Atrocities and peace in a CP-victory WWII

[Eurofed]

@Nivek:

I seem to remember having already stated somewhere upthread that a Pact Britain could be theoretically possible and plausible IF they go fascist (or even much less likely, communist) for reasons that have nothing to do with WWI outcome, such as the Great Depression. This is possible; however, if given that OTL interwar Britain never looked like having a serious risk of going to an extremist regime change, we would need the GD hitting Britain rather worse than OTL, and/or just the right low-probability event chain hitting Britain (e.g. the management of the 1926 General Strike going *really* bad). As I said, this is possible but it is not a high-probability event, so we have no need to concern themselves with it in the TL unless we are specifically seeking it to happen for story purposes.

I also made a point that UK partecipation in the League essentially happens because the Soviet regime (which ITTL the British have just as or even more political and strategic reasons to fear than IOTL, where they almost went to war with about Finland alone, not to mention a large-scale invasion of Eastern Europe and even the Middle East) is the main aggressor. Had the Pact attack being waged on the CPs hegemony by a "vanilla" right-wing authoritarian-nationalist revanchist Russia and France, there were very good reasons to expect that Britain, having grown at ease with the notion of continental hegemony over the last generation, would see it as "business as usual", Paris and Moscow trying to replace CPs hegeomy with their own, and remained neutral.

Apart from this, with all due open-mindedness for your ideas, I have to remark that your argument about the necessity of British revanchism is rather politically unplausible. TTL Britain lacks a vital component for going revanchist about the war outcome and the international order, namely the harsh peace deal. We have crafted (and IMNSHO it is a high-probability event) a peace deal which is very favorable to Britain: they lose almost nothing of their previous possessions (what very little they lose, they sell or swap for a compensation of comparable or better value), pay no reparations, and suffer no military limitations. They even come out of the peace table with significantly more colonies than they owned before the war. Their place in the international order as one of the top tier great powers and the greatest colonial empire on Earth is untouched and reaffirmed. Enemy armies never invaded British territory. This is the very textbook case of "peace with honor" and "losing the war, winning the peace" for the British elites AND the public.

Remember, OTL interwar Germany went deeply revanchist because it was inflicted a very harsh peace deal, with huge reparations which wrecked its economy, extensive and painful terrorial losses (compunded with the denial of national self-determination for German Austrians and Sudentenvolk), and massive military limitations. Germans had very good and sensible reasons to be angered for Versailles and wanting to overturn it. Now compare with TTL peace deal for Britain. Exactly what plausible-sounding arguments could hypothetical British revanchist demagogue extremists use to stir up the UK masses towards seeking a rematch ? I can see none that would seem reasonable to anything beyond a tiny radical ultranationalist fringe. As it concerns Britain going extremist by the social shock of fighting the war alone, that didn't really destabilize interwar Britain IOTL, so no reason why it should be expected ITTL.

As for France, again, the assumption here is that they make a wrong expectation about British neutrality. History is scarcely devoid of warlike expansionist leaders making wrong gambles about other powers' will to fight. Ask 1990 Iraq, 1982 Argentine, 1950 North Korea.

 

[Eurofed]

I prefer the first one, with the change that Hungary gets Fuime. They really wanted that port. Or perhaps Hungary and Italy make some sort of an agreement about the Italians annexing it and the Hungarians using it?

Well, I agree that Hungary rather needs a good port. OTOH, Fiume was overwhelmingly Italian. To reconcile both needs, I would favor a settlement rather akin to the OTL 1924 Treaty of Rome, by which Italy gets the city of Fiume, and Hungary gets free use and joint administration of the port facilities. Germany, Italy, and Hungary are going to form an economic union anyway, so tariffs won't be an issue. We can also assume that Germany and Italy agree to subsidize the creation of an Hungarian port in the Kvarner Gulf.

As it concerns the last map being a bit clichè, well this is the effect of geopolitical plausiblity snuffing out butterflies. There are three basic plausible outcomes for a CP-Italy-victory Habsburg Empire, and all of them are AH clichès to a serious degree, namely Collapse and Partition, Frail Survival in German ICU, and Federal Metamorphosis, in this order of likelihood. I favor the most plausible one (besides the one that I regard as the most geopolitically beneficial), but in order to make things a bit less clichè, this is also why I favored the butterflies of the Serb-Bosnian union and Hungary-Romania confederation.

 

[machine3589]

To reconcile both needs, I would favor a settlement rather akin to the OTL 1924 Treaty of Rome, by which Italy gets the city of Fiume, and Hungary gets free use and joint administration of the port facilities. Germany, Italy, and Hungary are going to form an economic union anyway, so tariffs won't be an issue.

This would be the best choice.

We can also assume that Germany and Italy agree to subsidize the creation of an Hungarian port in the Kvarner Gulf.

Eh, have you ever been there? Rijeka/Fuime is the only place for a port of some importance.

