Germany manages to enter Paris with the Spring offensive but AH collapses

pls don't ban me

Monthly Donor
the question popped up in my head randomly.
Basically, what would happen if Germany manages to actually defeat the french, let' say they do, by pure luck or allied mistakes, some huge encirclement , heavily advance and actually reach and go beyond Paris making Franc surrender.
At the same time AH collapses even earlier, let's say Diaz is less cautious or is replaced by Gaetano Giardino , and manages a much earlier Vittorio Veneto. Would there be a peace conference or does the war go on with basically the Italian alps as main war front?
 

Garrison

Donor
the question popped up in my head randomly.
Basically, what would happen if Germany manages to actually defeat the french, let' say they do, by pure luck or allied mistakes, some huge encirclement , heavily advance and actually reach and go beyond Paris making Franc surrender.
At the same time AH collapses even earlier, let's say Diaz is less cautious or is replaced by Gaetano Giardino , and manages a much earlier Vittorio Veneto. Would there be a peace conference or does the war go on with basically the Italian alps as main war front?
The spring offensive never came close to breaking through the Allied Lines or reaching Paris, so I think you need to provide a plausible scenario to actually discuss any consequences.
 

DougM

Donor
I agree that how this happens is extremely important. That being said. If it did happen i suspect the war will end in a peace treaty.
AH loses (a lot) Russia gains and Germany agrees to go back to Ho, and does not collect $200
I suspect that in effect in the west all sides go back to starting points. AH implodes and breaks up.
Russia gains in the East and gets massive influence and maybe some territory.
As an Outside, if France IMPLODES Then Germany may get part of AH so they will leave France.

But we do need a little more info on how this happens as how it happens and how badly it happens will have drastic impact on the way it ends and who agrees to what.
 

Garrison

Donor
I agree that how this happens is extremely important. That being said. If it did happen i suspect the war will end in a peace treaty.
AH loses (a lot) Russia gains and Germany agrees to go back to Ho, and does not collect $200
I suspect that in effect in the west all sides go back to starting points. AH implodes and breaks up.
Russia gains in the East and gets massive influence and maybe some territory.
As an Outside, if France IMPLODES Then Germany may get part of AH so they will leave France.

But we do need a little more info on how this happens as how it happens and how badly it happens will have drastic impact on the way it ends and who agrees to what.
I think its more likely Germany implodes than France, a last minute dubious victory isn't going to help their internal issues much.
 
I think the only way this happens is if Germany just goes after French sectors of the front only in its March+ offensives, hoping to achieve a political settlement / compromise peace, Maybe at attacks first at the Chemin des Dames , then rolls up the front, east encircling Verdun, maybe a May General offensive that takes Paris.

Germany holds Paris but American, British and French armies are in the field in France.

The Allies just commit to holding the line in France in 1918, but commit to an Italian October offensive with a handful of USA and British divisions (the British forgo an attack on the Turks to concentrate on Italy, the extra forces crush the Austrians.

In such a scenario. There may be no German revolution quite yet and the Germans may have to evacuate France to secure the Brenner Pass, Linz and the Skoda Works, and to hold down the Poles.
 
Last edited:

pls don't ban me

Monthly Donor
I think the only way this happens is if Germany just goes after French sectors of the front only in its March+ offensives, hoping to achieve a political settlement / compromise peace, Maybe at attacks first at the Chemin des Dames , then rolls up the front, east encircling Verdun, maybe a May General offensive that takes Paris.

Germany holds Paris but, French British and French armies are in the field in France.

The Allies just commit to holding the line in France in 1918, but commit to an Italian October offensive with a handful of USA and British divisions (the British forgo an attack on the Turks to concentrate on Italy, the extra forces crush the Austrians.

