In His Own Right

[LacheyS]

The Bulgarians aren't going to accept being boxed out of Macedonia (many of them consider Macedonian to be a dialect of Bulgarian; see http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=90674 ). I could see them making common cause with Italy. Also, can you refresh me on why Austria-Hungary is just accepting this South Slav expansion?

I didn't say they had accepted it; the talks are still ongoing in London between the powers. All that is happened is that people have agreed to stop fighting and return to the negotiating table. The Bulgarians, however, may not get much of a say....Greece and Serbia have reached an agreement and they are seeking an arrangement with Romania, meaning the Bulgarians are boxed in.

In addition, remember this is 1908 and Bulgaria has not had four years of independence up its sleeve to prepare for this conflict like they did with the first Balkan War in OTL. They took advantage of Ottoman weakness, joining in only when it was in her strategic interest to do so and she was sure of gains, rather than being part of a league effort - Bulgaria was right to feel morally offended at being shut out in 1912; here, she had no arrangements with any of the other powers. I don't think a newly independent Bulgaria would suddenly declare war on Serbia, Greece, France, Austria and Spain with an expectation that Italy would come to her rescue.

 

[Wendell]

I'd be impressed if some little country ends up winning an Italian colony or two

 

[LacheyS]

The Bulgarians aren't going to accept being boxed out of Macedonia (many of them consider Macedonian to be a dialect of Bulgarian; see http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=90674 ). I could see them making common cause with Italy. Also, can you refresh me on why Austria-Hungary is just accepting this South Slav expansion?

Austria-Hungary is tolerating this because she and Serbia have made amends and the former has made a number of agreements with Russia and Britain in order to achieve other political goals. Read "The Road to Salonika" about two or three pages back.

 

[G.Bone]

I have one small request:

War with UK so that Luckner, Lettow-Vobeck, etc come alive!

MUAHAHAHAHAHAhAH!

 

[LacheyS]

I'd be impressed if some little country ends up winning an Italian colony or two

Aw, you're just spreading propaganda on behalf of the colons. Or are you a semi-colon or flong? And where is the island floating nowadays anyway? Last I heard, you weren't far from me here in eastern Australia.

 

[LacheyS]

I have one small request:

War with UK so that Luckner, Lettow-Vobeck, etc come alive!

MUAHAHAHAHAHAhAH!

I don't guarantee; I will merely see if I can rearrange the history of the world to suit the pedantic wishes of my frivolous audience.

Everyone's a critic.

 

[Wendell]

Aw, you're just spreading propaganda on behalf of the colons. Or are you a semi-colon or flong? And where is the island floating nowadays anyway? Last I heard, you weren't far from me here in eastern Australia.

New Zealand, I think...

 

[LacheyS]

The Western Theatre

4 August
French troops cross the Italian border into Piedmont and Liguria.

9 August
Spanish marines land at Cagliari and establish control over the city during the next eight days. From this base, they begin to spread out across Sardinia, fighting an intense guerrilla war.

9-14 August
The Battle of Turin. The home of the Shroud and Italy’s first capital is well defended. The Alps to the west and north are impassable, so the French are forced to fight over the hills of Monferrato, when Italian troops are heavily dug in. Estimates are that France sacrifices over four thousand troops to achieve the fall of the key city.

18 August
The Battle of Gorizia. An Austrian naval flotilla off Trieste encounters an Italian fleet out of Venice. The Italians victor, however, losses on both sides are sufficient to eliminate the usefulness of both Adriatic fleets for the duration of the war.

Many suspected that the fall of Italy was a fait accompli. However, despite being vastly outnumbered and outgunned, history tells us that there is nothing easy about defeating an entrenched force on home soil. By the end of October, French casulties would stand at 79,000 dead and wounded. For the Austrians, they lost a more moderate, but still staggering, 45,000 in the same period. There was also growing unrest in France over the conduct of the war, despite the assurances of Prime Minister Clemenceau, particularly over the Navy's failure to break through the blockade and land troops north of Rome. The events of the period are recorded in the timeline below:

17-22 August
The siege of Genoa. The principal seaport of Italy attempts to use naval support to hold the city, but the French fleet far outnumber their Italian counterparts and slowly eliminate them.