As it concerns the last map being a bit clichè, well this is the effect of geopolitical plausiblity snuffing out butterflies. There are three basic plausible outcomes for a CP-Italy-victory Habsburg Empire, and all of them are AH clichès to a serious degree, namely Collapse and Partition, Frail Survival in German ICU, and Federal Metamorphosis, in this order of likelihood.

I was generally referring to the fact that the partition is by far the most used of all. I mean, every single recent CP-victory TL has the A-H falling. Its not even bound to CP-victory TL-s anymore; almost every other TL where you have a PoD in the 18th, 19th or 20th century features (amongst other things, but these features are always there) the A-H falling, the Ottomans magically remaining top dog in the balkans, and the Hungarians getting every nationalistic wet-dream they ever had fulfiled coupled with the board`s unbelivable confidence in the Hungarians when it comes to ruling an empire with large numbers of minorities. OTL shows that the Austrians did a much better job at this (and even had to fix the mess Hungarians made at lest once). The Hungarians arent really going to have a functioning Empire with little to no unrest by themselves if they couldnt even do it in the dual monarchy.

but in order to make things a bit less clichè, this is also why I favored the butterflies of the Serb-Bosnian union and Hungary-Romania confederation.

Yeah, this. This may be original, but they are 1000% unfeaseable. I mean, the Hungarians who finally get their dream-empire to go into a confederacy with Romania? Plus, I think Romania would become a German sattelite sooner then a Hungarian one because of the oil.

But this I found baffling: a Serbo-Bosnian union? Are you serious? Why would anyone appease the Serbs at all? Everyone else in Bosnia wouldnt really be happy with the idea of Serbs ruling them. This would also be a very bad precedent when talking about other territories the Serbs wanted. The Hungarians, Bulgarians, and even maybe Italians would probably be against such a thing.

 

[Wyragen-TXRG4P]

Trollerance, plz!

I dunno about the other guys, but concerning Hurgan, not going to give any serious concern whatosoever to the lunatic ramblings of a paranoid conspiracy theorist Germanophobe Pole supremacist that basically seems to think Main Kampf was penned in all but name by Frederick II of Prussia and co-authored by Catherine II of Russia, modern Germany and the EU are secretly managed by SPECTRE cabals of neo-Nazi, and Poles are the real chosen people, singled out for persecution by evol neighbors on all sides since the Romans.

You gotta give him credit for being quiet imaginative and open to very bold political ideas, thought.


A Central Powers victory can be a lot of things. Whever the war war was long or short would lead to very divergent post-war atitudes.

Beside, there might be divergences on what victory mean.

During WW1, propaganda films depicted German soldiers throwing Belgian babies from windows, all for teh evulzs of course. The secret plans of German domination where suddenly discovered, it was to take most if not all of the african colonies of France, Belgium and England. In other cases, it was to annexe the whole of europe between AH, Germany and the ottomans.

Another world war may not be impossible but definitively less likely.

 

[Eurofed]

Eh, have you ever been there? Rijeka/Fuime is the only place for a port of some importance.

Ok. Anyway, with the League economic union and military alliance, owning a major port of their own becomes not really important anymore for Budapet: Hungary (and Germany) can get unrestricted use of Italian ports for their merchant fleets and navies, so I bet the Hungarians end up using Trieste almost as much as Fiume anyway.

I was generally referring to the fact that the partition is by far the most used of all. I mean, every single recent CP-victory TL has the A-H falling. Its not even bound to CP-victory TL-s anymore; almost every other TL where you have a PoD in the 18th, 19th or 20th century features (amongst other things, but these features are always there) the A-H falling,

Very true, and I freely admit to be one of the most enthusiastic spreaders of the meme on the board. But this is a necessary after-effect of another meme, namely the rise of the Greater Germany-Greater Italy irontight alliance combo as the successful European hegemon. To build and/or really stabilize it, the Habsburg Empire has to be wholly expelled from Germany and Italy and cut down to Greater Hungary-Croatia. Think of it as the due long-term geopolitical punishment for the Habsburg failing their own historical chance to unify Germany and Italy. Nonetheless, I hope one day to make, or collaborate, in a TL where the Habsburg get a far-seeing leadership in 1848, and they unify Germany, Italy, and Hungary in one imperial state of their won.

But then again, Greater Hungary practically is a worthy successor of A-H where it matters, the task (after it failed the unifications) of keeping the northern Balkans together. So I don't regard it as A-H really "falling" because it is kicked out of Vienna, Prague, Trento, Trieste, and Zara. Only a necessary and geopolitically optimal rearrangement, which completes the job of the 1848 revolution and the 1859-1866 wars and makes the Triple Alliance up to its real geopolitical potential. About the Habsburg, the motto was very true that if you are not a part of the solution (about unifying Germany and Italy), you become part of the problem.

the Ottomans magically remaining top dog in the balkans, and the Hungarians getting every nationalistic wet-dream they ever had fulfiled

Well, about the Ottomans when it happens this is the necessary geopolitical aftereffect of a bigger phenomenon, namely the fact that powerful as it may otherwise be, the Grossdeutchsland-Italy combo needs to make an alliance choice between Britain (and Turkey) and Russia, it can't have both because of the Great Game.

