AHC: Germany collapses in 1917

kernals12

Banned
If Germany had collapsed a year earlier than IOTL, the world would be a much better place. Kerensky's provisional government in Russia could establish a Democracy. No communism, no red scare, no fascism etc.
So how can we make this happen?
 

NoMommsen

Donor
Kerensky's provisional government in Russia could establish a Democracy.
(Uhmmm, as "democratic" as the current presidential regiment ?)
Raid-in of current politics aside :

IF - big if - Kerensky manages to stay in power past february 1918 (ITTL without the "need" of a Kerensky-offense as IOTL), I somehow doubt, that it would be a democratic russia but a presidential (at best) dictatorship, that still has to struggle against various factions all over the former tsarist empire.

... still same doubts even if there is a Kerensky-offensive as part of the german collaps. Maybe an even better "receipt" for a Kerensky-dictatorship.

There are too many "breaking-lines" (industrialists vs. workers, city vs. peasantry, nobility vs. liberal bourgoise, liberal bourgoise vs. socialistic revolutionaries, to name a few), that these would NOT be "utilized" by the contestants for power.

Tbh : I doubt, that after the February-Revolution there won't be at some point something similar to the russian civil war of OTL, though probably lesser in scope than IOTL

No communism, no red scare, no fascism etc.
So how can we make this happen?
Let Germany win in Winter 1916/17 latest. :biggrin:
 
If Germany had collapsed a year earlier than IOTL, the world would be a much better place. Kerensky's provisional government in Russia could establish a Democracy. No communism, no red scare, no fascism etc.
So how can we make this happen?

You can't - at least not with a 1917 PoD.

Maybe, if the Brusilov Offensive is more successful and Austria-Hungary collapses, Germany could have to sue for peace in late 1916, but

a) The BO, even if somewhat more successful than OTL, is unlikely to do well enough for that.

b) If it does the beneficiary will not be Kerensky, but the Tsar. Indeed the February Revolution may well be butterflied away or at least postponed a long time.
 
Also a victorious Russia poses another problem: have a look at the territories that were promised to it. The world would be a very different place indeed.

Another is fascism is pretty much unavoidable IMO. Its inevitable for it to pop up somewhere at that ultranationalistic time after the war.
 
Have Turkey stay neutral

This opens the Bosphorus - which was responsible for 90% of Russian supplies etc

It also frees up hundreds of thousands of Entente troops who could be used on the Western Front / Italy

Hence Germany defeated/comes to terms in 1917
 
Have Turkey stay neutral

This opens the Bosphorus - which was responsible for 90% of Russian supplies etc

It also frees up hundreds of thousands of Entente troops who could be used on the Western Front / Italy

Hence Germany defeated/comes to terms in 1917


But if Russia is that much better off, the Tsar probably isn't overthrown, even if the war lasts into 1917 - which it might well not.
 
But if Russia is that much better off, the Tsar probably isn't overthrown, even if the war lasts into 1917 - which it might well not.

Better off than they were - wether or not if it is enough???

Perhaps greater pressure on the western front forces greater number of German reserves to be sent to that front making it easier on the Russians in 1915 and 1916

But as you imply the damage might already have been done - but Victory covers a multitude of sins
 
Better off than they were - wether or not if it is enough???

Could well be. Iirc, Nicholas agreed to abdicate under pressure from the generals, and fear that a refusal could mean civil war, leaving Russia at the mercy of Germany. If Russia is clearly in sight of victory, he has no reason to step down.


But as you imply the damage might already have been done - but Victory covers a multitude of sins

Indeed - even for a clot like Nicky II.
 
But if Russia is that much better off, the Tsar probably isn't overthrown, even if the war lasts into 1917 - which it might well not.

The Tsar is definitely not overthrown and the war ends in 1916 at the latest.

Better off than they were - wether or not if it is enough???

Perhaps greater pressure on the western front forces greater number of German reserves to be sent to that front making it easier on the Russians in 1915 and 1916

But as you imply the damage might already have been done - but Victory covers a multitude of sins

It takes very little for the Tsar to stay in power. Even Nicholas taking a different train in February 1917 would butterfly it away


Could well be. Iirc, Nicholas agreed to abdicate under pressure from the generals, and fear that a refusal could mean civil war, leaving Russia at the mercy of Germany. If Russia is clearly in sight of victory, he has no reason to step down.




Indeed - even for a clot like Nicky II.

Nicholas may have been a "clot" but he held the country together for 23 years. Kerensky and his band of traitors barely last 23 weeks
 

kernals12

Banned
Could well be. Iirc, Nicholas agreed to abdicate under pressure from the generals, and fear that a refusal could mean civil war, leaving Russia at the mercy of Germany. If Russia is clearly in sight of victory, he has no reason to step down.




