets Alsace-Lorraine, obviously. Russia will get Galicia including Cracow, maybe also parts of Posen with Polish majority (which actually could come out beneficial for Germany in the long run), Kars from the Ottomans.

AH will loose at least parts of Bosnia-Herzegowina to Serbia.

That's about it IMHO. Britain is the main winner.
 
Postwar I see France and Britain remainig friends. The Germans will still be a significant industrial power and France would he too smart to piss Britain off. Russia on the other hand I'm not so sure, how it manages to deal with its social problems will largely influence it's relationship with the Anglo-French. I would imagine that France would try its best to keep the alliance together and Germany contained.

As for peace terms, besides the obvious territorial and colonial losses I can't imagine the Britain wouldn't seek some sort of Naval restrictions on Germany. Certainly these terms wouldn't be harsh at Versailles but mainly to ensure that Germany can't enter a war against Britain with the type of fleet they had in 1914.

I apologize for any spelling or gramattical mistakes I'm typing on my phone
 
Okay so taking the given suggestions lets assume for the moment that in the west the French and British co-ordinate better and win a decisive victory at the Marne, and in the east the Russians win a decisively at Tannenberg. The Germans are thrown into retreat and the Allies continue to advance. If the Allies are able to push on and beat Germany in a much faster and less bloody manner than in our timeline what are going to be the knock-on effects?


  • Without the four years of blood and loss I don't think you'd get a highly vindictive Treaty of Versailles. A better guide would probably be the Treaty of Frankfurt that ended the Franco-Prussian war.
  • What sort of territorial concessions would Germany have to make, losing Alsace-Lorraine is a given but would they try and push for more? I could see Russian demanding Posen to add to their Kingdom of Poland, perhaps Eastern and Western Prussia as well? Even Alsace-Lorraine and Posen is likely to cause bad feeling, add in territory on the left bank of the Rhine and Eastern Prussia and you've just created some nice little revanchist feeling to help set up the rematch at some point in the future.

If Germany keeps fighting until the Allies have invaded and conquered, the war probably lasts another year or two, its still going to be hugely bloody, and the peace will probably be pretty vindictive.

However, if after early defeats in 1914 Germany realizes that its playing a losing hand (which requires levels of sense and forsightednessthat no WWI power possessed, but never mind), and negotiates from a position where it still retains significant strength, then Britain is likely going to restrain the French and Russian ultras. No French border at the Rhine. The UK does not want Germany permanently weakened and no credible opposition left to Russia. Especially if Germany cleverly concedes what the UK wants in the way of navy reductions.
 
The Ottomans stay neutral, Russia is able to trade grain with its allies and supply food to its civilians better, its armies have a much more enthusiastic civilian population right when the 1916-level production starts, war ends in 1917 with Germany starting to fall apart from being economically squeezed and the Habsburg Empire killed by a big Russian offensive. There's no easy way out of the Western Front deadlock, and that means the only way to really improve things for the Entente is to improve Russia's ability to stand the exhaustion war. If the Ottomans decide on neutrality, this means none of the disaster dominoes contributing to Kerensky and the Russian Civil War start. This also means when Russia overcomes the shell shortage its civilians face rather less starvation while Germany is on the one hand facing fewer fronts but also in an even more disadvantageous logistical position than IOTL. Russia stays in and can make good its surplus of guns from 1916 (enough to equip the early Red Army for the duration of the Civil War) then Germany is screwed.
 
Late August - Early September 1914. Germany succeeded handsomely in East Prussia in 1914 because Rennenkampf called a halt to the Russian 1st Army's advance after Gumbinnen. The Germans bluffed him into not attacking using a light screen force, while the main German armies annihilated the Russian 2nd Army at Tannenberg. Had Rennenkampf pursued the Germans after Gumbinnen, and both Rennekampf and Samsonov pushed forward aggressively, Germany would have been in trouble in the East.

In itself, this would not have been fatal -- the German heartland could have fought on even if East Prussia was lost altogether, but if Germany tried to retrieve the situation by sending too many troops from the Western Front, the Battle of the Marne and the follow-up could have turned into a real disaster provided the allies took maximum advantage.