Picking the former means to exercise their influence to arrest the Ottoman decline in the Balkans to pre-Balkan Wars levels, more or less. Whether this means that the Ottomans remain "top dog" in the region, and their rule in those areas would be any stable, with or without CPs support, is wholly questionable and open to discussion. The ethnic and religious facts on the ground were so much mixed that it could go either way, although I fully agree that stabilization of the Ottoman rule in its pre-1878 levels was wholly untenable in the long run, the ethnic and religious facts on the ground were wholly against them. We also have to remember that the Ottoman total defeat in the Balkan Wars was the effect of a fragile combination of factors, that can be easily butterflied away.

Of course, possible alternatives did exist: if Britain and G-I had timely agreed that Ottoman rule in the Balkans was unsalvageable and agreed to foster up Bulgaria and/or Greece as the successor, we could have got a swifter BW-like outcome. Of course, propping up Serbia was toxic to the interests of the G-I combo.

Anyway, a geopolitical alternative exists and it is the G-I combo picking Russia as its main ally. This would produce the total expulsion of the Ottomans from Europe after WWI, the expansion of Russia in Anatolia and Persia, the rise of Greater Greece (another AH geopolitical cliché, if you wish), and Turkey falling down to depths unheard of IOTL. There are TLs (such as my USAO and OW's "Two Eagles and the Lion" that develop that concept, too.

coupled with the board`s unbelivable confidence in the Hungarians when it comes to ruling an empire with large numbers of minorities.

But I don't happen to share that kind of confidence. It is simply that geopolitically, propping up the Hungarians is much simpler for the G-I combo to stabilize the northern Balkans to their benefit, since the interests of Berlin, Rome, and Budapest align well. A possible but much less politically obvious alternative would have been to foster Greater Romania in its place. Serbia, again, was not an acceptable choice, if it is allowed to rise high, it is very likely to step on the turfs of Berlin and Rome.

Anyway, my most likely expectation is that the Hungarians shall have their abundant troubles keeping their own minorities into line, and they shall need a lot of help from their allies either to keep order or to be dragged kicking and screaming into a federal reform of their empire or a sensible 1942-like second partition (with Slovakia still likely staying part of Hungary, however). If and when Berlin and Rome tire up of cleaning up Budapest's mess, they shall enforce one of hte latter two solutions above.

Nonetheless, I am fully convicned that keeping GH from falling would be rather less difficult than doing so for A-H for various reasons: 1) the nationalist interests of Germany and Italy are no more antagonist but supportive 2) there are rather less minorities to keep into line in comparison to the hegemon nationality: the Czechs, Italians, Slovenes, Dalmatians are gone to much stronger nation-states, the Hungarians are the top dogs.

OTL shows that the Austrians did a much better job at this (and even had to fix the mess Hungarians made at lest once).

Wholly irrelevant in comparison to the opposed factors above.

The Hungarians arent really going to have a functioning Empire with little to no unrest by themselves if they couldnt even do it in the dual monarchy.

Who said there is not going to be any significant unrest ? I didn't.

I mean, the Hungarians who finally get their dream-empire to go into a confederacy with Romania?

Why not ? They are still going to be the top dogs in the confederation and it would make Transylvania less troublesome. There is still going to be trouble, but this could make the Hungarian empire a bit less unstable.

Plus, I think Romania would become a German sattelite sooner then a Hungarian one because of the oil.

Economically, yes, German corporations shall run the show, but politically it is reasonable for Germany to delegate the chore to their own vassals/allies. Anyway, it is all a matters of degrees, since the CPs/League bloc is going to become very tight, with EU/NATO-like economic, military and to a lesser degree political integration. Germany on top, Italy the vice-hegemon, Hungary the main vassal in change of the Balkans, Turkey the main vassal in charge of the Middle East, and then the various minor vassals and sub-vassals.

But this I found baffling: a Serbo-Bosnian union? Are you serious? Why would anyone appease the Serbs at all? Everyone else in Bosnia wouldnt really be happy with the idea of Serbs ruling them. This would also be a very bad precedent when talking about other territories the Serbs wanted. The Hungarians, Bulgarians, and even maybe Italians would probably be against such a thing.

Ok, point taken.

 

[shillinger]

Well, it is assumed that they pull a successful Wallon Anschluss before the war, so that part of the Low Countries is covered. The pre-war efficiency level of the Dutch army is subject to butterflies, and it could easy be not that great to begin with, not really close to the League biggies, anyway. Going north is doable, even if the actual chance of breaking up in northern Germany from Netherlands is very low unless the Soviets are doing very very well on their end.

Im not even sure if they will reach the German borders; the Dutch may even have a joint defense plan with Germany.

It would be wholly idiotic megalomania if they would try to do it alone. They are making a mistaken gamble similar to Mussolini, their stronger ally does all the heavy lifting, they just have to backstab a couple of nations on their last legs and reap the reward.

