alternatehistory.com

I was going to add this to the Harsher Prague peace thread. But decided that would be in error, so i decided to make this a new thread.

Bismarck is often described as a key figure in the unification of Germany, but was he actually also a key figure in disuniting Germany.

Bismarck was a Prussian Conservative Monarchist, his loyalty was to the Royal line of the House of Hohenzollern. His concern was to secure
the survival of this Royal line.

Below is a quote, Bismarck in 1849 to one of his fellow Conservatives.

"We are Prussians, and Prussians we shall remain . . .. We do not wish to see the Kingdom of Prussia obliterated in the putrid brew of cosy
south German sentimentality."

Prussia proper, i.e East and West Prussia were populated mainly by people of Slav descent, these lands were never part of the Holy Roman
Empire, and lay outside of the German Confederation. They were never seen as part of the German homeland.

However Austria proper, was ethnographically, culturally and historically part of the German heartland.

At the moment, i see an irony in the Prussian Bismarck excluding Austria from Germany. One key problem of the late 19th century was that
Germany remained divided. Germany hadn't been fully unified in 1871.

A tradegy awaited Germany, Europe and the world, two world wars, one with an insane psychopath, in charge of one of the worlds most
powerful, industrialised, culturally and scientifically advanced nations of the world.

This tradegy stemmed directly from the failure of Germany to be fully united in 1871. The Second World War stemmed directly from the
First. The First World War had many causes. One thing that drew Germany to war in 1914, was being tied to having to protect a ramshackle
empire, that was surrounded by enemies. Germany could not abandon Austria and the Austrian Germans to fight Russia alone. German nationalism couldn't allow it.

And Russia could not allow Austria to crush the south Slavs. However Germany and Russia had no issues of conflict along there shared
border, unlike France and Germany. Germany was forced to choose between Austria and Russia. In doing so Germany tied her destiny to an
outdated power that stood in the path of the historical development of nationalism. War between Austria and Russia was inevitable, and
Germany's need to defend it's half German brother, deprived it of international maneuver.

Austria was like a man standing in the middle of a motorway, with Germany forced to stand there with it.

In being forced to choose Austria over Russia, Germany created the ground for the two front war Bismarck tried to avoid. The Franco Russian
alliance. If Germany was going to back Austrian meddling in the Balkans then Russia was bound to have an alliance with France as its only
alternative. This left Britain. Germanys problems in fighting France and Russia together, whilst being allied to a state that couldn't pull its
own weight, led directly to the violation of Belgian neutrality, and consequently war with Britain. War with Britain, led to war with America.

None of this was unavoidable. Germany could have gone on the defensive in the West and tackled Russia first, hindsight exaggerates the
obviousness of this approach. But its logical from the standpoint of the early 20C, to see why many in power in Germany, felt compelled to
tackle France first. France was and had been for centuries a superb world power. It had nearly conquered the whole of Europe only a 100
years before. The deficiences in any army are only apparent after the event. What if the French advanced in the west, the industrial heartland
of Germany - the Ruhr - was less than 150 miles away from the French frontier. Even a limited French advance could seriously threaten war
production. And what if the French had made some respectful progress with the bulk of the German armies in the east. At the same time
Britain and Japan might sieze Germanys oversees territories, more likely the longer the war dragged on.

And the war was most likely to drag on longer in a scenario where Germany dealt with Russia first. Russia was a difficult power to tackle,
history was littered with examples of Russians defeats, but none of the victors could come up with a means of finishing her off. If Russia
chose to fight on, then what. The French and Swedes had discovered this, the huge space, the lack of modern roads, winter and the
toughness of the population didn't lend itself to a quick knock out blow. Germany bogged down in struggling to fight a decisive battle with
Russia, whilst a huge, well trained, well motivated, well armed French army, serviced by good communications, nibbled at its Western
frontier, dangerously close to the Ruhr, was not an appealing scenario.

Had Germany not had to contend with Russia, or had the Austrians been a material compensation against Russia, then Germany could have
simply sat on the defensive in the west. Austria though was a liabilty and susceptible to the disillusionment of large numbers of it's own
citizens. Austria was incapable of defending itself against Russia, what if Italy attacked Austria ?. What then. And what if as feared, Russia
became stronger as the war dragged on. And might Britain financially bolster France and Russia to prevent one single power dominating the
continent. Might America do the same.

