March 1918. Germans just defend.

[Catspoke]

By March 1918 the Germans had largely achieved their war aims in which they pushed having this war. The growing power of Russia had been curbed and controllable buffer states had been setup in the east as buffers against a Russian revival and as economic explotation zones much better than any German colonies pre war.

The 1918 offensives seem risky, only a slight temporary superiority of manpower can be achieved and even if the best hoped for results are achived, the complete roll up of the Somme and the destruction of the British armies there, there is no guarantee that ends the war and the Allies backed by a fresh America, just don't continue to build up strength, and enforce the blockade.

So what if the Germans just do nothing, no offensives anywhere (except to secure their Russian gains as OTL), not west front attack, nothing in Italy or Salonika either.

While doing nothing: They offer the Allies (Italy, France and Britian and Belgium anyway), as a starting point for negotiations, their pre-war 1914 boundries, and offer as armistice conditions to further discuss peace, the German evacuation of occupied France, Belgium and Italy and the suspension of submarine warfare. The central powers announce that Alsace Lorraine, disposition of German colonies and Trieste will all be up for negotiations in the final peace as well as the future of the Balkans and Middle East.

Then they sit back and defend until the Allies agree to the above.

(perhaps this can never happen if Ludendorf is around, perhaps he has to die in a POD, but many German military and civilian leaders are aware of Germany's weaknesses and the fragility of their client allies by this point)

 

[pdf27]

The allies decline any such German offers and wait for 1919, which will bring with it the tanks and the Americans. At which point it's all over for the Germans - it's the Russian steamroller all over again, only with slightly better leadership and crushing material superiority.

 

[eliphas8]

The allies decline any such German offers and wait for 1919, which will bring with it the tanks and the Americans. At which point it's all over for the Germans - it's the Russian steamroller all over again, only with slightly better leadership and crushing material superiority.

How bout if they send their peace overtures to the British and French press if the governments won't listen? They could even send "peace with honor" terms along with it as the starting point. The people seem tired of the war by then.

 

[1.36]

The allies decline any such German offers and wait for 1919, which will bring with it the tanks and the Americans. At which point it's all over for the Germans - it's the Russian steamroller all over again, only with slightly better leadership and crushing material superiority.

Here's a better question. Should the Allies take this offer? If Germany is willing to leave France and Belgium and even negotiate over Alsace-Lorraine, why wouldn't the Allies accept the deal (or at least go to the table)? Germany in this scenario just basically told the allies they are willing to give everything up overseas and in the west in return for peace. Russia is in anarchy at this point so many in the Allied forces may even question the ability of France, UK, and the US to really enforce anything in Germany in that area.

Plus, if France is told they can have Alsace-Lorraine back, I'm sure they'd want to jump in on that...

 

[Perfidious Albion]

Then Germany shatters under the combined impact of the economic losses caused by the British blockade (essentially undefeatable now that the USA is assisting the blockade rather than trying not-so-subtly to break it) and the internal unrest that was already fuming at the time.

German WW1 victory is a reasonable possibility. German WW1 victory after the Americans have entered the war is not.

That was, in fact, a good reason why attacking was a sensible thing to do. With the United States in the war, the Triple Entente is getting stronger every day; if Germany is to break its power it needs to do so now, before there are so many Americans on the Western Front that victory was impossible.

As it happens, as OTL shows us, even then it was too late.

Also: the proposed German peace terms would be lovely, but aren't going to happen. They're going to want reparations after suffering such enormous economic damage, and the Triple Entente will refuse to give reparations. And the idea of Germany willingly giving up Alsace-Lorraine in a scenario when it's doing fairly well is… optimistic. I find it inconceivable that by 1917 either side in WW1 is prepared to offer the other side terms that the other side could possibly accept short of total defeat.

 

[Catspoke]

I agree if the Allies have the political will to continue to build up, risk hundreds of thousands of additional casualties, they have to win in 1919.

I guess what the Germans are hoping with such offers is that, with war weary countries, if that the liberation of France and Belgium can be achieved and Alcase Lorraine won via negotiation that these countries can't convince their people to go over the top, and fight and die to gain more than this?

If Britain gains her colonies, ensures the security of Belgium and France peacefully, is it worth a few hundred thousand dead?

 

[deathscompanion1]

Appeal to Wilson's ego. Offer for him to come and help bring about a just peace for all. Shouldn't be too hard to get him pissed at the Entente for dragging their feet.