This might cause interesting developments; the French wait for the Russians to beat the League so they can move in and occupy what they want. This means the French may not even enter the war for the first months or so. Depending on your plans, France might even stay out of the war if the League starts pushing the Soviets back before they (the French) mean to attack.

 

[machine3589]

-snip-

That was a general rant of mine against the Greater Hungary cliche. It wasnt aimed against this TL (which I think we have neglected a bit).


Anyhow, I did some thinking about your Hungaro-Romanian union, and realised its generally a swell idea. If you want to persue this chain of events, I might just put it into the next version of the map. Im still in favour of Bosnia remaining an Italian protectorate, though. Perhaps the Hungarians and Italians set up a state like the ISC out of Bosnia and Croatia and divide it into a Italian and Hungarian interest spheres? I would also think that modified late 1941. borders would be more beneficial to the Italians then annexing some very useless territories in interior Dalmatia.

All things considered, TTL has avoided some very nasty cliches like "Nevah Surrendah" and huge German annexations in France and Poland.

But now to some other issues:

1. What is the fate of Ireland?

2. Will TTL feature the Great Depression?

3. Will TTL feature the Spanish Civil War?

4. How will you make the League blind to the impending threat of war in the late 1930.-s?

5. Who will develop the first nukes and where will they be dropped (if they are dropped at all)?

6. Will Bohemia-Moravia become a protectorate similar to OTL Slovakia or will you integrate it fully to the German Kaiserreich?

 

[Nivek]

That was a general rant of mine against the Greater Hungary cliche. It wasnt aimed against this TL (which I think we have neglected a bit).


Anyhow, I did some thinking about your Hungaro-Romanian union, and realised its generally a swell idea. If you want to persue this chain of events, I might just put it into the next version of the map. Im still in favour of Bosnia remaining an Italian protectorate, though. Perhaps the Hungarians and Italians set up a state like the ISC out of Bosnia and Croatia and divide it into a Italian and Hungarian interest spheres? I would also think that modified late 1941. borders would be more beneficial to the Italians then annexing some very useless territories in interior Dalmatia.

All things considered, TTL has avoided some very nasty cliches like "Nevah Surrendah" and huge German annexations in France and Poland.

But now to some other issues:

1. What is the fate of Ireland?

2. Will TTL feature the Great Depression?

3. Will TTL feature the Spanish Civil War?

4. How will you make the League blind to the impending threat of war in the late 1930.-s?

5. Who will develop the first nukes and where will they be dropped (if they are dropped at all)?

6. Will Bohemia-Moravia become a protectorate similar to OTL Slovakia or will you integrate it fully to the German Kaiserreich?

1. In Eurofed Opinion(who is a shamelessly Anglowanker and phile) they gonna have a more peacuful Independance(again with the north ireland irredentia and socio-political mess, IMHO, I think here than the Eastern Crisis will be more explotated to try to gain Ireland like an Ally to avoid the High Seas blockade of the RN(the blockade is unavoidable and in this scenario gonna be worse in the short term) to a Fully Independant Ireland to have an Ally very close to the British(remember, the very important Irish-decendant Population in a Neutral USA will presure more and more to Wilson to Adopt a more Firm position about the Ireland Self-determination and Independance)

2. That is more hard to butterflied away(almost unavoidable if Exist A WW1 in the early XX century), but again that gonna start more early(because the Entente, the most debt-holder of the USA gonna be defeated and declare default more early) or more Latter(The CP gonna have more intern debt but that can be solved with foreing-read american capital in the short term who can make another bubble like and explode more later like in middle 30) but a Great depression like Economic Collapse is unavoidable in any capitalist system(but less or more hard depend of the economical policies)

3. That Depend of the Butterflied(know littler about the reason of that and History of Spain) but the actors and belligerant can change a lot(like in Kaiserreich)

4. The league is a Eurofed invention, in fact, France is not so stupid to go to the war against deutchland if doesn't have both Russia(check) and Britain in her side, a Blockade against france gonna be worse that one against deutchland(but France can attack more easily Britaina and vice versa) in fact, a *WW2 is not mandatory in a CP victory scenario(can be more local or geopolitical skrimish)

5. In a AH Cliche like, Deutchland gonna have all the jewish brains working for then without any moral implication(maybe no Einstein, he was a pacifist and socialist) and the same for the another *CP(Austia Hungary with Von Neumman and Italy with Fermi) but that depend, SU consideredt the Nuclear power almost a pseudoscience(was hiroshima who change their opinion) and France will doesn't have the resource and Britain depend of their overall situation, if thar is invented(maybe in a twist, by A-H), that gonna be used against the more hard to crack enemy in the *WW2(Soviet Union, Britain or Japan, that deppend of the butterflies)

6, Again, the Butterflies, Eurofed Wet dream(because i think he is a Trieste or Irredentia Italian) is the almost inevitable Ostrreich-Magyar disolution, for having Italy won easily all Hansburg spoils, but in a Victory CP-scenario, is like roll a dice(The God's Dice,xd), exist a lot of variable, one who centralized the empire, the breakout or a Federalization of the Empire(The Danube Federation Scenario), that depend of both, the action of Karl, the Hungary and minorities desires and most important... What Wilhelm gonna do??(not for nothing support A-H in the Savarejo Crisis)

Well, that are my 0.02 Pennies to the topic

 

[Lokari]

5. Who will develop the first nukes and where will they be dropped (if they are dropped at all)?

Any use of nukes on European theatre is going to be met with responce by chemical and biological weapons. Japan due to distances involved didn't have that option against USA.

