AHC: Ottoman Empire takes Egypt during WW1

Your challenge is to make sure Ottomans conquer Egypt all the way to, say, Al Alamein and hold it until the end of the war with a POD no earlier than 1 January 1910.
 
Plausible. The Ottomans had a claim on Egypt.

Sounds like this could could be a Central powers victory WW1 scenario where Italy joins and invades Egypt from Libya.
 
Your challenge is to make sure Ottomans conquer Egypt all the way to, say, Al Alamein and hold it until the end of the war with a POD no earlier than 1 January 1910.

With a 1910 POD? That's simple and doesn't even really require too radical of a shift in events.

Italy accepts the Ottoman compromise in 1911 to gradually take administrative control of Libya (under nominal Ottoman sovereignty) without a war: it saves both of them money, face in the international community, and avoids the risks of the other Great Powers taking the opportunity to meddle in their affairs. Without the political fallout created by the lose, the Ottoman state isen't thrown into chaos by the coup against The Young Turks, which when combined with a more intact and continued reorganization/modernization of the Ottoman army, the lack of damage to its navy, and the revelation that nobody was going to intervene to defend Ottoman territorial integrity, the Balkan League dare not launch any opportunistic attacks on Imperial territory in Europe. This gives the CUP further time to cement its domestic position, continue on its modernizing vision for the state, preserves Ottoman military resources and trust in the population in its ability to protect them/fear in their ability to repress them, avoid the intensity and perception of viability of ethnic seperatism within the Empire to a certain degree, as well as deny the Serbians of vital military experiances that would give them a vital organizational and tactical advantages over their Hapsburg counterparts earlier in the war. Without either the Balkan or Italo-Turkish war, there's also significantly less evidence of the importance air power would play in modern warfare, meaning the British don't deploy airplanes in as out-of-the-way location as Egypt.

Assuming the Great War roles around as IRL (Its not like Serbian radicals are going to be LESS likely to assassinate the Archduke, since their dream of Greater Serbia is still further denied, nor Austria less likely to declare war on a weaker Serbia), and the Ottomans end up as part of the CP, they come in with an army who's morale is much higher, better stocked with equipment, supported by a more unified and functional state, and with greater faith from its minority subjects and (through the Balkans) immediate access to material and command support from Germany. This allows for a stronger push from the Levant into Egypt, where Britain: lacking air recon, don't notice the offensive quite as quickly or build up the defences of the Suez as fast. Ottoman attacks on the Suez are therefore a victory, and engineers from the Berlin-Baghdad railway project alongside military engineers from Germany work to build the rail and pipe network across the Sinai to make the military presence stick and construct defenses. With a very real presence in the area now standing behind the Sultan's call to revolt/Jihad, the local Egyptians turn (at least in subtle ways) against the British military occupation, who pressured by Senussi raids from the West and their relative isolation from support from the rest of the Empire following the closure of the Canal find their position slowly collapsing... which only triggers further and more open Egyptian resistance and panic among local Commonwealth loyalists, leading to a steady withdrawal towards Alexandria.

Italy; who's relations with the Ottomans and Austrians are (slightly) warmer in this timeline due to the successful compromise and better CP military performance in Serbia and the Middle East (LIkely including the complete destruction of the Serbian army, since there's no Albania or Salonika connection for them to escape out of) remains neutral longer, happy to allow the Libyan rebels to die against British bullets rather than undermining Italian rule in their new province. Denied a solid position to retreat to west of Alexandria by Italian neutrality with the port to supply a major military campaign, London decides trying to hold the region is a lost cause and that the troops could better be used elsewhere. A policy of "orderly evacuation" is adopted: similar to the retreat from Gallipoli if done under fire, with the army being sent to the south of France for eventual re-deployment to the British sectors in Flanders under a doctrine of taking out Germany in order to cripple its weaker partners. Al-Alamein; a non-discript hunk of rock in the desert, sees the Cresent-and-Star rise above it on a day of little import outside maybe some dusty book, maybe sometime in late 1916/early 1917
 
I'd actually like to see a full timeline of that.