Given all this is it any wonder Germany chose to try to knock France out quickly. It's axiomatic that in conflicts each side tries to take out it's
strongest enemy first. To do anything else is to invite defeat. But Germany had no choice in picking the route, by which it could most quickly
defeat France, before Russia mobilized. Through Belgium and into war with Britain. The problem of defeating Britain and the route of least
opposition, submarine attacks on Britains Atlantic shipping life lines inevitably led to war with America, no world power could stand by
whilst its maritime trading freedom was under threat.

Being obligated to prop up Austria denied Germany peace with Russia, this in turn trapped Germany in a two front war, consequently
pushing Germany into conflict with Britain and America. Germany had it's foot caught in the trap of having to support Austria against
Russia. Bismarck frowned at the failure to continue the reinsurance treaty with Russia. Not being a nationalist meant, he possibly failed to
see that Germany had to defend Austria. In consequence, Germany arguably the most scientifically advanced nation in the world, and one of
the three most industrialised nations in the world, found itself allied to a weak state and fighting the other two most industrially advanced
countries in the world, Britain and America.

A tradegy of mass proportions that Germany found itself trapped in protecting a weak relic of history, and in so doing should find itself at
war with all the major world powers, the two most powerful of whom - Britain and America - were seen by many as logical and natural allies
of Germany.

This tradegy was a direct descendent of Bismarcks division of Germany for the sake of Prussian interests.

What if Bismarck had been a true German nationalist, or if someone who was, had been there in place of him. Might they have demanded
that German Austria have a closer but subordinate relationship with a Prussian dominated German Confederation in 1866. Rather than
excluding Austria, she is forced to concede a closer relationship within a German Confederation. This would then have necessitated the
independence of Hungary. How this occurs is uncertain. Wether in 1866 or 1867, maybe Austrias inclusion in a new Prussian dominated
German Confederation, forces Hungarian nationalist sentiments to bubble up more powerfully, and sooner.

This would have involved jettisoning Galicia, thrown to Russia by Prussia, like a bone to a trusty dog. ( Thats not meant to be offensive to
the magnificent cultural input of Russia to world history. ). Is this fanciful, maybe not, would Russia have been opposed it, i think not. Would
Britain have been able to do anything other than grumble, no. Would France go to war over this, most likely no, but if she did, then she
risked facing Prussia, Russia, and Italy. Prussia has the chance of raising the flag of German peril from an expansionist France, would the
German Austrians not be enflamed at France telling them they could not be part of a German Confederation. This is what French intervention would have amounted to in this situation.

Does this not cement Prussias power, all of Germany rallies behind the Prussian rallying cry - Germans have a right to be German, as the French have a right to be French. Is Britain going to fight the innocence of such a claim. I think not, is France going to be concerned that in a war against the Germanies, rallied behind a flag of National pride like never before, uniting all those German states of Austrian sympathy, behind Prussia, with Austria forced to follow, with Russia by implication of its Galician gains behind them, with Italy - enlarged by it's gains and possibly hungry for some French pickings and a main course of Rome itself - as a potential foe. Is France going to wade into such a conflict, definately not.

However it happens the Franco German war is easily implicated with the right of Austrians to be members of a German Confederation.
Frances defeat is more likely and the real unification of Germany that Bismarck missed or didnt want is assured. Here is a cleverer more skillful approach, a war with France calling for the right of Austria to be a player in Germany, Austrias South German allies are now unavoidably behind Prussia. They may find themselves surprised by this, and baffled at the wiliness of a Prussian policy that bought this about. But they cant reverse it.

Whats left is Hungary, in some ways in the same plight as Austria would have been. But Germany doesn't have to defend Hungary, there is
no Nationalist urge to do so. Agreement can now be reached with Russia, Hungary dependent on Germany will be relatively compliant.

Germany can avoid the two front war, and so war with Belgium, Britain and the the USA.

If Germany had been really united in 1871, theres less need to annexe Alsace Lorraine, if Germany doesn't then so much the better, Germany is free to reach an understanding with Russia in the Balkans.
Top