Could the Franco-Russian alliance, initiated in 1892, plausibly have broken up in its first 20 years of existence through 1912? If so, how?
For this to happen, you need Germany to buy either Russia or France into breaking their common alliance.
It is Germany's policy in the 1870´s that drove France and Russia into a necessary common alliance.
Germany isolated France and inflicted on It an irreconcilable wound that was perceived as an illegitimate amputation. And Germany went through such an incredible growth, modernization and rise that France would never go to war against Germany unless It felt compelled to.
And Germany isolated Russia a few years later.
This was a mistake that drove to the building of 2 major rival alliances on the continent.
So the question is : who was most easily buyable ?
To my opinion this was France because Russia was a superpower on the rise. If Germany had generously given back Alsace-Mosel to France, the alliance between France and Russia would have been dissolved in case of a major crisis. Best moment to do it was in July 1914, instead of the ultimatum demanding France to hand over several border fortresses to prevent german agression.
Indeed it was - and even moreso the preemptive-strike strategy in 1914. Like committing suicide because you're afraid to die.
The Franco-German rivalry didn't start with A-L and won't end with A-L. It's just a symptom. As much as I'd love them to see how self-destructive that rivalry was, I see no way now either Paris or Berlin can have that much insight.
Even less I can imagine that the July crisis is an appropriate way of doing so. If Wilhelm and Moltke understand that the Schlieffen Plan won't work they'll probably seek some last-minute diplomacy to prevent war and then try to reboot their alliances. This may include a referendum in A-L that they hope to win, but ceedig German-speaking territory to a non-German-speeking neighbor who wasn't friendly when he still had the said territory will be difficult to sell.
OTOH abandoning Austria and will settle all disputes that Germany has with Russia, taking the French role as loan provider for Russia will neutralize the Russian need for an alliance with France. Other benefits are:
So my heart is on buying out France, but my mind says Russia is the only logical choice.
- the option to annex German-speaking Austria when A-H collapses.
- France is no danger without Russia, but Russia is still dangarous without France, so an alliance with Russia removes both threads.
- The hilariously stupid Anglo-German naval arms race suddenly makes sense: The combined German and Russian navies may be strong enough to rival Britain.
Russia is in fact too big to be bought. Buying Russia would mean giving-up Germany's goal of Mitteleuropa.
Russia had a population of around 160 million people by 1913. And It would never accept being shut out of eastern Europe.
France alone was no match for Germany. Even if It had regained Alsace-Mosel, Germany would still have some 24 million people more than France, that is 57% more. And its industrial production was more than twice as big as France's.
Russia wasn't too big to be bought by France IOTL, and Germany had more of everything that France offered: Money, technology and backing for Russian expansionism into the Balkans.
As for Mitteleuropa: Do correct me it I'm wrong, but that idea never went beyond a mere brainstorming, let alone something Germany would even hesitate to give up when there were good reasons to do so. Wilhelm isn't Adolf and WWI isn't WWII.
I absolutely agree that France alone was no match for Germany, and that Germany can do without A-L, but I have doubts that this matters much. The difference in population and GDP didn't keep France from defeating Germany IOTL. What keeps France from taking A-L and secretly staying in the Entente? If the French do honor that deal, what makes the Germans trust them? And last but not least, which alliance sounds more tempting:
Another aspect is: An alliance to France strenghtens Republicanism, an alliance with Russia strengthens Autocratic Revisionism - the former is good for Germany, the latter good for the people who will make that decision.
- Russia wants no territory, gives the long-term perspective to annex German Austria leaves Germany without a strong enemy on any of its borders.
- France wants territory, has nothing to offer except peace itself, and Germany is the frontier state to Russia.
Who buyed who ? You know, when a giant owes you billions, It is you who are at risk. Not the giant indebted to you. OTL, Russia defaulted on its debt and France was the country that lost more than anyone in this default.
France desperatly needed a powerful ally to cease being at the mercy of overpowerful Germany.
France alone was absolutely unable to defeat Germany alone. It was able to win WW1 at a terrible cost only because It had enjoyed the support of the british empire and the russian empire, not to say the USA.
One can't understand Germany's fury, revanchism and hitlerism if one does not take into account the fact that the most powerful, most advanced and best organized country in Europe was defeated by a coalition of individually weaker, less advanced and not as well organized countries. This was untolerable for german pride and considered kind of against nature.
Mitteleuropa was much more than a mere brainstorming. It was Germany's war goals expressed in the september program (mass annexations up to the Meuse river, the Don river and Crimea) and communicated to Germany's enemies in the negotiations that took place at different times during the war.
My point of view is that Russia could not be "bought" by Germany because both wanted the same thing over which they could not compromise : hegemony, domination.
For Russia, foreign capitals and technology was not an end. It was a means to a goal : delivering the russian empire's full gigantic potential. And Germany was terrified at this prospect. That's why It decided to wage a preemptive war against Russia in 1914 : in order to wage this war before Russia became too modern and too powerful even for Germany.