Can WW1 be avoided?

[King Thomas]

Until either nukes are invented or the European countries get much more friendly with each other? Or is that ASB? And with no WW1 what would the world look like today?

 

[wietze]

not sure if ww1 can be totally avoided, many countries were actually waiting for it to happen.

It is easy to prevent otl WW1, but likely sooner or later conflict would erupt i think, although this might be an entirely different conflict.

 

[Lalli]

Very difficult, perhaps even impossible. World War surely happens sooner or latter. There every great power just waited good change start war. There was already clear blocks between great powers.

 

[David S Poepoe]

Yes. Nothing is ordained to happen. That many nations of Europe were planning for war overlooks that there was a growing movement towards disarmament also.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

I think Russia would likely start it in 1917 once its military expansion was finished that year; they would likely have the perfect excuse too, as Franz Josef of Austria-Hungary would die either at the end of 1916 or in 1917, which would elevate Franz Ferdinand to the throne and he planned to settle accounts with the Hungarians, who in turn were going to make the Ausgleich negotiations a nightmare so that the Empire would break up and they could achieve independence from Vienna. It was a toxic year and if FF is not assassinated in 1914 by 1917 he would probably help touch off WW1, aided by the Hungarians, and Russians. By then though Britain and Russia would have fallen out and France would be caught in an awkward position; Romania would have switched sides, Italy and Serbia recovered from their recent wars, and the Ottomans would have closed in on completing the Berlin-Baghdad rail line, plus gotten their new Dreadnoughts from Britain.

Basically Britain would be an awkward neutral wanting no one to win, while France is not really in a position to join in if Russia picks a fight, and everyone else in the Balkans wants to gangbang A-H, including the minorities in the Empire. Bulgaria is likely neutral for the duration while the Ottomans can join in more quickly and do better and not have to worry about pissing Britain off.

 

[funnyhat]

If Germany does not annex Alsace-Lorraine in 1871 (and instead settles for reparations or some overseas colony), that could change a lot of things. French desire for revenge will probably die down over time and while its government might still be concerned over the rise of Germany, it may not want to actually go to war with it again.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

If Germany does not annex Alsace-Lorraine in 1871 (and instead settles for reparations or some overseas colony), that could change a lot of things. French desire for revenge will probably die down over time and while its government might still be concerned over the rise of Germany, it may not want to actually go to war with it again.

I doubt that, A-L was a nice little focus for French politicians to point at, but the French people had gotten used to the fact it was gone forever 40 years later. Only when the war was on did recovering it become and issue, mainly because that was really the only logical territorial gain that France to make any claim on; even without that France never accepted Germany's rise and replacement of her as the continental hegemon, so the looming fear of being eclipsed militarily, economically, and demographically was not something France could tolerate (nor could Britain). It was one of the central structural conflicts that enabled WW1, A-L or no.

 

[historyfool]

A European war was waiting to happen in the timeframe, but not necessarily in 1914 and a few years could change the shape of the war greatly.

For example by 1914 Germany had essentially decided to quit the naval race, thus tensions with Britain would likely be reduced a few years later. Furthermore Russia will be more of a concern once its ongoing modernisation reaches a certain point. Britain might be more suspicious of them and the German war plan the latest by 1917 will likely focus on Russia. The Baghdadbahn will be completed a few years later, not a war changer if war errupts, but the effects can greatly change the Ottoman Empire in multiple ways.

AH by 16/17 will have at least internal troubles, maybe it will break up and Germany will look for new allies. Russia getting interested there is certainly a possibility, but that may or may not lead to a conflict with Germany. If AH is already gone far enough once that happens Germany might decide a separation is the way to go: A Russian sphere of influence, a German one and some border corrections for the minor powers in the area like Italy. That could well put Russia, Italy and Germany against Britain, France and the Kingdom of Hungary, though not necissarily lead to war.

 

[Jaydoh]

Earlier this month I attended a talk by Michael Neiberg about his book Dance of the Furies (as such, I can only relay what I remember of the talk, considering I haven't read the book in question). The thesis of his book is, bluntly, WWI was incredibly avoidable.

Franz Ferdinand's assassination made front-page news...for about two days. Soon after, newspapers across Europe returned to covering a political scandal with commanded much more interest. (I can recount the details if anyone's interested, but for the time being said scandal is irrelevant to this discussion) It also didn't help that nobody really like Franz Ferdinand.

