Altered WW1 Alliances

Germaniac

Donor
I am working on a short TL set during a first world war where Germany-Italy-Russia are pitted against France-Austria-Britain. How do you think this war would proceed?

I would think that A) Italy and France both attempt attacks over alps but realize the futility and it becomes a backwater, B) Italian-Austrian front similar to OTL front. C) Germany attacks France similar to OTL D) joint Russo-German attacks on Austria-Hungary with Germany attacking Bohemia-Moravia while the Russians attack Galicia.
 
Why is Italy commiting suicide? They instanty lose control of the entirety of their coastal waters, by which most of their internal trade comes. And they would then get to allocate most of their army to guarding against invasion, while lots of their people starve to death and freeze in the dark due to the instant lack of resources

Italy's great skill in the century leading up to ww2 had been to calculate the winner of any conflict and then join that side. This one looks like a total loser for them.

What are the ottomans doing? The dodecanese and libya look nice to have back.
 
Well, had WWI delayed by 10 to 20 years, the alliances would be this:

Allies:
Britain, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Ottoman Empire, Portugal, United States, Japan.

Axis:
France, Russia, Greece, Spain, Serbia.
 
Well, had WWI delayed by 10 to 20 years, the alliances would be this:

Allies:
Britain, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Ottoman Empire, Portugal, United States, Japan.

Axis:
France, Russia, Greece, Spain, Serbia.


I do not understand you, why would we have Britain switching sides if world war 1 was ten years later I mean Germany by this stage would still have their massive fleet programme and Britain would still be worried over German Hegemony over Europe
 
I do not understand you, why would we have Britain switching sides if world war 1 was ten years later I mean Germany by this stage would still have their massive fleet programme and Britain would still be worried over German Hegemony over Europe

What I mean is that delaying WWI by 10 to 20 years will result to rapid industrialization of Russia and Russia is expanding its railways and its army and navy will be modernizing without interruption. Given with stronger Russian Empire by 1924 or 1934 with delayed WWI, Russia will replace Germany as the threat of British hegemony in the seas.
 
I am working on a short TL set during a first world war where Germany-Italy-Russia are pitted against France-Austria-Britain. How do you think this war would proceed?

I would think that A) Italy and France both attempt attacks over alps but realize the futility and it becomes a backwater, B) Italian-Austrian front similar to OTL front. C) Germany attacks France similar to OTL D) joint Russo-German attacks on Austria-Hungary with Germany attacking Bohemia-Moravia while the Russians attack Galicia.

German-Austria-Russia sounds better (bringing back the old Alliance of Three Emperors). And Italy would be more confident on France's side, right?
 
I am working on a short TL set during a first world war where Germany-Italy-Russia are pitted against France-Austria-Britain. How do you think this war would proceed?

Under the military circumstances of summer 1914 IOTL (and they're the only frame of reference we've got, unless you tell us more), major disruption of Italian economy as has been pointed out is combined with the swift collapse of Austria, after which Germany stomps of France and the embarrased remnants of the *Entente sue for peace.

Just why these coalitions would occur is beyond me, though. By 1914, the most reliable and important rivalry, on which everything else turned, was in my opinion the rivalry between Russia and Germany (in her capacity as Austria's patron) for control of the Straits. Russia and Germany were both strong countries with expanding spheres of influence. They could hardly avoid bumping heads, whether violently or not.

Well, had WWI delayed by 10 to 20 years, the alliances would be this:

Nothing is inevitable until it happens.

I do not understand you, why would we have Britain switching sides if world war 1 was ten years later I mean Germany by this stage would still have their massive fleet programme and Britain would still be worried over German Hegemony over Europe

It should be noted that Britain had, by 1914, pretty conclusively won the naval race (as WW1 shows) and we were looking for a way to let the Germans bow out.

The German threat to dominate Europe might actually lessen, if Russia becomes stronger (which it was doing in 1914, though one can't discount the disruptive effects of a possible revolution).

What I mean is that delaying WWI by 10 to 20 years will result to rapid industrialization of Russia and Russia is expanding its railways and its army and navy will be modernizing without interruption. Given with stronger Russian Empire by 1924 or 1934 with delayed WWI, Russia will replace Germany as the threat of British hegemony in the seas.

