French Pacific Colonies in CP Victory

There are going to be powerful war hawks at work in the heights of British command, governance, industry and society. Belgium is about the only bargaining chip on the German side - so long as Willy doesn't do something inane like ride through Brussels on a white horse proclaiming its liberation from the Frankish yolke. BEF withdraws to Britain or establishes a stop line somewhere like Brittany.

The British Government has a large number of bargaining chips - the result of which was mutiny in Wilhelmshaven.

WNBR_15-42_mk1_Hood_guns_pic.jpg

So in this scenario, what do you think the final peace would be then? They are already in a peace conference, so there would be no more fighting.
 
A victorious germany should spend her money maintaining her new eastern empire. No fleet required.

Colonies are not worth it. Lithuania is worth more alone than all the colonies.

Make easy peace with britain and be done. I.e. ensure economic rights in the old colonies, but give up the colonies in exchange for money.
 
So in this scenario, what do you think the final peace would be then? They are already in a peace conference, so there would be no more fighting.

Honestly, I think at best for Germany you'll see an armistice with hefty indemnities against France and/or the occupation of the eastern 3rd of France and some sort of puppetisation of Belgium. BEF possibly holds a line across Brittany's land border.

Germany loses all influence on Colonial matters - perhaps with the exception of von Lettow-Vorbeck's small group - no more than 156 Germans and a few thousand natives. Japan looks at its battlefleet, looks at the Germans, looks at a map of the world and explains gently that there are no German territories in the Pacific. The Royal Navy laughs and resumes planning Hochseeflotte served a la Grand Fleet.
 
Honestly, I think at best for Germany you'll see an armistice with hefty indemnities against France and/or the occupation of the eastern 3rd of France and some sort of puppetisation of Belgium. BEF possibly holds a line across Brittany's land border.

Germany loses all influence on Colonial matters - perhaps with the exception of von Lettow-Vorbeck's small group - no more than 156 Germans and a few thousand natives. Japan looks at its battlefleet, looks at the Germans, looks at a map of the world and explains gently that there are no German territories in the Pacific. The Royal Navy laughs.
True. By what I'm asking is what Britain would be willing to concede to get a truly independent Belgium. So I figured French pacific colonies and Congo might be adequate lures for that independent Belgium.
 
True. By what I'm asking is what Britain would be willing to concede to get a truly independent Belgium. So I figured French pacific colonies and Congo might be adequate lures for that independent Belgium.

I can't see Britain conceding anything. The term I'm looking for is ultimatum. Belgian independence or we redouble the blockade, starve your people and strangle your economy. Blockade from Trieste to North Cape.
 
In Import and Export value, the pre war German colonies were on par with New Zealand. Adding Pacific Islands would be a burden. By 1915 Germans were turning away from overseas colonies and viewing Eastern Europe as the future opportunity.

If wanting to deprive France of possessions then Madagascar and Indo-China would do. If I wanted a fight with 3rd parties then French Guiana, Martinique or Reunion.
 
I can't see Britain conceding anything. The term I'm looking for is ultimatum. Belgian independence or we redouble the blockade, starve your people and strangle your economy. Blockade from Trieste to North Cape.


The British can’t force the Germans to do anything in Europe. Neither can the Germans do anything outside. And the Germans won’t be starving since it can import American food through neutral ports like Norway and the Netherlands like the Germans did before American entry in OTL and which the British cannot stop unless they would want to piss off the Americans. And Germany that controls both France and Eastern Europe won’t starve, and its economy won’t strangle.

Simply put, the British aren’t giving up anything in this proposal. The French and Belgians would be. So that would acceptable to the British as long as the demands in Western Europe are limited. Or else a puppet Belgium and occupation of eastern France like you suggested and you said would be the result of Germans not gaining anything outside of Europe.
 
