Kaiser Dies First, New Kaiser Dumps Navy

[wkwillis]

POD is that Kaiser Wilhelm, grandson of Victoria, Queen of England, is bumped off by the Poles in 1910.
His son takes over and dumps the navy in favor of not pissing off Britain. He takes the money and puts it into the army, and when the Serbs pick off Ferdinand and the war begins in October of 1913...
1. Britain is a lot less antiGerman.
2. Germany's army is a little more powerfull by a few divisions.
3. Germany's zeppelin force is a lot more powerfull.
4. Germany goes through the Netherlands, too, to fit in the extra divisions.
5. Russia's railroads are not as extensive and they can't get there as fast.
6. Turkey is still at war with Italy and the Balkans (except for Rumania).
7. Constantinople is under siege and Thrace is controlled by the Allies.
8. France is still using Plan Michel and advancing into Belgium.
9. Belgium has not built up it's army as much.
10. The crops are in and no one will go hungry next year.
11. Farmers have bought their fertiliser with the proceeds of the crop.
The war starts off different and gets more so.
1. The Netherlands floods their fields and blow their bridges as the Germans mobilize, retreating back to Fortress Holland with all the cows they can herd.
2. Belgium does worse with a smaller army and is shuttled into Amsterdam with their nitrate reserves behind essentially the entire Belgian army.
3. France meets the Germans and is promptly thrown back to France, losing the control of the Channel coast, but not the coal and iron and industry of northern France.
4. Britain has half the cabinet resign over getting into the war. The other half, because they don't get into the war.
5. Italy sends it's troops to the Alps and they don't succeed in doing anything except pinning down a few hundred thousand Austrian troops.
6. Serbia, etc, unite against Austria and advance slightly.
7. Russia does better against Austria in Silesia because there are less Austrian troops available for the Carpathian front.
8. The Russians get to Prussia a month later and have more time to shake down. No catastrophes at Tannenberg due to command disagreements and intercepted messages.
9. Japan does not get involved because they are Britain's ally and Britain is not at war. They do offer to buy the German colonies.
10. Britain offers loans conditional on buying the German, French, Belgian, Dutch, Italian, and Turkish colonies and the assets therein.
11. The price of coal, wheat, and nitrates goes up.
12. Gold floods the world market as the belligerents dump their reserves to pay for supplies and armaments.
After the first month the German General Staff reviews the situation.
1. There is an increasing shortage of ammunition, but they can still purchase nitrates overseas.
2. So can the enemy.
3. The Balkan railroad is ramping up and extending. Russia will get ammunition and Serbia et al will get wheat.
4. Turkey is on the wrong side of the straits and isn't going to cross any time soon, or at all.
5. Britain is not extending loans and is demanding payment on the prewar loans.
6. Austria is tied down to the south, stretched to the maximum extent by the Balkan Alliance and Italy.
7. The German fleet can defend the Baltic trade lanes against Russia, or enter the Mediterranean, but not both.
8. The British could enter the war if they pleased and there are still people who would like to.
9. Anything they declare contraband for the enemy is contraband for them.
10. Even if they declare nitrates and ammunition contraband, there are too many French, etc, ships to sink.
11. Britain is building a larger army, too large to fight, soon.
12. They can't go to war with Britain now, or later, and expect to win.
13. Russia is slowly mobilizing, has a cadre of trained veterans, and is in no hurry to invade without preparation.
14. The Polish Front is going to take more and more troops as the Russians continue to mobilize.
15. Rumania is plugging a lot of the front as a neutral, and may not stay that way.
16. Britain, Japan, the United States, and the various other neutrals are not ruining themselves with war.
The Staff recommends a peace treaty.

 

[schrammy]

france falls realy fast

so to sum things up
germany has a larger better equiped army
it is faceing only russia and france and not Britain.
if i understand this correctly (is bumped off by the Poles in 1910) there is no real reason to alter the von schliefen plan.
the german army can more or less walz trough belgium unopposed with verry little or no delay in its time tables.
they are not cut off from the world market and s have no supply shortages (unless they can't pay for them any more).

so even if indeed as in your point 3. (France meets the Germans and is promptly thrown back to France, losing the control of the Channel coast, but not the coal and iron and industry of northern France)
i doudt that this will be for verry long.

 

[Chengar Qordath]

I agree with schrammy; why would Germany be doing worse in the war if conditions are more favorable than OTL?

