Challenge: German-Russian Dual Alliance in WWI, AND have it be defeated

[Bopater]

I've seen a few topics in the last 2 or 3 months on a German-Russian Alliance prior to WWI, but most of those are just German/Russian wanks. In my opinion a more interesting scenario would be asking, how could that alliance be defeated?


So, the challenge is, with a POD of 1885 and WWI starting some where between 1910 and 1920, how could Germany and Russia lose? And please, no wars between 1885 and WWI more relavent then those that occured in the OTL, and try not to just have the US join the French led alliance from the start and crush every one(but they can join at some point).

 

[Troyer IV]

Though less likely at this point, I still think Lenin or some other rabble-rouser would have popped up on Russia's radar. Of course, he would have lost much umphf to his argument since Russia would not be losing so many lives and all that against Germany. But then you have to wonder... where would Russian soldiers be deployed? Would Germany allow foreign troops on their soil, or would they insist the Russians launch an invasion elsewhere.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Err... If it's German and Russia against France, Britain, Italy, the Ottomans and Japan, then I could sure see the G+R side losing. I could see them winning, too, or doing both (e.g. Japan gets Vladivostok, Britain gets all German colonies; France holds; AH and Ottomans crushed and disintegrate.)

 

[Troyer IV]

Well it really would have to revolve around Austria-Hungary's response to Serbia. Russia backed Serbia, and Germany backed AH, so... if the alliances were staggered differently...

 

[Saladan]

Not gonna happen. the manpower disparity alone is just far to great. According to my penguin atlas the population of Russia was 170 million, Germany 65 million, France 39.5 million, the UK (counting just the British isles) 45 million, Austria 50 million, the Ottoman empire 27 million, and lastly, Italy at 34.5 million. This Russo-German alliance now has 235 million behind it. and 269.5 if Italy joins. The opposing forces have 161.5 million. That's about 108 million difference in favor of the Russo-German alliance with Italy and 73.5 million difference with just Russia and Germany.

Germany now can focus entirely on France and OTL they almost won. If the Germans can get Italy to join (which if they offer some French and Austrian territory they will) then the French are out quickly. And then what are the British going to do then? Plus remember that Austria almost lost in the opening months of the war and would have if the Germans had not driven the Russians back. If the Germans and Russians alone are all buddy-buddy then even if the French, British, Austrians, Ottomans and Japanese are all against them then it still wouldn't matter. And I very much doubt the Italians would join against them since what are they going to gain? All of their territorial interests are in France and Austria.

In short even if it's interesting it falls into ASB.

 

[RGB]

Will the Russo-Germans run out of explosives, though?

 

[Typo]

Not gonna happen. the manpower disparity alone is just far to great. According to my penguin atlas the population of Russia was 170 million, Germany 65 million, France 39.5 million, the UK (counting just the British isles) 45 million, Austria 50 million, the Ottoman empire 27 million, and lastly, Italy at 34.5 million. This Russo-German alliance now has 235 million behind it. and 269.5 if Italy joins. The opposing forces have 161.5 million. That's about 108 million difference in favor of the Russo-German alliance with Italy and 73.5 million difference with just Russia and Germany.

Germany now can focus entirely on France and OTL they almost won. If the Germans can get Italy to join (which if they offer some French and Austrian territory they will) then the French are out quickly. And then what are the British going to do then? Plus remember that Austria almost lost in the opening months of the war and would have if the Germans had not driven the Russians back. If the Germans and Russians alone are all buddy-buddy then even if the French, British, Austrians, Ottomans and Japanese are all against them then it still wouldn't matter. And I very much doubt the Italians would join against them since what are they going to gain? All of their territorial interests are in France and Austria.

In short even if it's interesting it falls into ASB.

Of course, population don't tell the whole story, after all, by your logic, Germany should have lost to Russia in WWI since it's populaiton of 170 million should have overwhelmed that of Germany and Austria's 115 million while half of those were fighitng on other fronts.

 

[NCW]

Not gonna happen. the manpower disparity alone is just far to great. According to my penguin atlas the population of Russia was 170 million, Germany 65 million, France 39.5 million, the UK (counting just the British isles) 45 million, Austria 50 million, the Ottoman empire 27 million, and lastly, Italy at 34.5 million. This Russo-German alliance now has 235 million behind it. and 269.5 if Italy joins. The opposing forces have 161.5 million. That's about 108 million difference in favor of the Russo-German alliance with Italy and 73.5 million difference with just Russia and Germany.

