Negotiated End to WW1

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

Based on this thread:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=177937
I wanted to have a discussion about what would happen after the war if the following peace, a peace of exhaustion, was signed.
POD: Romania doesn't enter the war in 1916, which means General Falkenhayn keeps his position as head of the German army. This is crucial, as he was not in favor of unrestricted submarine warfare, a military dictatorship and the economic plan of Hindenburg (which destroyed the German economy through mismanagement), and wanted peace in 1917 by negotiation.

Because he opposes unrestricted submarine warfare, he is able to find support from the German Kaiser and Chancellor, both of whom were strong-armed into agreement by Ludendorff OTL. Consequently the Zimmermann note is never sent and the US does not enter the war. Loans are cut off to the Entente as per OTL, but no liberty loans are raised to replace them. Britain maintains a slightly muted war effort, but her allies Russia, France, and Italy are dependent on British loans for their war efforts, which have dried up entirely. Without collateral and their bonds being rated as junk, there is little money coming in except through direct taxation, which can only be raised slightly without causing revolution.

After April 1917 the French war effort has wound down, both because of the mutinies, which here are much harder to placate without the Americans and morale boost them brought, as well as an inability to purchase food from the US and finance minor attacks to wear down the Germans (OTL after the Nivelle offensive the French attacked around Verdun very successfully, which boosted morale and hurt the Germans'. Also the successful Petain version of the Chemin des Dames cannot occur due to lack of funds and willingness of the French soldier to fight).

The Russian provisional government bows out of the war early, after the October Revolution, because of no Americans or loans, which causes Romania to occupy and annex Bessarbia. The Ottomans still make later efforts to occupy the Caucasus region as Russia falls into civil war.

Italy is attack at Caporetto as per OTL, though slightly earlier, which devastates them. However, with Russia knocked out of the war early, no Americans, and no loans, the Italian socialists and anti-war protestors revolt, causing the government to ask for a cease fire. This topples the French government, which reforms under Joseph Caillaux, who starts negotiations with the Germans. The British join in, as do the Italians.
The negotiations conclude under the threat of German offensive.

In the West the Germans avoid reparations for France and Britain, but have to pay Belgium. They also annex Luxembourg and get trade concessions with Belgium. There are minor border adjustments on the Franco-German border in Germany's favor. Germany loses her colonies and has some limits to her navy. Italy loses minor territories to make the Austrian border more defensible. Italy also pays minor reparations for the war. Rump Serbia is united with Montenegro under the pro-Austrian Obrenovic's, who were deposed in 1903. In the East the Germans get Poland (still in negotiations with Austria-Hungary over the role each will play in that country)and the Baltic area. AH doesn't ask for anything, just food from Russia. The Bulgarians get to keep their conquests. Romania gets to keep Bessarbia. The Ottomans lose everything base on the December 1917 front line with the Brits. They try to take the Caucasus to compensate in 1918.

Important notes: there is no Brest-Litovsk, though the Russian Provisional government is fighting the Bolsheviks. There is no Bread Peace with the Ukrainians, which means the AHs are more stable in Galicia, having avoiding pissing off the Poles. AH is more stable than 1918 OTL, but the Hungarians and Austrians have the Ausgleich negotiations coming up and the Hungarians have large demands, including a separate army, which Kaiser Karl will not agree to. There are large numbers of returning to AH that have been exposed to Communism and are angry. Here they will not be asked to fight again, which pushed them over the edge, but in Hungary they have demands of nobility and are plotting assassinations of important figures like Tisza.

There is major inflation in Germany and AH, though not nearly as bad as the 1920's OTL version. A global depression has occurred as a result of the break down in trade and the consumer economy being turned into war economies in Europe. Germany has large gold reserves and is owed money by her allies, but they can't really pay and Germany owes the Netherlands for loans and trade. The nation never goes through the dictatorship of Hindenburg and Ludendorff, both of whom are lionized and claim they could have won total victory. Political violence does occur, but it is limited. A broad section of society wants the Kaiser replaced with the Crown Prince. Many want a constitution with limited authority for the monarch.

