If Bismarck had an epiphany...

If Bismarck had an epiphany, which alliance option should he pursue ?

  • An Anglo-German-Italian-Austro/Hungarian Quadruple Alliance

    Votes: 43 68.3%
  • A Russo-German-Italian Triple Alliance

    Votes: 15 23.8%
  • Partition of the Habsburg Empire, then a Russo-German-Italian-Hungarian Quadruple Alliance

    Votes: 11 17.5%
  • Other (explain)

    Votes: 3 4.8%

  • Total voters
    63

General Zod

Banned
Sometime in the 1870s, German Chancellor Bismarck awoke one night with a sweat. In a nightmare, he had foreseen the future: the inevitable collapse of his carefully-wowen diplomatic web to isolate France, owning to Russo-British rivalry, the isolation of the Empire owning to misguided naval competition with Britain and Austrian rivalries with Russia and Italy, the growing internal instability and decay of the useless Habsburg ally, the Empire starved by British blockade, invaded by French and Russian hordes, the monarchy collapsing in Socialist revolution...

It was horrible, and intolerable. He saw everything so clearly, what had escaped him so far. The diplomatic strategy he had followed up to that oment, might do in the short term, but was doomed to failure in the long term, when the fertile land of Prussia would have embraced him, and the inept sycophants that would surround some future Emperor would let his careful construction go to ruin. He would have to do better, build a alliance system that would be the strongest possible and absolutely able to ensure the success of the Reich in the general war that was coming, sooner or later.

But what to do ? In the coming days and weeks, several possible strategies dawned to his gaze:

-He could exercise his patronage to curb the rising influence of the naval lobby, ensure a navy is built of dimensions and type (mostly long-range cruisers, not battleships) which is not threatening to Britain, pick locations for German colonies that impinge on French but not British interests, and seek a commercial treaty with the British Empire. This ought to secure British friendship for the foreseeable future, and ensure the Italians stay true to their alliance. With Britain, Italy, and Austria-Hungary on Berlin's side, the Reich ought to cower Russia and France out of war, or win it in short order.

-He could solidify the alliance with Russia by supporting their claims on the Balkans. Let's face it, the Habsburg Empire and the Ottomans were bound to collapse sooner or later, it made no sense to exaust the strength of the Reich trying to breathe more life in those corpses. Better to abandon their alliance, and make an agreement with Russia and Italy to support their interests instead. In perspective, to make a pact for the eventual partition of the Habsburg and the Ottomans with those nations, in the contingency of a war or their internal collapse. With Russia and Italy allied to Germany, the Reich could cower any coalition of rival powers, be them Britain, France, Austria-Hungary, and the Ottomans, out of war, or win it in short order.

-He had been a fool to let the Habsburg get away with so little harm in 1866, even if killing them then would have probably too risky, with the Empire still half-formed, and France still strong. But no need for hesitation now. Austria-Hungary had always been the rope tying the hands of Prussia and Germany, and sentimental loyalty to it was foolish and misguided. Better to foster its breakup now, to cultivate relations with the Hungarian ruling elite and German Austrians, and to make an agreement for the partition of the Habsburg Empire with Russia, Italy, and Hungary. Then to let Russia or Italy pick some suitable casus belli with Vienna. Bringing Austrians and Bohemians in the Reich would regrettable strenghten those annoying Center politicos, in the Reichstag, but those rich and populous lands would greately strengthen the Empire, and the partition would secure the friendship of Russia and Italy for good. With an alliance to those two powers, and an Hungary suitably under their thumb, he could cower Britain and France out of any war, and dominate the continent.

Or maybe there might some other possibility...

What should Bismarck do ?
 
Last edited:
I voted for the Russo-German-Italian triple alliance. IMO such an alliance would have been nigh invincible and the balance of power would shift in favour of Germany. An Anglo-German-Austro-Hungarian-Italian quadruple alliance is a close second but I thought the former would be much more fun. Seeing the Royal Navy defeated by the HSF and a Baltic Fleet that is modernized with German aid is much more fun along with the inevitable partition of the Habsburg empire after it's defeated.
 
I just don't see Germany entering an alliance with Russia. That would involve the Germans regarding the Russians as equals.

If there was a partition of the Austro-Hungarian Empire... that might elevate Germany enough to be a senior member over Russia.
 
