How viable would the United Baltic Duchy have been after a German victory in WW1?

[Crashraven]

I don't see why there would be crazy resistance to German occupation when there was not crazy resistance to Russian occupation.

Likely it does develop and want to throw off the German yoke eventually. However Germany can dominate this state absence the intervention of other powers. Russia (or the Soviet Union) will surely try to change that, and may find local allies in doing so. But it's also possible many locals find they prefer to be a German puppet state to a Russian colony or find the two interchangeable and don't particularly care.

There were multiple uprisings over the course of 19th century, with the biggest revolution in 1905 (until 1907). This was a direct uprising against the reduction of autonomy and forced Russification initiative launched by Alexander III in Baltics, Poland and Finland. As well as the ban on the usage of Latvian language in eastern regions - people who were caught speaking Latvian in public, had to wear a plank, which stated "I spoke Latvian".
The difference was that the Russians constantly were sending punishment brigades to crush the rebellions, while a local German run duchy wouldn't have these resources to force the whole population down.

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

At the end of World War I, the Baltic Germans made an attempt to establish their own state, the United Baltic Duchy. This Wikipedia article gives the following description:



How viable would this United Baltic Duchy have been if Germany had won World War I? Three possible scenarios that come to mind:

1. Not at all. Estonians and Latvians will not accept German domination. A civil war breaks out resulting in the creation of the separate republics of Estonia and Latvia.
2. For a while. But after a few decades, when the local population develops more, the Estonians and Latvians will claim their rights and the UBD will still be split.
3. Very successful. The UBD develops into a democratic state with a multilingual population. German remains the higher cultural language, in addition to local languages such as Estonian and Latvian.

Or are there other possibilities?

4: Very Successful. Germany won the war. So its a German puppet state, a monarchy with one of the Kaisers relatives on the throne. It is a 'semi-constitutional monarchy' so there are some democratic institutions which play an advisory role but have no real power. In terms of decision making, its mostly done in Berlin with Baltic Germans having a small role and other groups almost none.

The population is small. If the locals get uppity, Imperial Germany sends in the army and crushes them with ease through weight of numbers. If Latvians and Estonians really pose a threat to the political order then we are looking at a possible genocide or mass deportation to the new German colonies (Mittelafrika) and their replacement with German colonists. But as others have said, maybe they accept German imperial rule the way they accepted Russian rule.

I guess it depends how extensively Germany won. I am imagining a French collapse when the Germans turn west after Brest-Litovsk (maybe the POD is this happening earlier?), with the Americans unable to plug the gaps in time. The Germans take Paris and the exhausted entente sue for peace. Septemberprogramm. Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Finland and Lithuania are all in the same situation as the UBD. From the agriculture of these Eastern European puppets, the German Empire becomes self sufficient in food, neutralizing the British Blockade. Further Belgium is a German vassal, France loses some valuable territory, is disarmed and saddled with the sort of reparations Germany had to pay OTL. Trade between France (as well as the rest of europe) and the British Empire/US is forbidden until they come to terms. France is destroyed as a great power and the French colonial empire is distributed as compensation to those who lose out by the creation of German Mittelafrika.

But maybe the Germans didn't win that way or that extensively. It all depends on the international situation.

Maybe OP can describe the international situation they envisage when they say 'Germany won the war.'

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

The duke has a greater interest in being popular among the Estonian and Latvian than among the Baltic German elite. I would expect him to represent the interests of the former.

Surely his greatest interest is in being popular with the German Kaiser - who can replace him.

