Austria accepts stop in Belgrade

[Aphrodite]

What if in the July crisis, Austria accepted the Kaiser's and Grey's idea of stop in Belgrade. It butterflies away the war but what about the future diplomatic situation?

Does Italy bolt the Triple Alliance? Under the terms of the treaty, the Italians are supposed to get compensation for Austria occupying Belgrade but its unlikely Austria would honor that pledge. So do the Italians decide that the Triple Alliance no longer serves a purpose? After all, having settled with France the only use for Italy was to keep the Austrians in check

What about Anglo-Russian relations? Do the Russians think the British offered enough support or do they think the British are waverers and seek reconciliation with Germany? Or do the British decide that the Russians are adventurers in need of reigning in and try to draw close to Germany? But if they do, what can they offer the Germans?

What do the Romanians do after King Carol dies? Do they think the Austrians weak or do they think that Russian support is dangerous.

Finally, does Austria's occupation provide an excuse for war latter? Assume the Russian great program is finished in 1917 and they feel very strong and the Austrians still haven't left Belgrade. Do they use that as an excuse to bring a final settlement of Balkan affairs

 

[ShortsBelfast]

Romanians are basically in an opportunistic position. Siding with either camp can bring territorial gains in either Transylvania or Bessarabia. I think they will side with whoever looks strongest. Italy is in a similiar position, I think they will gradually drift towards neutrality unless Austria does offer compensation.
Russian great program is likely to be overtaken by events as radio, aviation and armoured car technologies develop (slower than in wartime granted but even OTL 1915 levels by 1917 would (to a degree) alter the underlying assumptions validity. So I think Russians would feel somewhat stronger rather than very strong. Politically, the Tsar will not be in as bad a position as OTL 1917 but will be in a weaker position than OTL 1914. And the British will not have been able to ignore Russian activities in the Far East and won't have renewed their treaty in 1916. Russia may have to be more inward looking and France in a less bellicose position because less sure of British and Russian support.

 

[Catspoke]

English German relations are warm, after working through another Balkan crisis together, and the British have won the naval race, and there are no longer any colonial issues, perhaps Britain might let Germany take over Portuguese colonies and they would split them. Perhaps an incident in Angola is the trigger.

Russia would seethe. However I see them picking on the Ottomans as a way to get back at the Germans (and British). Armenia and Kurdistan are restive and would always have an incident that could be used.

 

[1940LaSalle]

English German relations are warm, after working through another Balkan crisis together, and the British have won the naval race, and there are no longer any colonial issues, perhaps Britain might let Germany take over Portuguese colonies and they would split them. Perhaps an incident in Angola is the trigger.

Russia would seethe. However I see them picking on the Ottomans as a way to get back at the Germans (and British). Armenia and Kurdistan are restive and would always have an incident that could be used.

How would that happen? Since when would Great Britain have the definitive say in possession of Portugal's colonies?

 

[miketr]

There was a Anglo-German agreement to divide Portuguese colonies but it had certain assumptions before activation. I took it as pump fake by the British that they never expected to have conditions meet while appearing to cut a deal.

Michael

 

[Aphrodite]

And what good does that do either Britain or Germany? Really, in the diplomatic game, what can Britain offer the Germans? All Germany is interested in is a firm declaration of British neutrality. If Britain gives that she forfeits the Entente and everything that she had gained by it- the end of colonial rivalries with France and Russia for instance. By 1914, the Franco-Russians are vastly outbuilding the Germans at sea. They're outbuilding Britain as well. The British may have won the naval race against Germany only to face a new one from their old rivalries

In a bidding war for Germany's favor, don't the Russians hold the upper hand? They can guarantee the peace and add 7 Dreadnoughts and 4 Battle cruisers to the German navy in a showdown with Britain. Even a neutral Russia eliminates the blockade

 

[Wendell]

English German relations are warm, after working through another Balkan crisis together, and the British have won the naval race, and there are no longer any colonial issues, perhaps Britain might let Germany take over Portuguese colonies and they would split them. Perhaps an incident in Angola is the trigger.

Russia would seethe. However I see them picking on the Ottomans as a way to get back at the Germans (and British). Armenia and Kurdistan are restive and would always have an incident that could be used.

Given the Russians' back and forth on mobilization, I could see them doing little more than protesting.

 

[Ferreti]

Does someone have a link to the proposal? I've never heard of it before.

 

[oofo]

Does someone have a link to the proposal? I've never heard of it before.

There were two such agreements between Britain and Germany. Here is a thesis from... 1942... on it (It includes maps!). From what I remember, the 1913 convention had Portugal going bankrupt as a pre-condition (Germany and Britain controlled most of Portugal's debt). Either way you can find out for yourself by reading it. It is mentioned in plenty of books on pre-ww1 relations as well.

