Germany Invades Ukraine in 1916

CaliGuy

Banned
What if, instead of going for Verdun, Germany would have tried invading Ukraine in 1916?

Basically, the goal of this would have been two-fold:

1. To secure a supply of grain for Germany in order to reduce the risk of hunger there.
2. To weaken Russia enough that Russia feels compelled to seek a separate peace with Germany (so that Germany can have a free hand in the West).
 

Deleted member 1487

What if, instead of going for Verdun, Germany would have tried invading Ukraine in 1916?

Basically, the goal of this would have been two-fold:

1. To secure a supply of grain for Germany in order to reduce the risk of hunger there.
2. To weaken Russia enough that Russia feels compelled to seek a separate peace with Germany (so that Germany can have a free hand in the West).
Well you'd have to remove Falkenhayn, because he had already tried a Russia-first strategy to knock them from the war and improve the CP strategic position by whittling it down to one front; he was done with Russia and thought he had maimed them and considered the west front the only way to get a strategically favorable result.
https://www.amazon.com/German-Strategy-Verdun-Robert-Foley/dp/0521044367
It's a rather convoluted explanation, but Falkenhayn was right to want to finish things in the west, as that was the only option for a decisive result, but even if you got H-L in power 6 months early or so, then you're not even looking at Ukraine as an option, they wanted to go through the Baltics and on the St. Petersburg. No one wanted to attack in Ukraine in 1916 except for Brusilov, because it was considered to be an non-decisive front by everyone on the CP side.
 
Germany was fearful of the British and French overwhelming the Western Front by sheer numbers alone (basically what happened in the 100 Days in 1918. Verdun was supposed to be a spoiler attack which triggered a major French and British counter attack against German defensive positions

Another offensive against Russia did not seem to offer any upside apart from empty Russian fields - I don't think Germany understood at the end of 1915 just how near collapse Russia was.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Well you'd have to remove Falkenhayn, because he had already tried a Russia-first strategy to knock them from the war and improve the CP strategic position by whittling it down to one front; he was done with Russia and thought he had maimed them and considered the west front the only way to get a strategically favorable result.
https://www.amazon.com/German-Strategy-Verdun-Robert-Foley/dp/0521044367
It's a rather convoluted explanation, but Falkenhayn was right to want to finish things in the west, as that was the only option for a decisive result, but even if you got H-L in power 6 months early or so, then you're not even looking at Ukraine as an option, they wanted to go through the Baltics and on the St. Petersburg. No one wanted to attack in Ukraine in 1916 except for Brusilov, because it was considered to be an non-decisive front by everyone on the CP side.
Thanks for this explanation, Wiking!

Also, though, what if H & L come to power six months early and aim for St. Petersburg? How would such a campaign have turned out?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Germany was fearful of the British and French overwhelming the Western Front by sheer numbers alone (basically what happened in the 100 Days in 1918. Verdun was supposed to be a spoiler attack which triggered a major French and British counter attack against German defensive positions

Another offensive against Russia did not seem to offer any upside apart from empty Russian fields - I don't think Germany understood at the end of 1915 just how near collapse Russia was.
Wasn't Germany already starving in 1916, though?
 

Deleted member 1487

Thanks for this explanation, Wiking!

Also, though, what if H & L come to power six months early and aim for St. Petersburg? How would such a campaign have turned out?
Probably have not gone well at all; the Somme would have been properly prepared by the Entente and they could attack the way they wanted, making it an even worse bloodbath for the Germans and less so one for the Entente. Meanwhile Brusilov would have been somewhat successful in his offensive, while in the area that the Germans would attack in the North wouldn't have been good offensive terrain. IMHO it would have ended even worse for the CPs than OTL.

Wasn't Germany already starving in 1916, though?
Not until winter 1916-17. As a result of H-L's economic plan that collapsed transportation in Germany and disrupted the ability to supply food to the cities.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Probably have not gone well at all; the Somme would have been properly prepared by the Entente and they could attack the way they wanted, making it an even worse bloodbath for the Germans and less so one for the Entente. Meanwhile Brusilov would have been somewhat successful in his offensive, while in the area that the Germans would attack in the North wouldn't have been good offensive terrain. IMHO it would have ended even worse for the CPs than OTL.

OK; understood.

Also, was an Entente breakthrough in the West in 1916 have been possible in this TL?

Not until winter 1916-17. As a result of H-L's economic plan that collapsed transportation in Germany and disrupted the ability to supply food to the cities.

OK. Also, did H & L's economic plan at least result in better war production for Germany?
 

Deleted member 1487

OK; understood.

Also, was an Entente breakthrough in the West in 1916 have been possible in this TL?
IMHO a break in via attrition that is more like the 100 Days Offensive...so not a breakthrough, more like forcing the German line to fall back.

OK. Also, did H & L's economic plan at least result in better war production for Germany?
Nope, worse relative to what it could have been and started unleashing labor to get revolutionary based on really vicious labor laws they passed.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
IMHO a break in via attrition that is more like the 100 Days Offensive...so not a breakthrough, more like forcing the German line to fall back.

OK. Also, how much do you think that the German line would have fallen in this TL? A couple of miles or so?

Nope, worse relative to what it could have been and started unleashing labor to get revolutionary based on really vicious labor laws they passed.

OK.

Also, somewhat off-topic, but do you think that France would have been willing to make a separate peace at any point between 1914 and 1918 if Germany would have offered them a plebiscite in Alsace-Lorraine?
 
Going for the Ukraine would do the Germans no good. They Anglo-French forces had virtually unlimited manpower and resources in their colonial Empires and everyday they were growing stronger. British war production was just beginning to kick into high gear. The Germans simply could not give them anymore breathing room

Capturing a large amount of Ukrainian territory is not going to give the Germans grain anymore than overrunning Romania did- the infrastructure and crops would be destroyed

Time was always against the Germans. Moltke bought just enough time in the West in 1914 to beat back the Russians in 1915. This had given the Anglo-French time to build up their armies in the West. The Russians remained viable in the field and the Tsar would never make peace as he knew about the growing strength of the Anglo-French in the West
 
Top