France is completely broke and owes major money to the US. This is backed by collateral, but with a devastated country, no reparations, and no ability to raise further loans France is economically crippled. Taxation can only provide so much money, which further exacerbates tensions in the country. Large scale death and what all view as a loss causes political violence verging on civil war. Caillaux is assassinated in 1918.

Italy is also smashed, having gained nothing but civil unrest, which tumbles into civil war, as angry soldiers and civilians take out their rage on their leaders.

AH is devastated with communists planning violence, inflation and debt sap the economy, various national groups have demands for the peace, and all sides have weapons and trained soldiers to fight for them. The Czechs are in a bad place due to the behavior of their soldiers during the war and the Czech legion, meaning many of their potential soldiers/leaders are exiled.

Russia is in civil war, but the Germans are not involved yet, just providing captured Russian weapons and munitions to the Whites. Britain is aiding them too. Fighting in the Baltics is starting, as returning Baltic soldiers, who were fighting for Russia, try to return home. Finland has also revolted and is now independent, but is fighting a civil war aided by the Germans. The Ottomans invade the Caucasus in May with the army of Islam.

Britain is also massively in debt, mainly to the US, as she took out loans for her allies to get them a lower borrowing rate, but they are unable to pay these loans back. Angry soldiers are returning and violence in India and Ireland are picking up.

With this scenario how will the peace play out???
 
With this scenario how will the peace play out???

At a quick guess? Badly.

The big winner is the USA, being owed money by just about everybody. Germany and Britain get out well enough, though both will be busy for the foreseeable future with internal matters.

Germany will have a hell of a time keeping it's new conquests under control, not to mention the inevitable mess that's the Russian Civil War and Austria-Hungary. Britain is comparatively better off, with less to police, but it's going to face flak for ... well, not winning the war. The government can talk all it wants about 'peace with honour', but the Central Powers are the only ones that can point and say: 'this is what we got, we won'.

I doubt either will collapse or even face major problems internally. It'll blow over, but it would be a tough few years.

Austria-Hungary is a toss-up. If Germany continues to support it, it'll probably come out of the inevitable showdown stronger. If Germany doesn't support it ... it devolves into a clusterfuck of epic proportions that might end up with the Empire fragmenting.

Italy might go socialist and become the first actual socialist state in Europe. Things got pretty messy OTL, when they were unequivocally on the winning team. Or they might wind up on the opposite end of the spectrum, a military junta in power. Either way, the centre cannot hold.

France is the big loser in your scenario. Massive casualties, massive damage and ... territorial loss (not to mention having to concede Elsass-Lothringen to Germany). This is pretty much the end of France as a Great Power. It's possible it might stabilize, but the Republic wasn't all that stable OTL so ... I'd say they wind up a German client (provided the Germans are savvy enough to help the French) or a general non-factor otherwise. After all, France hasn't won a proper war (defined as a serious European War) in the better part of a century and lost every time it went up against Germany (all of two times).

Russia is a mess I'm not familiar enough to get into. With an earlier peace it's likely they're more stable and the Reds weaker, but it's still a mess. Equipment alone won't help that much, OTL the Whites got a lot of gear (which the Soviets subsequently used against Poland after the Civil War). If Germany tosses Austria to the wolves and doesn't even consider helping France, it might stabilize things in Russia, but is it worth the cost?
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
I think a general agreement of a return to 1914 borders in the West would be most logical. France wouldn't agree to German expansion. Also Germany would instead get some land from Russia (a Polish puppet state and Kurland?) as well as a chief position in the negotiations over the fate of Austria- Hungary (Anschluss possible).
 
I think a general agreement of a return to 1914 borders in the West would be most logical. France wouldn't agree to German expansion. Also Germany would instead get some land from Russia (a Polish puppet state and Kurland?) as well as a chief position in the negotiations over the fate of Austria- Hungary (Anschluss possible).