Hence, any war in CP victory scenario where nukes are used(quite possibly by CP due to mentioned reasons) will turn into far nastier warfare then OTL.

 

[Eurofed]

Anyhow, I did some thinking about your Hungaro-Romanian union, and realised its generally a swell idea. If you want to persue this chain of events, I might just put it into the next version of the map. Im still in favour of Bosnia remaining an Italian protectorate, though. Perhaps the Hungarians and Italians set up a state like the ISC out of Bosnia and Croatia and divide it into a Italian and Hungarian interest spheres? I would also think that modified late 1941. borders would be more beneficial to the Italians then annexing some very useless territories in interior Dalmatia.

Those are both solid options, although I think that if the stubborn Hungarians are pushed by their allies and circrumstances into the (con)federal path with Romania, they would need to include Croatia in the union, too. A third partner would help stabilize the union substantially. I think it is an awesome butterfly because it would stabilize the northern Balkans and oterhwise quite instable Greater Hungary a lot. It would be just as good as the evolution of A-H into the Danube federation, but without getting in the way of Grossdeutchsland and Greater Italy, too, which are much better. So I say Hungary-Croat-Romania and Bosnia as an Italian satellite. The HCR would have their hands full getting the union to function even without having to manage Bosnia.

All things considered, TTL has avoided some very nasty cliches like "Nevah Surrendah" and huge German annexations in France and Poland.

Well, huge German and Italian annexations in France totally make sense next round, when the League powers decide to give the Pact a harsh 1945-style peace, and France would look like a recidivist aggressor. At that point, France is totally going to be pushed back to Middle Age borders. This round, we may safely stick to the September Program, the Italian traditional claims, and little more.

As it concerns Poland, I find it quite unrealistic, since the pressure groups that would have wanted huge annexations of pre-1914 Polish land were rather marginal in the German elites all the way up to Nazism. It is an idea of those who cannot keep their history straight between the Kaiserreich and the Nazis.

As it concerns "nevah surrendah", I think it is a nice nod to political plausibility that the British people realize that they have lost their bid to stop a continental hegemony forming, and they need to face and adapt to the new reality, not go kamikaze and totally wreck their nation and Empire trying to fight it to the death. Britwankers and Limey nationalists of course differ, taking "nevah surrendah" as a physical law.

Snubbing these obnoxious guys is one of the reason why I often amuse myself with British anti-wank TLs where they get their wish and the British Isles get nuked/blockaded/invaded by victorious Yankees/Napoleon/CPs/Axis. Guilty pleasure, no doubt. This TL, however, is not the time or place for doing that.

By the way, Nivek, while my typical Americanophilia can technically make me an Anglophile, it is a rather amusing label to give me in light of my rabid enthusiasm for Ameriwanks and Eurowank continental hegemonies, which Britain often opposes.

1. What is the fate of Ireland?

Interesting issue. I think that they are going to get their independence after all. Neutral America is going to become more and more hostile to continued British harsh oppression of rebellious Ireland. Even if they don't intervene directly, they are going to send supplies and get hostile to British attempts to blockade the island. Depending on how quickly the UK decides to make peace with the CPs, the latter may send supplies to the Irish, too, if they are still at war (a Britain that is uncompromising on Ireland is also going to be slow and accept peace on the continent). At some point, the British need to give up and accept a compromise, lest they face a US-CPs combo that would spell the end of their empire. And after losing a total war on the continent, I don't think the Briitsh public has the will to fight another seemingly endless guerrilla war against well-armed rebels to keep the Emerald Island. OTOH, Britain is still so strong that they do not need to throw Ulster to the wolves, so partition is totally coming. Depending on political butterflies, the partition may leave NI as big as IOTL, or smaller, losing those western counties that were actually Catholic majority. Ireland is still going to be neutral and independent in the end, even if they may stay Free State for a while.

Of course, there may be a TL variant where the British vent their frustration for defeat into gloves-off harsh repression of the Irish rebels and America doesn't care for internal political butterflies. This Britain, however, would remain hostile to the CPs, so it's not going to happen in our chosen scenario.

I can't comment on Nivek's point on this since I just didn't understand it.

2. Will TTL feature the Great Depression?

Quite likely. I am no economics expert, don't see any special reason why the 1920s financial bubble sould be butterflied away ITTL. I agree with Nivek here.