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

There's some factors to consider if we take the original idea of the Baltic Duchy being integrated into the German Empire as a constituent state (as opposed to a separate, independent state, which creates its own dynamics)

• Whether or not the Baltic Duchy adopts a restrictive constitution/unequal suffrage to maintain Baltic German minority control over the Latvians/Estonians, it is not going to matter on the federal level. Once Baltic citizens become German citizens, they will all have equal votes to the Reichstag - which means that Baltic representatives to the Reichstag are not going to be Baltic Germans when they only compose 5% of the vote, but Latvians and Estonians instead. This'll rather quickly affect the imperial government's opinion towards the Baltic Duchy and also create a rather powerful group of agitators for a democratic pluralistic Baltic Duchy that the Baltic Germans cannot suppress (as the Reichstag elections are, again, federal, and not affected by state laws)
• The trend in Germany itself is towards equal suffage - the Prussian House of Representatives more or less reached a majority for abolishing the three class voting system in 1918, while Saxony had already abolished theirs before the war. Unless Germany ends up with a permanent military dictatorship after the war (not very likely) this trend is going to push the Baltics as well.
• There were plans to colonize the Baltics during late WWI, like projects developed by Alfred Hugenburg et al. but I find it unlikely that large numbers of German settlers would move to the impoverished, war-battered Baltics when Berlin or the Ruhr are more lucrative (this is also one of the reasons why Germany was unable to colonize Posen before 1918), and in fact you'd more likely see the opposite reaction, people from the Baltics moving to Germany in larger numbers (much like Poles moved to the Ruhr and formed the Ruhrpolen). Baltic Germans are going to start moving to Germany proper as well - far from all of them are wealthy aristocrats, just as many are relatively impoverished city dwellers or farmers, etc. etc. What I mean is that the ethnic balance is not going to seriously change in German favor under normal conditions, i.e. without ethnic cleansing (which is a whole other can of worms).

Militarily, it would not be difficult for Germany to maintain control since the Baltics are small and not very populated, while also being really close to Germany proper, but with these factors at hand I'm not sure if it would remain Baltic German dominated for long.

So, this is a German colony which exists primarily to keep the German Empire self sufficient in food, in the face of potential blockade by US/UK. There is no reason that the political institutions here will follow the trends in Germany.

The Baltic Germans might have wanted the UBD to become part of Germany. But that wasn't the plan in Berlin. The fact that Germans form a small minority of the population is why the UBD cannot become part of Germany and would be a separate state, but not independent. It would be like a British Dominion.

I mean, just look at the British Empire in the 19th century. The trend in Britain itself was towards universal suffrage and greater inclusion. While in the colonies the trend was towards greater oppression and exclusion. There is no reason to think Germany would treat Latvians/Estonians any better than the British treated the Boers.

 

[Augenis]

So, this is a German colony which exists primarily to keep the German Empire self sufficient in food, in the face of potential blockade by US/UK. There is no reason that the political institutions here will follow the trends in Germany. The Baltic Germans might have wanted the UBD to become part of Germany. But that wasn't the plan in Berlin. The fact that Germans form a small minority of the population is why the UBD cannot become part of Germany and would be a separate state, but not independent. It would be like a British Dominion.

Except the whole idea of the Baltic Duchy project is that it joins as a constituent state of Germany, not as a colony. Or, originally, as a part of Prussia in personal union, but that still makes it a constituent state of Germany, not a colony.

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

Except the whole idea of the Baltic Duchy project is that it joins as a constituent state of Germany, not as a colony. Or, originally, as a part of Prussia in personal union, but that still makes it a constituent state of Germany, not a colony.

Yes, this was the idea of the Local German Nobility in the Baltics, who proclaimed the UBD.

But it would not be these men who would decide its eventual fate/status. If Germany won the war that decision would be made in Berlin. Plently of influential people in Australia and Canada wanted to join Britain proper as part of an Imperial Federation.

But it wasn't up to them. The decision on their status would be made in London. And they didn't get their wish.

 

[Augenis]

Yes, this was the idea of the Local German Nobility in the Baltics, who proclaimed the UBD.

But it would not be these men who would decide its eventual fate/status. If Germany won the war that decision would be made in Berlin. Plently of influential people in Australia and Canada wanted to join Britain proper as part of an Imperial Federation.

But it wasn't up to them. The decision on their status would be made in London. And they didn't get their wish.

