"Fight and be Right"
- Thread starter EdT
- Start date
Thande
Donor
Great chapter. Your footnotes have got out of order between 9 and 19 though (then they synch back up because you duplicated 19).
The Russian sects sound eminently plausible to me, but then I've read Erast Fandorin...and I find the future fate of Corea to be interesting. It would appear here that the Coreans owe the Russians' defeat to the Japanese, which means I'm surprised that your spoiler maps for 1940 show Corea as independent and not conquered by Japan as OTL. Still, given how China is implied to reform and rise, I suppose Corea could keep its independence by playing China and Japan off one another...
The Russian sects sound eminently plausible to me, but then I've read Erast Fandorin...and I find the future fate of Corea to be interesting. It would appear here that the Coreans owe the Russians' defeat to the Japanese, which means I'm surprised that your spoiler maps for 1940 show Corea as independent and not conquered by Japan as OTL. Still, given how China is implied to reform and rise, I suppose Corea could keep its independence by playing China and Japan off one another...
Glad people like the post. As a side note, I have a map showing the Vladivostok campaign in some detail. If I post it, I give the siege's ending away, so would people like me to post the thing or hold it back?
Russia does not have a great war, that's for sure. There are some difficult years ahead.
BTW, I'm so sorry I haven't replied to your PM yet- was on holiday when you sent it and only just remembered that I never got back to you. Will do so soo!!
The 1890s are not a good time for the Hazara- joining up with the British gives them the employment, relative safety and the possibility of moving to India.
That it isn't, and it's going to get worse yet...
Thanks! I think I've fixed that now. Footnotes are always a problem as copying and pasting never preserves the link- I have to do the whole thing manually.
At this point ITTL as mandated by the Treaty of Iizuka, Corea is formally a wholly neutral nation independent of both China and Japan. In reality it's pretty subservient to Japanese interests but far less so than it would become IOTL. There is no chance of Japanese annexation, for example. As China gets its act together in the 1910s and 1920s, it progressively attempts to assert what Beijing regards as its Treaty Rights, much to the irritation of Japan. It's a major factor in the outbreak of the Great War, funnily enough.
Russia does not have a great war, that's for sure. There are some difficult years ahead.
BTW, I'm so sorry I haven't replied to your PM yet- was on holiday when you sent it and only just remembered that I never got back to you. Will do so soo!!
The 1890s are not a good time for the Hazara- joining up with the British gives them the employment, relative safety and the possibility of moving to India.
That it isn't, and it's going to get worse yet...
Thanks! I think I've fixed that now. Footnotes are always a problem as copying and pasting never preserves the link- I have to do the whole thing manually.
At this point ITTL as mandated by the Treaty of Iizuka, Corea is formally a wholly neutral nation independent of both China and Japan. In reality it's pretty subservient to Japanese interests but far less so than it would become IOTL. There is no chance of Japanese annexation, for example. As China gets its act together in the 1910s and 1920s, it progressively attempts to assert what Beijing regards as its Treaty Rights, much to the irritation of Japan. It's a major factor in the outbreak of the Great War, funnily enough.
First, great update, very informative and well written. Secondly, I think you can hold back until you reveal the end of the siege, but that said, my bet in on the Japanese taking the port city. Keep it up!
Thande
Donor
By the way Ed, I know you've edited political caricatures from the time to illustrate your TL before...are you aware that back copies of Punch are available through Project Gutenberg? For example, if you click on this link it takes you to a collection of their caricatures including several of Randolph Churchill, e.g. one with him dressed as a farm labourer (due to him being the champion of the working man).
Eh, no worries - you'll get to it when you do, no rush - for God's sake, you were on holiday! Answering something from me should rank about 6,789,204th on the list of priority!
As for the map, my vote goes with posting it with the last update that the map shows info from, if that makes sense...I just tried to tutor today, I'm beat.
Would agree. Keep up the suspense although I also suspect, with the other problems Russia is facing that the seige will end up successfully for the Japanese.
EdT - love the interference from St Petersburg fouling up Kuropatkin's plans by insisting on too many troops.
Was rather doubtful that an attack through Afghanistan would work because of the terrain and locals making logistics dodgy to put it mildly. Must admit if I had been Roberts I would probably be inclined to fight further south, waiting until the Russians were even further from their supply forces and engage them at the end of their tether. However I'm not a military veteran.Steve
Wow, I had no idea- these are absolutely wonderful! I've seen most of Reginald Cleaver's but these are really cool too, only ever seen very small or poor quality copies, and never so many. This'll keep me occupied for a while...
All this is based on what Roberts worked out OTL, to an amazing amount of detail actually. He didn't want for ambition either- he even worked out a plan for a military offensive into Central Asia once the Russians had been kicked out of Afghanistan! The latter is perhaps not the most plausible thing, but given his success fighting in the region and real appreciation of logistics, if anyone could have managed it it's him.