Commentators at the time are actually on the record in early 1914 as saying that militarism was on the inevitable decline, and the threat of war was less than it had ever been in the previous decade. Europe had made it through the Fashoda Crisis and two Moroccan Crises without a war, and those were the closest the alliance systems had come to clashing in the years leading up to WWI. Note: all of those crises had dealt w/ conflicts over who had influence where in Africa, which by 1914 had largely become a moot point.

An additional point about the perceived decline of militarism: there was an incident in Alsace-Lorraine in 1913 where a hotshot 20-something German army captain (who was also a Count) walloped the living sh*t out of a shoe-shiner who didn't bow in his presence or something (note: said shoe-shiner had some disability that prevented him from performing 'proper' genuflection). The German military puffed out their chest and defended the actions of one of their won (a COUNT no less), and illegally cracked down on resulting Alsatian dissent. Said actions lead to the Reichstag passing a motion of no confidence for the FIRST TIME in the 2nd Reich's history, and when Wilhelm II next visited the legislature, the legislators REFUSED TO STAND in acknowledge of the presence of their monarch. This was seen as the death knell of German militarism. (Click the link for Wikipedia's recount of the Saverne Affair)

As historyfool mentioned, Germany had already conceded the naval arms race by this point. In fact, on the day that Franz Ferdinand was assassinated the British navy was having fun getting drunk in Kiel with their German counterparts, and the UK was preparing to organize an event of its own to return the favor.

France, contrary to popular belief, did not actually care about Alsace-Lorraine before WWI. Early on in the war there was a survey of Frenchmen to see why they thought the war was about. Revanchism for Alsace-Lorraine didn't even hit 2%.

Neiberg puts the beginning of WWI on three miscalculations. Firstly, the Austrians realized that, for the first time in a long time, they were the VICTIM. They wanted to capitalize on this by extending their influence into the Balkans, which they were convinced would not spread into a wider war. Because, you know, the alliance system (which many point out as a cause of WWI) had actually done a pretty good job of DISCOURAGING warfare up till that point. Secondly, Germany ALSO believed that Austria could get away with this without drawing in any outside powers. Thirdly, Russia attempted brinkmanship, but overplayed its hand when it mobilized its army.

At this point, Germany felt it was reacting to Russian hostility on its border, so it mobilized too. Unfortunately, Germany's SOLE war plan, the Schlieffen Plan, presupposed a two-front war. So Germany's military also mobilized on France's border (Germany instigated the first military action of WWI prior to even declaring war on France). When Wilhelm II questioned Moltke the Younger as to why Germany couldn't just, you know, only maker war on the Eastern Front, Moltke said there was nothing he could do and that he couldn't transfer any troops from the west. To which the Kaiser wiltingly replied, "Your uncle [Moltke the Elder] would have given me a different answer."

So then Germany invaded through Belgium (because unchangeable Schlieffen Plan), which prompted Britain to join the war (which it wouldn't have otherwise). And Italy didn't back up the Triple Alliance because it called out Austria's and Germany's aggression (despite Austria passing it off as a defensive war against Serbian state-sponsored assassination and Germany passing it off as a defensive war against Russian mobilization). So there's two more ways the "alliances lining up for inevitable war" trope re: WWI doesn't pan out as simply as one might expect.

Sorry if that was a bit disjointed; there's only so much I can remember. Basically: Europe's rival powers had precedent for backing away from crises, militarism and colonial rivalry were on the decline, and WWI only started because three different countries made geopolitical miscalculations under the assumption that a large war WOULDN'T happen.

 

[Michel Van]

WW1 is not avoidable

All major powers in Europe were pissed off,

British that German were building big war fleet
the Germans because British not taken them serious
and the French threaten the Germans
the french were in rearmament with Germans for War of 1871.
Habsburg Empire had internal problem try solution that by expand the Empire
same goes for Russian tzar empire.

To make matter explosive was Von Bismark politics of changing leagues and treaty
those let to WW1 after Habsburg Russia start the War
French forced by there treaty with russia declare War to Habsburg
were German Empire forced by there treaty with Habsburg, to declare War to Russian and France

even if Prince Franz Ferdinand was not killed in Sarajevo
they just had found another reason to declare war...