As would I... indeed, I'm sorely tempted by a handful of timeline ideas that have come up relating to the ottomans after reveiwing some of my own stuff and reading through some extended timelines by others. But given my past issues I'm unsure of my abilities to provide the steady stream of updates a good thread requires ad its readers deserve alone.
 
Plausible. The Ottomans had a claim on Egypt.

Sounds like this could could be a Central powers victory WW1 scenario where Italy joins and invades Egypt from Libya.

Also, I'm not sure this would count, since in that case the Italians would almost certainly be the ones to reach the target first.
 
Also, I'm not sure this would count, since in that case the Italians would almost certainly be the ones to reach the target first.
I think it is valid.

The Italians could help conquer Egypt and than lose it to the Ottomans at the peace conference postwar. Or the Italian forces could defeat the British land forces in Egypt only for their navy to be completely destroyed by the Allied Navy. The Ottomans could move in thereafter because they are less vulnerable than the Italians to a blockade. The only thing the Ottomans would need to do is to close the Suez and keep it closed for the rest of the war.
 
Last edited:
I think it is valid.

The Italians could help conquer Egypt and than lose it to the Ottomans at the peace conference postwar. Or the Italian forces could defeat the British land forces in Egypt only for their navy to be completely destroyed by the Allied Navy. The Ottomans could move in thereafter because they are less vulnerable than the Italians to a blockade. The only thing the Ottomans would need to do is to close the Suez and keep it closed for the rest of the war.

The operative word in the OP was "conquer", so having it dropped into their lap at a peace conferance without reaching that point on the ground dosen't really seem to fit that definition. That's for Gwachinko to decide though.
 
I think there is some distinct underestimation going on regarding the value and importance of the Suez Canal to the British Empire. It will not simply sigh and give up. Britain can bring to bear at least 3 divisions worth of troops from India, the various Indian expeditionary forces used in Egypt and elsewhere in @, the South Africans, the Anzacs, 2 TA divisions and elements of Home Forces, at a minimum, plus the small matter of the Royal Navy. This is the artery of empire and would be the focus of a great deal of force and priority.

The Ottoman Army or the industrial structure of the Empire cannot be sufficiently changed or reformed in 4 years to surmount the logistical difficulties of a cross-Sinai invasion and simply ascribing German assistance as a panacea will not necessarily suffice.

Simply asserting that a lack of an Italo-Turkish War will butterfly military aircraft developments away to the extent that the British ignore what would necessarily be a vast logistical buildup in Palestine isn't going to cut it; even if there is a craze for lead paint in Cairo, there are still other means of intelligence apart from aerial observation.

A PoD would need to be substantially earlier than 1910 to achieve success in this matter. As it stands, it fails the test of realism and practicality.
 
Your challenge is to make sure Ottomans conquer Egypt all the way to, say, Al Alamein and hold it until the end of the war with a POD no earlier than 1 January 1910.

Launching a surprise attack into Egypt during the first weeks of WW1 while the British Empire is distracted the Ottoman Empire conquers Egypt.

Meanwhile in Europe one of 2 things happen

Cooler heads prevail and the whole war comes to an end - or one side rapidly beats the other

What ever happens the war is over in a month or 2 and suddenly faced with the undivided attention of the British Empire the Ottomans withdraw.

This is the only way that the Ottomans get to hold it "to the end of the war" - because anything longer than that sees their over extended forces beaten back and eventually defeated by the British Empire - possibly aided by others who do not want to see the Suez canal closed!
 

BlondieBC

Banned
I think there is some distinct underestimation going on regarding the value and importance of the Suez Canal to the British Empire. It will not simply sigh and give up. Britain can bring to bear at least 3 divisions worth of troops from India, the various Indian expeditionary forces used in Egypt and elsewhere in @, the South Africans, the Anzacs, 2 TA divisions and elements of Home Forces, at a minimum, plus the small matter of the Royal Navy. This is the artery of empire and would be the focus of a great deal of force and priority.

The Ottoman Army or the industrial structure of the Empire cannot be sufficiently changed or reformed in 4 years to surmount the logistical difficulties of a cross-Sinai invasion and simply ascribing German assistance as a panacea will not necessarily suffice.