Honestly, I think at best for Germany you'll see an armistice with hefty indemnities against France and/or the occupation of the eastern 3rd of France and some sort of puppetisation of Belgium. BEF possibly holds a line across Brittany's land border.

Germany loses all influence on Colonial matters - perhaps with the exception of von Lettow-Vorbeck's small group - no more than 156 Germans and a few thousand natives. Japan looks at its battlefleet, looks at the Germans, looks at a map of the world and explains gently that there are no German territories in the Pacific. The Royal Navy laughs and resumes planning Hochseeflotte served a la Grand Fleet.

So again, what would be the final peace treaty be? Remember that all parties are in armistice and there is no blockade and no fighting whatsoever while negotiations are being hammered out and during that, Germans could freely import from abroad. Assume in this scenario that the British wants to have peace too.

You said that Belgium is a bargaining chip, which implies it could be bargained for something the Germans could not have. So no ultimatums on Belgium.
 
Okay, perhaps the ultimatum won't work - though it starved Germany to breaking point in OTL. The question is, outwith glory-obsessed nutters like the Kaiser, what is the value of colonial possessions across unfriendly sealanes versus the value of a developed European nation with its infrastructure, population and industry...

If you were German, would the colonial option - at the RN's mercy - or holding Belgium look better?
 
Last edited:
Considering the French looked at ceding their caribbean and pacific colonies to the US in exchange for the right to buy planes on credit OTL, I think it is more likely they'd try selling their pacific holdings to the US to pay off whatever indemnity the Germans impose upon them.

Also, why should Germany particularly care about some pacific islands that'd be near-impossible to defend? Germany could plausibly regain Togo and Cameroon in exchange for withdrawing from Belgium, I think. Maybe they force a deal with Belgium to get economic rights (or even a condominium) in the Belgian Congo.

From France, the territories Germany would be most likely to ask for and get are French Congo and Gabon. The issue is that Germany will want to impose a heavy indemnity on the French so that they have fewer resources for rearmament, and too many colonial demands would mean that France won't accept as heavy an indemnity. Plus, Britain will oppose Germany gaining a West African base (ergo Senegal or Guinea) or any territories in the Indian Ocean (Djibout, Madagascar, or Comoros). They'd likely want to avoid a German Dahomey or Upper Volta too - no need to have Germans on both sides of Nigeria or on the Gold Coast border.
 
Okay, perhaps the ultimatum won't work - thoygh it starved Germany to breaking point in OTL. The question is, outwith glory-obsessed nutters like the Kaiser, what is the value of colonial possessions across unfriendly sealanes versus the value of a developed European nation with its infrastructure, population and industry...

If you were German, would the colonial option - at the RN's mercy - or holding Belgium look better?
Belgium, of course. I’m just stating the possibility of getting compensations from other defeated countries for loss of colonies, which would be galling to the pride.

The British should not have a problem with it, since, as you stated, it would be at the mercy of the RN. It would a poisoned pill for Germany in the long run, and the British would see it that way too. That would be a better guarantee that the new continental hegemon would behave unlike where the Germans have nothing that the British could take.

So if I were the Germans, I’d take a puppet Belgium at any time without colonies. If I were the British, an independent Belgium would be a propaganda victory since it was the stated war goal. Colonies from other powers going to Germany would be worth it to achieve their public war goal so I would immediately agree.

“We saved Belgium” would be something the government could say to the British public with a straight face.
 
Considering the French looked at ceding their caribbean and pacific colonies to the US in exchange for the right to buy planes on credit OTL, I think it is more likely they'd try selling their pacific holdings to the US to pay off whatever indemnity the Germans impose upon them.

Also, why should Germany particularly care about some pacific islands that'd be near-impossible to defend? Germany could plausibly regain Togo and Cameroon in exchange for withdrawing from Belgium, I think. Maybe they force a deal with Belgium to get economic rights (or even a condominium) in the Belgian Congo.