Don't ally with Russia, ally with Britain. Britain is much less of a threat to you, so you don't care if you make it stronger. Russia, on the other hand, you make it stronger in your own backyard. Russia is the one you need to corral.

Although if Russia gets to the Straits, the Brits are much more likely to come in on your side and Russia's land strength might get diverted in naval directions.

Hmm. If one were a little Machiavellian, maybe one would ally with Russia long enough to let them knock the Ottomans out and get entangled in the Balkans, probably beating up A-H in the process. By now the Russians are the big bads that everyone is scared of and you and A-H and Britain draw close together.
 

General Zod

Banned
You know, I have suddenly realized I left out another obvious option, partition the habsburgs with Italy and Russia, then gradually distance from the Russkies and ally with Britain instead. A bit machiavellian, but well within Bismarck's capabilities.

Too bad you can't edit the poll itself. Maybe I ought to redo the thread... :confused:
 
Hmmm. Bismarck had a strong personal conviction that Russia was the key, such as his famous "secret of statesmanship" ("have a good treaty with Russia"). The two front war seems to have been an old worry (memories of the Seven Years War, maybe?), so it seems to me that bismarck would see the main mistake as allowing Russia and Germany to go to war when they had no outstanding disputes. He'll probably sign a secet agreement on the Balkans ASAP.

Then again, the British option has its merits. Bismarck will foresee Russia being humiliated and shaken in 1905, and perhaps he won't be confident of navigating around such a disaster and will instead choose to get on the right side of it. At this stage, Bismarck wasn't into colonies. Stepping on the naval lobby isn't going to bring tears to his eyes.

It rather depends how he interprets the disaster.

Sorry, not even considering option three. I speak bluntly, but GZ has a rather fanatical belief in the absolute uselessness of the Hapsburgs for absolutely anything which biases in favour of deleting their state from the map. Diplomatically, this has buckets of problems. How exactly has the "lasting friendship" of Russia and Italy been won? I anticipate Russia teaming with Serbia to make Hungary inviable owing to Orthodox nationalisms. Russia already has a mandate to do what it likes in the Balkans, now that AH is out of the way. Britain and France will be fearful of Germany rocking the boat so much, and many others said before by people more knowledgeable than me.


Why on earth are the Ottomans so doomed? Bismarck is having this vision before 1878, isn't he? Should he choose option Britain, priority one is going to be an Anglo-German-Austrian pledge to keep Russia's filthy mitts off the Balkans. From there, the Ottoman's ride ought to get eaiser and easier.

I just don't see Germany entering an alliance with Russia. That would involve the Germans regarding the Russians as equals.

If there was a partition of the Austro-Hungarian Empire... that might elevate Germany enough to be a senior member over Russia.

Sorry, what? You know that Bismarck actually made an alliance ith Russia that was allowed to lapse by the next government, right? I hope this isn't another misconception born from the idea that the Kaiserreich was into Herrenvolk and Lebensraum crap.
 

General Zod

Banned
Sorry, not even considering option three. I speak bluntly, but GZ has a rather fanatical belief in the absolute uselessness of the Hapsburgs for absolutely anything which biases in favour of deleting their state from the map.

Actually it's more like that I have this big pet peeve against incomplete national unifications, so that's why I try to sneak the Anschluss and US-Canada union in whatever TL I can, by whatever flimsly PoD pretext I can concoct. Apart from that, yep, I do regard letting A-H live as Bismarck one's grevious mistake, apart from the alliance one this thread is all about.
 
Actually it's more like that I have this big pet peeve against incomplete national unifications, so that's why I try to sneak the Anschluss and US conquest of Canada in whatever TL I can, by whatever flimsly PoD pretext I can concoct. Apart from that, yep, I do regard letting A-H live as Bismarck one's grevious mistake, apart from the alliance one this thread is all about.

*Foams at the mouth*

Canada? America? One nation?

What madness is this!

If the yanks wanted a united Anglosphere, why did they have a revolution?:D

Seriously, though, you haven't really responded to what I said about the benefits (or lack thereof) of partition. The idea of "lasting friendship" with Italy and Russia is just as naive as any "ties of honour" to the Hapsburgs, and of course there are lots of real diplomatic arguments against partition. Such things weren't done. Our personal convictions can't change diplomatic dogma.

Also, what about the Ottomans?
 
Last edited:
I'd go for a German-Belgian-AH military and the German-Japanese-Italian defensive alliance.