 

[M79]

I'm not sure the Allies will listen at this point, but tickling Wilson's ego might help. The Germans would also want to open with terms just plausible enough to encourage negotiations but not dissuade their own public, so perhaps as an opening offer:

-Recognize German annexation of Luxembourg
-Recognize German authority in Alsace-Lorraine but permit plebiscite under certain conditions
-German East Africa remains German, all other African colonies to Britain and all Asian colonies to France
-Germany to annex Belgian territory east of the Meuse
-Immediate cessation of hostilities during negotiations
-Status Quo Antebellum for Ottomans minus Palestinean Mandate for UK
-Belgian gains to be recognized
-Greece and Romania to be returned to their prior governments
-Serbia to be annexed to Austria-Hungary
-Trento to be allowed a plebiscite to determine its fate
-Trieste to be allowed a plebiscite to determine its fate
-Germany to pay reparations to Belgium for violating her neutrality

 

[Uruk]

I'm not sure the Allies will listen at this point, but tickling Wilson's ego might help. The Germans would also want to open with terms just plausible enough to encourage negotiations but not dissuade their own public, so perhaps as an opening offer:

-Recognize German annexation of Luxembourg
-Recognize German authority in Alsace-Lorraine but permit plebiscite under certain conditions
-German East Africa remains German, all other African colonies to Britain and all Asian colonies to France
-Germany to annex Belgian territory east of the Meuse
-Immediate cessation of hostilities during negotiations
-Status Quo Antebellum for Ottomans minus Palestinean Mandate for UK
-Belgian gains to be recognized
-Greece and Romania to be returned to their prior governments
-Serbia to be annexed to Austria-Hungary
-Trento to be allowed a plebiscite to determine its fate
-Trieste to be allowed a plebiscite to determine its fate
-Germany to pay reparations to Belgium for violating her neutrality

Why in Gods name would the entente even consider negotioating on these terms? Just think of the furor among the public as it becomes public that the politicians are about to sell out Serbia and Belgium the very reason for the war.

 

[M79]

Why in Gods name would the entente even consider negotioating on these terms? Just think of the furor among the public as it becomes public that the politicians are about to sell out Serbia and Belgium the very reason for the war.

Because it's negotiation, these are not the terms they are going to want and if they come back it will be with terms more harsh than what they might accept. If the war drags on with no end in sight and German subs keep decimating marine shipping it makes the world a miserable place, especially for the UK. Every week more Allied dead are coming home and the Germans are defending their turf. Until massed tank breakouts are possible who gains? Besides Wilson wants a "war for democracy" and this could be a springboard to that.

 

[lukedalton]

Because it's negotiation, these are not the terms they are going to want and if they come back it will be with terms more harsh than what they might accept. If the war drags on with no end in sight and German subs keep decimating marine shipping it makes the world a miserable place, especially for the UK. Every week more Allied dead are coming home and the Germans are defending their turf. Until massed tank breakouts are possible who gains? Besides Wilson wants a "war for democracy" and this could be a springboard to that.

Unfortunely in the South Italy is going to kick severly A-H ass and with the Hasbourg out of the war the allies can attack from the South so the German are not in any position to even attempt to ask this kind of demand.

 

[Perfidious Albion]

To M79:

But it is still obviously clear that the situation is constantly improving for the Triple Entente and constantly getting worse for the Central Powers. The Central Powers were already near collapse, and with the United States to fund them Britain and France are not near collapse. Take away the 1918 offensives and the Central Powers last longer than they did IOTL, but but they still don't have the industrial capacity to achieve even an unfavourable draw in a total war in which the USA is on the other side.

Germany is utterly incapable of retaining its colonies in the face of British naval power alone, let alone American naval power too. Britain will refuse to give them and Germany can do nothing to change this outcome.

France will not recognise a German Alsace-Lorraine for the sake of a slightly earlier peace when it can win the war and then get both Alsace-Lorraine and enough reparations from the Germans to pay for any damage done. The longer the war goes on, the more reparations the French will get.

And since Britain entered the war (or rather, claims that it did) because of Belgium… Britain probably won't recognise any German gains against Belgium even if it is forced from the Continent as in the Second World War.

I reiterate:

1. By 1917, neither side is politically capable of giving terms that the other side will accept.
2. Once the United States of America has entered the war, Germany's defeat is certain, due to sheer industrial and financial disadvantage and due to the blockade.

 

[Catspoke]

In terms of an armistice, the evacuation of Belgium and France without demolitions and a suspension of submarine warfare is enough. Both sides get something from this, Belgium and France get their whole countries back right away with no additional damage and no additional casualties. Britain no longer has to deal with merchant losses.

Germany gets to withdraw her armies unmolested to more easily defended lines while still holding her gains in the east. Germany also knows once active fighting stops it can be hard politically to resume it.

As far as a peace: Alsace Lorraine has to be up for negotiation. The Allies have a military advantage and you have to give them a reason to quit on this advantage. However this works out, The French get it with economic concessions, a joint condominium, the French have to get something.

Britain has to get the German colonies (basically OTL). Britain can't risk submarine bases all over the world in the next war. The German colonies aren't worth much (Lithuania is worth way more than all of them together) so easy for the Germans to give up.

