How Long Could World War I Be Delayed

Let's say Franz Ferdinand is not assassinate on June 28th 1914 in Sarajevo. How long could World War I be delayed and could it be delayed permenantly? If not when would it happen and what changes of alliance would there be? Would a later World War I be less bloodier without trench warfare thanks to tanks, aircraft, and other technology or bloodier?
 
The tensions were too high. If just that POD, eventually, within the next decade, it would happen. Not OTL, maybe very far of from OTL, but a First World War would happen.
 
Let's say Franz Ferdinand is not assassinate on June 28th 1914 in Sarajevo. How long could World War I be delayed and could it be delayed permenantly? If not when would it happen and what changes of alliance would there be? Would a later World War I be less bloodier without trench warfare thanks to tanks, aircraft, and other technology or bloodier?
2. Franz Ferdinand avoids assassination. (I am not in any way suggesting that this would prevent WWI, before you say that. I'm simply saying it would start differently)
I am starting to feel threatened here. I posted mine 9 minutes before you, AND you saw my thread :mad:
 
I think the 'build up' to war would have met a climax by 1915/1916 and then would have subsided. I believe that the Socialist were set on make huge gains in the next elections in both France and Germany and they would have striven for some sort of disarmament. In the same vein I suspect that a lot of bills will either be coming due or nations facing bankruptcy by at least 1917 because of the massive armament programs going on.

I don't believe the Great War was bound to happen or inevitable, but similar to David Fromkin's analogy of a plane flying thru the air that sudden and unexpectedly hits some terrible turbulence.
 
Well, if the German general staff had their was, their would of been war by 1916. Can they be held back? That is the question. Germany wasn't going to have another election for a while and even after it it would take the SDP a long time before they were able to do anything much to check the power of generals and industrial magnates. And it's not like there were a shortage of diplomatic crisis waiting to happen: there was revanchist Bulgaria with large parts of territory run by irredentist guerillas, there was the Armenian Reform Package and its consequences in Asia. And each diplomatic crisis had a very high chance of starting a war. Each of the protagonists had an overinflated confidence in their own abilities. Each of the protagonists had a substantial war-party. Each lived in fear of being caught napping by the others. War plans were based on an assumption of first-strike which required rapid mobilisations based on tight schedules. As soon as war loomed, countries had to start mobilising to prevent being cuaght with their trousers down, but once they mobilised, others had to mobilise. You know have a bunch of mutually suspicious powers, all believing they'll win a war, and all with nationalistic fervor raised to fever pitch.

If you somehow navigate each crisis without everything blowing up (wierd and whacky domestic politics could stay hands, such as the frequent speculations about how a civil war in Ireland would have affected Britain's freedom to act in Europe, and if Franz Josef were to fall down some stairs, Austria would be in rather a bad way vis-a-vis Hungary), then after 1916 things subside. That date was when the Generalstab believed they had to go to war: after it they may be more cautious (then again, they are Prussian militarists...). Another factor is that Germany was clearly going to loose the naval arms race and would have to find some way of bowing out. Bulgaria's revolutionaries can fulminate all they lack, but nobody will get worked up about the snow melting on the Balkans unless its for self-interested reasons. So I'd imagine that in remarkable and unlikley circumstances, it might just be possible to avert WW1 altogether with a PoD concerning Fran Ferdinand.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
I recall reading an essay by a British historian (can't recall the name right now, I'll post it later) that suggests the whole thing could have been avoided had Franz Ferdinand not been assassinated. Basically, his not being killed means that the vehemently anti-Serb Austrians (like Hötzendorf) remain muzzled.

If nothing goes terribly wrong by 1916, Franz Ferdinand ascends the throne and takes concilliatory measures towards Serbia and the Slavs within A-H in general (as he had planned in OTL). The hawks go out of style in Vienna and Budapest. With Austria-Hungary becoming more peaceable (due also to increased economic and military impotence), Germany knows its window to win a successful war against a rapidly-developing Russia and the rest of the Entente is closing fast.

Assuming the Germans don't say "it's our last shot" and lose their minds and go to war (basically alone), a grudging sort of peace settles over the continent. Germany's not strong enough to take the Entente anymore, the Balkans crises have started to fizzle out, and Russia is on its way to becoming a superpower (not just a Great Power).

At least I believe this is what's posited; my memory may be spotty. I'll check later.
 
I recall reading an essay by a British historian (can't recall the name right now, I'll post it later) that suggests the whole thing could have been avoided had Franz Ferdinand not been assassinated. Basically, his not being killed means that the vehemently anti-Serb Austrians (like Hötzendorf) remain muzzled.

If nothing goes terribly wrong by 1916, Franz Ferdinand ascends the throne and takes concilliatory measures towards Serbia and the Slavs within A-H in general (as he had planned in OTL). The hawks go out of style in Vienna and Budapest. With Austria-Hungary becoming more peaceable (due also to increased economic and military impotence), Germany knows its window to win a successful war against a rapidly-developing Russia and the rest of the Entente is closing fast.

Assuming the Germans don't say "it's our last shot" and lose their minds and go to war (basically alone), a grudging sort of peace settles over the continent. Germany's not strong enough to take the Entente anymore, the Balkans crises have started to fizzle out, and Russia is on its way to becoming a superpower (not just a Great Power).