25 August
Reserves out of Milan reach the front and force the French army to retreat from Como. French troops headed toward Florence are rediverted to prevent the collapse of the front.

26 August
Facing invasion, the heavily Francophone province of Aosta Valley rebels, declaring loyalty to France and overthrowing their governor. A token French regiment moves into the valley.

26-31 August
The battle of Milan is a major victory for the Italians, with the French advance slowing by the day. Battle lines and trenches are drawn outside the city, with both sides sacrificing considerable blood for little ground.

29 August
A military governor is established in Liguria to begin pacification of the Italian portion of the population. In later years, France will strongly encourage migration to the region in an attempt to build a French majority.

31 August – 17 September
The siege of Verona. The Italians destroy bridges across the Adige River to halt Austrian advances. The city remains safe as long as the defences in the south hold.

16 September
The fall of Venice spells the end for Verona as well, with supply lines to the north cut. France and Austria agree now to proceed to squeeze Lombardy from both sides to close off the last of the northern provinces. Lombardy is home of one-sixth of Italy’s population and the engine of its economy. It also contains an estimated 250,000 Italian soldiers.

10 October
The last Italian forces on Sardinia surrender to the Spanish. In a costly war of attrition, both sides have recorded innumerable casualties. Later estimates will place the figure at about 140,000, most of those Sardinian civilians.

19 October
Spanish marines land on the southern coast of Sicily near the Gulf of Gela. The difficulties of Sardinia have strapped the morale of the Spaniards, who are quickly realising that there is nothing simple about the restoration of the Sicilian throne.

More to follow on the war in later posts.......

 

[Shadow Knight]

I don't know those casualties seem low. I know this is a bit earlier than OTL WWI, but 4K to take Turin seems awefully low.

Now I don't expect say the casualty ratio of say the Battle of the Somme (the UK losing some 60k in one day IIRC) but well entrenched troops with good supply and good defensive terrain are going to chew up an attacker. I'd expect at least twice that number dead (8k) and two to three times that wounded (with the medical tech at this time period on maybe a third of those will be able to come back for combat duty) just to take that city. Not mentioning all the dead and wounded in the fighting taking place around it.

Once France and Austria get into the plains of Lombardy maybe the kill ratio will go down, but as long as the fighting is going on in the Alps (NW and NE) Italy should be having more favorable kill ratios even if they lose.

 

[LacheyS]

I don't know those casualties seem low. I know this is a bit earlier than OTL WWI, but 4K to take Turin seems awefully low.

Now I don't expect say the casualty ratio of say the Battle of the Somme (the UK losing some 60k in one day IIRC) but well entrenched troops with good supply and good defensive terrain are going to chew up an attacker. I'd expect at least twice that number dead (8k) and two to three times that wounded (with the medical tech at this time period on maybe a third of those will be able to come back for combat duty) just to take that city. Not mentioning all the dead and wounded in the fighting taking place around it.

Once France and Austria get into the plains of Lombardy maybe the kill ratio will go down, but as long as the fighting is going on in the Alps (NW and NE) Italy should be having more favorable kill ratios even if they lose.

I was operating on the principle that Italy has, in TTL, about one soldier for five enemy soldiers, and thus would be forced to spread itself a lot more thinly. In addition, Italy did not have sufficient troops in place until about a month into the war, as they had to move a large number north. By the time the Italian forces reached the north, Piedmont and Veneto was already gone, so their first proper defences will be in Lombardy and Tuscany. I will go further into the campaigns for those two provinces in 1909, but expect very high casulty rates there (so much so that France may begin to reconsider its commitment).

In addition, Spain is having considerable problems in Sardinia with guerrillas and may not be able to sustain its foothold in Sicily. It is heavily reliant on Italy abandoning the island to move further troops north, or it may find its citizens abandoning the fight. Either way, Sicily, Lombardy and Tuscany won't be decided until early in the New Year.

