British Realignment 1915-1925 ?

The Germans had watched other countries grow - Russia into Asia, The USA across North America, France in Africa etc. Late 19th century ideas and concepts pushed the Germans into thinking that they had to do the same in order to survive. As there was no where to spread in Europe - they looked elsewhere. Britain was actively painted as the villain - holding Germany back. Those advocating this message also felt that it was Germany's moral right to spread it's culture by the sword and that this was inevitable - law of the jungle. The dotted lines between navy, world politics and Britain had to be reinforced with average Germans. The goal of world politics required a navy and the obstacle was Britain. I know its a bit harder than 'four legs good, two legs bad' but its the same concept. Vilifying Britain and her impressive but ramshackle empire was a precursor to the political support to build a fleet to attain weltpolitik. Honestly - what would a Bavarian care about a navy?

Any rapprochement with GB sucks the wind from German navalists political support. Germany counted on GB not being able to settle her differences with France or Russia. The alliance value of the fleet was lost with the defeat of Russia in 1905. The German response to Britain coming to the aid of France was to threaten Holland, the Navy added Denmark.

The Kaiser regarded the moving of the RN Med squadrons to the North Sea as a cassius belli but saner heads prevailed against him sending the note. It did prompt a war council where fighting Britain, France and Russia was decided on in Dec 1913. Sarajevo just met all the pre-conditions. The British sent Battle cruisers to Russia at the same time as the Battle Squadron to Kiel in 1914 to be even handed with the Russians/French on one hand and Germany on the other.
 
Lack of competing interests is IMO some very good precondition to 'come together'.
Alliances need more than just that, they also need mutual interests, and not just general ones like "x country is bad".

France and (too a lesser extent) Russia can sympathize with British hysteria over the North Sea and English Channel.
Similarly to France and Russia, Britain is terrified by the possibility of Germany overrunning France.

Conversely, Germany and (especially) Austria-Hungary could not care less about British hysteria over Central Asia.
Similarly, Britain doesn't care how much of Poland is within each of the three partitioning empires.
 
Well other the Kaiser Wilhelm being a bit of a....well let's say idiot.
It was Lord Salisbury who rejected the whole idea of a German alliance

Among his many reasons

Neither party could guaantee they would uphold such a treaty

Such a deal would permanently alienate France and prevent a colonial settlement

That the risk of defending Germany was higher than the threat of a French invasion

That neither the cabinet or parliament would approve such a treaty

The list is rather long
 

NoMommsen

Donor
It was Lord Salisbury who rejected the whole idea of a German alliance
IIRC we are discussing here a period starting 12 years after the mentioned Lord Salisbury held office (left office of Prime Minister 1902).

... affairs changed since then
Among his many reasons

Neither party could guaantee they would uphold such a treaty
A problem inherent to virtually every treaty of this time, not to forget that Britain under leadership of Lord Salisbury himself conduct such rather "two-sided" diplomatic games (i.e. portuguise colonies)

Such a deal would permanently alienate France and prevent a colonial settlement
Throwing the one under the bus for the other ... really nothing new in (british) diplomacy.
And reagdieng coloniial affairs :
The germans - politicians (Bethmann-Hollweg), not the rather powerless Kaiser Bill - had in 1913 once again proved to be fine-off with bread-crumbles regarding colonies (renewal of the already once by Britain betrayed treaty regarding portuguise colonies).
What would well secure british holdings.
And ITTL the only truly global colonial competitors, France and Russia, would by the rise of the russian giant be in a quite ... able position to demand chasnges - if Britain would NOT have something to counterbalance. ... Like a continental "partner" on their borders.


That the risk of defending Germany was higher than the threat of a French invasion
Whoever asked for some "active" defending Germany ?
And - btw - what could better prevent France from starting an iknvasion from its northern coast, thatn being threatened by a german attack on its eastern continental front ?


That neither the cabinet or parliament would approve such a treaty
Erhmmm, from 1902 onwards ... different (liberal) goverment ? ... different (liberal) parliament ? ...

The list is rather long
However, you seem to depicture a Britain, that leaves its "traditional" politics of balance-of-power by supportinmg the second-strongest against the strongest for "howling with the wolves aka the strongest
... with the questionable outlook of maitaining a leading position, which most likely ITTL with a rather unhampered/unhindered/uninterrupted development, militarily, naval and economical would be Russia, with France as its appendix.
 