3. Will TTL feature the Spanish Civil War?

This is heavily influenced by butterflies. We have ample leeway to have it go all kinds of ways, from CPs investments and influence developing and stabilizing Spain, to France intervening in Spain and turning into a fascist satellite, to (lesser likely of all, b/c the CPs are going to allow it, even if they are in an appeasement pahse), Soviet influence making it go Red.

4. How will you make the League blind to the impending threat of war in the late 1930.-s?

Plenty of ways. They can be: overconfident out of victory disease that they can squash Pact revanchists like bugs if need truly be; too absorbed into dealing with Great Depression related economic and social problems, like OTL 1930s America; too mired into managing their colonial empire (while widespread colonial revolts in 1930s Africa are not realistic, they do in Asia) and dealing with China and Japan; distracted by commercial rivalries with America.

Again, Nivek, there are plenty of ways that a *WW2 can be butterflied away in a CP Italy & victory scenario. We are just purposefully picking a TL where it doesn't. I disagree that opportunist nasty France would need an alliance with Russia and UK both in order to move. Russia is quite sufficient, if they can have a plausible wrong expectation that Britain is going to stay neutral.

5. Who will develop the first nukes and where will they be dropped (if they are dropped at all)?

The CPs, without doubt. They are gonna keep all their Jewish scientists, and a combined German-Italian-Hungarian project is going to have plenty of brains and enough money. Even more so if Britain joins the combined effort and they get UK scientists, money, and Canadian uranium. If America is pushed by Japan to join the League, too, it goes beyond question. I think thay are going to be dropped on the toughest enemy to crack, to give it the telling blow: Soviet Union first, then Japan.

6. Will Bohemia-Moravia become a protectorate similar to OTL Slovakia or will you integrate it fully to the German Kaiserreich?[/QUOTE]

Without doubt, the latter. Mainstream German public opinion only got to accept Czech independence as a fact after Versailles. It was a nod to Western public opinion and self-determination in order to get the Sudetenland back without a fight by making a valid argument out of self-determination. Previously, they thought that if A-H were to break down, Bohemia-Moravia totally belonged in Germany for historical (Bohemia-Moravia always was a fundamental part of the HRE) and economic reasons and because of its large German minority.

Nivek about the fate of A-H, you are theoretically right, but the dissolution and partition of A-H is one case where I much prefer to play with loaded dice. I admit a bias giving Italy a much-deserved break towards success, but it not just that and Germanophilia pushing for Grossdeutchsland. I honestly think that in 1848-1918, a successful Grossdeutchsland-Greater Italy strategic partnership is an excellent way to unify Europe under a sane and stable hegemony that avoids many OTL tragedies. And I honestly think that the partition would be the best geopolitical way to dispose of the Habsburg spoils after they regrettably and utterly failed their historical task of unifying Germany and Italy. The partition creates a satisfied Germany and Italy up to their full potential and positive forces in Europe, and Greater Hungary which for all its all flaws, has even better chances than A-H of evolving into a federal direction and stabilizing the Balkans as much as they could be (esp. if they take Romania onboard). Above all, I remain an Eurofederalist, and root for any kind of decent European unification.

I think that with CP Italy, a victorious Germany is easily going to realize at the first renwed signs of Habsburg trouble that they have a much better substitute for the role of theri main European ally, and their committment to keep A-H artificially alive is wasteful and self-harmful.

 

[Eurofed]

Folks, I'd like to reopen the discussion on the peace treaty to explore the possiblity of making it a bit more harsh to Britain. Namely, Britain has to cede (perhaps sell) Malta to Italy and Cyprus to Turkey.

 

[Nivek]

Folks, I'd like to reopen the discussion on the peace treaty to explore the possiblity of making it a bit more harsh to Britain. Namely, Britain has to cede (perhaps sell) Malta to Italy and Cyprus to Turkey.

That is possible if Britan want to keep fighting both after Russia and France Collapse(99% of chance to that happen) and they try a desesperated maneavre in North Africa(Like a second gallipolli in palestine), and later being so soundly defeated and puting in 'great retreat mode' that forced to a Harsh to Humilliant peace(and not forget both the Irish and Indian, if they learn than they opressor werew defeated in the battlefield and still want to fight.. both side will rebel and make the peace worst for the britons),

Something who i want to mention you... here the suez channel will become a CP asset, independant of which one control the shares... because here the Ottomans share a bordern with the channel, and if the britsh try more... the ottomans will demand the full control of egypt and the phisical possesion(Germany and lesser degree italy will have the military and political possesion of the channel) of the Suez Channel.. and in that case. the shares of the company is no more than and cheap piece of paper(that is the reality in economy), and that is better, because here, nobody want the british become so powerful(like Mckinder said: Britain is geografically sense in europe, but not is part of europe)

and you're so leaning with the Soviet Union(you want the Ucranians suffer the holodomor?), in OTL, the soviet promises and give all to germany for not meddling in the RCW... here will be the same(keresky is a idiot like otl), and both the Ukaraine and white ruthenian area become germans satelites

that is my comment

Att

Nivek von Beldo

P.S. I still doens't have sense the collpase of A-H, because the so called pangermanist is the ultra-right wing fringe.... and after a long war, the Left will have the power, and they will not accept the destruction of ally state, regathrless the ireddentia level... who is always a right wing fringe(in all states, more here with the war)