 

[LacheyS]

The Anglo-German Summit of 1908

King Edward VII and his Foreign Minister, Sir Edward Grey, arrived in Frankfurt on 12 August. Their meeting with the Kaiser Wilhelm II and Friedrich von Holstein was technically to discuss the war in the Balkans, but the primary concern of the British delegation was the size of Germany's navy.

Discussions about the Balkans opened discussions. Britain was no longer cocnerned about Russian access to the Mediterranean, while Germany was concerned about the loss of power for one of her key friends, the Ottoman Empire. All of the victories in the Balkans had been for friends of Britain - Greece and Serbia (technical ally by way of Russia). Germany wanted some degree of compensation in any peace deal for the Ottoman Empire, primarily a concession over the Suez Canal. Britain was not prepared to concede control over the Canal but agreed in principle that the Porte needed to walk away from the peace talks with some type of diplomatic concessions. It was agreed that Germany would co-sponsor any peace talks with Britain and that all terms of peace would be approved by both Germany and Britain before they were placed before the warring nations. Both nations also agreed not to interfere in the conflict. Thus, in the end, the meeting only produced a statement of principle, rather than any conclusive agreement, over the Balkan War.

The second part of the summit related to the issue of Germany's naval expansion. Von Holstein, an opponent of the arms race, had been working towards convincing other members of the German government of the need to abandon the increasing expansion of her navy. He asked Grey pointedly, "At what point does the size of the German Imperial Navy become a threat to British interests?" He explained that Germany wanted complete control of sea traffic travelling in and out of the Baltic, including sea traffic through the Gulf of Bothnia. The reconstruction of the Russian fleet in the Baltic was well underway, and the presence of British vessels made Germany fear for its security.

At the time, there was a belief that a ratio of 3:1 was sufficient to guarantee victory in any war. Sir Edward Grey presented the idea that, should Germany be prepared to slow her expansion such that she remained at one third the size of the total Royal Navy, Britain would be prepared to surrender right of access to the Baltic Sea, unless Germany declared war on Russia. Germany would be permitted to complete ships already under construction, but would not be allowed to build further ships if they exceed the ratio. At the time, it was Britain's plan to have thirty dreadnought battleships by 1915. This would limit Germany to ten compared to Russia's four. However, Germany would be entitled to expand other ships. Von Holstein convinced the Kaiser to shut his mouth and agreed to take the proposal back to the Chancellor.

 

[G.Bone]

Ah yes - the kernel of quarrel between England and Germany, even though the two are good chums and all that.

This is one of the POD's I was thinking over a TL; sadly I am no good at charting a TL, just continuing an established one.

It seems that in order to appease England, one has to cut down on the expansion. With this cutting down, hopefully Germany can sort of be better in it's tech and all that. Glad to see they're attentive to the Porte, even if it has lost th' Balkans.

The installment of the Spanish/French/Italian War seems a wee bit one sided even though there is some struggle going on for independence. It's not that I'm sympathetic for the Italian underdog; it's just that it doesn't have the huge deviances of character that the other installments had. I suppose with this later invasion of Italy, a whole lot of people are going to die, and that other (established) powers are going to be involved.

Ah - European politics -

I don't suppose the other powers are up to interfereing with this - other- war?

Quibble: What has happened to the immigrants that have been barred from TTL's USA? Have they gone to Canada, Mexico, and other countries that would benefit from their enlarged pool? I know of Russia and Eastern Europe - but what about the other countries, i.e. China and Japan?

 

[LacheyS]

Ah yes - the kernel of quarrel between England and Germany, even though the two are good chums and all that.

This is one of the POD's I was thinking over a TL; sadly I am no good at charting a TL, just continuing an established one.

It seems that in order to appease England, one has to cut down on the expansion. With this cutting down, hopefully Germany can sort of be better in it's tech and all that. Glad to see they're attentive to the Porte, even if it has lost th' Balkans.

