Excellent update. You did a great job keeping the conflicts clear and the interests of the powers separate. It could have been very confusing, but you managed the six months of six battles very handily.
Thanks! I'll admit that this update was a bit of a slog, because I had to rough out the politics and motivations of several countries I hadn't thought much about thus far. The discussions in the comments helped a great deal.
Speaking of which, how do you think the All-India Reform Congress will react to the war? It's a much more embryonic organization than OTL's Indian National Congress, and at this point isn't as openly nationalist (it doesn't yet oppose British rule and has British as well as Muslim members). My guess is that, at least at first, it would make a point of being loyal in the hope of gaining favor for Indian autonomy after the war, but that its position might evolve depending on how the war unfolds and what Britain does.
And the crap hits the fan.
Man, has it ever.
Many of TTL's historians will point to the socialists' withdrawal from the French government as a monumental miscalculation. They assumed that the fall of the government would prevent anything major from happening until May, and that the voters would sweep the populist coalition out of office. They underestimated Leclair's willingness to disregard the unwritten constitution and use all of a caretaker government's
technical powers, as well as the extent to which the clerical parties in parliament would support his rush to war. And now, he'll use the war to postpone elections indefinitely, although he won't suspend the constitution or prorogue the legislature.
Certainly, the socialist parties that had never been part of the "red-blue" coalition will be quick to blame those that were.
The fact is, though, that events had already taken on their own momentum by then. A different outcome to the French constitutional crisis might have slowed things down, but the end result would still have been the same.
And so it begins. I would have expected a far less enthusiastic approach by the North Germans - after all, they are going to see all the initial land fighting in Europe almost alone against three land-based Great Powers, and they'll have to fight for their life. But the war is actually existential for more or less everyone - except Britain and France, but the stakes are very high for them as well.
Not all the North Germans are as eager to fight as Wilhelm II and his coterie. There's a sizable number who realize what industrial war will be like (remember that the NDB is one of the few nations that's had a taste of it before) and the trade unionists are well aware that Wilhelm will try to use the war to roll back Friedrich III's reforms. But pan-Germanism is a popular cause, there's widespread sympathy for the Bavarian rebellion, and the idea of avenging the stolen victory against France has broad appeal.
I expected Italy to be already in a defensive alliance with North Germany - but then North German behaviour isn't actually that "defensive" (that would justify a British lukewarm approach about Bavaria at the start... until London realizes that they can't afford North Germany to be destroyed).
Well, in purely technical terms, North Germany
is defending itself against the French and Austrians - they declared war on it before it declared war on them. But you're correct that the NDB's behavior is defensive only in a narrowly legalistic sense, which would give pause to both the British and Italians. As we've discussed, Italy will come in soon enough - it has to mobilize if it wants Rome, and once it mobilizes, it will probably be at war with France and Austria whether or not it wants to be - but it will let the bidding continue for a while.
As for the Scandinavian Powers... both would have, in theory, something to gain, Finland and Schleswig respectively for Sweden and Denmark.
Fair point. As you say, though, the risk to Denmark will outweigh any potential reward. It might be a closer question for Sweden, but if it invades Finland, it will probably end up with much more than it bargained for: Finland is tough country for invaders, and the Finns were content enough under Russian rule that they'd fight.
Also, I had expected Ethiopia entering the mess right from the start. This not being the case makes for more interesting thing to happen.
Has Egypt really that much room for independent decision? They are tecnichally an Ottoman vassal, are they not? Stamboul will and could request their support habdily, and with all the Panislamic stuff going around, whatever passes for the Egyptian legislature at this point would likely agree.
Ethiopia is tempted, because the potential rewards are great, but so is the risk. There's a very real chance that it could find itself surrounded - Egypt is to the north, the Anglo-Omani empire to the south, and the North Germans in Ubangi-Shari to the west - and there's a fair probability of becoming someone's colony if it loses. Whether Ethiopia joins - and if so, on what side - is still up in the air.
Egypt is a nominal Ottoman vassal, but at this point it's
very nominal - it has as much of a choice about whether to join the war as OTL Canada or Australia did in World War II. With that said, joining the Ottomans would be the natural thing for it to do, and the Ottoman cause will be popular, so once the requisite sweeteners are offered, it will probably jump in.
Serbia would align with Austria and Russia I guess, that could be annoying for the Ottomans, but would Greece think about joining? The Ottomans are due for some uncomfortable moment I'm afraid.
Like Ethiopia, Greece is of two minds - it has much to gain, but also much to lose, and it had achieved a fragile detente with the Ottomans in the years just prior to the war. They'll probably wait and see at first, and depending on how the fighting goes, there may be some strange bedfellows.
Other two neutrals whose behaviour in the first stages of the war will be critical are Baden and Wurttemberg. Their stance will determine how badly North Germany is encircled. Likewise, which one of the two Bavarian governments controls Palatinate? The width of the front might change because of this.
Both sides will be courting them, and their leaders will also face serious internal pressure from both directions. They'll have a role to play in the first year of the war, which you'll find out soon.
The Palatinate is in royal Bavarian hands, and is hostile territory to the North Germans.
Another question: How are the alliances to be called?
I've been hoping that the Anglo-German-Ottomans might be referred to as the Axis
Though, perhaps more realistically. either side could simply be the allies, alliance, etc. It's not like IOTL's WWI or WWII here; IOTL the Triple Entente grew out of the Franco-British entente formed during the Crimean, and the Central Powers were referred to as such due to their geographic situation. Especially in regards to the Anglo-German-Ottoman alliance, with Vienna in the way, and considering the wide-flung nature of the British Empire's dominions and domains it'd be a bit difficult to refer to them as "Central," and it'd be a bit of a diplomatic faux pas to refer to the Franco-Austrian-Russian as the Entente in this situation.
Other than that anything referencing empires seems a bit off, as
everyone in this conflict is an empire.
That's a good question. I expect that the alliances
would have, or acquire, names - the press would want to call them something besides "our side" and "their side."
Each of them could actually be described as an axis: Britain-NDB-Ottoman Empire runs northwest to southeast, and France-Austria-Russia runs southwest to northeast. The term "axis" in OTL originated with a specific leader describing a specific agreement, though, and neither would exist in TTL. Maybe "the Alliance" and "the League?" I'd
like something more creative, but can't think of anything offhand.
This conflict is going to be nasty.
Yes, and it will only get nastier once the parties realize they're in it for the long haul, and once the political factions
within each nation realize that the overriding struggle is between reaction and modernity.