If the annexations in the west are restricted to Luxemburg, it might get through, given that the war ended with the threat of a German offensive. Generally, though, Status-quo-ante in the west, vassal states in the east and possibly some colonies back is a huge success for Germany and a great defeat for the Entente.

Considering AH of course everything is possible. I tend to believe that the Empire will partition - and that the Germans rather than keeping it alive organize its partition, taking large parts for themselves and laying the fundamental for an alliance with Italy and the then hopefully more stable Balkan states.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
If the annexations in the west are restricted to Luxemburg, it might get through, given that the war ended with the threat of a German offensive. Generally, though, Status-quo-ante in the west, vassal states in the east and possibly some colonies back is a huge success for Germany and a great defeat for the Entente.

Considering AH of course everything is possible. I tend to believe that the Empire will partition - and that the Germans rather than keeping it alive organize its partition, taking large parts for themselves and laying the fundamental for an alliance with Italy and the then hopefully more stable Balkan states.
Yes, Germany would win, but the French can still brag they didn't lose an inch of land and annexed German colonies. Win-win situation.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
If the annexations in the west are restricted to Luxemburg, it might get through, given that the war ended with the threat of a German offensive. Generally, though, Status-quo-ante in the west, vassal states in the east and possibly some colonies back is a huge success for Germany and a great defeat for the Entente.

Considering AH of course everything is possible. I tend to believe that the Empire will partition - and that the Germans rather than keeping it alive organize its partition, taking large parts for themselves and laying the fundamental for an alliance with Italy and the then hopefully more stable Balkan states.

Germany will pop the Habsburg up rather than partition them. To annex Austria and Bohemia would give the German internal trouble, when we see a political shift toward the Catholics, and would weaken Prussias dominant position in the Empire. So Germany won't push a annexion of Austria-Bohemia, through if AH collapse they will likely have no choice other than doing so because of popular support for it.
 
As long as Germany doesn't demand too much in the west, this is plausiable. However, I seriously doubt the Germans would do any better than the Entente did in OTL with regards to forming a lasting peace. The Balkans in particular, are unsolvable for anyone, let alone the Second Reich.

It's perfectly possible that France/Italy/Russia form another alliance in the 1930s and that would lead ultimately into World War II (the outcome, I know would be fairly obvious, but it could get very dicey for the Germans if the British and Americans decide to help the New Entente).
 
I think that Germany will not afford to have Austria-Hungary being imploded for a WHILE. Considering that Germany is being dominated by the Protestants and the Protestants had a suspicion of a Catholic-dominated Germany. Austria's integration will add more Catholics in Germany and may decrease the Protestants into a plurality. I think the 1914 borders will be retained with some gains in eastern part from Russia.
 
At a quick guess? Badly.

The big winner is the USA, being owed money by just about everybody.

What happens when the US treasury refuses to back more loans? JP Morgan and the rest were asking for this for a very good reason. Short answer is without more US loans and by extension more US sales what exactly do you think is going to happen to the US economy?

The short answer is a the US economy implodes in late 1917 or 1918. A number of banks that hold lots of British and French notes are going to get taken down. Factories close due to lack of foreign orders, etc. The post war recession arrives early for the US. Problem is there is no wave of dough boys with lots of army wages to fuel a wave of consumer spending. The banks are screwed because they are holding a lot of foreign debt instruments that many view as toxic; at least till its clear if London and Paris are going to pay those debts. So in the short term the banks won't be doing any loans.

So the US faces a couple of year long recession / depression before recovery in the early 1920's. The depth of the recovery will depend on what goes on with world trade.

So things are not all roses in the US but they are hardly as bad as found in Europe. Things get ugly if France defaults though.

Michael
 
So we are in the end of 1917...

Germany loses her colonies and has some limits to her navy.