Any particular reason that you're excluding the rest of the British Empire ? And Italy is likely to fight on the same side as the UK for much the same reasons as in OTL.

Cheers,
Nigel.

 

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

Not gonna happen. the manpower disparity alone is just far to great. According to my penguin atlas the population of Russia was 170 million, Germany 65 million, France 39.5 million, the UK (counting just the British isles) 45 million, Austria 50 million, the Ottoman empire 27 million, and lastly, Italy at 34.5 million. This Russo-German alliance now has 235 million behind it. and 269.5 if Italy joins. The opposing forces have 161.5 million. That's about 108 million difference in favor of the Russo-German alliance with Italy and 73.5 million difference with just Russia and Germany.

this seems to be assuming Russia is well armed, unlike OTL, which i find unlikely.

In Sheer Numbers, the German-Russian alliance would definitly have the edge, but they'ld probably loose out in the Supply area.

also, Perhapse Japan would play a larger role, perhapse making Russia Fight on a two frount war?

 

[Wednesday]

Any particular reason that you're excluding the rest of the British Empire ? And Italy is likely to fight on the same side as the UK for much the same reasons as in OTL.

'Snagging freebies from Austria-Hungary' isn't going to apply this time around if the Habsburgs are on the Entente's side.

 

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

'Snagging freebies from Austria-Hungary' isn't going to apply this time around if the Habsburgs are on the Entente's side.

so assuming nothing drastic it appears:

England, France, Austria-Hungary, possibly Japan against Russia and Germany.
Ottomans would be a bit of a Wild Card. Personaly putting my money on Joining with Britian, but I dunno.
Italy also seems to be a wild card.

 

[yourworstnightmare]

Italy would join the German- Russian alliance if the French and Austrians seem preoccupied enough. Otherwise they'd just stay neutral.

Japan could very well play a HUGE role in such a war.

Say the war start because the Entente supported Austria- Hungary mess wiht Russian supported Serbia. We'd probably see Serbia, Montenegro, Romania and Greece being Central Powers, while Bulgaria and Ottomans joining the Entente. Germany would have a Southern and a Western Front (the Austrians would be smashed from all directions).

 

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

Italy would join the German- Russian alliance if the French and Austrians seem preoccupied enough. Otherwise they'd just stay neutral.

good point.

Japan could very well play a HUGE role in such a war.

Imagine, an Underequipted Tzarist Russian army fighting Both the Ottomans, and whoever else, AND a Victory Fevered Japanese Army.
sound pretty bad for Russia.

Say the war start because the Entente supported Austria- Hungary mess wiht Russian supported Serbia. We'd probably see Serbia, Montenegro, Romania and Greece being Central Powers, while Bulgaria and Ottomans joining the Entente. Germany would have a Southern and a Western Front (the Austrians would be smashed from all directions).

so:
Entete: Britian, France, Austria-Hungary, Japan, Ottomans, Bulgaria
Central: Russia, Romania, Germany, Montenegro, Greece, Serbia, possibly Italy.

someone needs to do TL.

 

[Syphon]

I can't really see this as being a goer.

Apart from the Population of the immediate states involved lets leave the Colonies aside for the moment as this could be a factor in both side winning.

With Russia firmly in Germany's corner Rumania will remain neutral at best or outright join the German russian alliance Nothing the Entente can offer them will get them to try and fight the bear and the Eagle all by themselves.
Bulgaria probably joins as well as they have issues with the OE and AHE.

Greece could go either way as could Italy but the latter would require AHE giving up "Italian" territory.

The real big problem here is resources with no eastern front Germany will get food and resources from Russia and Rumania while supplying them with munitions arms and equipment.
The Russian Baltic and White Sea fleets also becomes an issue.

Even if Japan goes after Siberia it is a sparsely populated undeveloped region that can be reconquered when the main enemies are destroyed.
Even if Russia loses temporary control of all of Siberia the logistical issue for the Japanese will make it impossible for them to make this theatre more then a side show.

AHE is destroyed in the first few months of the war as they simply can't fight both Russia and Germany.
This is why I'd say Italy would be a co belligerant just to seize the Italian regions of AHE.
German with some Russian help could then turn it's full might on poor old Belgium and France.
The Russian manpower would be helpful but it is the food and resources that will help the German win.

What would GB do when it fins France and the AHE conquered the OE on the ropes and Japan facing an angry bear and eagle wanting revenge.