Indeed - even for a clot like Nicky II.
Even Nicky II was preferable to Lenin and Stalin.
 

kernals12

Banned
(Uhmmm, as "democratic" as the current presidential regiment ?)
Raid-in of current politics aside :

IF - big if - Kerensky manages to stay in power past february 1918 (ITTL without the "need" of a Kerensky-offense as IOTL), I somehow doubt, that it would be a democratic russia but a presidential (at best) dictatorship, that still has to struggle against various factions all over the former tsarist empire.

... still same doubts even if there is a Kerensky-offensive as part of the german collaps. Maybe an even better "receipt" for a Kerensky-dictatorship.

There are too many "breaking-lines" (industrialists vs. workers, city vs. peasantry, nobility vs. liberal bourgoise, liberal bourgoise vs. socialistic revolutionaries, to name a few), that these would NOT be "utilized" by the contestants for power.

Tbh : I doubt, that after the February-Revolution there won't be at some point something similar to the russian civil war of OTL, though probably lesser in scope than IOTL

Let Germany win in Winter 1916/17 latest. :biggrin:
Putin's rise was substantially motivated by the humiliation of the USSR's collapse. Kerensky will be in the exact opposite situation of Yeltsin, Russia will have defeated Germany and probably gained new territory.
 

Deleted member 1487

Have Turkey stay neutral

This opens the Bosphorus - which was responsible for 90% of Russian supplies etc

It also frees up hundreds of thousands of Entente troops who could be used on the Western Front / Italy

Hence Germany defeated/comes to terms in 1917
Probably sooner than that, maybe even 1916.
 
The economic heart of Europe collapses and you think things will be better? Best case scenario it goes Communist. Worst case is a failed state that will suck up a lot of occupation troops with the continued spending and bloodshed that entails. Scientists and other educated professionals likely emigrate a generation earlier further compounding Germany's problems, unless they go Red.

Russia will be lucky if the Provisional Government survives. I get a Weimar vibe with Russia yearning for a return to an authoritarian leader.

So we get a reverse WWII with a fascist Russia and a Communist Germany.
 

kernals12

Banned
The economic heart of Europe collapses and you think things will be better? Best case scenario it goes Communist. Worst case is a failed state that will suck up a lot of occupation troops with the continued spending and bloodshed that entails. Scientists and other educated professionals likely emigrate a generation earlier further compounding Germany's problems, unless they go Red.

Russia will be lucky if the Provisional Government survives. I get a Weimar vibe with Russia yearning for a return to an authoritarian leader.

So we get a reverse WWII with a fascist Russia and a Communist Germany.
By collapse, I meant militarily, as happened in late 1918.
 
Even Nicky II was preferable to Lenin and Stalin.


Couldn't agree more. But most people who do threads like this put their faith in the Provisional Government, which imho never stood much chance. For my money, the only question is whether Russia ends up with a despotism of the left or of the right.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Couldn't agree more. But most people who do threads like this put their faith in the Provisional Government, which imho never stood much chance. For my money, the only question is whether Russia ends up with a despotism of the left or of the right.

While it is an excellent point that you and others have that the probable Russian beneficiary of any PoD that collapses Germany in 1917 is the Tsar rather than the Provisional Government, it is just *possible* to thread the needle and end the war after the Tsar's overthrow and before the Bolshevik Revolution with a late breaking PoD or two. Here are a few ideas:

a) Unlike OTL, the Germans keep their forward lines in January 1917 instead of retrenching. Without a better organized and "thicker" defense in the west on the Hindenburg line, the Allied offensives of 1917 might actually work at driving back the overextended Germans, bite-by-bite, so that Germany collapses by the end of the year under the recurring blows and the WAllies and even Russians do not come to feel their efforts are futile.

b) The Germans mismanage the Hindenburg economic plan even more than OTL and this leads to imbalances that collapse the Army or home front earlier than OTL.

c) Romania does not declare war on Germany in 1916 in a moment of (ir)rational exuberance. Instead, she joins the war in 1917 after the American DoW and inspired by the British western offensive and Kerensky offensives.

d) a combination of a) and c) - Romania does not join the war in 1916 and as a consequence Falkenhayn remains in command. He insists on keeping the forward line in the west. This enables spring Entente offensives in the west to have some success. Coming around the same time as the American DoW, this leads to Romania declaring war in spring or early summer 1917, which adds more stress.

I could imagine all of these leading to Germany being down for the count by the end of 1917.

And furthermore, I think none of them, especially a, c or d, would bear obvious fruit for the Entente situation before the February revolution occurs in Russia.
 
I could imagine all of these leading to Germany being down for the count by the end of 1917 .


Trouble is, you haven't had the 1918 offensives, whose failure broke the German army's morale. W/o that a German collapse is at best extremely unlikely, and probably impossible.

So unless you can find a way for them to do Michael etc a year earlier - - -
 
Last edited:
Top