I doubt that. We have a negotiated peace, but still in my eyes basically a CP-victory.
I fear a rather classical imperialistic reshuffling of colonies. If Britain forces Germany to give up all or most colonies, Germany might be enticed to pressure compensation out of France.

Now, a few hints:

- Germany might get back at least the French portions of Togo and Cameroon, so there would be minor adjustments in favour of Britain left

- Germany might try to get the proctectorate over French-Marocco and maybe another site for a base in West-Africa

- remember: Lettow-Vorbeck would still be fighting in (around) DOA, so there might be place for some sort of compromise

- Germany would be very eager to get its only "settling" colony back, but negotiating with South Africa would probably prove difficult. If enough money flows, maybe a joint solution could be found?

- Another adversary too far away to impress would be Japan, so I deem Tsingtao to be lost; or on the other hand Japan might rather return it to Germany than to China.

I agree that Germany will not keep everything it had in 1914.

Concerning the HSF, the most curbing of naval expansion will be the inability to fund it...

Anything else would be...paper.
 

Deleted member 1487

What happens when the US treasury refuses to back more loans? JP Morgan and the rest were asking for this for a very good reason. Short answer is without more US loans and by extension more US sales what exactly do you think is going to happen to the US economy?

The short answer is a the US economy implodes in late 1917 or 1918. A number of banks that hold lots of British and French notes are going to get taken down. Factories close due to lack of foreign orders, etc. The post war recession arrives early for the US. Problem is there is no wave of dough boys with lots of army wages to fuel a wave of consumer spending. The banks are screwed because they are holding a lot of foreign debt instruments that many view as toxic; at least till its clear if London and Paris are going to pay those debts. So in the short term the banks won't be doing any loans.

So the US faces a couple of year long recession / depression before recovery in the early 1920's. The depth of the recovery will depend on what goes on with world trade.

So things are not all roses in the US but they are hardly as bad as found in Europe. Things get ugly if France defaults though.

Michael

Hew Strachan presents the issues as Wilson realizing what was coming, but wanting to cut off loans before the US economy became even more dependent. It seems he was willing to take the short term hit to the economy to avoid a major one after US industry became even more addicted to war profits. As Mikestone mentioned in the other thread the US loaned only $2.2 Billion before they entered the war, leaving the majority of the +$9 Billion after the declaration of war by the US off the books ITTL. So the US won't have as drastic of effects as you outlined here, as the majority of the purchases were by this point (according to Mikestone again, though IIRC this is also what Strachan states in his book) food and cotton, with other incidentals occurring as well. Actual machined goods only really started appearing after 1917 (though unfilled shell casings and explosives were shipped before).

Yes those banks, private individuals and institutions holding French, Russian, Italian, and British bank notes and bonds will be SOL. They will have made a bad investment that hurts the US economy to a degree, but I doubt it will be much more than a mild recession. There is collateral for the defaulting British and French loans, so the banks won't lose their shirts because of those loans.

Now Germany, despite its large internal debt (government debt to private individuals) will find that these private individuals (industrialists and the like) will have lots of money from their war profits and will be hungry for American raw materials. So I don't know if the slump in orders will be all that bad once Germany can purchase from the US again.
 
It's perfectly possible that France/Italy/Russia form another alliance in the 1930s and that would lead ultimately into World War II (the outcome, I know would be fairly obvious, but it could get very dicey for the Germans if the British and Americans decide to help the New Entente).

Well, France and Italy have both been permanently struck down to the regional power status, meaning you would have to make the Russinas do all the heavy lifting (assuming they have a Stalinesque industrialisation crash course; otherwise they would be a bit less screwed as their New Entente allies). Heck, even with British support they are unlikely to make *WWII into anything less then a one-sided war. If the Americans jump in, then you get a very interesting war, though American support for the New Entente is about as likely as Hitler rising to power in ITTL Germany.