Now on to the colonies.
India has a very large population but it is real close to Russia.
How many German rifles would it take to have this colony break into a full scale rebellion.
If this happens how many Australian, South African, British and other Empire forces will it take to keep the heel well and truly on the back of the restive Indian masses.

If I were the British Political leadership I would quickly make it clear that I'd remain neutral if France and the AHE were stupit enough to try and take on these two.

GB might even decide to expand at their expense and seize french colonies just to stop Germany getting them.

This could be a much better war for German and a much worse one for France.

 

[General Zod]

Folks, there is absolutely NO WAY Italy would join the Entente's side or stay neutral throughout in this war, since all states it wants to gain territory from (France, A-H, and OE) are in the opposite coalition. British sea power and political links won't cut it, and since A-H is in the opposite coalition, Italy's main political links shall be with Germany, not UK, and it shall have no reason whatsoever to betray the Triple Alliance.

There are only two possibilities: Italy has been preparing for this war in the Triple Alliance, so it shall join the war from the start, go on the defensive on the French front and on the coasts, and on the offensive vs. A-H in combination with Germany and Russia (it really neads to conquer Tyrol and reestablish a land connection with Germany quickly so it can get German-Russian reinforcements and commodities for its economy), or is not so well prepared, so it shall stay neutral until either France or A-H seem on the verge of falling, then join the German-Russian Alliance. Italy is no "wild card" here.

 

[General Zod]

someone needs to do TL.

There is already one in progress, the authors estimate it should cover the period of WWI in the next week. Sadly for the OP's intents, it shall have the Entente crushed to a pulp.

 

[Wednesday]

Folks, there is absolutely NO WAY Italy would join the Entente's side or stay neutral throughout in this war, since all states it wants to gain territory from (France, A-H, and OE) are in the opposite coalition. British sea power and political links won't cut it, and since A-H is in the opposite coalition, Italy's main political links shall be with Germany, not UK, and it shall have no reason whatsoever to betray the Triple Alliance.

There are only two possibilities: Italy has been preparing for this war in the Triple Alliance, so it shall join the war from the start, go on the defensive on the French front and on the coasts, and on the offensive vs. A-H in combination with Germany and Russia (it really neads to conquer Tyrol and reestablish a land connection with Germany quickly so it can get German-Russian reinforcements and commodities for its economy), or is not so well prepared, so it shall stay neutral until either France or A-H seem on the verge of falling, then join the German-Russian Alliance. Italy is no "wild card" here.

That's all well and good, except for the part where the Italian government is apparently supposed to commit suicide. Surrounded by enemies, with little to no chance of relief from German or Russian fleets and armies...would the Italian premier really throw his state headfirst into a conflict that they have a very good likelihood of losing and an extraordinarily low likelihood of being rescued from? Taking a brief glance at Italian history before the First World War would seem to back that up - only aided the Lombard and Venetian rebels in 1848-9 when it seemed as though the Habsburg empire was about to collapse, only fought the 1859 war after securing the aid of France, only fought in 1866 when the Prussians were drawing away most of the Austrian army, repeatedly backed down from solo confrontation with France over the Patrimony of St. Peter in the 1860s but when France was away and getting the tar beat out of it Rome was occupied on the sly in 1870.

Confronted with hostile seas and war on nearly all of the land borders if they join up with Germany and Russia, and well aware that the most they could do is lose the northern provinces in order to draw resources away from an attack on their allies, Italy may simply lend support to the Entente anyway in expectation for some sort of compensation later, perhaps Anglo-French support for an Italian sphere of influence in the Balkans, perhaps including Albania. Or maybe they will lend quiet support to the Russo-German alliance in the hopes that if they win, support will be given for Italian seizure of Italia irredenta. Any constructive support for either side will likely be deferred until such a time as the Italians are reasonably sure who will win, then they will bandwagon to secure concessions.

Italy might be persuaded to substantively join the Russo-German alliance if they weren't opposed on every side. Detaching the United Kingdom would probably be the easiest way to accomplish this...but then the outcome of the war becomes depressingly certain.

 

[General Zod]

Surrounded by enemies, with little to no chance of relief from German or Russian fleets and armies...would the Italian premier really throw his state headfirst into a conflict that they have a very good likelihood of losing and an extraordinarily low likelihood of being rescued from?