The idea is, assuming no revolution, not too implausible. The Russians could never be a naval threat in the way the Germans were simply because they did not have a coast on the North Sea, but they could menace the Empire in various places. The last letters between George and Nick before WW1 were an attempt to defuse strained relations in Persia, in fact.

The idea that tsarist Russia might become much stronger and drive Germany and Britain to reconcile is plausible (which isn't to say war is the likeliest outcome), but where does your strange certainty about what all the other countries will do in this scenario come from?
 
Last edited:
Traditionally the old style Monarchies Germany, Austria-Hungaria and Russia were more closely related to eachother than to one of the more western European States, as all were rather Ancien Regime and less democratically developped than the West. So on this base, they technically coudl get well along, if focussed on the social agenda only.

On Nationalistuc motives, the Slavisch Rusian Empire was an archenemy of both A-H and Germany, who were mostly multi-ethnic, but dominated by the Germanic people. This Nationalistic attitude also made France a likley opponent to the German and A-H Empire, as France was more or less a National State, compared to the more multi Ethnic neighbours. Italy was questionably the same, being not truly national state, but roughly made up of a more European orientated North and a more Mediteranean orientated South. The UK were left outside this, being traditionally much more Liberal towards minorities.

So the proposed German-Rusian-Italian Alliance is not possible, as two archenemies are not going on well with eachother and Italy is a serious uncertain factor (as it also was in the OTL). A-H and France could not get well with eacother for simmilar reasons, besides both laying claims on being the leaders of their alliance as well, making it a serious competition. The UK could tie up with any state, or alliance, except with Russia, which was considered a liability and a contender in colonial affairs. (Also France, but to a somewhat lesser sence, as France did not threaten the UK's primary colony India, which Russia did by claiming Perisa and parts of today's Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan.)

So an Alliance between a German orientated Coalition of Germany, A-H as a core, could more likely be supported by the UK, Italy and possibly some lesser states, while the block around Russia was more likely to be supported by France and possibly some minor states as well. That would be the core for any alliance forming in the pre WW1 period.
 
The UK were left outside this, being traditionally much more Liberal towards minorities.

Yeah, we only imposed English-language schools all over the Highlands, organised the systematic theft of the land, and chucked out the inhabitants to make room for the sheep, unlike the cruel Germans who attacked their Danish population with language rights. :rolleyes:

Every minority in every country has its own story. Generalisations never tell us anything of substance.
 

Eurofed

Banned
Why is Italy commiting suicide? They instanty lose control of the entirety of their coastal waters, by which most of their internal trade comes. And they would then get to allocate most of their army to guarding against invasion, while lots of their people starve to death and freeze in the dark due to the instant lack of resources

Italy's great skill in the century leading up to ww2 had been to calculate the winner of any conflict and then join that side. This one looks like a total loser for them.

What are the ottomans doing? The dodecanese and libya look nice to have back.

As it concerns the economic and military situation of Italy, please be mindful that it all depends on when this alliance system is established. If it hearkens back some decades, and it becomes TTL equivalent of the Triple Alliance, Italy can easily take steps to significantly diminish its vulnerability in the early phase of a general war: develop the railroad system within Italy and across the Alps, build stockpiles of commodities, fortify the Alps and the coasts. In this war, the German-Russian-Italian alliance is sure to take a defensive stance against France and in the Balkans and the Middle East (since Turkey is to be assumed to go Entente), and to focus their resources to quickly crush Austria with a three-front offensive. After the Habsburg empire is overrun, the Triple Alliance controls Central Europe, Italy has unrestricted access to German and Russian commodities to feed its war economy and can support its allies with crushing France, then Turkey with overwhelming numbers. Then Britain can talk peace terms, or enjoy the sight of the TA picking apart its empire in the Middle East piece by piece.

Onkel Willie made a rather good TL where a German-Russian-Italian Triple Alliance forms when Bismarck chooses to support Russia, not Austria, during the Congress of Berlin.
 
Last edited:

Eurofed

Banned
If the PoD is in the late 70s-early 80s, the effort is to be spread across several decades, so it doesn't amount to much, and it builds on stuff (development of the railroad network, fortification of the Alps and the coasts) that Italy did IOTL anyway. And Germany can surely spare some loans to help strengthen an ally that secures the southern side of the alliance.
 

Typo

Banned
Dude, like the money has to come from somewhere which it was spent historically, since you are asking for them to do significantly more than OTL

I don't think you understand that Italy was absolutely amazingly poor before 1945.
 
Top