Simply asserting that a lack of an Italo-Turkish War will butterfly military aircraft developments away to the extent that the British ignore what would necessarily be a vast logistical buildup in Palestine isn't going to cut it; even if there is a craze for lead paint in Cairo, there are still other means of intelligence apart from aerial observation.

A PoD would need to be substantially earlier than 1910 to achieve success in this matter. As it stands, it fails the test of realism and practicality.

Good points. What @FillyofDelphi left out is one small event. Due to the CP being in better shape in this alternative WW1, the Germans gain the channel coast in the Race to the Sea. With the panic that sets in as the Germans move the large land based naval guns to Calais along with various smaller ships, the UK is faced with even a darker challenge. Much like in WW2, the Med is "temporarily" abandoned. It just turns into a permanent state of affairs. The British fall back to Aden as their main base to contain the Red Sea issue. The UK also keeps some forces in the South Sinai to close up the canal.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Launching a surprise attack into Egypt during the first weeks of WW1 while the British Empire is distracted the Ottoman Empire conquers Egypt.

Meanwhile in Europe one of 2 things happen

Cooler heads prevail and the whole war comes to an end - or one side rapidly beats the other

What ever happens the war is over in a month or 2 and suddenly faced with the undivided attention of the British Empire the Ottomans withdraw.

This is the only way that the Ottomans get to hold it "to the end of the war" - because anything longer than that sees their over extended forces beaten back and eventually defeated by the British Empire - possibly aided by others who do not want to see the Suez canal closed!

Not possible unless by sea, and the Ottomans navy will be too small. The Sinai can only be crossed in January due to water issues unless you want to build a railroad.
 
Good points. What @FillyofDelphi left out is one small event. Due to the CP being in better shape in this alternative WW1, the Germans gain the channel coast in the Race to the Sea. With the panic that sets in as the Germans move the large land based naval guns to Calais along with various smaller ships, the UK is faced with even a darker challenge. Much like in WW2, the Med is "temporarily" abandoned. It just turns into a permanent state of affairs. The British fall back to Aden as their main base to contain the Red Sea issue. The UK also keeps some forces in the South Sinai to close up the canal.

Even in such a case, the British Empire (note the difference from the UK) is not going to take the loss of Suez or the Mediterranean lying down. It has the forces, the ships, the money and the will and is in a very different position to 1940/41.

It is not a matter of containing the Red Sea, but controlling the Suez Canal. As said, it will be the focus of all of the forces used in Gallipoli, Mesopotamia and Africa, which can be moved to Egypt relatively faster than a sufficiently large Ottoman army can be built up and advance across Suez while building a railway.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Even in such a case, the British Empire (note the difference from the UK) is not going to take the loss of Suez or the Mediterranean lying down. It has the forces, the ships, the money and the will and is in a very different position to 1940/41.

It is not a matter of containing the Red Sea, but controlling the Suez Canal. As said, it will be the focus of all of the forces used in Gallipoli, Mesopotamia and Africa, which can be moved to Egypt relatively faster than a sufficiently large Ottoman army can be built up and advance across Suez while building a railway.

If the war is going badly against the Entente and Flanders has fallen and Germany has part of the English Channel, the things you list will merely be unfulfilled wishes. For a historical example, one can look at when push comes to shove, the 13 Colonies are negotiable. As is when push comes to shove fighting the Axis, Indian independence is A Ok.
 
You are mixing and matching historical circumstances rather fast and wild there and doing so with your own addition to the proposed scenario.

If Germany has the Channel Ports, then the defence of the British Isles falls upon the second line Territorial Army, the New Army and the Grand Fleet.

It does not require the Indian Army, the Anzacs or the collected older vessels of the Mediterranean Fleet and other stations to the east. Indeed, keeping Suez open becomes a vital matter, as it sustains the trade and financial flow of the Empire that would be needed to keep up a defence against a greater threat at home.

Egypt is not going to take resources away from the Channel, France and Home Defence, save for the Australian and New Zealand forces. The rest of the forces used at Gallipoli, Salonika, Mesopotamia, East Africa and historically in Palestine would be focused on Egypt. This presents too great a difficulty for the Turks to overcome from a 1910 standing start.
 
Top