I mean, sure, and there were plenty of ideas to carve out settler colonies in the Baltics, but then it won't be the Baltic Duchy project and so rather irrelevant to this thread. At least from what I understood of the OP.

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

I mean, sure, and there were plenty of ideas to carve out settler colonies in the Baltics, but then it won't be the Baltic Duchy project and so rather irrelevant to this thread. At least from what I understood of the OP.

The OP ends with the words 'or are there other possibilities...'

So I laid out what I thought would happen. It would be the UBD which the local German nobles set up OTL, I don't believe an entirely new administration would be set up, it would be what these people built. Just the Kaiser would appoint one of his relatives as monarch and make it a separate vassal state rather than part of Germany.

 

[Jürgen]

Surely his greatest interest is in being popular with the German Kaiser - who can replace him.

The moment the duke have been crowned, the emperor can no longer replace him, unless he does some really insane stuff like rebelling.

 

[Jürgen]

The OP ends with the words 'or are there other possibilities...'

So I laid out what I thought would happen. It would be the UBD which the local German nobles set up OTL, I don't believe an entirely new administration would be set up, it would be what these people built. Just the Kaiser would appoint one of his relatives as monarch and make it a separate vassal state rather than part of Germany.

The duke-elect was duke (titular) Adolf Friedrich of Mecklenburg, the brother of the Dutch prince-consort and also the emperor’s 2nd cousin.

 

[Helmuth48]

Maybe OP can describe the international situation they envisage when they say 'Germany won the war.'

By 'Germany won the war', I have in mind primarily a victory in the East. Either by following an 'east first' strategy and/or a negotiated peace with France, Britain and the US. Maybe a white peace in the west (and giving up the colonies) in exchange for maintaining the treaty of Brest-Litovsk? An extensive victory in the west seems unlikely to me.

The Baltic Germans might have wanted the UBD to become part of Germany. But that wasn't the plan in Berlin. The fact that Germans form a small minority of the population is why the UBD cannot become part of Germany and would be a separate state, but not independent. It would be like a British Dominion.

I agree with you that the United Baltic Duchy will not be annexed by Germany. According to the article in the OP, it will be a protectorate, with the Baltic Germans forming the ruling elite.

The question is how long they will last, since they are only 5% of the population. A solution might be to expand this ruling class to include Estonians and Latvians who can speak German. Which could eventually lead to the population becoming largely bilingual, i.e. German and a local language, so that at some point there would no longer be any distinction between these groups.

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

By 'Germany won the war', I have in mind primarily a victory in the East. Either by following an 'east first' strategy and/or a negotiated peace with France, Britain and the US. Maybe a white peace in the west (and giving up the colonies) in exchange for maintaining the treaty of Brest-Litovsk?

Got you.

Well, this is probably the worst case scenario for Eastern Europe. Every Empire is built on the exploitation of some oppressed group and without the peoples of MittelAfrika to treat this way, it is going to be the Eastern Europeans. With MittelAfrika and potentially not enough Germans willing to move there, take up privileged administrative roles and run the place, these roles may have been offered to Estonians/Latvians who spoke German. Leading to them becoming seen as part of the Empires ethnic elite. Without the colonies, eastern europeans are the lowest strata in the empire.

The question is how long they will last, since they are only 5% of the population.

Germany is right next door, with a much larger population than Latvia or Estonia and the military beat stick to keep the oppressed down. If they need a larger elite in the UBD then attracting Germans to move from Germany to the UBD - where they would be in positions of privilege so plenty would be willing - seems much more likely than the assimilation of Latvians/Estonians

An extensive victory in the west seems unlikely to me.

Well there was a pretty shaky moment between a major wave of mutinies in the French Army 1917 and the arrival of large numbers of American troops. Had the Germans got Brest-Litovsk 6 months earlier than OTL and been able to deploy their whole Eastern Army to the west when the French Army was in crisis due to the wave of mutinies, I think it is more likely than not that the western front would have collapsed and France would have sued for peace.