And suppose the immediate German defeat at the Marne was compounded by an understandable military blunder: a determination to try to hold the line instead of retreating. Psychologically, it had to have been hard to retreat, anyway, after coming so close to Paris. Then if the British and French broke through, there's a real chance of von Kluck's westernmost army being surrounded and destroyed while the remaining German forces are rolled up and forced to the east.

The problem is German pre-war plans already expected some degree of defeats in the East IOTL, Tannenberg took everyone by surprise. If Jilinsky's Army Group crushes German forces immediately in East Prussia Imperial Russia is hardly likely to overrun East Prussia in a matter of weeks, the far more mobile and relatively advantaged Soviet armies of 1944 failed to do that, the Tsarist Stavka won't do better. A Russian victory in East Prussia would help but it wouldn't in itself change the war overmuch.
 
Okay so taking the given suggestions lets assume for the moment that in the west the French and British co-ordinate better and win a decisive victory at the Marne, and in the east the Russians win a decisively at Tannenberg. The Germans are thrown into retreat and the Allies continue to advance. If the Allies are able to push on and beat Germany in a much faster and less bloody manner than in our timeline what are going to be the knock-on effects?


  • Without the four years of blood and loss I don't think you'd get a highly vindictive Treaty of Versailles. A better guide would probably be the Treaty of Frankfurt that ended the Franco-Prussian war.
  • What sort of territorial concessions would Germany have to make, losing Alsace-Lorraine is a given but would they try and push for more? I could see Russian demanding Posen to add to their Kingdom of Poland, perhaps Eastern and Western Prussia as well? Even Alsace-Lorraine and Posen is likely to cause bad feeling, add in territory on the left bank of the Rhine and Eastern Prussia and you've just created some nice little revanchist feeling to help set up the rematch at some point in the future.
  • Russia buoyed by military victories and annexations is able to regain a small piece of stability, plus they don't have large groups of annoyed armed peasants standing about to rebel. Now the underlying problems with the country and its rulers are still there so it's simply more of a slight delay before some form of revolution kicks off.
  • All of the countries involved aren't drive to near bankruptcy. Germany will be paying reparations so they're not so great but France and especially Great Britain will be much better off, IIRC it was the Great War that effectively sealed Britain's eventual economic decline.
  • If it's over before the US becomes involved then no Woodrow Wilson or his bloody Fourteen Points. The US continues its isolationist course although its growing power gradually leads it to take more interest and active part in global affairs. What does this do for black culture? I have vague memories of black troops being effected by exposure to France during the war and Paris in the interwar years but don't really know.
  • No Fourteen Points means interesting things for Austria-Hungary. If they're pushed into dissolving - and I can't really see a monarchy like Russia pushing for that, annexing territory sure but otherwise might set a bad example for the minorities - they can probably stumble on for a bit but they're separating fairly soon. Probably losing some territory to Russia, I've got no idea what they might want, and indemnity payments will unbalance things.
  • For the British and French if it's over quickly and they don't have to call up large numbers of colonial troops what does this do to the decolonisation process? IIRC fighting and dying for their mother countries in Europe helped foster nationalism and a belief that they'd earned their independence. Even before the war in India you had the Indian Councils Act 1909 and later the Government of India Act 1919 so they were already very slowly moving towards independence. With the Indian National Congress continuing to campaign for better better representation and eventual Dominion status the colonies were on the way out, however with no war expect a much slower process which could be no bad thing.
  • The German colonies will probably be divided up pretty much as in our timeline I would expect. Well that's most of what I can think of for the moment. :)
  • Edit: One other factor I just thought of, with no years of slaughter the old order wont be so completely discredited to so many of their citizens. Socially that's going to have major impacts.