Which is why von Holstein was there. He is sympathetic to the view that Germany needs to get out of the naval race, mostly because it is causing investment in the south to suffer and he feels that Germany can't win it anyway. Von Bulow was also, in OTL, concerned regarding the sanity of the Kaiser's drive, though he towed the government line. There is also considerable opposition from various factions within the Reichstag. I don't see the Kaiser backing down on this; however, I do see an attempt by opponents to the naval race to force his hand.

The installment of the Spanish/French/Italian War seems a wee bit one sided even though there is some struggle going on for independence. It's not that I'm sympathetic for the Italian underdog; it's just that it doesn't have the huge deviances of character that the other installments had. I suppose with this later invasion of Italy, a whole lot of people are going to die, and that other (established) powers are going to be involved.

I don't want to reveal too much, but I am increasingly coming to the idea that France's commitment to the war won't be enduring. The forces are already gathering to bring Clemenceau down, led by Aristide Briand, who doesn't think France should have gone to war in the first place. Spain has had a difficult time in Sardinia - the easy victory it had expected did not come and there are likely to be revolts next year in Spain itself. And I don't know if Austria would be willing to go it alone.

As to the interference of others, I can't see the Ottomans, Russia or Germany joining in. The British don't want to go to war against France for fear of provoking the Triple Alliance. So, in short, there will probably be none.

Quibble: What has happened to the immigrants that have been barred from TTL's USA? Have they gone to Canada, Mexico, and other countries that would benefit from their enlarged pool? I know of Russia and Eastern Europe - but what about the other countries, i.e. China and Japan?

I hear your quibble. You want to know what happened to the migrants. Well, most of them stayed in Poland-Lithuania, helping to build that new country. However, we are talking about a movement of about millions of people who would thus far have migrated to the US had it been open. Clearly, not all of those would have stayed. However, Canada is about to close its doors as well after taking an additional 300,000 Russians and Poles. Mexico was encouraging migration, but even if you doubled their intake (a stretch, as Mexico was not a popular choice), you only end up with 60,000. I can't see the Afrikaners welcoming them into South Africa. There is currently an uprising in India. Australia, Britain and the US are all saying "No way". They have to stay where they are: there is nowhere else to go. In fact, as a tolerant government, Poland would probably actually attract some migrants from Russia and other countries where Jews were persecuted.

Chinese and Japanese migrations to the United States also did not occur. Oh, some made it in, if they were able to pass the very stringent migration tests, but again, on the whole, they were locked out. In OTL, the US population in 1910 was 92.5 million; in TTL, it will be 81.7 million.

However, the immigration restriction will not hold forever. The closure of those borders would have added enormous pressure on wages. By 1912, there will be a labour shortage. So eventually, Roosevelt is going to have to back down and find some accommodation with migration. In addition, the lack of migration has forced a change within the US itself; large numbers of African Americans are now being employed and, with that, comes a substantial increase in their economic and political power.

 

[Wendell]

Literally just before the outbreak of World War I, Edward House was in Berlin negotiating with the Kaiser a potential pact between the Germans, British, and Americans. Might something like that happen here?

 

[LacheyS]

Literally just before the outbreak of World War I, Edward House was in Berlin negotiating with the Kaiser a potential pact between the Germans, British, and Americans. Might something like that happen here?

It is a feasible option. I am trying to work out how the Reichstag can establish some kind of superiority over the Kaiser, however, the Bundesrat is likely to oppose any key changes. I can see the Government and the Kaiser coming to blows very shortly, but I am uncertain what effect, if any, the resignation or dismissal of the Chancellor would have. Still researching.....

 

[DMA]

It is a feasible option. I am trying to work out how the Reichstag can establish some kind of superiority over the Kaiser, however, the Bundesrat is likely to oppose any key changes. I can see the Government and the Kaiser coming to blows very shortly, but I am uncertain what effect, if any, the resignation or dismissal of the Chancellor would have. Still researching.....

Maybe Bismarck can hang around a little longer & fears that the new Kaiser may not be as wise as Wilhelm I ...