Here is a WorldA map of the plans made by @Beedok

 

[BooNZ]

What if in the July crisis, Austria accepted the Kaiser's and Grey's idea of stop in Belgrade. It butterflies away the war but what about the future diplomatic situation?

How does this butterfly away the war? OTL Serbia-Russia-France rejected the idea A-H should have oversight of Serbia's investigation of itself over terrorism charges - an A-H occupation of the Serbian capital is a significant escalation on that concept.

If war is somehow is averted, due to the near miss, both the British and French are increasingly likely to view ongoing Russian belligerence as a liability. If the Entente alliance survives, its going to be strictly defensive in nature and Russian adventurism in Balkans, Caucasus and Asia explicitly excluded. From 1914 A-H probably has the most to gain from increases in military budgets (the significant CP increases only started in 1912 and A-H still had a lot of catching up to do), but even if it only modernizes its artillery and better indoctrinates its new recruits, its going to look a lot less like lunch.

 

[Swedish luck]

Austria did acept to stop in belgrade but they dident tell anyone exept germany

 

[Coulsdon Eagle]

There were two such agreements between Britain and Germany. Here is a thesis from... 1942... on it (It includes maps!). From what I remember, the 1913 convention had Portugal going bankrupt as a pre-condition (Germany and Britain controlled most of Portugal's debt). Either way you can find out for yourself by reading it. It is mentioned in plenty of books on pre-ww1 relations as well.

Here is a WorldA map of the plans made by @Beedok

IIRC the possibility of a peace being launched off the back of the partition of Portuguese colonies was a major factor in Portugal joining the Allies. Britain wasn't keen on adding another ally that would need support, but the Portuguese believed if they participated in the war then no-one would steal their empire at the peace talks.

 

[NoMommsen]

What if in the July crisis, Austria accepted the Kaiser's and Grey's idea of stop in Belgrade. It butterflies away the war but what about the future diplomatic situation?

How does this butterfly away the war? OTL Serbia-Russia-France rejected the idea A-H should have oversight of Serbia's investigation of itself over terrorism charges - an A-H occupation of the Serbian capital is a significant escalation on that concept.

I have to admitt, I share the doubts of @BooNZ . A "Stop in Belgrade" would be exactly the kind of violation of souvereignity Russia and especially Serbia were not prepared to accept and in their wake France.

The "success" of such a solution of brokering an agreement by a combined german-british effort would turn the alliances system upside down :

• on one hand : Germany - with A-H as its "appendix" - and Britain as the powers "voting for european peace (for the price of a very circumscribed military action) against (?)
• on the other hand France and Russia - with the "appendix" of Serbia having to "pay" for this limitation of action with the serbain sovereignity (despite whatever "benign" diplomatic formulation might be found)

With the additional problem of France rather "following" Britain, thereby leaving Russia in the lurch or vice versa. And in the latter case, France not "following" Britains "good service" and advice but rejecting it ... how would this affect the british attitude in case hostilities still commence ?


I could see Germany being able to put enough pressure on Austria to .... "truly" stand to its (IOTL too[?] late cag´hnge of mind towards the "stop in Belgrade option).

But would Britain be able to exert enough pressure on France as well as Russia to accept such a solution ?
To do so, wouldn't it need some ... "continental" power to project ? ... maybe by the threat of an alliance with the other, "the" continental power (for the moment) Germany ?

 

[Catspoke]

There were two such agreements between Britain and Germany. Here is a thesis from... 1942... on it (It includes maps!). From what I remember, the 1913 convention had Portugal going bankrupt as a pre-condition (Germany and Britain controlled most of Portugal's debt). Either way you can find out for yourself by reading it. It is mentioned in plenty of books on pre-ww1 relations as well.

Here is a WorldA map of the plans made by @Beedok

Reading the thesis it appears the final negotiation, aborted by WW1 would change the trigger from bankruptcy to a more vague trigger a "disturbance" or whatever. Germany could then use any pretext, mistreatment of nationals, etc. to trigger the divide. The only real disagreement is whether it would be publicly published (Britain wanted it to be, Germany didn't for complex reasons).

Germany would get "her place in the sun", and we be busy developing these colonies instead of building battleships and causing trouble and of course Britain gets a chunk too. but Britain would have to abandon an old ally.

Without the Archduke getting killed, there is no reason as the naval race continues to wane, Britain and Germany working deals to keep the peace of Europe, and Russia growing more powerful that Britain and Germany could get close enough to do this. An incident could be arranged to trigger it.