 

[wkwillis]

1. The French army was in the right place at the right time, instead of off in Alsace and Lorraine. This is the most important change.
2. The Dutch army was bigger than the British army and on the scene at the time, instead of dispersed across Britain.
3. The Belgians wound up defending the nitrates of Amsterdam instead of the dunes of the coast. A much more significant location both strategically and logistically.
4. The Balkans were united instead of opposing each other. Bulgaria was on the Allied side instead of in opposition. Greece was not divided.
5. The Balkan armies had occupied Thrace. The Turks couldn't get into the war except by attacking through the Caucausus.
6. The Balkan armies had occupied Thrace. IE, they had a through route to Russia for ammunition
7. The Italians were in the war at the start, pinning down Austrian troops that should have been in Silesia defending it from the Russians.
8. The Russian army had more time to shake down before arriving at the battle front. They needed it, if you can believe World War One history books.
Other than those eight short term factors, the Entente would have been better off with Britain. In OTL the Entente won the war. In this ATL they didn't.

 

[Tom_B]

I am finding this confusing. It starts out with the more usual No Navy Bigger Army stuff. When this is phrased right it does not mean no navy but that Germany is willing to accept a fleet that does not pose a threat to Britain but is large enough to defeat both the French and the Russian Baltic Fleet and defend its colonial possessions. So what this means is something like a moratorium on laying down new dreadnoughts and BC with eventual plans for resumption at lower levels later (Bayern class delayed and planned as only a pair).

The extra money for the Army is unlikely to mean extra divisions. Ther Germans were actually less fond of conscription than the French. The extra marks would go into firepower not manpower--foot artillery for the reserve corps, more machineguns, etc.

Zeppelins were part of the Navy so why would they be more numerous? Fixed wing airplanes will not be as numerous and armies will be relying more on cavalry for recon.

Why is Italy attacking its nominal ally Austria from the beginning--is it because they are at war with the Ottomans? All this means is the Italian war with the Ottomans remains seperate. Giolitti liked the Austrians. He may actually honor his treaty commitment.

Rumania has a secret treaty with Germany as well.

With a longer Russian mobilization the Austrians avoid Gnila Lipa. They should be able to advance as far as Lublin before the Russians show up in force. A longer "shakedown" period does not turn Samsonov and Reenkampf into friends, Zhilinksy is still too aggressive and the Russian problem with radio intercepts persisted a long time OTL. A Tanenberg is still possible but more likely a series of lesser frustrations and setbacks ensue.

Tom

 

[David S Poepoe]

Impossible

Too late, your POD is too late to do anything. By 1910 for Britain to be alot less anti-German the sun will have to rise in the West. The Kaiser actually has restraints on his power and its the Reichstag that has repeatedly responded to public demands for the construction and expansion of the High Seas Fleet.

4. Doesn't make sense (move into Netherlands).

 

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

Rumania has a secret treaty with Germany as well.

And look how it was honored in OTL. Romania has high hopes on Germany to counter Russia, but the bigger enemy is Austria-Hungary.

 

[benedict XVII]

I also have some difficulties imagining:

1. Britain not reacting to violation of both Belgian and Dutch neutrality
2. Belgian army somehow moving north to Amsterdam. Belgain strategy was always to wait for the support of its guarantors in the Antwerp stronghold. Why a,d how to retreat from Antwerp to Amsterdam just beats me. The non-occupied French north is much closer, so why run to a mousetrap in the north?

 

[LordKalvan]

I have also some problems in accepting an early entry of Italy into the war: not on the Entente side (better, on the Franco-Russian side), because they were quite close to UK in those years, and would have no reason to do it; even more difficult is to imagine the Italians on the side of the CP, unless there is a complete change of AH foreign policy (which appeared to be mainly geared to antagonise Italy wherever possible).
I think it would take a deliberate effort of German diplomacy to create a working (and honest) alliance in the Mediterranean and the Balkans. I do agree that this would change drastically the situation (the combined Italian and austrian fleet would have been able to interdict the passage from Algeria to france, and strand in NA large number of french soldiers. The French fleet would not be in a position to react, given british neutrality). It would even be possible to envisage a combined landing in southern france.
But -I repeat - you must change completely AH policies

 

[MarkA]

In another post I related how in OTL Willie, while still a prince, was saved from drowning in the Potsdam Lakes by British diplomatic staff attending Lady Ampthill who was teaching the future Kaiser how to scull. If you want a POD which does away with him I think it is probably neater to allow him to drown.