Italy, gets Trieste, just enough to get her to quit the war without too much complaining. Britain, France and USA are really deciding things.

Serbia, does anyone really care, the Russians are no longer a factor, if Italy gets Albania she might not care if Serbia is a rump state.

Turkey, Britain is going to get Palestine, southern and central Iraq, improving security of the Suez and Persian gulf oil, Turkey will make up for that with parts of Russia.

The USA hasn't done much yet, but has to be happy her entry in the war has secured France, Britain and freedom of the seas, even though many of Wilsons lofty ideals are not realized.

-----------------------------------------
This takes a smarter Germany, not Ludendorf but some people like the crown princes of Germany and Bavaria, certianly the Austrians knew things were pretty shaky, even at the beginning of 1918.

 

[Glenn239]

The allies decline any such German offers and wait for 1919, which will bring with it the tanks and the Americans. At which point it's all over for the Germans - it's the Russian steamroller all over again, only with slightly better leadership and crushing material superiority.

One slight problem. This guy,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Points

Was commander in chief of the American army, and he wasn't taking orders from the British or French.

 

[Perfidious Albion]

[snip]

This relies on the assumption that France, the United States and the United Kingdom will accept a negotiated peace when they can instead obtain complete victory very shortly. They are in a superior position and they can simply continue and win, and once they have won they can extract money from Germany to pay for their losses and damages. I'm not sure why you seem to think that the Entente powers desire peace so much that they would be willing to give up victory for it.

 

[deathscompanion1]

This relies on the assumption that France, the United States and the United Kingdom will accept a negotiated peace when they can instead obtain complete victory very shortly. They are in a superior position and they can simply continue and win, and once they have won they can extract money from Germany to pay for their losses and damages. I'm not sure why you seem to think that the Entente powers desire peace so much that they would be willing to give up victory for it.

Because the Americans are essential for said victory and if offered the restoration and security of democracy in the West then they frankly will be more than happy compared with spending blood and treasure fighting for Imperialism.


If Germany was serious and had a reality check then it would be relatively easy to talk directly to the Americans simultaneously and make some initial promises and stroke Wilson's ego until he thinking he is a diplomatic master strongarms the entente into accepting an armistice.

The Americans are key, easiest to satisfy, essential to the continuation of the war, detached from the other allies. They are the most likely to accept any reasonable German armistice and then once the guns stop its up to the British and French to restart them. Not a popular option.

 

[Falecius]

I should note that Trieste won't be up for negotiations in any shape or form whatsoever as long as a Hapsburg Dual Monarchy remains in existence.

 

[Faeelin]

If Germany was serious and had a reality check then it would be relatively easy to talk directly to the Americans simultaneously and make some initial promises and stroke Wilson's ego until he thinking he is a diplomatic master strongarms the entente into accepting an armistice.

When I think of "willing to negotiate with Americans to promote democracy," the German military junta that ran the Kaiserreich by this point doesn't seem realistic.

 

[deathscompanion1]

When I think of "willing to negotiate with Americans to promote democracy," the German military junta that ran the Kaiserreich by this point doesn't seem realistic.

They don't have to mean it, just make the right noises during the armistice period. They have to look good, the allies have to be good or the Americans will get pissed off.

And if played right they could make the point that elections etc come secondary to bread so they can't do anything until the blockade is lifted.

 

[Perfidious Albion]

I would like to ask: Do you genuinely think that Woodrow Wilson would think it a politically good idea to make the controversial decision to enter a war, justifying it with lots of grand rhetoric about how essential it is to fight 'evil tyranny' and to 'protect democracy'… and then change his mind and start negotiating with the alleged 'evil tyranny'?

My answer is a 'no'. He wouldn't look like a diplomatic master, he'd look like an idiot—and he would know that very well. It isn't politically sensible to boldly commit to one course of action against a great deal of opposition, then change your mind and turn to the complete opposite.

Germany is not going to get out of this war unpunished once the USA has entered the war. To suggest that the Germans would offer a peace acceptable to the Americans is either (as Faeelin said) to grossly misunderstand the political realities in the German Empire (which make such conciliatory terms utterly, utterly unacceptable) or to grossly misunderstand the political realities in the United States.

Let me suggest Wilson's likely peace terms:

1. Germany totally relinquishes all its gains in the west
2. Germany totally relinquishes all its gains in the east to become independent nations (Wilsonian ideas of national self-determination)
3. Germany gives up Alsace-Lorraine to France, which is the state the majority of Alsace-Lorraine wants to be part of (self-determination strikes again!)
4. Austria-Hungary has to give so much autonomy to its national minorities that it is effectively no longer an actual polity (and again!)
5. Germany pays some reparations, though not very heavy ones, to the countries it has invaded

Let me suggest the German Empire's likely answer:

1. "No."

There is a very good reason why the default idea for how to make the Central Powers win the First World War is to avoid unrestricted submarine warfare.