DBWI: Franz Ferdinand died

As we all know, the 8th of August (yesterday) was the 70th anniversary of the end of the Great war, to be followed by the Second great war (1959-1962)

But i was reading a scenario, the wrong turn, by Harry Turtledove which said that the Great war could have been catalysed fy franz ferdinand'd death in Sarajevo.

What would have happened?
 
Far fetched, the Austro-Hungarians would have simply pounded the Serbs for a while and that would have been that.
 
As we all know, the 8th of August (yesterday) was the 70th anniversary of the end of the Great war, to be followed by the Second great war (1959-1962)

But i was reading a scenario, the wrong turn, by Harry Turtledove which said that the Great war could have been catalysed fy franz ferdinand'd death in Sarajevo.

What would have happened?

Be skeptical of Turtledove as a historian, dear chap. His stuff is worth it for the prose, and nobody rivals his imagination when it comes to the unintended consequences of events [;)], but his PoDs are given to sensationalism.

This one... I don't see it. What geopolitical issues are at stake here? The straits, and by extension the Ottoman Empire, was a matter of clear importance to Russia, but what did Serbia have to do with anything? The courts of Europe would have roundly condemned the terrorists and that would be that. Fears of South Slav nationalism were, as we saw OTL, heavily exagerrated and would have come to nothing in the crunch.

"Wrong Turn" from then on is a hell of a read, but I really question whether this Tannenberg thing could happen. Nobody would be that stupid. And what's the narrative point of it anyway, since the Russians win anyway? Also, Turkish neutrality seemed like an excuse not to adress the Armenian thing...
 

Susano

Banned
Eh, Russia could have supported Serbia, but really despite all political differences between the countries I think the personal contacts between Kaiser and Czar would have prevented any war. Most likely. Of course both had at times trouble to reign in their governments...
 
Well, nobody really liked Franz Ferdinand, not even Franz Joseph did. - Most people in Austria-Hungary would have been glad if he had been murdered.

No, there's little probability that his death could have started a war. But the Magyars certainly would have built monuments for his muderers.
 
Eh, Russia could have supported Serbia, but really despite all political differences between the countries I think the personal contacts between Kaiser and Czar would have prevented any war. Most likely. Of course both had at times trouble to reign in their governments...

What I doubt is the Austrians getting so agitated in the first place. As Rast says, they'd probably celebrate.
 

Susano

Banned
What I doubt is the Austrians getting so agitated in the first place. As Rast says, they'd probably celebrate.

Behind closed doors? Eh, probably. Publically they will have to do something at least, though, so as to not lose face. I dont think there need to be war against Serbia as Tourtledove or Johnrankins have said, but there will be some pressure on Serbia, if only so that Austria appears to do something about the death of its crown prince.
 
well, there are some things i found implausible. Communism managing to compete with capitalism for 46 years after WW2? Some gangster's son being President? Gandhi, that lawyer in south Africa, getting independence for india via nonviolent methods?
 

Susano

Banned
well, there are some things i found implausible. Communism managing to compete with capitalism for 46 years after WW2? Some gangster's son being President? Gandhi, that lawyer in south Africa, getting independence for india via nonviolent methods?

Eh, you cant blame Turtledove for a bit idealism regarding India. The independance wars were a bloody mess as is. Most TLs on this forum about the appripriate timeframe also include some betterment for it. The whole "Gandhi" thing (who apparently really was some lawyer in South Africa) was a bit far-fetched, though, too much "Great Hero" like...
 
well, there are some things i found implausible. Communism managing to compete with capitalism for 46 years after WW2? Some gangster's son being President? Gandhi, that lawyer in south Africa, getting independence for india via nonviolent methods?

OOC: Dude, people in DBWI-worlds are supposed to be interestingly or amusingly wrong about OTL.

IC: The nonviolence of Gandhi's methods was rather balanced out, and more, by the "partition". He writes well, but that man is one hell of a pessimist. I almost stopped reading there.

The whole "Communist China" schtik was pretty cool, though. They made a lovely contrast with the Russians.

Eh, you cant blame Turtledove for a bit idealism regarding India. The independance wars were a bloody mess as is. Most TLs on this forum about the appripriate timeframe also include some betterment for it. The whole "Gandhi" thing (who apparently really was some lawyer in South Africa) was a bit far-fetched, though, too much "Great Hero" like...

Speaking of this, what about this Brusilov guy? The Russians have hightailed it out of Poland and Lithuania and suddenly this guy comes along, knocks heads, and wins the war! The military side was completely convincing, but given the caricature of the Tsarist leadership early on, one almost feels Brusilov is actually Turtledove. "See, this is what they should have done!"

 
Yes, and Turtledove's lame excuse for the UK getting involved? I sincerely doubt that the UK would enter into a giant war over one small European country they had a old pact with. And America! I mean, yes, sinking American ships would piss us of, but not enough for war! So, he makes up a lame-ass telegram that gets intercepted that Germany wants Mexico to attack the US! I mean, that is simply daft!
 