On the other hand, a WWII analogue could be butterflied away alltogether, seeing how Italy, France and Russia have much more internal problems to deal with then Interbellum Germany had.
 
Last edited:
Germany ... has some limits to her navy.
I don't see Germany accepting naval limitations in a negotiated peace unless they are part of more general limits; in essence, something similar to the Washington Naval Treaty, except between Germany and Britain instead. An agreement like that would probably be a boon to Anglo-German relations by putting an end to the naval arms race that did so much damage to relations between the two states.
 

Deleted member 1487

I don't see Germany accepting naval limitations in a negotiated peace unless they are part of more general limits; in essence, something similar to the Washington Naval Treaty, except between Germany and Britain instead. An agreement like that would probably be a boon to Anglo-German relations by putting an end to the naval arms race that did so much damage to relations between the two states.

The limit I imagine would be a 2:3 with Britain, meaning Britain gets to keep its superiority, which is a ratio Germany was shooting for in 1912 and tried to negotiate, but was rejected by Britain. Here it would be to placate Britain, but as Germany is here unable to afford to expand her navy for years, it would be desirable to placate Britain.
 
A broad section of society wants the Kaiser replaced with the Crown Prince.

How do you get to this idea? I do not remember the Crown Prince being that particularly popular. Which part of the political spectre are you alluding to?
He had good connections to Falkenhayn, though, who IIRC, leads Germany to victory in your scenario.

Many want a constitution with limited authority for the monarch.

Definitely, and I would say that actually only minor changes to the Constition would have been necessary.
I deem good chances for that with two decades of a lame-duck-Wilhelm II. He had been damaged politically before 1914 and completely paralyzed during the war. Taking political power away from him would be a blessing in disguise, restricting him to what he could do best, i.e. looking good in a wide array of spectacular uniforms.

Germany will have a hell of a time keeping it's new conquests under control, not to mention the inevitable mess that's the Russian Civil War and Austria-Hungary. Britain is comparatively better off, with less to police

If I remember Wiking's scenario correctly, there will not be so many conquest for Germany. Minor border changes in France and Belgium (Briey? Liege?) are not that much of a challenge considering both have been occupied by Germany since 1914 already. Luxemburg even less so.

Poland and the Baltics should become puppets, so the dirty work will be done mainly by natives.

Britain on the other hand will feel the strain of over-extension just as in OTL in decades to come. Besides, they will be in a strategic dilemma. I doubt that there would be much confidence in either French or American support in future conflicts. Thus, would Britain maybe continue as Japan's ally? Or search for a detente with Germany?

Overall, European diplomacy will have to find a new basis, with two powers (UK,GE), in the long run three, undeniably being on a different power level than the remaining one.


as well as a chief position in the negotiations over the fate of Austria- Hungary (Anschluss possible).

Which negotiations over the fate of Austria-Hungary? In this scenario AH is an intact and victorious state, though, like everybody else, damaged by the strain of war. Yet, an Anschluss in such a situation is wishful thinking of the Alldeutsche lunatic fringe. Overall, considering this scenario, I am quite confident that even Karl I. can things in Austria-Hungary enough under control to keep the monarchy meddling on and maybe slowly transform into something workable.

Yes, Germany would win, but the French can still brag they didn't lose an inch of land and annexed German colonies. Win-win situation.

I am not sure if they would get off that lightly. It would not be a dictated peace, but it would be clear that France has lost this war.

I seriously doubt the Germans would do any better than the Entente did in OTL with regards to forming a lasting peace.

Indeed. And never overestimate the Reich's diplomatic abilities. Never.

(WW2*) could get very dicey for the Germans if the British and Americans decide to help the New Entente.

But why should the USA do that in such a scenario, esp. if Germany is on
the defensive? Also bear in mind that the outcome of the scenario will probably set several of the Entente powers on a communist or authoritarian course.

They will be in splendid neutrality again and continue to be the richest country on Earth.
 
