"Best Case" Russian WWI victory?

Inspired by https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/best-case-german-wwi-victory.459462/

What is the best case Realistic Russian WWI victory without entering ASB or wank.
Include Colonial wins, land wins, and the post war success that might occur.

Just curious due to Russia's industrialization really picking up, their population increasing by about 50 million people in 20 years (1916 population estimate versus 1897 census), and their already massive land-area.

Also, what are the long term effects of a win? An earlier cold war? What happens to Tsar Nicholas II and how soon does the Czar become a purely honorary role?
 
Assuming no crippling civil war, famine, Gulag, & a gradual conversion to Republic, then Russia becomes by 1950 the most powerful single nation in both Europe and Asia. If the US does not benefit from two world wars then the 20th Cent may be the Russian Century
 
I always thought that the Russians needed to avoid the 'middle income' trap in any industrialising scenario, which is contingent on attracting vast sums of capital to deepen their industrial and infrastructure base. Over time I have always thought that the Russians would shift towards a Constitutional Monarchy, but this may require Grand Duke Michael to become Tsar.
 
For the sake of the OP Rasputin dies and so Czar Nicholas never leads the army, meaning his German wife sticks around helping in hospitals instead of running affairs of state. Russia goes defense, trading land for time, the us enters the war, and allies win in 1918.
 
For the sake of the OP Rasputin dies and so Czar Nicholas never leads the army, meaning his German wife sticks around helping in hospitals instead of running affairs of state. Russia goes defense, trading land for time, the us enters the war, and allies win in 1918.
when does Rasputin die (before the war or during the early months).
 
In terms of "winning the war" because of an actual Russian victory on the Eastern Front, the Brusilov Offensive would be the key point. AH very nearly broke.
 
You could have Russia take a much more defense-oriented stance against the Central Powers on the Eastern Front, establishing defenses in Congress Poland and letting the Central Powers bleed themselves dry against well-entrenched Russian forces.
 
Russia and Italy are in similar positions regarding the World Wars - the winning move is not to play as there's nothing of real value to gain - Italy is too small to hold what it could gain and Russia is so big that anything gained would be an addition of marginal value that would estrange the neighbors for decades.

In case there is a WW1... invasion of Germany seems like the best way to settle that, preferably while actually being prepared to do so and without the invading armies sabotaging themselves. Berlin, Königsberg and Breslau are wide open and infinitely more important to the war effort than Galicia while trying to push through the Carpathian mountains into A-Hs core would be a logistical nightmare.
 
The winning move is not to play.

There would be plenty of foreign investment available if pre-WW1 trends continued. GB and Germany had about £100m each invested in Russia, France had about £400m.

By 1914, GB had £3,763,300,000 invested globally. Lots of opportunity in Eastern Europe and GB was accelerating it's foreign investment:
eL1VPyW.jpg


Not until 1993 would trade, as a proportion of the global economy, reach the levels it had attained by 1913; the international flows of capital, not until 1996.

wwQhMzS.jpg
 
The best case, for something that would still be called World War One, is a pre-1900 PoD: Germany picks Russia over Austria-Hungary.

You'd need a different spark for the war - no way is Austria-Hungary going to dare be the aggressor given how vulnerable they are to quick invasion - but a Russo-German alliance defeats any plausible array of European powers. The Russians probably pick a fight in the Balkans, then the Russo-Germans defeat an alliance of Britain, France, Austria-Hungary, the Ottomans, and Japan (Italy has nothing to gain in opposing them and the US has no reason to get involved).
 
Honestly, Nicky die at the beginning of the war and his brother take his place and run the nation and war effort with a little more competence so the nation held (barely) till the end of the conflic...political chaos, probable attempt at revolution and civil war postponed at after Germany is defeated
 
Looking at the capitol investment chart in post #12 reminds me of the Koch family fortunes foundations in Leninist USSR.
One of the Koch brothers ran for president on the Libertarian Party ticket in the US in the late '80s, and they were pretty influential in getting the CATO institute up and running. I guess libertarians have reversed the roles in the well-known Lenin quote about the capitalists selling him the ropes he would hang them with.
 
Most of Russia's gains would be from successful institutional reforms, land reform, and sticking to a normal capitalist economy. The Empire is so vast already that Petrograd has little reason to gobble up more territory. Eastern Galicia might be on the table if the pan-Slavists get their way, but that's about it.

Britain and France are unlikely to endorse outright Russian annexation of the Dardenelles, if it got the vague international/demilitarized zone status planned under the Treaty of Sevres or something close to it, the territory would become the Danzig of the Balkans and a major cause of the next world war.

Maybe they get an independent Armenia and a Megali-Idea greater Greece as solidly pro-Moscow lil buddies that can keep the Turks in their place in western Anatolia and ensure Russian naval access through the Dardanelles.
 
You could have Russia take a much more defense-oriented stance against the Central Powers on the Eastern Front, establishing defenses in Congress Poland and letting the Central Powers bleed themselves dry against well-entrenched Russian forces.
The Germans would not attack in the east in 1914.
What Russia should have done was to stay on the defensive against the Germans and concentrate on maximizing damage to A-H in 1914
, which would require an intelligent mix of offensive and defensive operations. Then, once the otoman empire enters the war, a concerted Russian/Allied effort should prioritize defeating them.
Instead of a "German first" policy, the allies should have run WW1 as three separate wars.
1- France and Britain Vs Germany
2- Russia and Serbia (later Italy) vs Austria-Hungary
3 - Secondary French/Russian/British effort against the Ottoman Empire
Either this leads to a series of victories, with the Ottomans falling first, followed by A-H and with Germnay last, or forces Germany to divert forces to shore up its allies, leading to its defeat.
 
Top