Yes, and Turtledove's lame excuse for the UK getting involved? I sincerely doubt that the UK would enter into a giant war over one small European they had a old pact with. And America! I mean, yes, sinking American ships would piss us of, but not enough for war! So, he makes up a lame-ass telegram that gets intercepted that Germany wants Mexico to attack the US! I mean, that is simply daft!

OOC: Why am I surrounded by such fools!

IC: Actually, the diplomacy was very extensively researched, if you leave aside the flawed premise. I'd recomend giving The Struggle for Mastery in Europe, 1848-1928 by AJP Taylor a look. His lunatic Russophobia [;)] doesn't show through, and what's left is a splendid diplomatic narrative. Britain was actually enormously concerned about German power, and the alliance with France in 1915 was a formalisation of a relationship taht already existed, intended to deter Germany and restore her to sanity because of our growing doubts about working with Russia against her.
 
Okay can we stop using a fiction book as the central idea for our discussion? Such things really go into other threads.

Now the idea here I think has some merit. First as history has shown us despit the nationalist ideas of the various ethnic groups in AH it has an underlying cultural identity. Let us assume FF dies, and just as a starting off point us Old HT's time frame of 1914. It works as a group of Serbians did in fact plot out such an action, and even train men to do it.

So the following are possible ideas.

1. Austro-Serbian War of 1914
FF dies at the hands of an obvious Serbian group. AH sees this not as a method of sorrow but a chance for the much coveted lands to the south. While Russia has a stake in the region, public opinion for monarchy infested Europe would no doubt have some feelings in favor of AH. So AH either makes a general demand and Serbia gives in, or the more likely event is that Serbia says no giving the AH forces reason to invade. It is a quick, won through overwhelming numbers.

Time goes on AH must now deal with not only the ethnic groups seeking freedom in their own lands, but the Serbs who have a template for a nationalist state. If the Great War still occurs as OTL we may see AH fall then and not in 1959.

2. Central-Entente War
This is interesting, as Russian has interests in Serbia and thus reason to defend it. Germany has an alliance with AH, France with Russia, and Italy with Germany. So in this matter the question is who strikes first? My money is on the Russians. They acted foolishly when confronted in 1905, did so again in 1923, and would no doubt assume their size would give them victory in 1914.

So Russia calls its forces up sending shockwaves through Europe, with nations responding in kind. It takes three weeks so in August we have Russian forces marching upon AH. This creates the ideal war many in CP wanted. In a time before planes - no matter what HT says pilots do not fly scouting missions and think "hey let's pull out a pistol and shoot the other guy" nor will it be endless trenches- the fight will be one of marching. The German plan was to swep into Belgium and then march on France. Italy has to fight as Russia invaded so France will face a two front war, and no doubt be defeated in a few weeks. Now Germany can focus everything East, Russia is lonely and will no doubt try for a safe peace.

3. Grand War
Same as above but with the UK involved. HT for some reason has the Italians as rather poor soldiers, and cowardly fighters. Yet looking back they had a military and an Empire above AH, and many other European nations. So Italy is obligated to help its ally out. When the Germans invade beligum the UK declares war on Germany.

France is still doomed to fail but maybe they last out half a year instead of a few weeks. Wth British help they can hold the German or the Italian front, but not both. Another interesting thing is how it is possible for Italy to fight the UK head on in Egypt, and over in Somalia. That will no doubt end in a British victory but given Italian naval abilities in the Med they should make the UK bleed. War ends around 1916-17 depending on how stupid the Entene wants to be.

4. Grand War Light
Same as above but the Uk stays out of Europe. They fight the colonies, and German shipping but no British set foot in France.

5. No war
Cooler heads can prevail, or a princes council can be set up to settle the matter. AH will be given a sliver of land and a apology. Serbia must be made to look the bad guy, but outside of future anger towards each other I cannot see major events changing OTL.

6. Long war
Let us assume for an instant that trenches really are impossible to get over. That the Turtledove Trinity cannot be broken like those books make it sound without tanks, or bombers twenty years to early. Well things get interesting.

First France may well hold out given its Empire, but the mixture of Germany, Italy, AH, and a friendly Ottoman Empire will no doubt give the Central Powers similar abilities.

So it becomes the war of industrial, skilled armies against manpower rich Empires. I call this the long war for I see it easily reaching the three year mark. Now a CP victory leads to more land, and the Entente dealing with years of their Empire's raising up. Entente victory perhaps leads to slightly more radical, or democratic movements. On the whole I favor the CP's, they had greater abilities and more over greater drive for victory. France, Russian, and the UK at war will deal not just with german machine guns, but Indians seeking freedom, African states rising up, and Polish or Ukrainians trying to get a better deal.
 
Top