These French mutinies had such an impact that France was very reluctant to launch offensives for the rest of the war out of fear of a repeat, meaning responsibility for offensives fell almost entirely to the Americans.

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

by following an 'east first' strategy

This idea comes up a lot on this forum, but it wasn't practical.

The only way to get ordinary people in the various belligerents to go along with WW1 was to tell them it would be over quickly, 'over by Christmas'. This might sound realistic if your objective is Paris. And the last time Germany fought France (Franco-Prussian war) it was over quickly, a with a decisive German Victory. So France First is something you can sell.

If you stand on the defensive in the west and focus east from the start, it becomes hard to convince people you are going to win quickly. Or Easily. Moscow/St Petersburg is much further away than Paris and history isn't exactly littered with wars against Russia which were won quickly and easily.

Besides what Germany wanted most out of the war was non-european colonies, or 'a place in the sun' as the Kaiser liked to phrase it. That and putting a permanent end to French ability to pose a meaningful threat to Germany. You get that from defeating France, not Russia.

 

[Jürgen]

By 'Germany won the war', I have in mind primarily a victory in the East. Either by following an 'east first' strategy and/or a negotiated peace with France, Britain and the US. Maybe a white peace in the west (and giving up the colonies) in exchange for maintaining the treaty of Brest-Litovsk? An extensive victory in the west seems unlikely to me.


I agree with you that the United Baltic Duchy will not be annexed by Germany. According to the article in the OP, it will be a protectorate, with the Baltic Germans forming the ruling elite.

The question is how long they will last, since they are only 5% of the population. A solution might be to expand this ruling class to include Estonians and Latvians who can speak German. Which could eventually lead to the population becoming largely bilingual, i.e. German and a local language, so that at some point there would no longer be any distinction between these groups.

Baltic German identity was always open to outsiders, and the UBD is unlikely to be an apartheid regimes, instead the Baltic German elite will hold power through limitation of the franchise based on wealth and owning property.

This also mean that Baltic German formal control will break down rather fast, but they keep control through dominance of the civil service and economic control.

If they’re smart they make Latvian and Estonian the local administrative languages (the fact that they split Livonia in Estonian and Latvian part indicates they would do that.p), while German is only the federal official language and of course the administrative language of Riga. So you get 3 Estonian language cantons, 3 Latvian language canton and one German language canton.

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

The moment the duke have been crowned, the emperor can no longer replace him, unless he does some really insane stuff like rebelling.

Ok so he would have been more or less a figurehead then? The Japanese could not have legitimately replaced Puyi, but we all know where the real policy decisions for Manchuko were made.

In the post you are replying to here, replace 'The Duke' with 'the German military attaché to the UBD' or whoever really called the shots.

 

[oofo]

Oh boy, I can finally put my graduate research to use so I'll just rant.

So over the past few years I've been through a lot of material on German Ostpolitik during WWI. Interestingly, I have yet to find a single scholarly work or primary soruce which mention the words "United Baltic Duchy" (Vereintiges Baltische Herzogtum) (or mention it with a primary source referenced to back it up). Fischer doesn't mention it, Baumgart doesn't mention it. I have no idea where the term originated. I question a lot of the things which the wikipedia article presents as fact. I could see a state like this emerging from a German victory, but as for the name itself, I'm not sure about it.

The duke-elect was duke (titular) Adolf Friedrich of Mecklenburg

As far as I know, Adolf Friedrich zu Mecklenburg was never elected as duke. That's not to say he wouldn't have been one of the main candidates for such a throne had it been made. He was president of the "German-Baltic Society" which was formed in mid 1917, and was in contact with notable Baltic Germans. So the House of Mecklenburg had an interest in the region, but so did Prussia.

The Baltic Germans might have wanted the UBD to become part of Germany. But that wasn't the plan in Berlin.

Except the whole idea of the Baltic Duchy project is that it joins as a constituent state of Germany, not as a colony. Or, originally, as a part of Prussia in personal union, but that still makes it a constituent state of Germany, not a colony.