In such a scenario. There may be no German revolution quite yet and the Germans may have to evacuate France to secure the Brenner Pass, Linz and the Skoda Works, and to hold down the Poles.
Frankly speaking, it was a question that popped up in my brain suddenly while reading stuff about Caporetto and Vittorio Veneto.
Never been an expert on the western front per sè ( i kinda followed the Verdun batte in detail and that's it).
So let's agree to this Scenario.
Italy puts as army leader Gaetano Giardino who seeks to attack more. and manages to make AH collapse earlier while Germany enter Paris.

2 friends of mine and myself agree that Italy, already with 0 desire to stay in the war any longer, would do another betrayal and negotiate a separate peace with Germany to take for themselves Istria, Dalmazia and Trent. Germany while angry at the initial Italian back stab would accept as it would give them a neutral nation to get food from and the possibility to send troops to their last standing ally, Bulgaria ( Capitulated in September 1918)
 
Frankly speaking, it was a question that popped up in my brain suddenly while reading stuff about Caporetto and Vittorio Veneto.
Never been an expert on the western front per sè ( i kinda followed the Verdun batte in detail and that's it).
So let's agree to this Scenario.
Italy puts as army leader Gaetano Giardino who seeks to attack more. and manages to make AH collapse earlier while Germany enter Paris.

2 friends of mine and myself agree that Italy, already with 0 desire to stay in the war any longer, would do another betrayal and negotiate a separate peace with Germany to take for themselves Istria, Dalmazia and Trent. Germany while angry at the initial Italian back stab would accept as it would give them a neutral nation to get food from and the possibility to send troops to their last standing ally, Bulgaria ( Capitulated in September 1918)
I have no doubt that Italy in practice once they beat the Austrians would concentrate on getting to Trieste and Dalmatia, securing the Austrian fleet, posturing against the south Slavs, and the last thing they would do is try to push on into Germany , but an actual separate peace seems unlikely as it would annoy the USA, Britain and France and risk getting official at a peace conference their gains they are occupying de facto.
 

pls don't ban me

Monthly Donor
I have no doubt that Italy in practice once they beat the Austrians would concentrate on getting to Trieste and Dalmatia, securing the Austrian fleet, posturing against the south Slavs, and the last thing they would do is try to push on into Germany , but an actual separate peace seems unlikely as it would annoy the USA, Britain and France and risk getting official at a peace conference their gains they are occupying de facto.
I mean, nothing stopped Italy from betraying its former allies in 1915.
Italy's leadership also started fearing ,after Caporetto, that the London agreements might be put in discussion with the poor Italian performance. there is also to consider the overall behavior of the common people. from i know most did not the war to being with. many in the Venetian region were already accepting without much issue to return under Hapsburg domain if it gave them peace.
IF Italy makes some amazing win that help them recover their borders and occupy what they wanted, they can say that there is heavy risk of uprisings and peace out separately.
BTW, here's the video where an Italian professor explains everything, it's in Italian but Youtube subtitles should be good enough
 
I mean, nothing stopped Italy from betraying its former allies in 1915.
Italy's leadership also started fearing ,after Caporetto, that the London agreements might be put in discussion with the poor Italian performance. there is also to consider the overall behavior of the common people. from i know most did not the war to being with. many in the Venetian region were already accepting without much issue to return under Hapsburg domain if it gave them peace.
IF Italy makes some amazing win that help them recover their borders and occupy what they wanted, they can say that there is heavy risk of uprisings and peace out separately.
BTW, here's the video where an Italian professor explains everything, it's in Italian but Youtube subtitles should be good enough
I guess the difference here is that especially with the Austrians out, and more American forces arriving every day, everyone .knows the Allies will win eventually.
(One could argue Italy betrayed the Central Powers because it seemed to Italy the Allies would win in 1915.)
Smart Germany would be playing every diplomatic card they could to avoid an OTL like armistice, and I could see them trying like you suggest. With Italy actually bringing down the Austrians it sort of flips the script on the Caporetto legacy though.