It sounds to me that you'd probably incline less towards the 'forward school' and more towards General Wolseley's Circle, who didn't like the idea of moving into Afghanistan for precisely the reasons you state and instead preferred to engage the Russians at, or just before, the Indus. This would be combined with the entry of Persia into the war and a small expeditionary force sent to play havoc along the Caspian coast.
FWIW, Wolseley was probably right in that the Russians would be so exhausted by the time they reached India that they'd be in no condition to fight, assuming they made it at all. Roberts' counterpoint to this was that in his view, the very act of the Russians getting through the Khyber Pass was a major British defeat, and would cause such disorder and demoralisation within the Indian component of the Raj's army that it could spark a second mutiny. Hence his forward strategy.
OTL, a mix of both was used- remember that at this point Durand hasn't addressed the border issue, so Afghanistan still has most of what today is the F.A.T.A in Pakistan. A lot of Roberts' advance is into land that Britain would take in 1894/5 OTL anyhow; the Durand Line was meant to roughly reflect the 'scientific frontier', although ITTL its equivalent will be somewhat to the west.
Spot on. The British have probably over-estimated the risk of this in reality, but it's a major concern for them- the Russians of course are guilty of the same sin, and both IOTL and ITTL are working on the basis that if they can get to the Indus, India is theirs. Somehow I don't think it'd be that easy...
The Japanese are operating on the very edge of their capabilities- their success is far more to do with Russian weakness in the region than their own strength. The IJA, after all, failed to beat the Chinese only a few years earlier. Even with cheap British credit, this is going to be a pretty expensive war for Japan.
The problem the Russians have in the Far East is a similar one to that of the German colonies in WW1- small forces in theatre, no prospect of reinforcement and an enemy able to wear you down at their leisure. The key is the lack of a Trans-Siberian railway, which not only limits the size of the garrison but effectively prevents reinforcement by land. It's the railway which OTL allowed the massive expansion of Vladivostok and her defences in the years before the Russo-Japanese War; the difference between the city in 1894 and 1904 is pretty staggering, and shows how short a window the Japanese genuinely had to try something like what we're seeing here.
The Russians can (and do) scrape up all the troops they have east of Laike Baikal as a relief force, but to get to the front, they will have to walk. And if they want to send a proper army eastwards, it's going to have to march the 7000 miles or so from Omsk.
The real test for Japan will be what to do with Formosa, which boasts a powerful Franco-Russian naval sqaudron, proper fortifications and a number of French army units. Even with British help it's going to be a very tough nut to crack- it makes Vladivostok, with a single cruiser and a few regiments of cold and hungry Russians, look like a sideshow- but Tokyo is determined to take the island.
All of which comes later, of course.
DBWI: "War of the Dual Alliance" delayed
This timeline makes me want to do a DBWI on what would happen if the war had been delayed so the Russian Naval squadron could get to the Far East, and maybe even have the railway be completed. To make it even more interesting, maybe butterflies could make the Tsar allow the General's plan in Afghanistan to be carried out. I say this because it seems that everything that could go wrong for the Russians is going wrong--I'd put money on an Anglo-Japanese victory.
This timeline makes me want to do a DBWI on what would happen if the war had been delayed so the Russian Naval squadron could get to the Far East, and maybe even have the railway be completed. To make it even more interesting, maybe butterflies could make the Tsar allow the General's plan in Afghanistan to be carried out. I say this because it seems that everything that could go wrong for the Russians is going wrong--I'd put money on an Anglo-Japanese victory.
I Blame Communism
Banned
I too predict a victory for us and Japan, and I'm starting to consider the post-war diplomacy. It seems to me that Russian defeat is going to mean decisive checks both in the Far East and Central Asia, closing diplomatic issues that lasted until 1905 and 1907 OTL.
France, meanwhile, having suffered two humiliating victories in so many decades, is going to start underestimating her own capabilities for a while. They were deeply conscious of their natural weakness against Germany in OTL, even after WW1 (even more after WW1, in fact), so I think they'll be keeping their heads down in Europe and overseas for a while and thus not picking sides in any Anglo-German dispute.
So, when Germany starts aspiring to Weltmacht in the early 20th C (and transforming ex-Austria-Hungary into its back garden in the process), France is willing to let it. Britain is threatened on the sea, Russia is threatened at the straits. With their colonial conflicts resolved prematurely, its only natural for the two to move together: the only issue left between them is the Ottoman Empire. Perhaps it succesfully reforms under German tutelage and becomes a threat to both their interests; perhaps the Russians swallow their pride and live with it; perhaps it becomes a kind of joint dependency: any option can be made to explain its destruction by 1940.