Japan: The reasons for Japan are two fold. The first is that by creating an alliance German goods have a more secure foot hold inside of Asia, which Germany so coveted. This adds an extra layer of security to what holdings Germany will eventually have. The second is that many European holdings are now in somewhat of a question, or they will be in 1905, by a strong Asian state allied to a strong European state. As a defensive alliance pre-1905 going to war means a very large market is lost to the Europeans, post-1905 it means all holdings are in danger as stated above.

Belgium: Here is the dark secret of European politics: an ally of a ally is not an enemy. With Belgium allied with Germany by proxy the UK is allied with Germany. Sure the UK may object to actions by Germany but they loose real chance to go to war as long as their long term ally is friends with Germany. Belgium, unlike the UK, will encourage colonization, as well as up hold efforts by Germany to colonize. King Leopold with his Congo efforts will have somewhat of a kindred spirit in the German Empire.

AH: Obvious ally. History points to them as dead weight, but in truth a strong army, with good industry is a very grand thing to have on ones side.

Italy: This is a defensive alliance as Italy from a hindsight perspective has the most strength as a paper ally. If France desires war and has to worry of another front things become a problem.
 

Baskilisk

Banned
*Foams at the mouth*

Canada? America? One nation?

What madness is this!

If the yanks wanted a united Anglosphere, why did they have a revolution?:D
quote]
Because they wanted freedom? Of sorts?
Okay, bad arguement. They wanted home rule. And thanks to them, Australia and Canada got it too.
So a home-ruled Anglosphere. Kind of an oxymoron.
 
I would go with the GB one. That way, you can gain colonies abraod, and you still retain the option of smashing the Russian Empire. I'm not sure if these were German ambitions at the time, but since we(and Bismark) now know that Germany can win agaisnt Russia, he may decide he wants a European empire. By going with Britian he has a choice in the matter.
 
GB one, for one most of German colonies won't be taken. Then they can gang bang French colonies overseas. Russia is well, we cheated by seeing history but yea the Russian Revolution marginalizes Russia's effect late in the war. Not to mention the fact that Germany coulda held out longer in WW1 in truth they lost mostly by demoralization. With a push into France, and the lack of support from an anarchic Russia I'm pretty sure the Germans would feel pretty good about themselves and keep up the war till they won.
 
The British option - learn from the Napoleonic Wars, the only nation that can't be beaten by a continental power is the one which has the sea as a moat and a navy as a bastion. Given that, the long-term choice is either to ally with it, or oppose it and lose

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
The British option - learn from the Napoleonic Wars, the only nation that can't be beaten by a continental power is the one which has the sea as a moat and a navy as a bastion. Given that, the long-term choice is either to ally with it, or oppose it and lose

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

I think you're assuming unlimited ends, ie, Bismarck's diplomacy is guided by his desire to either ally with or defeat and subjugate all other world powers. If not, then a benevolently neutral Britain is perfectly acceptable to Bismarck, and as far as I'm concerned perfectly possible. Why does Britain have to either ally with or fight Germany? Any Germany under wise leadership has pretty much exactly zero areas of conflict with Britain (no threatening navy, little desire for colonies being part of the definition of wise).

I also think that you overestimate Britain's capability. Although of course I'm not being nuanced in my reading of your post here, you literally said that any fight between Imperial Germany and Britain must invariably result in victory for Britain. To take the example of the other option here, let's suppose a German-Austrian-Russian-(Italian?) bloc versus an Anglo-French-Japanese bloc. How will Britain prevail?

My personal conviction is actually swinging towards the British option, but I think you've gone too far that way.
 

General Zod

Banned
Diplomatically, this has buckets of problems. How exactly has the "lasting friendship" of Russia and Italy been won?

They don't have any serious conflict of claims with Germany or members of the alliance anymore. Moreover, they have major ones with states that are members of the rival alliance (France, the Ottoman Empire). Besides, if the partition happens in the 1870s, there is ample time for political and economic ties (big German investments in both countries) to grow and fortify the alliance.

I anticipate Russia teaming with Serbia to make Hungary inviable owing to Orthodox nationalisms.

Serbia can happily get and keep Bosnia in this scenario, as far as Budapest is concerned, so they shall have their Great Serbia. Besides, in this scenario, Bulgaria stays the main proxy of Russia in the Balkans, not Serbia, and one that Germany and Hungary are also willing to support.

Russia already has a mandate to do what it likes in the Balkans, now that AH is out of the way.