On the other hand, a WWII analogue could be butterflied away alltogether, seeing how Italy, France and Russia have much more internal problems to deal with then Interbellum Germany had.

Not going to happen sadly. Butterflying WWII is impossible IMO without getting rid of the first war as well or giving one of the sides an absurdly good peace. The only likely scenario apart from an Italy/France/Russia vs Germany/Austria/puppets war is Britain/USA/Russia/Japan vs. Germany/most of Europe.

A German victory in World War I would actually make WW2 more likely; two rotting empires (Austria and Turkey) would still be clinging to life, while the rise of communist groups in Italy, France and Russia would leave Germany still encircled by enemies. Germany would probably still defeat the three communist states but if it gets too greedy and tries to hold onto too much, then the Empire might start to fall apart in the 1930s from overstretch.
 
The limit I imagine would be a 2:3 with Britain, meaning Britain gets to keep its superiority, which is a ratio Germany was shooting for in 1912 and tried to negotiate, but was rejected by Britain. Here it would be to placate Britain, but as Germany is here unable to afford to expand her navy for years, it would be desirable to placate Britain.
Something like that should work reasonably well. The fact that there was never any sort of Anglo-German pre-WWI naval agreement in OTL always struck me as one of the bigger diplomatic failures of the Germans.
 
Not going to happen sadly. Butterflying WWII is impossible IMO without getting rid of the first war as well or giving one of the sides an absurdly good peace. The only likely scenario apart from an Italy/France/Russia vs Germany/Austria/puppets war is Britain/USA/Russia/Japan vs. Germany/most of Europe.

A German victory in World War I would actually make WW2 more likely; two rotting empires (Austria and Turkey) would still be clinging to life, while the rise of communist groups in Italy, France and Russia would leave Germany still encircled by enemies. Germany would probably still defeat the three communist states but if it gets too greedy and tries to hold onto too much, then the Empire might start to fall apart in the 1930s from overstretch.


That so? Italy, Russia and France vs. Germany and alles doesn't really sound like an actual World War to me. And I don't think it has a high probability of occuring, either.

Even a victorious France was reluctant to go to war with a defeated Germany; only with the British on their side they even considered it.
How come a defeated France arrives at the conclusion that they can actually win this time around? Don't you think two lost and devastating wars in less than half a century against a foe that only gets stronger while you are getting weaker is tad bit detrimental to the fool notion of trying it for a third time?

And what's Italy supposed to do in such a war? Throw mean looks from the sidelines before they get overrun?

That leaves Russia. They might try something, about two to three decades after the war. But until then the formerly rotting Empires that are AH and the Ottomans will either be dead and replaced or stabilized. Either way, Russia has to face Germany and all her vassals/puppets more or less alone.
That's if Russia recovers in the same manner they did OTL. Wouldn't bet on it though, as Germany will probably support the Whites. So I don't really see a Russia that's stronger than IOTL.

As for your second option, i.e. Britain, USA, Japan and Russia vs Germany and allies... Why? How? I really don't see why that should happen. At all. Seriously, what do the US stand to gain from this venture? Or Japan, for that matter? How come Japan and the US resolve their conflicts for something they aren't even interested in? Why would Britain want to replace one continental hegemon with one that's communist?
 
I could see Luxembourg being annexed, but no other permanent border adjustments in the west. There may be parts of France and Belgium occupied (and likely plundered) by Germany for say 2 years post treaty.

As for the naval aspect one possibility is that all powers involved agree to a temporary moratorium (2 or 3 yrs) on new naval construction incl. submarines during which there will be naval limitation talks. This would lock in a huge RN advantage in surface warships in the near term.
 
I don't see Germany accept the loss of their colonies either.

Yes negotiating with SA might be difficult, but on the other hand not getting back South west africa would have to be compensated in one way or another.

With their New Guinea colony i could see them try to get a deal with the dutch, in exchange for lessing of the debts (although i doubt if the dutch would go for it).
 
Top