More Blockade Runner Subs in WW1, USA CP?

What if there were more blockade runner subs in the first world war? Would increased trade have prevented American economy from being so one sided in favor of the entente? OTL there were actually plans to build blockade runners in American harbors. These could come true, either for the Germans or for American businessmen looking to trade with a blockaded nation. The blockade runners also offer an opportunity for tension between England and America, as the Americans could be proud of their defense of "free trade" and the British consider them to be violating maritime law. Could investment in blockade runners, on either side of the Atlantic, tip America from the entente to the central powers? Would it work with other factors to achieve it?
Also, here is an article about one of the "merchant submarines":
http://www.digplanet.com/wiki/German_submarine_Deutschland
 
We had a couple of discussions on here, one of which was that the sister ship to the Deutschland merchant ship (Bremen?) was not lost which had the arrangements for making more subs in the USA.

If Germany can avoid unrestricted submarine warfare and have 20 or so such subs toiling between the USA and Germany it could bring in a supply of strategic industrial supplies in 1917. Nickel, Rubber, Copper etc useful in keeping the factories going.

Of course if Germany can just avoid unrestricted submarine warfare and/or the Zimmerman telegram the USA would still be neutral and there would always be a hole in the blockade. The merchant subs are just a bonus.
 
I have often wondered that if war was delayed some years in Europe, it was obvious that the naval race with Britain was lost, diesel technology improves, if the Germans would figure out in peacetime that merchants subs would be handy for resupplying colonies, communications, blockade running etc, and subsidize such boats for the merchant service.
 
We had a couple of discussions on here, one of which was that the sister ship to the Deutschland merchant ship (Bremen?) was not lost which had the arrangements for making more subs in the USA.

If Germany can avoid unrestricted submarine warfare and have 20 or so such subs toiling between the USA and Germany it could bring in a supply of strategic industrial supplies in 1917. Nickel, Rubber, Copper etc useful in keeping the factories going.

Of course if Germany can just avoid unrestricted submarine warfare and/or the Zimmerman telegram the USA would still be neutral and there would always be a hole in the blockade. The merchant subs are just a bonus.

But would it be enough to offset the trade balance? And would it have been a potential flashpoint for conflict to break out with England? Especially if some rich and powerful men own these subs and aren't keen to have a pro-British president(Wilson) in office. Would meeting German traders humanize the "Huns" and make Americans more sympathetic to their plight? The crew of the OTL blockade runner were treated like celebrities, what would happen with subs docking all the time?
 

Driftless

Donor
Another point to consider with the blockade was the impact on food imports. There was an estimated 400,000 - 700,000 Germans who perished from the effects of starvation during the war, mostly due to the blockade.

You would need a very large fleet of submarines to significantly impact the blocked food & medical supplies.
 
Another point to consider with the blockade was the impact on food imports. There was an estimated 400,000 - 700,000 Germans who perished from the effects of starvation during the war, mostly due to the blockade.

You would need a very large fleet of submarines to significantly impact the blocked food & medical supplies.


But if we are assuming continued US neutrality, the food blockade won't be as tight.

US belligerency meant that the Northern Neutrals' imports (which were largely from there) could be controlled at source. As a result, in 1917/18 they dropped to less than 10% of the 1915/16 figure (see Stevenson 1914-18, p455). If that reduction doesn't happen, it will help Germany far more than a few merchant subs.
 
But if we are assuming continued US neutrality, the food blockade won't be as tight.

US belligerency meant that the Northern Neutrals' imports (which were largely from there) could be controlled at source. As a result, in 1917/18 they dropped to less than 10% of the 1915/16 figure (see Stevenson 1914-18, p455). If that reduction doesn't happen, it will help Germany far more than a few merchant subs.

It was pretty bad in the "turnip winter" of 1916-17 when the U.S was still neutral, so I don't think it was solely due to the DOW.
 
It was pretty bad in the "turnip winter" of 1916-17 when the U.S was still neutral, so I don't think it was solely due to the DOW.

Not great, but there's a difference between bad and very bad.

Incidentally, according to Offer, even OTL the German death rate in 1918 had only risen back to what it was in 1900. Obviously not good - twenty years of medical progress at least temporarily reversed - but hardly the sort of thing that causes a great power to collapse.
The food blockade made life unpleasant for Germany - esp for the poorer quarters of its towns - but it wasn't going to bring about her defeat her defeat in any foreseeable future. Shortage of things like rubber and lubricating oil was a bigger problem, but there the merchant subs might indeed have brought in useful quantities. They could also have helped another way, by carrying despatches which the Allies could not intercept and decode.
 
If the USA is kept more neutral, then the British blockade may suffer. In OTL they were not too fond of the blocking of neutrals to the pre war level. Here it may force the British to lift that part of the Blockade and that would help Germany.

It may be a long shot, but with continued communication from 1914 and onward that is Imo possible. Esp. as the Entente has not the information monopol of OTL. So that it could print whatever slander, lie and fact it wished. Or print not...
 
I have long thought that the cessation of trade between Germany and USA due to the British blockade was a significant if not crucial factor in the US actions in WW1. The US learned to do without the products that Germany produced such as industrial dyes and chemicals over a few years so that by 1917 there was nobody significant in the US who had much to lose by the DoW.

If Germany had kept up a trickle of trade in high value items such as dyes and chemicals for strategic materials then there would have been some voices and interests who would have been against both the British blockade and the DoW on Germany. Whether these would have been enough to delay or even prevent US entry into the war I don't know, but it couldn't hurt.
 
By 1917, could Imperial Germany afford to buy foreign goods with gold? ... silver?

Could Germany avoid starvation by importing high-density foods (e.g. meat and cheese) while buying starches, grain and lower-quality calories from the Ukraine?
How aobut simply importing vitamins by submarine?
 
By 1917, could Imperial Germany afford to buy foreign goods with gold? ... silver?

Could Germany avoid starvation by importing high-density foods (e.g. meat and cheese) while buying starches, grain and lower-quality calories from the Ukraine?
How aobut simply importing vitamins by submarine?

You would never be able to make an impact importing food with submarines, it would only be for the highest value industrial products.
 
The important points for continued trade are Imo, that there is still trade going on. So the German product depandand industries may press for more.

And again, the information flow from the CP towards American countries is Imo even more important. In OTL that was quickly cut by the British, by going for the cables. (Again an act that was against the percived rules.)
Because if the Entente/British are not more or less controlling the media, they can not spin the evil hun theme as effective as OTL.

And that may be a major point for the CP. Even if it only pushes the USA towards a less pro-Entente position in terms of money and supplies.
 
I have long thought that the cessation of trade between Germany and USA due to the British blockade was a significant if not crucial factor in the US actions in WW1. The US learned to do without the products that Germany produced such as industrial dyes and chemicals over a few years so that by 1917 there was nobody significant in the US who had much to lose by the DoW.

If Germany had kept up a trickle of trade in high value items such as dyes and chemicals for strategic materials then there would have been some voices and interests who would have been against both the British blockade and the DoW on Germany. Whether these would have been enough to delay or even prevent US entry into the war I don't know, but it couldn't hurt.

Could you give me a link with information about these products and how America did without them? It seems interesting.
 
Top