At least I believe this is what's posited; my memory may be spotty. I'll check later.

This is basically my position, although I'm of the opinion that since there were other secondary hotspots unrelatred to Serbia, you still need lots of luck to bring this about.

Was it AJP Taylor? I believe he once said that Franz Ferdinand surviving was a late enough PoD.
 
Let's say Franz Ferdinand is not assassinate on June 28th 1914 in Sarajevo. How long could World War I be delayed and could it be delayed permenantly? If not when would it happen and what changes of alliance would there be? Would a later World War I be less bloodier without trench warfare thanks to tanks, aircraft, and other technology or bloodier?

Even if you hold off for a few years, that technology only developed as quickly because of the War. If you hold off the wars start till 1918, the tech level will not be the same as OTL 1918. All sides will still start the war with the same misguided notions and get bogged down into trench warfare, unless some other conflict happens inbetween they can learn from, which is unlikely as the slightest spark would have set the whole thing in motion.

And Germany were itching to hit Russia before they could industrialise beyond Germany.
 
This is basically my position, although I'm of the opinion that since there were other secondary hotspots unrelatred to Serbia, you still need lots of luck to bring this about.

Was it AJP Taylor? I believe he once said that Franz Ferdinand surviving was a late enough PoD.

Neil Ferguson, if I remember correctly-The Pity of War. He also spends quite a bit of time explaining how Britain really should have stayed out of the war, and how great a German-dominated Europe would have been. Your Mileage May Very.
 
Neil Ferguson, if I remember correctly-The Pity of War. He also spends quite a bit of time explaining how Britain really should have stayed out of the war, and how great a German-dominated Europe would have been. Your Mileage May Very.

And a half... still, if Germany wins in 1914, it might not be all bad. It might, but it might not.
 
Neil Ferguson, if I remember correctly-The Pity of War. He also spends quite a bit of time explaining how Britain really should have stayed out of the war, and how great a German-dominated Europe would have been. Your Mileage May Very.

So did Pat Buchanan in his Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War.
 
Even if you hold off for a few years, that technology only developed as quickly because of the War. If you hold off the wars start till 1918, the tech level will not be the same as OTL 1918. All sides will still start the war with the same misguided notions and get bogged down into trench warfare, unless some other conflict happens in between they can learn from, which is unlikely as the slightest spark would have set the whole thing in motion.

And Germany were itching to hit Russia before they could industrialise beyond Germany.
I would think so... for example, early tanks were only developed because of the specific conditions of trench warfare. i.e., "hey, we want to get this armoured vehicle across a 10-15-foot gap. How do we do that?" With the answer being the British rhomboid type.

I can, however, see machine guns being more widespread given a few more years, especially if there is some (relatively) minor conflict outside Europe, in which their use is decisive.
 
How long could WWI be delayed about? Forever. The Central Powers were ready to crumble and were crumbling by 1914. In a few years, the whole political landscape would change. In Germany, the Establishment was decisively discredited, while the SPD kept growing, and the new conservatives and the Center began massive theft of SPD planks, e.g., abolishment of the restrictive Prussian suffrage. In Austria-H, Franz Joseph would croak soon and then the whole edifice supported only by his presence would probably start crumbling. Moreoever, the German General Staff had vastly overestimated Russian military modernization and believed that, between French modernization and Russian modernization, the window of opportunity for a successful war was closely down fast. It's doubtful that the General Staff would be as willing to back up their bluff (the infamous blank cheque) in 5 years' time. Moreso since the Prussian Establishment (as opposed to German) was fast approaching its hour of reckoning: Should they make good on their threat of coup, or should they join the rest of the country? In the former case, there would be a civil war and thus in no condition for WW, and the victory of the reactionaries hardly a foregone conclusion; it's debatable whether the soldiers not radicalized by a world war would fire on the civilians, especially since everyone in Germany except the old conservatives considered the universal and secret suffrage sacrosanct. And who knows what would happen in 5 years in that crickiest state of them all: Russia?
 
Let's say Franz Ferdinand is not assassinate on June 28th 1914 in Sarajevo. How long could World War I be delayed and could it be delayed permenantly? If not when would it happen and what changes of alliance would there be? Would a later World War I be less bloodier without trench warfare thanks to tanks, aircraft, and other technology or bloodier?

Don't forget that military technology devoloped significantly because of the war, their would be no need to develop stalemate weapons like tanks because few Generals pre 1914 predicted that was how war stratagey was going to change ( What with the whole 19th centuary thinking and Berlin before Christmas etc)
 
Also you should take into account that Germany felt that 1914 was the last chance they would have to tackle Russia before it became a superpower (note the rate of Industrial advance in Russia and it's not difficult to see why Germany thought they would end up un-stopable)
 
Also you should take into account that Germany felt that 1914 was the last chance they would have to tackle Russia before it became a superpower (note the rate of Industrial advance in Russia and it's not difficult to see why Germany thought they would end up un-stopable)

Correct, but it was 1916 that was the official date. If Bulgaria or Armenia (or indeed Serbia) had become sufficiently inflamed in 1915, there's still a huge danger of war.
 
Top