By the mid-20s, we know, Austria's been chomped up by Germany, which isn't going to calm anyone, and Russia and Britain have made a formal alliance. About then, British semi-dependency Portugal blows up, and this seems to me the signal for an ideological dimension to the blocs emerging, since by this time we know that Russia is nasty for Jews and Britain has strict censorship: hopefully social democracy has prevailed in Germany.
Meanwhile, Germany, with its colonies limited to a few scraps and presumably losing the *naval arms race, and with the Kaiser having a wierd affection for Asia, starts investing majorly in the more stable Qing Empire. At the same time, it starts actively trying to conciliate France and Italy.
The Chinese start getting uppity about Korea, the Russians fear encirclement, the wrong things get said at the wrong times...
I think we can sketch the road to the prologue from where we are now.
France, meanwhile, having suffered two humiliating victories in so many decades, is going to start underestimating her own capabilities for a while. They were deeply conscious of their natural weakness against Germany in OTL, even after WW1 (even more after WW1, in fact), so I think they'll be keeping their heads down in Europe and overseas for a while and thus not picking sides in any Anglo-German dispute.
So, when Germany starts aspiring to Weltmacht in the early 20th C (and transforming ex-Austria-Hungary into its back garden in the process), France is willing to let it. Britain is threatened on the sea, Russia is threatened at the straits. With their colonial conflicts resolved prematurely, its only natural for the two to move together: the only issue left between them is the Ottoman Empire. Perhaps it succesfully reforms under German tutelage and becomes a threat to both their interests; perhaps the Russians swallow their pride and live with it; perhaps it becomes a kind of joint dependency: any option can be made to explain its destruction by 1940.
By the mid-20s, we know, Austria's been chomped up by Germany, which isn't going to calm anyone, and Russia and Britain have made a formal alliance. About then, British semi-dependency Portugal blows up, and this seems to me the signal for an ideological dimension to the blocs emerging, since by this time we know that Russia is nasty for Jews and Britain has strict censorship: hopefully social democracy has prevailed in Germany.
Meanwhile, Germany, with its colonies limited to a few scraps and presumably losing the *naval arms race, and with the Kaiser having a wierd affection for Asia, starts investing majorly in the more stable Qing Empire. At the same time, it starts actively trying to conciliate France and Italy.
The Chinese start getting uppity about Korea, the Russians fear encirclement, the wrong things get said at the wrong times...
I think we can sketch the road to the prologue from where we are now.
Last edited:
Have to admit I wasn't expecting a section on Russian cults but it was a lovely addition, very intriging. Obivously Rasputin certainly can't be left out.
I'm predicting that the Russians are buggered in Afghanistan, they'll be routed in the first major battle but then as the Brits chase them out, they'll suffer similar problems in trying to cross the whole country and you'll end up with deadlock.
So EdT, where will your cavalcade of counter-factual go next? North Africa? Congo? Alps? Westminster?
I'm predicting that the Russians are buggered in Afghanistan, they'll be routed in the first major battle but then as the Brits chase them out, they'll suffer similar problems in trying to cross the whole country and you'll end up with deadlock.
So EdT, where will your cavalcade of counter-factual go next? North Africa? Congo? Alps? Westminster?
Those humiliating victories. Some nations can never recover their national pride from embarrassingly winning a war.
But overall, I agree with you. I am just wondering if there might be a violent regime change in Russia after they lose the war-perhaps to a more liberal constitutional monarchy or even a Republic?
I Blame Communism
Banned
Those humiliating victories. Some nations can never recover their national pride from embarrassingly winning a war.
But overall, I agree with you. I am just wondering if there might be a violent regime change in Russia after they lose the war-perhaps to a more liberal constitutional monarchy or even a Republic?
Whoops!
However, we know that Russia goes down an altogether darker path. For one thing, it passes anti-semitic legislation (remember Altneuland?), and then there's this thing here.
So my reading is this: the Russian empire suffered a humiliating vict... defeat in 1905 OTL, and it made the monarchical system, with its severe social strains, visbly wobble. To survive, it had to transform itself into an awkward transitional polity, and while Nicky was trying hard to bring back the good old days, its ultimate fate was decided by WW1, when the state simply couldn't take the strain and blew up.
But if we move the humiliation back a decade or so (and that's a lot of time, because Russia was industrialising at breakneck pace before the war, that being where all those societal strains came from), revolution may be a damp squib that serves only to make the regime very, very paranoid about any suspicious political movements whatsoever.
Vladimir reigned from 1900, apparently, but he doesn't look so decrepit 40 years later. Perhaps something happened to Nicholas and the infant tsar's empire was brought under the control of Wittes and Stolypins.. and Pobedonostsevs, who all set about consolidating the regime through ruthless repression and the creation of a mass-movement underpinned by Orthodox faith and influenced by the innovative propaganda of General Boulanger (and perhaps even early Unionist Britain), with more than a whif of Black Hundreds about it.
Last edited: