DBWI: What if Franz Ferdinand was killed in 1914?

[victhemag]

On June 28th, 1914 Austro-Hungarian Archiduke Franz Ferdinand very, very narrowly escaped assassination by a Slavic national group. Later, the Archiduke prevented all attempts by the government to declare war on Serbia, realizing that doing so would only end up upsetting the slavs in his empire even more. It was a very tension-filled period of time in which a large-scale war was threatened by many different countries. However, as we all know, the tensions gradually simmered down, and after a couple of tension-filled years, Russia became too powerful for the German Empire to want a large-scale European war. Large-scale war was averted, and the 20th century went on as we know, with Germany eventually coming to dominate much of the European continent economically. Many ask what would have happened if the First or Second Moroccan Crises led to a large war, but for now I want to ask this question of what would have happened had Ferdinand been assassinated and war broken out in 1914. Would Britain get involved in this all-out war? Would the world today all be unanimous republics still? Does technology get further developed than the very bulky computer I am using right now? Do hundreds of millions die in the 20th century as a result of this war and the follow-up effects of this war? With the European countries in debt from this war and a potentially tumultuous 20th century, would they decolonize their colonies rather than give every person living in the colonies total equality? How different does the world look today? Very different? Not very different?

 

[FillyofDelphi]

Assuming that by some kind of comedy of errors the killing of a highly unpopular (among the Habsburg state instiutions at least) political figure by a radical organization with dubious connections to some figures in the Serbian government could result in the outbreak of a general European war...

No, I can't see it. Maybe you get a Habsburg invasion of Serbia, which could lead to the out break of a regional alt-Third Balkan War (With Bulgaria trying to recover from her lost territories and facing off against the Greeks, Serbs, and Montenegrians... maybe Romania as well. The Turks probably stay on the sidelines). But it's virtual ASB to say Britàin and France get involved without an international conference stepping in first to mediate the affair. Austria would win, obviously, but likely only gets minor concessions as the other Great Powers win at the peace conference

 

[Jon Crawford]

Depends on if anyone supports the Serbs. If Serbia has foreign support than that country may intervene against AustriaHungary.

The domino effect would follow shortly thereafter.

 

[Red Arturoist]

give every person living in the colonies total equality?

Isn't that Eibenfeldtist propaganda? Or where did you get the "total equality" thing from? Ever been to Spanish Guinea??

 

[Red Arturoist]

Depends on if anyone supports the Serbs. If Serbia has foreign support than that country may intervene against AustriaHungary.

The domino effect would follow shortly thereafter.

Don't know who. Russia definitely not! It can't even get a warm-water port out of supporting Serbia! And do you believe the Ottoman Empire is gonna support a Christian nation?

 

[victhemag]

Assuming that by some kind of comedy of errors the killing of a highly unpopular (among the Habsburg state instiutions at least) political figure by a radical organization with dubious connections to some figures in the Serbian government could result in the outbreak of a general European war...

No, I can't see it. Maybe you get a Habsburg invasion of Serbia, which could lead to the out break of a regional alt-Third Balkan War (With Bulgaria trying to recover from her lost territories and facing off against the Greeks, Serbs, and Montenegrians... maybe Romania as well. The Turks probably stay on the sidelines). But it's virtual ASB to say Britàin and France get involved without an international conference stepping in first to mediate the affair. Austria would win, obviously, but likely only gets minor concessions as the other Great Powers win at the peace conference

How could it not have led to a European war? 1914 was an insanely tension-filled time; Europe was essentially a powder keg just waiting to be blown up, and I believe that something as minor as the archiduke’s assassination could have easily led to a european war, and I think it would’ve went like this. Austria declares war on Serbia; Serbia has an alliance with Russia, Russia declares on Austria; Germany declares on both Russia and France. However, is Germany going to attempt the Schlieffen plan? If Germany does so and invaded Belgium, that would risk the British entering the war. So my questions are: should Ferdinand’s assassination prove to be the spark that lights the powder keg that is Europe, does Britain get involved in the war, and 2: Who would win this war, and what are the long term effects from it?

 

[victhemag]

Depends on if anyone supports the Serbs. If Serbia has foreign support than that country may intervene against AustriaHungary.

The domino effect would follow shortly thereafter.

Russia would have, they are a slavic nation and supported Serbia at the time.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

How could it not have led to a European war? 1914 was an insanely tension-filled time; Europe was essentially a powder keg just waiting to be blown up, and I believe that something as minor as the archiduke’s assassination could have easily led to a european war, and I think it would’ve went like this. Austria declares war on Serbia; Serbia has an alliance with Russia, Russia declares on Austria; Germany declares on both Russia and France. However, is Germany going to attempt the Schlieffen plan? If Germany does so and invaded Belgium, that would risk the British entering the war. So my questions are: should Ferdinand’s assassination prove to be the spark that lights the powder keg that is Europe, does Britain get involved in the war, and 2: Who would win this war, and what are the long term effects from it?

What exactly are you saying? If Germany wasen't willing to go to war during the Moroccan Crisis to defend its own interests (which could actually be geopolitically justified) against the verdict of an international council, what makes you think they'd back Vienna to the hilt if she declares war over the assassination? The causus belli is so thin its basically two dimensional, and if Austria and Russia look like they're about to duke it out (Especially after the regional balance has been completely screwed up by the Balkan Wars) Britain is going to insist on mediating the disagreement and will likely be able to get France and Russia to both go along: knowing they will dominate the congress just like last time. Also, why is Germany declaring war on France? Sure, France might declare war on THEM, but its just as likely they just threaten it and get Germany to agree to sit down and talk it over rather than risk fighting a two front war.

Also, the war would be over very quickly. Everybody and their mother knows that with mobalization sizes reaching what they were in 1914 and the expenses of industrial war large extended conflict would never have been fiscally viable for any side. Russia would have burned through her entire reserve of securable assets in under 6 months based on all the models.

 

[CountDVB]

Like some have already said, this definitely would have led to some great European War for sure. The rise of nationalism was growing and at the wrong place and at the wrong time, it would cause a massive domino chain.

As for the Moroccan Crisises, those were different because of the involvement of the Americans, both of them. Morocco is still one of the US's first and strongest allies, even during the de-Arabization years which led to the Berber Cultural Restoration.

Germany may have been pretty dominant with most of Europe under their sway, but they didn't want to risk warrin with the Americans in either Moroccan Crisis, especially after Pacific War which resulted in the famous "Bond of Brotherhood" between the US and China, plus add the US's alliance with Russia

Back during that time though, when war was still viewed as honorable and that sort of stuff. It could still happen. Meanwhile, the British and French were growing close and France and Germany were gonna war with one another at some time.

 

[James Ricker]

Assuming that by some kind of comedy of errors the killing of a highly unpopular (among the Habsburg state instiutions at least) political figure by a radical organization with dubious connections to some figures in the Serbian government could result in the outbreak of a general European war...

No, I can't see it. Maybe you get a Habsburg invasion of Serbia, which could lead to the out break of a regional alt-Third Balkan War (With Bulgaria trying to recover from her lost territories and facing off against the Greeks, Serbs, and Montenegrians... maybe Romania as well. The Turks probably stay on the sidelines). But it's virtual ASB to say Britàin and France get involved without an international conference stepping in first to mediate the affair. Austria would win, obviously, but likely only gets minor concessions as the other Great Powers win at the peace conference

You're forgetting about the possability of Nicholas II doing something stupid.
The odds of him doing something stupid in support of Serbia are pretty good, especially if acts before all the facts are In.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

You're forgetting about the possability of Nicholas II doing something stupid.
The odds of him doing something stupid on support of Serbia are pretty good, especially if acts before all the facts are In.

This is 1914, not 1814. Yes, technically the All-High Warlord has authority to unilaterally declare war, but mobalization takes weeks and he has an entire state apperatus in his way; much of who were scared stiff about the possibility of war leading to revolution for two decades after 05'. There's too much of a buffer for idiots and bad luck to lead to every Great Power stumbling into war without somebody having the sense to snap them out of it.

 

[SeaCambrian]

Like some have already said, this definitely would have led to some great European War for sure. The rise of nationalism was growing and at the wrong place and at the wrong time, it would cause a massive domino chain.

Nationalism was a dead relic of the 19th century, like communism. There is no way that arbitrary "nation-states" would be formed across Europe. That would be like imagining a communist Russian Empire.

 

[James Ricker]

This is 1914, not 1814. Yes, technically the All-High Warlord has authority to unilaterally declare war, but mobalization takes weeks and he has an entire state apperatus in his way; much of who were scared stiff about the possibility of war leading to revolution for two decades after 05'. There's too much of a buffer for idiots and bad luck to lead to every Great Power stumbling into war without somebody having the sense to snap them out of it.

You are forgetting the classic Russian paranoia. compounded by the fact Nicholas II to not surround himself with the best and brightest Russia had to offer.
I bring up 1919 as evidence of that.

 

[raffaele gaggioli]

You are forgetting the classic Russian paranoia. compounded by the fact Nicholas II to not surround himself with the best and brightest Russia had to offer.
I bring up 1919 as evidence of that.

Considering the russian army was beaten by a bunch of polish rebels that year , it is safe to assume that Nicholas II was lucky that he was only forced to abdicate rather than being killed
Seriously i know that Germany was secretly founding the rebels but the fact that Poland won its indipendence against Russia tells you a lot about the military situation in the Empire

 

[James Ricker]

Considering the russian army was beaten by a bunch of polish rebels that year , it is safe to assume that Nicholas II was lucky that he was only forced to abdicate rather than being killed
Seriously i know that Germany was secretly founding the rebels but the fact that Poland won its indipendence against Russia tells you a lot about the military situation in the Empire

We all know the story about the Battle of Warsaw, the Tzar's Cossacks being defeated by the Winged Hussars in the last great Cavalry battle in history. Nicholas II and his staff tried to escape in an automobile but were captured by the Winged Hussars.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

You are forgetting the classic Russian paranoia. compounded by the fact Nicholas II to not surround himself with the best and brightest Russia had to offer.
I bring up 1919 as evidence of that.

As @raffaele gaggioli pointed out, invoking domestic police powers and a State of Emergency/Siege is an entirely different kettle of fish to declaring an offensive war on another GP and pursuing it even after the others have called a conference. The first aligns with the interests of the state system and those occupying it and is an unavoidable risk. The later is a vanity project for a handful of radical Panslavics