Who succeeds him? Does the new Kaiser not entertain building a 'blue water navy'? How does this affect the relationship between Britain and Germany and between Britain and France?

 

[wkwillis]

I am finding this confusing. It starts out with the more usual No Navy Bigger Army stuff. When this is phrased right it does not mean no navy but that Germany is willing to accept a fleet that does not pose a threat to Britain but is large enough to defeat both the French and the Russian Baltic Fleet and defend its colonial possessions. So what this means is something like a moratorium on laying down new dreadnoughts and BC with eventual plans for resumption at lower levels later (Bayern class delayed and planned as only a pair).

The extra money for the Army is unlikely to mean extra divisions. Ther Germans were actually less fond of conscription than the French. The extra marks would go into firepower not manpower--foot artillery for the reserve corps, more machineguns, etc.

Zeppelins were part of the Navy so why would they be more numerous? Fixed wing airplanes will not be as numerous and armies will be relying more on cavalry for recon.

Why is Italy attacking its nominal ally Austria from the beginning--is it because they are at war with the Ottomans? All this means is the Italian war with the Ottomans remains seperate. Giolitti liked the Austrians. He may actually honor his treaty commitment.

Rumania has a secret treaty with Germany as well.

With a longer Russian mobilization the Austrians avoid Gnila Lipa. They should be able to advance as far as Lublin before the Russians show up in force. A longer "shakedown" period does not turn Samsonov and Reenkampf into friends, Zhilinksy is still too aggressive and the Russian problem with radio intercepts persisted a long time OTL. A Tanenberg is still possible but more likely a series of lesser frustrations and setbacks ensue.

Tom

1. It's a smaller navy and a different navy. No battleships, but more Zeppelins and more cruisers. It's a navy designed the fight the French and the Russians, not the British.
2. I assume that the Germans will overcome their reluctance to promote middle class officers in peacetime, the way the eventually promoted them in wartime.
3. From my point of view the only thing better than the Italians joining the war against Germany is the Turks not joining the war against Russia. Turkish, Italian, Greek, Bulgarian, and Albanian neutrality in WWI so they can concentrate on fighting each other is okay by me. Let the Serbs and Montenegrans fight the Austrians. Russia can send it's grain to market and freely import consumer goods and armaments if they aren't at war with Turkey.

 

[Kurt_Steiner]

Too late, your POD is too late to do anything. By 1910 for Britain to be alot less anti-German the sun will have to rise in the West. The Kaiser actually has restraints on his power and its the Reichstag that has repeatedly responded to public demands for the construction and expansion of the High Seas Fleet.

I fully agree, as Germany had lost the chance to keep the UK away from France since the signature of the Entente Cordiale agreements in London on April 8, 1904.

Perhaps if the Kaiser dies before the Chamberlain-Bülow talks, it could have some chance.

 

[David S Poepoe]

I fully agree, as Germany had lost the chance to keep the UK away from France since the signature of the Entente Cordiale agreements in London on April 8, 1904.

Perhaps if the Kaiser dies before the Chamberlain-Bülow talks, it could have some chance.

I think the POD practically has to be back in the 19th century. It has nothing to do with naval rivalry either. I think the seed of it is economic and has to do with the power tapped by the unification of the German states.

 

[Kurt_Steiner]

The unification of Germany was unstopable, IMHO. Either way, even in the case of a different union, that is, a northern Germany under Prussia and a southern Catholic union more or less pro-Austria and/or Franco, I don't see much difference, as we would end changing the main danger for Europe from Germany to France.

The question is, once Germany is unified, could Germany and the UK manage to arrive to some kind of mutual understanding? Ok, perhaps to ease that we need to get rid of Wilhelm. But this can be done in anotehr way.