How long do you think it would take for a combined German-Italian offensive to seize the Tyrol land strip and establish land connection between the three allies ? Relatively little time and effort, in my estimate (by the standards of WWI mountain trench warfare, of course). So that "extraordinarily low" is more than a little biased IMO. Once that happens, German-Russian armies can support Italian defense of its coasts and British sea power is essentially neutralized. At the very most they can seize Sardinia (trivial loss) and Sicily (painful loss, but it won't cripple Italy in any way, in terms of industrial or manpower potential), and everything the RN seizes here shall be recovered with hefty interests at the peace table.

Confronted with hostile seas and war on nearly all of the land borders if they join up with Germany and Russia, and well aware that the most they could do is lose the northern provinces in order to draw resources away from an attack on their allies,

No, the most they can do is to help divert a substantial amount of French and A-H manpower on very difficult fronts for the Entente to breach, given their big manpower disadvantage, which substantially diminishes French strategic possibilities and accelerates Habsburg demise, then they can play an substantial part in the destruction of France. And later their fleets and armies can play an important part in the blockade of the British Isles and the conquest of the OE.

Italy may simply lend support to the Entente anyway in expectation for some sort of compensation later, perhaps Anglo-French support for an Italian sphere of influence in the Balkans, perhaps including Albania.

Italian support to this Entente simply is geopolitically ASB. You might as well expect France to take the side of Germany.

Any constructive support for either side will likely be deferred until such a time as the Italians are reasonably sure who will win, then they will bandwagon to secure concessions.

As usual, typical underestimation of Italy. Nobody is assuming that they could have been preparing for this war for decades.

Italy might be persuaded to substantively join the Russo-German alliance if they weren't opposed on every side.

As I said, at the most their entry in the war on the side of the Alliance would be delayed until they see signs of imminent French or Austrian collapse.

Nonetheless, in the collaborative TL we are writing, Italy does the bold thing and joins the war from the start. As a matter of fact, economic and militaty collaboration with Germany and Russia for decades has made them substially stronger economically as well as militarily (they already had an economic boom and major industrialization ongoing, and an army refitted on German standards).

 

[Zimmerwald1915]

How long do you think it would take for a combined German-Italian offensive to seize the Tyrol land strip and establish land conenction between the three allies ? Relatively little time and effort, in my estimate. So that extraordinarily low is more than a little biased IMO. Once that happens, German-Russian armies can support Italian defense of its coasts and British sea power is neutralized.

Normally, I'm quite fond of the G-R-I alliance, but this point never seemed very sound to me. Sure, a coordinated German-Italian attack on Tyrolia could very probably give the two states a land connection. What of it? As far as I can tell, the one and only heavy transport route between Germany and Italy would be the Munich-Innsbruck-Venice railway, which even if used at capacity would probably not be able to transport the number of troops and supplies you're talking about in a reasonable amount of time. This is particularly true if said troops are coming from Russia. If they are, they'd have to cross the whole of Germany, in a time before trucks and the Autobahn when rail was the really big means of getting troops places. This would be a logistical nightmare for the Germans and Russian troops could only reach Italy after some weeks. In fact, the difficulties involved in transporting Russian troops to Italy are prohibitive. If Italy's going to host any foreign troops (and even then, the same logistical difficulties apply), those troops will be German.

 

[General Zod]

Normally, I'm quite fond of the G-R-I alliance, but this point never seemed very sound to me. Sure, a coordinated German-Italian attack on Tyrolia could very probably give the two states a land connection. What of it? As far as I can tell, the one and only heavy transport route between Germany and Italy would be the Munich-Innsbruck-Venice railway, which even if used at capacity would probably not be able to transport the number of troops and supplies you're talking about in a reasonable amount of time. This is particularly true if said troops are coming from Russia. If they are, they'd have to cross the whole of Germany, in a time before trucks and the Autobahn when rail was the really big means of getting troops places. This would be a logistical nightmare for the Germans and Russian troops could only reach Italy after some weeks. In fact, the difficulties involved in transporting Russian troops to Italy are prohibitive. If Italy's going to host any foreign troops (and even then, the same logistical difficulties apply), those troops will be German.

Italy does not need truly outrageous amounts of German-Russian troops to defend its coasts against British landings, since British manpower is also called for in France, Persia, Afghanistan, and Turkey. The British army being limited at the start, it is most likely that any available British troops in the first months of the war are absorbed by French, Turkish, and Middle Eastern theaters, with little spared for major landings in the Mediterranean, Gallipoli-style. And it only needs them until A-H collapses, afterwards Italy has manpower to spare (as all the Alliance does), and the land connection to Germany and Russia is wide open. Sure, the Brenner railway shall be a lifeline until then.