And then why it ought to grow hostile to Germany ?

Britain and France will be fearful of Germany rocking the boat so much, and many others said before by people more knowledgeable than me.

Yep, but since Germany chooses the Russian option in this scenario, this is to be expected anyways. France shall be hostile anyway, the option shall be between Britain and Russia.

Why on earth are the Ottomans so doomed?

They are if the OTL course is followed, or if Bismarck chooses the Russian option.

Bismarck is having this vision before 1878, isn't he?

Yep.

Should he choose option Britain, priority one is going to be an Anglo-German-Austrian pledge to keep Russia's filthy mitts off the Balkans. From there, the Ottoman's ride ought to get eaiser and easier.

That's right. IF he chooses that option.

Anyway, since I mean to repost the poll with more options, may anyone suggest other good alliance option that I failed to mention in the OP ? I have been wondering if there is any non-ASB way that Bismarck could have convinced the USA to an alliance. If he could have sent a Prussian expeditionary corps to help the Union in the ACW, it would have been quite simple, but that is beyond the boundaries of the scenario.


and of course there are lots of real diplomatic arguments against partition. Such things weren't done. Our personal convictions can't change diplomatic dogma.

A suitable casus belli with one of the partitioning powers or separatist agitation by a minority can be organized.

The reasons for Japan are two fold. The first is that by creating an alliance German goods have a more secure foot hold inside of Asia, which Germany so coveted. This adds an extra layer of security to what holdings Germany will eventually have. The second is that many European holdings are now in somewhat of a question, or they will be in 1905, by a strong Asian state allied to a strong European state. As a defensive alliance pre-1905 going to war means a very large market is lost to the Europeans, post-1905 it means all holdings are in danger as stated above.

A good idea in general, but maybe too anacronistic since in the 1870s Japan had very recently begun its long path to modernization. This might be a nice auxiliary option, but cannot be the mainstay of Bismarck's winning strategy.

AH: Obvious ally. History points to them as dead weight, but in truth a strong army, with good industry is a very grand thing to have on ones side.

Such an industry and most of the lands half of that army (of rather dubious quality considering its performance from 1792 to 1866) are even grander if they ar brought under the control of the rather more efficient German Empire.
 
Last edited:
You make some good points, but miss some of mine, namely: at any point before 1878, the the Ottomans are far from corpses. Those two statements (Ottomans aren't dead, this is before '78) were one and the same. According to my sources (Osprey books and AHP;)) the Ottomans had a decent chance of forcing a military stalemate and mediated peace under OTL circumstances.

You haven't convinced me of the possibility of value of partition, but you've convinced me that you can win the argument! *Throws in the towel*
 

General Zod

Banned
You make some good points, but miss some of mine, namely: at any point before 1878, the the Ottomans are far from corpses. Those two statements (Ottomans aren't dead, this is before '78) were one and the same. According to my sources (Osprey books and AHP;)) the Ottomans had a decent chance of forcing a military stalemate and mediated peace under OTL circumstances.

Yup, however, see it this way: since the whole point of the scenario is about Bismarck getting a vision-like flash of uncanny pretty much complete (as far as it can be without ASBs sending messages from the future, anyway, but the man was a bloody genius, so I make some assumptions here) insight about the OTL-like unfolding of the WWI if things keep on this way, he "knows" that a slightly stronger Ottoman (or Habsburg) Empire shall not be sufficient for saving Germany's butt. Let's face it, even if a different 1877-78 and Balkan wars course had left most of the Balkans in the Ottoman hands, would this alone have saved the CPs ? I am terribly skeptical about it. So he seeks other options. Either the Anglo option has the AH and OE kinda of falling in CP camp by natural inertia, or they have to be sacrificed to gain a better ally (Russia).

You haven't convinced me of the possibility of value of partition, but you've convinced me that you can win the argument! *Throws in the towel*

:D:D:cool::cool::p:p;);)

However, think that there is different option about partition, which I mistakenly left out of the OP and poll, if you fear the partition-Russian allaince option makes Russia too stron g and still too untrustworthy, or unnecssarily sacrifices the Ottomans: Bismarck could arrange the partition with Italy, Hungary, and Russia nonetheless, then gradually over a decade or two distance Germany from Russia and develop a British alliance instead. More than a bit Machiavellian and duplicitous, but well within his exceptional skills. Expect it too to show in the next version of the poll.
 
Top