 

[Eurofed]

That is possible if Britan want to keep fighting both after Russia and France Collapse(99% of chance to that happen) and they try a desesperated maneavre in North Africa(Like a second gallipolli in palestine), and later being so soundly defeated and puting in 'great retreat mode' that forced to a Harsh to Humilliant peace(and not forget both the Irish and Indian, if they learn than they opressor werew defeated in the battlefield and still want to fight.. both side will rebel and make the peace worst for the britons),

Well, I agree that if the British keep fighting, a combined CP offensive against Egypt, British Arabia, and Persia (making a strategic threat on India) is the obvious answer. And if they do so, they would certainly lose Egypt at the peace table. Also agreed that the rebellion of Ireland and the independence movement in India shall be even more stronger than OTL. However, I expect that if India looks in danger, Britain shall drop everything else, making peace with the CPs on the spot, and focus all its resources on suppressing the Indian insurgents, so it ought ot able and keep the Raj at this point.

Something who i want to mention you... here the suez channel will become a CP asset, independant of which one control the shares... because here the Ottomans share a bordern with the channel, and if the britsh try more... the ottomans will demand the full control of egypt and the phisical possesion(Germany and lesser degree italy will have the military and political possesion of the channel) of the Suez Channel.. and in that case. the shares of the company is no more than and cheap piece of paper(that is the reality in economy), and that is better, because here, nobody want the british become so powerful(like Mckinder said: Britain is geografically sense in europe, but not is part of europe).

Wll, ITTL Germany, Italy, and the Ottomans one way or the other shall come to share the ownership of the Suez Canal, no doubt. Even if they timely agree to a lenient peace with Britain, they shall displace France. If Britain fights on, it shall lose Egypt.

and you're so leaning with the Soviet Union(you want the Ucranians suffer the holodomor?), in OTL, the soviet promises and give all to germany for not meddling in the RCW... here will be the same(keresky is a idiot like otl), and both the Ukaraine and white ruthenian area become germans satelites

Actually, about Ukraine, I was picking butterflies that leave Soviet Russia a worthwhile main instigator of WWII, by not losing it Ukraine.

P.S. I still doens't have sense the collpase of A-H, because the so called pangermanist is the ultra-right wing fringe.... and after a long war, the Left will have the power, and they will not accept the destruction of ally state, regathrless the ireddentia level... who is always a right wing fringe(in all states, more here with the war)

This would be a good point if Germany was purposefully trying to break up A-H. Indeed only PG would root for that. But the scenario is different. A-H again falls prey to its internal divisions, then Germany decides that after they fought a war to save the Hapsburg, another bout of troubles is one too many, and listen to urgings from Rome and its own Pan-German nationalists that a better solution is possible. If the crisis arises from internal Habsubrg weakness, Pan-German arguments would have much more mainstream weight in the face of events.

 

[shillinger]

Considering Machine`s tread, I noticed he made a few modifications to the Peace Treaty. Should we amend it as well?

 

[Eurofed]

Considering Machine`s tread, I noticed he made a few modifications to the Peace Treaty. Should we amend it as well?

Could you please list them ?

Edit: after a cursory check of the most recent list posted in this thread (here) with the one machine posted at the start of the CP-military thread (here), it seems to me the only significant difference is that Germany buys Equatorial Guinea. I've no problem whatesoever with adding this to the Peace Treaty. Anything else I failed to notice ?

 

[shillinger]

Could you please list them ?

Well, there is the lack of Nancy and the Vosgues listed, plus Waloonia is forbidden to construct millitary fortresses on its territory.

 

[Eurofed]

Well, there is the lack of Nancy and the Vosgues listed, plus Waloonia is forbidden to construct millitary fortresses on its territory.

I don't see the justification for leaving Nancy and the Vosgues to France, especially the latter since they were mentioned in the September Program as German war goals for strategic reasons. The military limitation for Wallonia is an excellent idea and addition to the treaty, however.

 

[Eurofed]

New revised Peace Treaty

Britain (Europe): status quo.

Britain (colonies): gains western Tanganyka, Senegal, Guinea, Goa, Macao, the French Indian Ocean islands. Sells Somaliland to Italy.

South Africa (colonies): gains southern Namibia and eastern half of the Caprivi Strip.

Japan (colonies): gains German Pacific possessions.

Australia (colonies): gains New Guinea.

Germany (Europe): annexes Luxemburg, Briey, Longwy, Belfort, Nancy, the western slopes of the Vosges, and a slice of Belgian Luxemburg (the Arlon area). Protectorate over the Unified Baltic Duchy, Finland, (de facto) Poland.