Let's have his father don't die because of his throat cancer -Dr Morell Mackenzie, the leading laryngologist in Europe, recommends to proceed with surgery and the problem is solved. Then Friedrich III could have moved away from the conservative Junker-dominated state it was set up to be under Wilhelm I and Bismark, and towards a representative constitutional monarchy, probably on the British model. This would probably be accompanied by a move away from militarism, which would have both good and bad consequences - I think that militaristic societies tend to see the army as a tool of diplomacy, which is generally bad. One problem I can see arising from this scenario, however, is that of alliances - Germany historically turned to Russia and Austria, as fellow absolutist states, for partnership, but a Germany turning liberal may not like to appeal to them. The familial bond with Russia and Britain through Victoria would still be present, however, so an alliance there may be possible. The French would still be pissed about losing Alsace-Lorraine, so they aren't an option, and Italy, the Ottomans, and Spain aren't Great Powers. Germany would probably be on worse terms with Austria-Hungary, as a liberal, more democratic Germany would not look so kindly on Austria suppressing its minorities. However, this could turn to Germany's benefit, as without German support Austria-Hungary is a lot less likely to attack Serbia and start the Great War.

Germany and Russia would get on about the same. On the one hand, less German support for Austria would please the Russians. However, a more liberal, more democratic Germany would, like Britain, be critical of Russian domestic policy and pressure the Tsar to adopt more political reforms for the Russian people, instead of maintaining the absolute monarchy. This would push the Tsar toward France, which is prepared to overlook Russian domestic policy for strategic gain.

Also, If Friedrich lived to the same age as his son Wilhelm, he'd die in 1913 at the age of 82, after 25 years as Kaiser. That's time enough for him to have a strong influence on the development of Germany and on his son Wilhelm.

 

[Redbeard]

The unification of Germany was unstopable, IMHO. Either way, even in the case of a different union, that is, a northern Germany under Prussia and a southern Catholic union more or less pro-Austria and/or Franco, I don't see much difference, as we would end changing the main danger for Europe from Germany to France.

The question is, once Germany is unified, could Germany and the UK manage to arrive to some kind of mutual understanding? Ok, perhaps to ease that we need to get rid of Wilhelm. But this can be done in anotehr way.

Let's have his father don't die because of his throat cancer -Dr Morell Mackenzie, the leading laryngologist in Europe, recommends to proceed with surgery and the problem is solved. Then Friedrich III could have moved away from the conservative Junker-dominated state it was set up to be under Wilhelm I and Bismark, and towards a representative constitutional monarchy, probably on the British model. This would probably be accompanied by a move away from militarism, which would have both good and bad consequences - I think that militaristic societies tend to see the army as a tool of diplomacy, which is generally bad. One problem I can see arising from this scenario, however, is that of alliances - Germany historically turned to Russia and Austria, as fellow absolutist states, for partnership, but a Germany turning liberal may not like to appeal to them. The familial bond with Russia and Britain through Victoria would still be present, however, so an alliance there may be possible. The French would still be pissed about losing Alsace-Lorraine, so they aren't an option, and Italy, the Ottomans, and Spain aren't Great Powers. Germany would probably be on worse terms with Austria-Hungary, as a liberal, more democratic Germany would not look so kindly on Austria suppressing its minorities. However, this could turn to Germany's benefit, as without German support Austria-Hungary is a lot less likely to attack Serbia and start the Great War.

Germany and Russia would get on about the same. On the one hand, less German support for Austria would please the Russians. However, a more liberal, more democratic Germany would, like Britain, be critical of Russian domestic policy and pressure the Tsar to adopt more political reforms for the Russian people, instead of maintaining the absolute monarchy. This would push the Tsar toward France, which is prepared to overlook Russian domestic policy for strategic gain.

Also, If Friedrich lived to the same age as his son Wilhelm, he'd die in 1913 at the age of 82, after 25 years as Kaiser. That's time enough for him to have a strong influence on the development of Germany and on his son Wilhelm.

Interesting!

Basically I think any French-Russian cooperation or chance thereof will determine German foreign policy, no matter how sympathetic or not the regimes of potential allies are. Growing Russian strength (the fastest growth rate in early 20th century) combined with French lust for revenge will have the future look very threatening seen from Berlin. Support can be found in UK however, who will not be interested in France and Russia (the two main threats to the Empire) running over Germany, and in case of French/Russian aggression the RN will immediately cut off France and keep the Russian fleet in harbour. The Mediterranean Fleet will laso keep Italy from actively entering the French alliance. Not that I think the British will join an alliance with Germany, that wasn't the British ideal, but by letting the world know what the Empire could do - if it wanted to.

But perhaps a more liberal Germany will give a federal A-H a chance, and if some of the resources saved on battleships can be invested in beefing the A-H's - it might be a very good investment. After all A-h had the second fastest growth rate in early 20th century, and from an industrial level ahead of Russia.


Regards

Steffen Redbeard