 

[Neroon]

Finally an update i can find something to comment on !
The other one's were quite interesting, too but couldn't really find anything to comment about.

Sir Edward Grey presented the idea that, should Germany be prepared to slow her expansion such that she remained at one third the size of the total Royal Navy, Britain would be prepared to surrender right of access to the Baltic Sea, unless Germany declared war on Russia.

I think Germany would ask for - and recieve - 2 additional clauses to this agreement (3:1 limitation is after all quite a concession, especially with Britain not knowing that Germany can't affort a prolonged naval race).

1. Britain also surrenders her right of access to the Baltic Sea should Germany declare war on Russia in reaction to a Russian declararation of war on either:
- Finland
- Poland - Lithuania
- Austro - Hungaria
- The Ottoman Empire

2. Germany is permitted to expand her fleet beyond the 3:1 limit, should that be neccessary to maintain a 50% superiority over Russia (the exact percentage would be negotiable, of course).

 

[LacheyS]

Clash With the Kaiser

With the Kaiser's drive towards war, the National Liberals were torn by the direction to take. As the second largest party in the Reichstag, and the largest party in the Government of Chancellor von Bulow, they were almost evenly split on the question of military spending, the massive burden that was driving the German economy into the ground. However, the work of the Foreign Secretary von Holstein had convinced the Chancellor that something needed to change. The Kaiser could no longer be trusted; basic reform was necessary to change the old electoral laws and end the domination of the Prussian junkers, to end the militarism and to modernise the German Reich.

On 28 October, 1908, the difficulties of government unity were compounded when an article appeared in Britain's Daily Telegraph, purporting to be an interview with the Kaiser. The Kaiser alleged that there was considerable anti-British sentiment in Germany and that he was struggling to contain it. There was considerable outrage both in Germany and abroad, including France, Russia, Britain and Japan. As Chancellor, it was von Bulow's duty to defend the Kaiser. However, over the past year, his political position had slowly moved away from the Kaiser and he felt he could not do so. After days of building pressure in the Reichstag, he advised his party he would not defend the Kaiser and, in the heated debate that followed, von Bulow announced that he was leaving the party. He took with him nearly half the party's members.

The split of the National Liberal Party meant that the task of building a majority in the Reichstag could only fall to Julius Bachem, the leader of the Catholic Centre Party. As a non-noble and a Catholic, there would traditionally be no possibility that he would ever be appointed Chancellor.

Meanwhile, the Kaiser had sunk into a deep depression, believing himself to have been abandoned. When von Bulow and Bachem visited him on 10 November to advise him of the changes on the Reichstag and to suggest that the Chancellorship be transferred to Bachem, he drove them away in a megalomaniacal rage, screaming that they were "bad, bad, bad", throwing at them the imperial seal.

Uncertain as to what to do next, Prince von Bulow returned to the Reichstag and publicly disassociated himself from the actions of the Kaiser, announcing that he had tendered the Kaiser his resignation, but that the Kaiser was not "sufficiently in his own mind" to accept it. There was outrage among his former party members and among the conservative Junkers, who moved a motion of no confidence but were defeated by eight votes.

Wilhelm II had avoided appointing strong political leaders, not wanting anyone who could interfere with his rule. With the fall of von Bulow, it became clear that another bureaucrat could not exercise the strength necessary to keep the Empire on course. However, the mind of the Kaiser was insufficiently strong for the test as well. With that fact before them, the Reichstag appointed his son, Crown Prince Wilhelm of Germany and Prussia, as Regent.

 

[DMA]

Just a thought - it would have been within the power of the Reichstag, if Wilhelm II was in such malaise, that a Regent could have been appointed to rule on the Kaiser's behalf. This may have been far more palatable for the majority of the Reichstag...

 

[LacheyS]

Maybe Bismarck can hang around a little longer & fears that the new Kaiser may not be as wise as Wilhelm I ...

But Bismarck was dead well before the POD. I think, however, that Wilhelm II was certifiable. If not for Bismarck's strong foundations, the Kaiser would have killed Germany long before World War I.