Imperial Federation of 1914: Victory in Europe

Which name do you prefer?


  • Total voters
    54
It's 1914 (Hoi4, because of course), the Brits have ingeniously invested in motor trucks and armored cars in the lead up to the European War, forming 8 new Motorized Divisions of 120,000 additional troops. Great diplomatic effort is made to assure the Ottoman Empire it will not be endangered in the aftermath of German defeat. In the words of Sir Edward Grey, "I give you the full weight of the British word of honour and diplomatic tradition, we will not attack you, and France and Russia have also signed a pledge of non-aggression against you lasting forty years, as condition for our agreeing to join this war on their side." With the Persian Gulf and Egypt secure, Britain prepares the bulk of the Indian Army for transit to England, promising self-government under the British flag, and, the hopeful securing of everlasting Imperial union between the Indian and British people at the Imperial Conference.

The British, French and Russian Navies all combine for a massive assault, knocking the German High Seas Fleet off the face of the earth, while simultaneously, an enormous convoy sets sail from Portsmouth and prepares to land the Royal, Territorial and Indian Armies in what will be the largest seaborne invasion in history, near Wilhelmshaven. Like bolts of lightning, the British motorized and cavalry divisions sweep across the German heartland, determined that they shall not halt their engines until the great encirclement on the Franco-German frontier is complete.

One week later, the German army is halved. 3 months later.., the war is over. Patriotic fervor reaches a fever pitch, and basking in the glory the British and Dominion governments resolve once and for all to secure the constitutional bond of the whole of the British Empire. The concept is sound, they know they want an Imperial government strictly limited to Imperial matters (foreign affairs, defence, trade negotiation, some elements of finance, a court in London for international arbitration), and the particulars of obligated defence contributions - though thorny - are ironed out, but one problem still eludes them. What bloody name to give it!


What name could the new Imperial Federation have that would make Indians not only feel they belong to it, but that "it" belongs to them as well, which is the only way to keep the union long-term. Here are some of the names I've thought of, and my first inclination was to go with "United Kingdom", with either the Council of Princely States having a vote in the Imperial Council/Parliament (along with the British monarch of course, and this may only come in due time), or an Indian monarch, or two making up one vote if they agree; a hindu high prince and muslim sultan, with all three major religions having a figurehead, or, perhaps most lofty of all......the heir to the throne of England marries an Indian princess. Below are the names I've been pondering, but I call on your help to figure out the best one, so feel free of course to add your own. If you think using the word "British" would work long-term, explain yourself lol, because I don't think it lasts past 1960-70 (in my timeline feudalism is gradually abolished in India, so they will be growing far wealthier than in OTL). I'll display the poll results but try not to let it sway you your instinct.


The United Kingdom of British Nations and India (or "of British and Indian Nations)

The United Kingdom: Empire of British Nations and India

United Commonwealth

(United Commonwealth of British and Indian Nations; or UC of Nations)

Britannic Commonwealth of Nations

(educational effort to expand the meaning of "Britannic" to include Indians, not going to be an easy task)

Commonwealth of Britannic Nations

Commonwealth of Nations

United Empire

The British Empire

British Commonwealth of Nations

(probably what would be chosen if it weren't for India, and indeed was chosen at the 1917 Imperial Conference)

Imperial Commonwealth

Imperial Federation

The Commonwealth Federation

United British Empire

United Britannic Commonwealth
 
Last edited:
In the words of Sir Edward Grey, "I give you the full weight of the British word of honour and diplomatic tradition, we will not attack you, and France and Russia have also signed a pledge of non-aggression against you lasting forty years, as condition for our agreeing to join this war on their side."

Russia agreed to this? Did someone in Britain cure hemophilia?

Nitpicking aside, as far as a name goes, I picked none of the above as I'm partial to the Imperial Federation.
 
Russia agreed to this? Did someone in Britain cure hemophilia?

Nitpicking aside, as far as a name goes, I picked none of the above as I'm partial to the Imperial Federation.


The war had been going on for about 2-3 months before the British joined in, and Russia was already having a pretty hard go of it, just barely holding the majority of her lines (was beginning to rupture northeast of Krakow). The Ottomans had not yet joined the war, so while Russia clearly always hoped to take Constantinople and Turkish-held Armenia, the military situation is just too important, and getting both a British entry as well as an indefinite Ottoman abstention, dictated the correct course of policy in Petrograd.

In addition, this agreement means the Ottoman Empire will not be closing the straits to Russian trade and shipping, and Britain will be able to bring more forces to the main European theaters. Without British entry it’s not a guarantee that the French and Russian navies will be able to defeat the High Seas Fleet, so if Russia doesn’t do this then they’re looking at a potentially major blockade of their overseas trade (just as in OTL), and all the starvation and revolutionary pressure that entails.
 
Last edited:
I agree completely with what was said about Russia. They probably think they can backstab the Ottomans later once they defeat the Austro-Hungarian is a Germans.
 
I agree completely with what was said about Russia. They probably think they can backstab the Ottomans later once they defeat the Austro-Hungarian is a Germans.