Hello,

the fastest way to crush germany is to avoid the early mistakes...
do not provoke the osmans - give em their battleships - offer even another pair in 1915... so they will not side with germany (big asb, because great britain and france want to destroy the osmans, also the russians hope for this... but this would help a lot, the osmans allied with entente means secure supply line to russia

also, make the french be not so idiotic with their plans and - also - make their generals far better... with this the border conflict is not the big pain in the a.. for them and they can beat the germans big at the marne.

combine this with mechanical breakdowns of the "dicke bertas"... so the antwerp-forts hold. with this, the german western army is really in deep trouble...

if this comes together with a better russian advance, esp. in the south, they can take out austria, without austria the germans are doomed in 1915...

but you make a mistake about entente-war goals.

they exist from day1 (even 10 years earlier)

the russians: they need sucsess to stabilize their nation... it is weak and without this, revolution is sure. So russia need to take land, from ah and germany... so no poland, just a fictional poland, part of russia

great britain need to destroy the (stronger) economical enemy... so they will take the german trading fleet, will force em to pay huge sums in gold and destroy important parts of the german economy... they need to do or germany will be economically to strong for them

france want "revenge"... destroying the big neighbour was the clear war goal from 1871. So no light peace...

versailles or worse, nothing else.

if the entente had been not tamed by the americans they had made "peace" even more cruel and brutal as they did. no "fair" peace is possible

but i bet, if they do some mad, like genozids and sterilisations of million people (ONLY chance to avoid german revenge, germany is just to strong economically), after that they will fight each other again.
 
East Prussia being ceded in an early Entente vitory is ASB, as would be ceding West Prussia. Germany loses the colonies and Alsace-Lorraine. No change to the border with Denmark. As for Posen, I'm honestly not sure if Russia wants to risk having more Poles, inluding many who may have been better off in Germany than in Russia.
Yeah, I guess I was pushing things a little bit with those two. :D For Posen I saw it as the Russians wanting to take it for two main reasons - partly as a balance/prestige thing since France is gaining territory so they want some as well, and better to have the problematic Poles where you can keep an eye on them rather than a safe haven over the border where they can plot beyond the reach of your police force.
 
I'm not sure whether Germany would loose all its colonies. After all, in a quick war the Allies might not had enough time to conquer them all? At least Tansania is still around.

I'd expect Tansania to Britain (Cape-Kairo), parts of Cameroon to France. Maybe the pacific islands also to Britain/Australia. they'd also loose Kiautschou, thus Germany gets out of asia. France gets Alsace-Lorraine, obviously. Russia will get Galicia including Cracow, maybe also parts of Posen with Polish majority (which actually could come out beneficial for Germany in the long run), Kars from the Ottomans.

AH will loose at least parts of Bosnia-Herzegowina to Serbia.

That's about it IMHO. Britain is the main winner.

So, Germany keeps Togoland and Kamerun reverts to pre-Moroccan crises borders?

Yeah, I guess I was pushing things a little bit with those two. :D For Posen I saw it as the Russians wanting to take it for two main reasons - partly as a balance/prestige thing since France is gaining territory so they want some as well, and better to have the problematic Poles where you can keep an eye on them rather than a safe haven over the border where they can plot beyond the reach of your police force.

I understand your reasoning, I just think that those Poles would be even more troublesome if Russia gets so many more of them (along with a few more Germans), whereas in Galicia, the Russians are getting fewer Germans, and more Poles and Ukrainians from economic and political conditions more like those of Russia than of Germany.

Also, Russia getting Wilsonian Armenia and Galicia (with Cracow) is more than enough spoilage from a short war. Though, the easiest way to a short war I can see is Ottoman neutrality.
 
Last edited:
Why should they? Abolition of the strong central European power that hadn't existed prior to 1871 was the aim of the fringe, who had dominated the centre for centuries before 1870.
It was the demise of the Russian Empire and the threat of the forming Soviet Union that moved them not to dissect Germany more than they already did.

A victorious Tsarist Russia takes East Prussia and adds Posen Province and Silesia to her Polish Duchy. France goes - with Russian backing - for the Rhine border. Bavaria and the Southern states get extra conditions for seceding from the Reich. - And the British - unable to prevent the Franco-Russian fait accompli in Europe - enjoy possession of the former German Colonies and console themselves that the British Empire is now bigger than it ever was before...

rast

I don't know about this, especially in a short victorious war. You don't have the same degree of devastation, nor the need for gravely weakening Germany explicitly because counters to it in the east have collapsed with the fall of both Russian and Austrian empires. I could possibly see the Rhine demilitarised but seeking to annex it. Also Russia would be making a rod for its own back by bringing all the Poles under their control.