 

[Anaxagoras]

There is one lien of thought which asserts that the Germans were keen on war in 1914 because they knew Russia would be too powerful to defeat by the time their modernization plans were complete in 1916. Better to have a war in 1914, then, while the Germans were still comparatively powerful enough to beat the Russians down. Hence the otherwise hard-to-explain German decision to issue the "blank check" to Austria-Hungary during the crisis with Serbia.

If this is correct, then if war is avoided until 1916 it would become less likely thereafter, because the Germans would be too wary of Russian power to back Austria-Hungary up.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

There is one lien of thought which asserts that the Germans were keen on war in 1914 because they knew Russia would be too powerful to defeat by the time their modernization plans were complete in 1916. Better to have a war in 1914, then, while the Germans were still comparatively powerful enough to beat the Russians down. Hence the otherwise hard-to-explain German decision to issue the "blank check" to Austria-Hungary during the crisis with Serbia.

If this is correct, then if war is avoided until 1916 it would become less likely thereafter, because the Germans would be too wary of Russian power to back Austria-Hungary up.

They would have no choice but to fight in 1916 or later for A-H due to having a lack of allies thereafter. Then they can be picked apart by Russia and France after A-H is dismantled. Germany cannot tolerate Russia invading or demanding territory from A-H without fighting, otherwise A-H will fall apart and then Germany is in very serious trouble in a year or so.

 

[ATL Czar]

They would have no choice but to fight in 1916 or later for A-H due to having a lack of allies thereafter. Then they can be picked apart by Russia and France after A-H is dismantled. Germany cannot tolerate Russia invading or demanding territory from A-H without fighting, otherwise A-H will fall apart and then Germany is in very serious trouble in a year or so.

But wasn't A-H also modernising its army at the time, and would have been finished around the same time as Russia? So I wouldn't think it would end up dismantled in a delayed war, probably something like OTL happens on the Eastern Front, with the Russians conquering Galicia, but then being pushed back by German and Austrian forces. If there even is a war.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

But wasn't A-H also modernising its army at the time, and would have been finished around the same time as Russia? So I wouldn't think it would end up dismantled in a delayed war, probably something like OTL happens on the Eastern Front, with the Russians conquering Galicia, but then being pushed back by German and Austrian forces. If there even is a war.

They weren't modernizing to the same degree, nor were they building up production capacity in the same away, while the Hungarians were likely to sabotage the funding by 1915-16 over politics yet again. So the A-H army doesn't go into the war with 1880s artillery, but it will probably have a civil war on its hands in 1917 when the Hungarians push for independence. Don't forget though that the Russians will have an even larger army that IOTL by 1917, while the A-Hs and Germans won't. The Russians can mobilize faster than even IOTL when they surprised the CPs with their speed, so they will get more men to the front faster and will have Romania on side at the start of the war, a more prepared Serbia, and probably Italy too. I don't know how France would react and I don't see Britain supporting and aggressive war against Germany, but they wouldn't help the Germans other than to not blockade them. Its a different war, but still pretty bad for the CPs and definitely for Austria.

 

[33k7]

yes ww1 can be avoided

Alexander the Peacemaker reigned until 1907 will help

Kingdom of Bulgaria begrudgingly accepts it spoils from the first Balkan war will help

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=249422

 

[cracou]

I doubt that, A-L was a nice little focus for French politicians to point at, but the French people had gotten used to the fact it was gone forever 40 years later.

Completelt and definitively wrong:
- the "revanchisme" was incredibly common (among politicians and the whole population)
- at school children had to learn maps which included Alsace in France (with a specific color, most of the time violet for mourning)
- popular songs were for example "la strasbourgeoise" and had a strong politican stance.
- History book were written so as to include Alsace in the French cultural area.

 

[kalamona]

They weren't modernizing to the same degree, nor were they building up production capacity in the same away, while the Hungarians were likely to sabotage the funding by 1915-16 over politics yet again. So the A-H army doesn't go into the war with 1880s artillery, but it will probably have a civil war on its hands in 1917 when the Hungarians push for independence. Don't forget though that the Russians will have an even larger army that IOTL by 1917, while the A-Hs and Germans won't. The Russians can mobilize faster than even IOTL when they surprised the CPs with their speed, so they will get more men to the front faster and will have Romania on side at the start of the war, a more prepared Serbia, and probably Italy too. I don't know how France would react and I don't see Britain supporting and aggressive war against Germany, but they wouldn't help the Germans other than to not blockade them. Its a different war, but still pretty bad for the CPs and definitely for Austria.