There was no singular plan in Berlin, there were multiple competing views on the situation, the Prussian province/personal union idea was advocated for mainly by Ludendorff's circle. Kaiser Wilhelm did scribble this on a newspaper article , which I unfortunately cannot show my photo of.

"Nonsense! The Baltic is one, I will be its master and tolerate no opposition. I have conquered [his emphasis] it, and no lawyer can take it from me!
Balticum is one, under Prussia's king in personal union, who conquered it! As under Frid. Rex! [?]"

(It's important to note though that Wilhelm was very easily swayed by whoever was around him at the time and de facto did not have the final say on foreign policy matters. Here he is basically just parroting lines OHL had been whispering into his ear.)

There was also the idea of giving it to one of Willy's sons (throughout the war pretty much all of his sons were proposed to be made the monarch of some fief)

But the Foreign Office, members of the Reichstag (such as Ebert), all had differing views on the region. The Baltic Germans themselves have ideas, but there were differences in opinion amongst them too. Paul Schiemann, a major player in the Baltic German community, was expelled from Riga in 1917 for anti-knight views and advocating for independent Baltic states, and the Germans banned him from coming back until October 1918. There was very little support for something like the United Baltic Duchy among the Latvians and Estonians.

Finally someone recognises Latgale would have been part of this entity.

I doubt that the local people of Latgale will have any say in that at all. The borders will be set by the Germans and Russians at the negotiating table. However, the Brest-Litovsk treaty is not clear about it... According to the Wikipedia article in the OP, Latgale will be one of the seven cantons of the UBD.

In the original Treaty of Brest-Litovsk signed in March 1918, Russia ceded Courland (plus some bits of Livonia around Riga), but not the Livonia and Estonia governorates, which were to remain occupied by Germany "until order is restablished." This was basically a half-measure brought about by disagreements between German leadership. The military (OHL ie: Ludendorff, Hindenburg, etc.) pushed for Livonia and Estonia to be ceded like Courland, but the Foreign Office (AA) was opposed to this, thinking that it would cut Russia off from the Baltic Sea and create a permanent threat to St. Petersburg, ensuring that future relations between Russia and Germany would be strained.

Russia only renounced sovereignty over Livonia and Estonia in the German-Soviet Supplementary agreement signed in August 1918.

The OHL was apparently keen on shifting the border of Livonia eastward into Latgale for defensive reasons. This issue was apparently brought up at the only meeting of the German-Russian boundary commission established by the Brest-Litovsk Treaty in May 1918, and the Russians were very opposed to shifting the border eastward. Unfortunately I haven't had the chance to look at this document yet though, so I can't provide specifics.

On the other hand, there is a note exchanged between Joffe and von Hintze that was added as a secret protocol to the August supplementary treaty which alludes to the border to be determined by the commission. It seems to imply borders which match those of the Russian governorates (along the line Lake Pskov-Lake Luban-Liwenhof (Livani)) but at the same time taking the "defense of Livonia" into consideration in the area Southwest of Lake Pskov. I would say this represents the AA's view on the matter.

How viable would this United Baltic Duchy have been if Germany had won World War I

In short, I don't think the outlook would be good for it. It would be propped up by German bayonets, and if this is a 1918 victory (which I kind of assumed it was, so apologies if not) the guys carrying those bayonets want to go home, not stay in the Baltics. Without greater consideration to Latvians and Estonian national aspirations, it would probably fail.

Or are there other possibilities?

The state proves unfeasible due to Estonian and Latvian discontent. Germans fall back to just Courland and Riga (possibly stay in the Moonsund as well), and Livonia and Estonia are ceded back to Russia.

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

In short, I don't think the outlook would be good for it. It would be propped up by German bayonets, and if this is a 1918 victory (which I kind of assumed it was, so apologies if not) the guys carrying those bayonets want to go home, not stay in the Baltics. Without greater consideration to Latvians and Estonian national aspirations, it would probably fail.