That would mean reneging on the non-aggression agreement signed by themselves, France and Britain, so the political fallout for Russia would be pretty significant, for starters nobody would ever take her seriously so she wouldn’t be able to do any deal-making unless it’s with France.

Now if it’s after the 30 or 40 year period of the non-aggression treaty, then sure.
 
Liberals disliked Ottomans fro being not-very liberal.
Conservatives disliked them because they wanted their stuff.
Tactical alliance with Ottomans, sure, but no certainty it'd last long.
All of victorious Entente would be working day and night to prove that Ottomans broke treaty first.

I agree completely with what was said about Russia. They probably think they can backstab the Ottomans later once they defeat the Austro-Hungarian is a Germans.
I am pretty sure that Russians would want at least inclusion of protection of remaining Christians in Ottoman Empire in the treaty.
It would take only one particularly undisciplined Ottoman infantry battalion massacring Armenian village without provocation for Russians to have "good enought" excuse to break treaty.

And if oil is discovered in Mesopotamia, well, British might let Russians do it, as long as it allows them to secure that oil for themselves. Either by annexation, or by forcing Ottomans to sell all shares in local oil companies in exchange for some sort of lend-lease.
"Oh look, there is war. We must move in to protect our interests."
"Oh look, Arabs are rebelling. We must move in to stop atrocities against civilians."
"Oh look, Constantinople is endangered by Russian fleet. We must set up international demilitarized zone in the straits."
"Oh look, Ottoman government has collapsed. We will kindly help Arabs set up stable government."
 
The only thing you haven't countenanced is the calculation on my end - the British end - that we have actually concluded not only do we wish to leave the Ottomans out of the war (it wasn't common knowledge just how much success the British armies would have), but also because we perceive Russia as the greatest potential threat to Imperial security after the war. In other words we're happy to have an Ottoman state ready and eager to seize Azerbaijan and Russian Armenia in the event of war, as well as not wanting Russia to have the straits with a warm water port on the Suez Canal's doorstep. The Ottoman's are given an opportunity to salvage their empire, but nobody really expects them to succeed, so after the 30/40 years are up then Britain can go after whatever oil it wants. The position (or potential belligerence) of Russia will be more clear by then too, with no doubt either major constitutional reform taking place in that time-span, or revolution. For now you keep a decent bulwark against Russian expansion in Asia after the war.

To be fair, this was the explanation I thought up when - in my Hoi4 game - the Ottomans declined the German's call to arms under the Central Powers Alliance. There is a chance they could still accept if Germany or Austria-Hungary sends another request, but Austria-Hungary is like a week away from capitulating, and the Ottomans have been declining all requests so far. The Ottomans at the turn of the century were of course looking for a western ally, and originally they went to the British, multiple times in fact, but the Brits turned them down.
 
Last edited:
Well, no, I did point out that British might just settle for buying out all Ottoman oil industry (like they did OTL in Persia), instead of direct annexation. In this case they'd want to keep everyone else out.
Same for straits: In event of Russian successes in war against Ottomans, British would try to force international demilitarized straits zone, so Russians would remain bottled in.

And failure of Ottoman-British cooperation wasn't just on British side, Turk leadership was increasingly Germanophile, by 1910s there might've been too late, not without concessions like giving back Cyrpus or capitulations. Ottomans were too angry at British who've kept eating away at her border territories.
In video game where countries are largely mono-entities, player can turn them around 180 degree at will, especially in PD games. But irl, afaik there was no British political faction wanting an alliance with Ottomans that was strong enough to push that policy.
 
But irl, afaik there was no British political faction wanting an alliance with Ottomans that was strong enough to push that policy.

That may well be true, but I had to come up with some explanation why the Ottomans were denying German calls to arms.
 
The United Kingdom of Great Britain, Ireland, India, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt, Sudan, East Africa, Rhodesia, Bechuanaland, Somaliland, Togoland, Cameroon, Gambia, Gold Coast, Nyasaland, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Tanganyika, Uganda, Zanzibar, Guiana, Bahamas, Barbados, Jamaica, Leeward Islands, Windward Islands, Bermuda, Mauritius, Aden, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, South Arabia, Trucial States, Fiji, Malaya, Borneo, ..........
 
There's no throne of England in 1914 unless you've completely changed the Acts of Union (both 1707 and 1800) in which case the butterflies that causes will change the potential name of a union.
 
There's no throne of England in 1914 unless you've completely changed the Acts of Union (both 1707 and 1800) in which case the butterflies that causes will change the potential name of a union.

You know what I mean quasi modo. Go easy on an American.
 
The United Kingdom of Great Britain, Ireland, India, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt, Sudan, East Africa, Rhodesia, Bechuanaland, Somaliland, Togoland, Cameroon, Gambia, Gold Coast, Nyasaland, Sierra Leone, Swaziland, Tanganyika, Uganda, Zanzibar, Guiana, Bahamas, Barbados, Jamaica, Leeward Islands, Windward Islands, Bermuda, Mauritius, Aden, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, South Arabia, Trucial States, Fiji, Malaya, Borneo, ..........

Lord have mercy on our souls.
 
Top