Also your basic assumption was wrong. No one had an explicit aim to 'abolish' Germany and most groups would realise the stupidity of trying, at least by foreign occupation. The aim, as it had been for centuries was to stop one national/political group being overwhelmingly dominant. The western powers especially have a vested interest in not going too far in weakening Germany because in a couple of decades that overwhelming power might be Russia.

Steve
 
Guys

In the event of a quick allied victory I suspect that even Enhva Pasha would be able to get the Ottomans in on the central power side. If the crew of the Goeben still attack Russian ports while flying the Ottoman flag its likely he either repudiates their actions or he gets replaced by other Young Turks. I can't see them getting involved as there's no point in supporting a lost cause. Even if they did their role would probably be fairly trivial before an armistice is agreed so probably no changes other than the formality of Egypt ceasing to be an Ottoman protectorate.

With Austria I could see a fairly moderate peace as no one would benefit from a major partition of it, except for possibly Italy who may well not jump in in time. It might lose Bosnia to Serbia, which could help Austria and really foul up Serbia and possibly Galacia to Russian Poland but other than that would likely be unchanged.

Steve

The thing is, it also still creates problems in Western Asia as a Sykes-Picot partition would be in play. Also, what colony would Germany get to keep?

What do you see happening to Austria-Hungary?

The territorial losses should be minimal and limited to the east because Italy would be unable to jump in. Oh I forgot, Russia would probably want A-H to give something up to Serbia.

But the whole Imperial structure may be in line for changes, and Franz Josef's death may provide the necessary spark. Dissolution isn't the only possible outcome though.
 
Guys

In the event of a quick allied victory I suspect that even Enhva Pasha would be able to get the Ottomans in on the central power side. If the crew of the Goeben still attack Russian ports while flying the Ottoman flag its likely he either repudiates their actions or he gets replaced by other Young Turks. I can't see them getting involved as there's no point in supporting a lost cause. Even if they did their role would probably be fairly trivial before an armistice is agreed so probably no changes other than the formality of Egypt ceasing to be an Ottoman protectorate.

With Austria I could see a fairly moderate peace as no one would benefit from a major partition of it, except for possibly Italy who may well not jump in in time. It might lose Bosnia to Serbia, which could help Austria and really foul up Serbia and possibly Galacia to Russian Poland but other than that would likely be unchanged.

Steve

This makes sense, but could Bukovina still change hands, and if so, does it go to Russian Poland, to Romania, or does it become independent?
 
This makes sense, but could Bukovina still change hands, and if so, does it go to Russian Poland, to Romania, or does it become independent?

Wendell

Not sure but since Romania's unlikely to get off the fence in time, especially given its monarch;), I would guess if it moved it would be to Russian Poland.

Steve
 
Wendell

Not sure but since Romania's unlikely to get off the fence in time, especially given its monarch;), I would guess if it moved it would be to Russian Poland.

Steve

That makes sense, actually, especially given its demographic cross between Bessarabia (already Russian ruled at this time) and Galicia.
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
I could see Britain demanding ships (warships, passenger and merchant), Second Industrial Revolution infrastructure and technicians in reparation. All those chemical factories (especially Haber process) and engineering works would be moved to Britain. An early ICI plus engineering education and scientific management.

France would want land. A-L, Saar region and colonies. Russia has lots of land already, so is more likely to go after the gold.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Easiest changes to help Entente:

1) Ottomans stay neutral, large amounts of supplies delivered to Russian Army, which is much stronger in 1915/1916.
2) 1st and 2nd Russian army encrypt their communication.
3) Keeping Ottomans out + some sweeteners gets Bulgaria on winning side.
4) France's plan pre-1912 was to defend against sweep through Belgium. Keep this plan in 1914.
 
Top