Modernization of the AH army is not only a question of funding and "sabotage" by the hungarian parlament, but for an extent, the personality of FJ and FF. And of course, Conrad and co. on the other hand, i do not think, that after the compromise over the army funding (and, most importantly, the funding of the Honvédség) there would be another obstruction/sabotage, whatsoever (unless FJ or FF try to revert the whole thing).
Civil war/rebellion IMHO is pretty much out of question after 67. Even when the hardliner independist gained majority in the hungarian parlament, they just imploded and made a compromise with Wien. For the record, more ro less everyone on power/near power was quite statisfied with the overall situation, except the lower classes. So, social unrest is inevitable - well, rallys, protest were quite common anyway.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

I get what you're saying Kalamona, but the problem would come from FF, as he wanted nothing less than a rewrite of the Hungarian constitution to enable universal male suffrage in Hungary, which would remove the power of the nobility, the only class that had the vote at the time, and empower the poor and ethnic minorities; it was literally a fighting issue for the Hungarians, so if and when FF forces it, which he fully intended to do when he assumed the throne, in fact planning to refuse to accept the Hungarian crown until the constitution was rewritten, then there will be war, because the nobility would be out of power, which was the one thing they valued. They cannot compromise, as there is no middle ground, its capitulate or fight.

 

[Jaydoh]

WW1 is not avoidable

All major powers in Europe were pissed off,

If they were all ticked off, then why didn't all of the other crises at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century not explode into an early WWI?

British that German were building big war fleet

This has already been refuted twice during this thread. Germany had accepted that the naval arms race was over, and the episode at Kiel shows that the respective naval high commands had buried the hatchet.

the Germans because British not taken them serious

Not a reason to start a war. A reason to threaten war and hem and haw, certainly, but not to go to war.

and the French threaten the Germans

If threatening always lead to war, we'd be on the umpteenth Korean War by now. Threats are part of rivalrous geopolitics, all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

the french were in rearmament with Germans for War of 1871.

The Cold War was a huge arms race then ended up not resulting in war. This is an insufficient reason.

Habsburg Empire had internal problem try solution that by expand the Empire
same goes for Russian tzar empire.

The Hapsburgs were using war to solve internal problems (by bringing Serbian nationalism to heel, hopefully), but they WEREN'T expecting it to turn into a wider conflict. No one wanted to start a large war on purpose, so war would only come (as OTL), if they mistakenly think they've geopolitically isolated the conflict.

To make matter explosive was Von Bismark politics of changing leagues and treaty

Bismarck had been out of the picture for a while, so I'm not entirely sure as to why this is relevant.

those let to WW1 after Habsburg Russia start the War
French forced by there treaty with russia declare War to Habsburg
were German Empire forced by there treaty with Habsburg, to declare War to Russian and France

Yes, things escalate quickly once you knock down the first domino (look at how fast things accelerate once Russia mobilize, whereas the month between the assassination and then had practically nothing happen), but the first domino is not guaranteed to fall.

even if Prince Franz Ferdinand was not killed in Sarajevo
they just had found another reason to declare war...

Only if they thought they could get away with it. Even a year or two of avoided WWI could be enough time to modify the alliance system somehow in the hopes of making a desired war a one-on-one affair. But a wider Great War isn't likely, imo.

Completelt and definitively wrong:
- the "revanchisme" was incredibly common (among politicians and the whole population)
- at school children had to learn maps which included Alsace in France (with a specific color, most of the time violet for mourning)
- popular songs were for example "la strasbourgeoise" and had a strong politican stance.
- History book were written so as to include Alsace in the French cultural area.

Then why did the French overwhelmingly cite reasons other than Alsace-Lorraine when asked what the Great War was about? Why did French journal and diary entries from around the beginning of the war period almost never mention this revanchisme?

 

[cracou]

Then why did the French overwhelmingly cite reasons other than Alsace-Lorraine when asked what the Great War was about?

When? At that time Revanchisme was so obvious that you didn't even have to mention it. I don't know where you come from but let's say USA. Just imagine that Mexico annexed California 4 years ago, forbid English (and so on...). You get the idea.
Now French (in High School) learn that there were many explanations (Alsace being only the reason why French didn't like Germans) such as alliances, aggressiver german behaviour, stupid reactions from many sides and so on.