Anglo-German Alliance?

Hey Guys,

Throughout the end of the 19th Century and the beginning of the 20th Century Joseph Chamberlain tried multiple times to create a military alliance between both Britain and Germany, though on all occasions he failed either due to the German Foreign Minister, Bernhard von Bülow or due to the British Prime Minister, The Marquess of Salisbury.

But, what if Joseph Chamberlain had succeeded on one of the occasions due to some POD on either a more lenient PM, a more lenient German Foreign Minister, possible even by having Joseph Chamberlain taking a more influential parliamentary position (such as foreign minister rather than colonial secretary as OTL), or a drastic one being having a weaker German Emperor who had a weaker foreign minister, and thus more inclined to go along with Chamberlain perhaps.

So let's say that the military alliance is created between Britain and Germany, what effects would this have on Anglo-French relations? What other affects would follow the alliance between Britain and Germany?
 
If Wilhelm II had not been such an ass, it might have been possible too. His diplomatic bumbling didn't improve Germany's stature in the world. If it had happened, I dare say that WW I as we know it would have been butterflied away unless something really stupid happens. The alliance blocks will look like this:

Britain - Germany - Austria-Hungary and Italy vs. France and Russia.

America will likely remain neutral even if it is pro-British neutrality and the Ottoman Empire will only be drawn in if Russia, in the event of war, is stupid enough to open up a another front for itself. With this combination of powers allied against the Franco-Russian Alliance, getting into a war alone would be incredibly dumb. Italy will likely fight alongside the CPs ITTL or remain neutral, but they'll never joing the Entente against Austria-Hungary; that'd be suicidal.

France will be forced to try and play nice against the CPs even if they don't like it. Anglo-French relations will obviously deteriorate. In any war, Italy and Germany will attack simultaneously while the unbeatable Royal Navy will blockade French ports and keep the French Navy bottled up in its ports. Russia will then face German and Austro-Hungarian armies in Europe and British ones in the Middle East and perhaps Japan will jump in to expand in Manchuria at the expense of Russia. I say we're going to get an armed peace for the foreseeable future ITTL.
 
Hey Guys,

Throughout the end of the 19th Century and the beginning of the 20th Century Joseph Chamberlain tried multiple times to create a military alliance between both Britain and Germany, though on all occasions he failed either due to the German Foreign Minister, Bernhard von Bülow or due to the British Prime Minister, The Marquess of Salisbury.

But, what if Joseph Chamberlain had succeeded on one of the occasions due to some POD on either a more lenient PM, a more lenient German Foreign Minister, possible even by having Joseph Chamberlain taking a more influential parliamentary position (such as foreign minister rather than colonial secretary as OTL), or a drastic one being having a weaker German Emperor who had a weaker foreign minister, and thus more inclined to go along with Chamberlain perhaps.

So let's say that the military alliance is created between Britain and Germany, what effects would this have on Anglo-French relations? What other affects would follow the alliance between Britain and Germany?

He could not have been For. Sec. because Lord Salisbury had taken that office himself (a rare instance where the PM was not First Lord) .

The problem with an AngloGerman alliance was not really either Salisbury or von Bulow. Rather, it was that each country wished the other to accept "second place". And neither of those peers was a man to accept second anything. However, von Bulow was a particularly perspicious and intelligent man, and Salisbury was no fool (was there ever a Cecil that was?)

The best way to achieve it would have been to provide a common and significant enemy. Presumably, France. Though the German Fleet would always be a major problem.

Perhaps, a later Gen Boulanger - and a French attempt to "take" over Belgium? (They could establish adequate historical claims, though obviously the Treaty of Vienna would be a problem.). That would alienate both Britain and Germany. Luxembourg might be butterflied to give a PoD ?
 
He could not have been For. Sec. because Lord Salisbury had taken that office himself (a rare instance where the PM was not First Lord) .

Actually Lord Salisbury in his 3rd government, under pressure from Queen Victoria (and someone else who I can't remember) Salisbury gave up his office as Foreign Secretary which passed to Lord Lansdowne.It was during this time when Chamberlain tried for the 3rd time to create an Anglo-German alliance, and it looked to be his most successful time until he made a rather derogatory comment on the way the German troops acted during the Franco-Prussian War.
 
Perhaps some kind of Royal Unification between the British and Germany Monarchys pre-WWI... I'm not really fammiliar with the Germany Royal system, but I know the two royal families are allready related, not sure how that would play into it.

The German Army coupled with the British navy would make a powerful nation indeed.
 
I doubt it'd lead to 'WW1 with Britain joining the allies'.
British relations with France are just too good, a full understanding was being reached and friendship with Germany won't change that. At best Britain will remaining neutral, if the balance of power is under threat they may even join the entente anyway.
 
An alliance like this would mean a Germany that is willing to make intelligent diplomatic moves. With this alliance, France becomes quite isolatd. In the meantime, Russia also has many difficulties. The Central Powes win the war before it even starts.
 

Al-Buraq

Banned
I doubt it'd lead to 'WW1 with Britain joining the allies'.
British relations with France are just too good, a full understanding was being reached and friendship with Germany won't change that. At best Britain will remaining neutral, if the balance of power is under threat they may even join the entente anyway.

According to Paul Kennedy " Rise of Fall of British Naval Mastery", a strong factor in Britain's non-alliance with Germany and "semi-alliance" with France and Russia was Britain's relative Naval weakness by the turn of the 19th Century.
The RN could no longer rule the waves against multiple foes, so an Anglo-Japanese Alliance was made to allow a reduction of the Far East Squadron, an "understanding" with the US allowed a similar reduction of the Carribean and Pacific presence and a start was made on creating Commonwealth Navies.
If allied to Germany and nominally at risk of war with France and Russia (who knows where Italy would have ended up?) the RN would have as enemy coasts the entire channel, Atlantic and Mediterranean coasts of France, Half of North Africa a lot of the West African Coast and Indo-China threatening India and Malaya. The Russians were also positioned to threaten the Baltic and North Atlantic and on land, India (never forget India!). Help from Germany's fleet would have been (they thought) marginal as a Russo-French blockade of German ports could only be lifted by the RN.
Of course, all these fears came to pass in 1940.
The Entente Cordiale was not an alliance, just the best of a set of bad choices. Britain was careful to avoid the type of interlocking alliances that triggered the First World War and a formal deal with Imperial Germany would probably have brought war on a bit earlier with a worse result for Britain.
 
Top