Germany (colonies): recovers Cameroon (1911-1916 borders), Rwanda and Burundi, eastern Tanganyka, northern Namibia, western half of the Caprivi Strip, and Tsingtao. Gains Morocco, Belgian Congo, Ubangi-Shari, Benin, Middle Congo, Gabon, Angola, northern Mozambique, and some minor adjustments to the north of Togo. Buys Equatorial Guinea.

Italy (Europe): annexes Nice, Savoy, Corsica, and the western slopes of the Alps. Protectorate over Albania, Montenegro, (de facto) Greece.

Italy (colonies): recovers Libya, Eritrea, and Somalia. Gains Tunisia, Djibouti, central-southern Mozambique, Ivory Coast, Ethiopia, Somaliland.

Austria-Hungary (Europe): Gains (nominal) protectorate over Poland, (real) protectorate over Romania (which gains Bessarabia). Serbia becomes an Austrian protectorate and is heavily garrisoned by the CPs.***

Turkey (Europe): depending on PoD, it may keep either the 1914 borders or the post-1st Balkan War ones (keeping the slice of eastern Thrace beyond the Enos-Midia line or not, which otherwise goes to Bulgaria).*

Turkey (Middle East): recovers 1914 borders plus Transcaucasia, Khuzestan, Persian Azerbaijan.

Bulgaria (Europe): keeps/recovers southern Dobruja and western Thrace, annexes Vardar Macedonia. Depending on POD, it may keep either the 1914 borders or the post-1st Balkan War ones with Turkey.*

Netherlands (Europe): after a later plebiscite, it gains Flanders.

Netherlands (colonies): gains Indochina, sells Irian to Australia.

America: gains French Caribbean, French Guyana, New Caledonia.

France: keeps Algeria, the northern portion of West French Africa (Mauritania, Mali, Upper Volta, Niger), Chad, and Madagascar.

Russia: keeps Belarus, Ukraine, northern Caucasus, and Central Asia.**

French possessions in China are split between Germany and Italy.

Besides the territorial losses, France gets a harsh peace treaty: war reparations equivalent to some 80 billion GM are imposed on them. Their army is limited to 125,000 professional soldiers and officers (maximum 100,000 in the mainland at any time), conscription is forbidden, and the French aren’t allowed to posses heavy artillery, chemical weapons, tanks, armored cars, and military aircraft. Furthermore, a demilitarized zone of 100 km is established in French territory on the borders with Germany and Italy. The French navy is forbidden to own capital ships and submarines.

Russia may have to pay reparations if it has not got the Bolsheviks in charge. Military limitations likewise possible with the same caveat.

The peace treaty declares that the war's responsibility lies into Panslav terrorism and aggressive French and Russian revanchism and imperialism.

Britain and Japan pay no reparations and suffer no military limitations.

Britain makes a pledge not to interfere with the territorial or political settlement of continental Europe or CP colonial empires, the CPs pledge to respect the security of the British Empire.

Belgium is forbidden to build fortresses on its territory or to enter any political-economic union or military alliance with France without the assent of the Central Powers, and its neutrality is rescinded. It must grant extensive autonomy to Flanders, and in five years, run a plebiscite on the union of Flanders with the Netherlands (which the Flemish irredentists win).

French shares of the Suez Canal are seized and the onwership redistributed among the CPs and UK as follows: Britain 50%, Germany 20%, Italy 20%, Turkey 10%.

* These changes depend heavily on the conditions in which the war starts, i.e. weather an alternate POD is used to start WWI or the Arch-Duke gets killed on schedule.

** The USSR has roughly the Interbellum borders. Alternatively, the border is drawn similarly to the Soviet-Polish front in June 1920.

*** Later Austria-Hungary falls prey to its internal instability, collapses, and is partitioned. Germany gets Austria, Bohemia-Moravia, and Slovenia. Italy gets Istria and Dalmatia. Hungary keeps its traditional territories and Croatia (infederal union). Bosnia becomes an Italian protectorate, Serbia and Romania Hungarian protectorates. Italy gets the city of Fiume, and Hungary gets free use and joint administration of the port facilities.

 

[Eurofed]

Folks, I've started a sister thread to discuss a variant of the scenario (expanded CPs and Entente lineup, Britain gets an harsher peace, fights WWII with the Bloc). Come and play there too.

 

[Nivek]

Folks, I've started a sister thread to discuss a variant of the scenario (expanded CPs and Entente lineup, Britain gets an harsher peace, fights WWII with the Bloc). Come and play there too.

i already post there(a scenario similar like that of Onkell's friend) and in general i give my opinion... for me i prefer this scenario(even if we know than the british will not thrown out the Towel so easily, but better with the original scenario for me), well, in fact we gonna should do the factual Timeline rather than keep argue(i register to help in the timeline)

Att

Nivek von Beldo

P.S. do you know about my opinion about Austro-Hungary, and that deserved a good debate too. here, something than can pleased several parts...