For the most part they did. However OTL in 1919, a sizeable minority of those guys (more than enough to put down a Latvian/Estonian insurrection) volunteered to pick up the bayonets again and go fight in The Baltics to help the local German elite maintain its dominance.

 

[Helmuth48]

Germany is right next door, with a much larger population than Latvia or Estonia and the military beat stick to keep the oppressed down. If they need a larger elite in the UBD then attracting Germans to move from Germany to the UBD - where they would be in positions of privilege so plenty would be willing - seems much more likely than the assimilation of Latvians/Estonians

As previously stated by others, the UBD is quite remote. A migration of Baltic Germans to Germany's industrial and cultural centers is more likely....

The only way to get ordinary people in the various belligerents to go along with WW1 was to tell them it would be over quickly, 'over by Christmas'. This might sound realistic if your objective is Paris. And the last time Germany fought France (Franco-Prussian war) it was over quickly, a with a decisive German Victory. So France First is something you can sell.

If you stand on the defensive in the west and focus east from the start, it becomes hard to convince people you are going to win quickly. Or Easily. Moscow/St Petersburg is much further away than Paris and history isn't exactly littered with wars against Russia which were won quickly and easily.

The objective of the German army leadership was to defeat the enemy army, not to conquer capitals. "War is over by Christmas" could also be sold as, "The French and Russian invading armies don't stand a chance, we're going to crush them!" In 1915, Germany still adopted an "east first" strategy, which was very successful. Poland, Lithuania and Courland were conquered. Anyway, that's another discussion

 

[Helmuth48]

So over the past few years I've been through a lot of material on German Ostpolitik during WWI. Interestingly, I have yet to find a single scholarly work or primary soruce which mention the words "United Baltic Duchy" (Vereintiges Baltische Herzogtum) (or mention it with a primary source referenced to back it up). Fischer doesn't mention it, Baumgart doesn't mention it. I have no idea where the term originated. I question a lot of the things which the wikipedia article presents as fact. I could see a state like this emerging from a German victory, but as for the name itself, I'm not sure about it.

Thanks for your research! I already found the Wikipedia article flawed in terms of reference. Although it remains an interesting topic...

 

[Wesley_Lewt]

As previously stated by others, the UBD is quite remote. A migration of Baltic Germans to Germany's industrial and cultural centers is more likely....

If they are the most privileged 5% of the population and major landowners, they will surely, for the most part, want to stay on their estates collecting rent rather than move to Dresden so they can work in a Factory? Germans of more humble origins will migrate to the UBD if you offer them the land that used to belong to the Russian section of the nobility.

Wesley_Lewt
The objective of the German army leadership was to defeat the enemy army, not to conquer capitals. "War is over by Christmas" could also be sold as, "The French and Russian invading armies don't stand a chance, we're going to crush them!" In 1915, Germany still adopted an "east first" strategy, which was very successful. Poland, Lithuania and Courland were conquered. Anyway, that's another discussion

That was 1915 after the sweeping dash across France had been brought to a standstill, began to be repelled and so the Germans switched to the defensive in the west. By then everyone was locked into the war, by then stopping the war was very hard for the public to do. At the beginning in 1914 when the public could realistically have got cold feet and forced the Government to call it off, the plan was a lightning dash on Paris. Capitals are Railway hubs and taking them cripples enemy logistics. Wars usually end when the writing is on the wall as to the outcome. Just as chess ends with checkmate, rather than the king being taken, enemy armies almost always surrender rather than face destruction when it looks inevitable.

The objective of the German army leadership was to defeat the enemy army, not to conquer capitals. "War is over by Christmas" could also be sold as, "The French and Russian invading armies don't stand a chance, we're going to crush them!"

But when are we going to crush them? What ordinary people want is for their son/husband/brother to come home and for rationing and other wartime economic hardships to end. And for this to happen sooner rather than later. They will go along with you when you enter a war if, and only if, they think this is going to be a short term state of affairs.