If the war goes on into 1919, the Americans will have the big armies in the field, and it will be an American led peace conference, best to not annoy the Americans overtly. But certainly defacto, I don't see Italy trying to move beyond the Brenner pass north, and would get into open conflict with the South Slavs if necessary.
 
Last edited:
At this point a peace that sees germany be forced to concede land in the west but keep thier gains in the east is still worth it and can be spun as a victory for both sides populations, you could probably even offer the west demographic resettlement of germans from alsace lorraine and other otl losses both in europe and overseas to the new german acquisitions in the east in order to give France security guarantees be removing any ethnic claim from the germans.
 
Last edited:
Why is the loss of Paris in 1918 assumed the end of the war? France had agreed to no separate peace in 1914 and the US and all it's resources are committed now. If anything, the German armies have converged in Paris with depleted flanks that the Entente and 'associates' can push through and cut off.
 
Why is the loss of Paris in 1918 assumed the end of the war? France had agreed to no separate peace in 1914 and the US and all it's resources are committed now. If anything, the German armies have converged in Paris with depleted flanks that the Entente and 'associates' can push through and cut off.
While its plausible that the French government takes it on the chin and continue, the loss of the capital would be a staggering blow and its likely that the French could not sustain it. Just from a strategic perspective the loss of the industry and railways would be crippling for the Allied war effort.
 

pls don't ban me

Monthly Donor
While its plausible that the French government takes it on the chin and continue, the loss of the capital would be a staggering blow and its likely that the French could not sustain it. Just from a strategic perspective the loss of the industry and railways would be crippling for the Allied war effort.
Also the french army already made several mutinies. if i recall they even had to promise in 1917 to not make other offensives for the rest of the year.
 
This scenario is rather complicated to implement, as one of the reasons why Austria-Hungary collapsed so quickly at the end of the war was due to the presence of French troops in the Balkans.
So it's hard to see France collapsing on its main front, but continuing to lead brilliantly on a secondary front.
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
Also the french army already made several mutinies. if i recall they even had to promise in 1917 to not make other offensives for the rest of the year.
Hmm... that would be the same French Army that kicked the Germans out of almost all their gains at Verdun in 1917?

The French Army didn't refuse to launch offensives, but they did accept, planned & carried out limited offensives of the Petain style: maximum artillery, minimum infantry.
 
Hmm... that would be the same French Army that kicked the Germans out of almost all their gains at Verdun in 1917?

The French Army didn't refuse to launch offensives, but they did accept, planned & carried out limited offensives of the Petain style: maximum artillery, minimum infantry.
Yes, but you Paris have been retaken that way?
The answer is no.
 
Also the french army already made several mutinies. if i recall they even had to promise in 1917 to not make other offensives for the rest of the year.
The mutinies in the French army in 1917 were a direct result of Nivelle's bogged-down Chemin des Dames offensive.
The mutineers' main demand was an end to the offensive, and this was achieved when Nivelle was replaced by Pétain.
Despite their serious impact on the conflict, these mutinies did not pose a risk of collapse for France.
 
Italy would probably not jump ship here, since they will still see the writing on the wall with Britain and the US in the field, and will be quite ecstatic to exploit French weakness (say, muscling them out of the Levant or something). And even if the Germans take Paris, I think France would still fight on for the same reason, AH collapsing and the US arriving means they are still going to win the long war.

Now the big difference is that France is seen as not a coequal partner while Italy is viewed as more necessary to appease. Italy gains a freer hand in the Balkans, and while Germany could walk away with more in the east I could ironically see Germany suffering harsher terms if the war still drags on, since the WAllies will be thinking that France can't hold the peace on its own. Perhaps the Saarland is split off or annexed to France, or more of Prussia given to Poland.
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
Yes, but you Paris have been retaken that way?
The answer is no.
Of course Paris can be retaken, but not in a block-by-block urban assault, but by deliberate attacks on the long flanks that a German advance to Paris would bring.

After all, Henri of Navarre though Paris worth a mass.
 
Top