From France, the territories Germany would be most likely to ask for and get are French Congo and Gabon. The issue is that Germany will want to impose a heavy indemnity on the French so that they have fewer resources for rearmament, and too many colonial demands would mean that France won't accept as heavy an indemnity. Plus, Britain will oppose Germany gaining a West African base (ergo Senegal or Guinea) or any territories in the Indian Ocean (Djibout, Madagascar, or Comoros). They'd likely want to avoid a German Dahomey or Upper Volta too - no need to have Germans on both sides of Nigeria or on the Gold Coast border.
My thinking is that the Pacific French islands would compensate for the loss of the Pacific islands to Japan. They cannot force Japan to return their islands, so they take the French islands instead as compensation.
 
So again, what would be the final peace treaty be? Remember that all parties are in armistice and there is no blockade and no fighting whatsoever while negotiations are being hammered out and during that, Germans could freely import from abroad. Assume in this scenario that the British wants to have peace too.

You said that Belgium is a bargaining chip, which implies it could be bargained for something the Germans could not have. So no ultimatums on Belgium.

Britain won't be lifting the blockade if Germany still has occupation troops in France and Belgium. That gives the diplomatic high ground to Germany, as in the event of negotiations dragging on or breaking down they can resume putting on the pressure far easier than Britain can.
 
A victorious germany should spend her money maintaining her new eastern empire. No fleet required.

Colonies are not worth it. Lithuania is worth more alone than all the colonies.

Make easy peace with britain and be done. I.e. ensure economic rights in the old colonies, but give up the colonies in exchange for money.
It's always fascinating how people expect Germany to not have a navy after winning WW1 when the UK blatantly showed how much it cares about other nations rights on the seas.

The rational reaction would be to double down, especially now that the French and Russian armies have become non issues.
 
It's always fascinating how people expect Germany to not have a navy after winning WW1 when the UK blatantly showed how much it cares about other nations rights on the seas.

The rational reaction would be to double down, especially now that the French and Russian armies have become non issues.

I agree but the reasons for building the fleet, 'the why' are not the same that they were. You could also add that 1913 levels of trade, markets, economics and globalism are dead after a protracted war. By the end of the war the HSF was planning for the post war period with the certain knowledge that their pre-Jutland ships were too lightly armed.
 
My thinking is that the Pacific French islands would compensate for the loss of the Pacific islands to Japan. They cannot force Japan to return their islands, so they take the French islands instead as compensation.

A couple issues

1) Wouldn't the easy loss of Pacific islands to Japan show their indefensibility?
2) the French Pacific islands are pretty far from the German Pacific islands and don't have the same benefits with regard to telegram cable centers and whatnot.
 
What I can tell you 100% is that the Germans will cede Japan Tsingtao and the islands they took during the war. The German foreign office, 3rd OHL, etc, all supported doing that. Sort of an attempt at a gesture of good faith towards the Japanese.

I don’t remember ever reading anything concrete about annexing French territories in the Pacific. Getting colonies in Africa was treated as a higher priority by most (with the exception of some naval officers) so the Germans might also cede Guinea and Samoa in exchange for the return of prewar colonies in Africa, should negotiators choose to press for the return of them.

Honestly it’s an extremely complex question, as the big “mittelafrika” was never really a priority. Most of the plans for colonial empire were drawn up by members of the navy, and not given much thought by OHL or the foreign office. In the Spa Conference held in 1917 by the Germans to discuss war aims, there is no mention of colonies at all if I remember correctly.

Colonies always came second to securing Germany’s position in Europe and the Ottoman Empire. It would be more likely, in my opinion, that the Germans consent to an independent Belgium in return for British withdrawal from the Ottoman Empire. Maybe Belgium would be enough leverage to snag some colonies as well though, if desired. I don’t think anyone can say for sure.

What each side considers as an “independent” belgium differs of course, and there’s the question of whether the Germans would be willing to give it up, but that’s another topic.
 
Top