IIRC we are discussing here a period starting 12 years after the mentioned Lord Salisbury held office (left office of Prime Minister 1902).

... affairs changed since then
However, you seem to depicture a Britain, that leaves its "traditional" politics of balance-of-power by supportinmg the second-strongest against the strongest for "howling with the wolves aka the strongest
... with the questionable outlook of maitaining a leading position, which most likely ITTL with a rather unhampered/unhindered/uninterrupted development, militarily, naval and economical would be Russia, with France as its appendix.

When responding to a post you should read what it wad in response to. It makes for a smoother discussion. REDCOAT had blamed the Kaiser for the collapse of the 1902 alliance talks. I pointed out that it was Salisbury who a ed the talks and gave his reasons

Nothing in your post changes that.

For all the talk about "Britain moving towards Germany" you have failed to explain how this helps Britain more than the Entente or helps Germany much at all

The only thing that Germany would value is a firm promise to go to war with France if France sided with Russia. Britain would never do so

You also avoid the risk such a move holds. What if Britain loses the Entente without gaining Germany? Germany would prefer a deal with the Tsar as it would be firmer and offer better benefits for far less risk
 

NoMommsen

Donor
When responding to a post you should read what it wad in response to. It makes for a smoother discussion. REDCOAT had blamed the Kaiser for the collapse of the 1902 alliance talks. I pointed out that it was Salisbury who a ed the talks and gave his reasons

Nothing in your post changes that.
About the time 1899-1902 ... I well agree with you.

Only not on its importance for the time discussed here.

For all the talk about "Britain moving towards Germany" you have failed to explain how this helps Britain more than the Entente or helps Germany much at all
Help Britain :
in short - not being thrown under the bus regarding global/colonial matters by the other two members of the Entente
Help Germany :
at least a few colonial tokens and - more important - being unharrassed by Britain in a continental war. As this :
The only thing that Germany would value is a firm promise to go to war with France if France sided with Russia. Britain would never do so
is simply wrong.
Germany would have been perfectly well served, if Britain would have guaranteed just its neutrality aka non-siding with France.

You also avoid the risk such a move holds. What if Britain loses the Entente without gaining Germany? Germany would prefer a deal with the Tsar as it would be firmer and offer better benefits for far less risk
Maybe the Kaiser and the Tsar ... but not the politicians, who on both side fought such ambitions (not only at the time of Björkö) due to their more emotional leaning to other sides.

What would a german-russian alliance been able to achieve ...
 

Redcoat

Banned
IIRC we are discussing here a period starting 12 years after the mentioned Lord Salisbury held office (left office of Prime Minister 1902).

... affairs changed since then
"Throwing the one under the bus for the other ... really nothing new in (british) diplomacy. "
However, you seem to depicture a Britain, that leaves its "traditional" politics of balance-of-power by supportinmg the second-strongest against the strongest for "howling with the wolves aka the strongest
... with the questionable outlook of maitaining a leading position, which most likely ITTL with a rather unhampered/unhindered/uninterrupted development, militarily, naval and economical would be Russia, with France as its appendix.
Yeah. Almost the definition of British diplomacy right here.
 
Japan was still a British client state in 1914. Any Russian revanchism in the east during next few years runs counter to British interests with Japan, & in a larger extent Asia.

One thing the Brits can offer Germany is a effort to keep France neutral. France sought the Entente with Britain precisely because they had doubts their Russian ally would be sufficient were Britain to align against Russian.

And this is the three way stumble that I think pans out if we had no Great War. The British will be getting concerned at Russia's ongoing growth and potential for revanche in China. Japan not only has something to defend but not many options to expand. Both France and the UK are likely going to fall out of love with allying with Russia but neither has a good option for moving towards Germany or away from Russia. France could swallow her pride and go for détente and Britain could edge towards something a little warmer but cannot fully alienate Russia. The biggest danger is a backfire, Russia and Germany find common ground, worse still over China and a restructuring of the spheres therein. I might suggest the death of Alexei, likely sends his mother into a convent with grief and Nicky is left alone to repair his relationship with Wilhelm. The shift might be a Franco-British trade/defense alliance with Japan moving forward as Russia steers a more independent path and the Triple Alliance hunkers down, likely Italy wiggling free. Russia still faces an uncertain domestic situation that could change everything.
 
Top