Negotiated Peace in WW1?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

Assuming the US doesn't enter for whatever reason (let's say that the Zimmerman Telegram is never sent and the Uboot offensive is called off before it brings America in), how would the negotiations have worked?

Both British and French governments were committed to victory dictated on their terms, the later especially after Clemenceau took power in November 1917. Germany was equally committed to peace on their terms. I don't see negotiations being entered into until 1918 at the earliest, but without one side or the other being at a position of weakness and willing to accept what amounts to a loss, negotiations are not going anywhere. Is there any solution to this deadlock that doesn't lead to a collapse into revolution of either France or Germany and leaves all powers somewhat satisfied?
 
What about bringing the US in as the mediator? Assume that Wilson falls down a flight of stairs in 1916 and the much more reasonable President Marshall decides to take up the task.

So Marshall, getting wary of US merchantmen sunk, decides to invite the powers for peace talks in Washington. In addition, Marshall offers the services of the United States in being a neutral mediator in the struggle.

Unexpectedly, it is the small players--Austria Hungary and Italy--that get the ball rolling. AH is close to collapse and after the terrible losses, Italy has been battered to the point of nearly losing the war; the United States offers a plebiscite over South Tirol (or Alto Aidge); A discouraged Italy sees this as the only potential gain for their efforts, a confident Austria sees it as a non-issue concession.

The rest of the powers, recognizing that nations are taking themselves out of the war, are under intensifying pressure to make a peace. Greece is thrown to the Ottoman Empire. The UK and Japan divvie up most of Germany's overseas colonies, while Belgium is halved in size as Germany annexes Luxembourg and Belgian Luxembourg. Germany keeps the Baltic States, but free nations of Ukraine and Poland are established in the East.

France is a holdout and so doesn't gain much at peace talks. The UK and Italy agreeing to a peace deal that keeps Germany from annexing Eastern Europe forces them essentially into a forced peace, although this is cause for bitterness.

In short, Russia clearly loses and no one clearly wins. I'm sure that 20 years later, the deadlock will be revisited once again.
 

Deleted member 1487

What about bringing the US in as the mediator? Assume that Wilson falls down a flight of stairs in 1916 and the much more reasonable President Marshall decides to take up the task.

So Marshall, getting wary of US merchantmen sunk, decides to invite the powers for peace talks in Washington. In addition, Marshall offers the services of the United States in being a neutral mediator in the struggle.

Problem with this is that Wilson tried in 1916 and all he got were ridiculous terms that signaled neither side really wanted to negotiate, especially on on Wilson's terms. He issued his 14 points-esque ideas, which involved Germany giving up Alsace-Lorraine, Belgium, everything in the East, and to dissolve Austria-Hungary. That is a clear, painful loss that the Central Powers could and would not accept, especially given their defensive successes in the field in 1916. The allies had no men on any of the territory that this proposal was to give them, which in German eyes meant that Wilson was just stumping for the Entente (which he was).

But the matter was more complicated than just that. Both sides still would only accept a victory that the other would not even consider, even by 1917-1918.

Unexpectedly, it is the small players--Austria Hungary and Italy--that get the ball rolling. AH is close to collapse and after the terrible losses, Italy has been battered to the point of nearly losing the war; the United States offers a plebiscite over South Tirol (or Alto Aidge); A discouraged Italy sees this as the only potential gain for their efforts, a confident Austria sees it as a non-issue concession.

Again, probably not going to happen that way either. Italy was kept in the war due to a massive recovery and was willing to see the war out once its army had retrained and reequipped. Even without the Americans the Italians were still ready to go, thanks to massive influxes of equipment from the Allies and a new, more competent commander. Austria tried to get the ball rolling in 1916 when Karl took over, but was betrayed by the French who revealed Austria's attempts (Sixtus affair) at a separate peace. They no longer trusted the Allies, especially as they were backing Italy's claims to the hilt.

The rest of the powers, recognizing that nations are taking themselves out of the war, are under intensifying pressure to make a peace. Greece is thrown to the Ottoman Empire. The UK and Japan divvie up most of Germany's overseas colonies, while Belgium is halved in size as Germany annexes Luxembourg and Belgian Luxembourg. Germany keeps the Baltic States, but free nations of Ukraine and Poland are established in the East.

Please, Turkey is on its last legs and was in no shape to take an undefeated Greece. Besides, Greece was the weapon of the British in the Balkans and they would not give them away seeing as Britain got them independence in the first place. And the Ottoman empire is going to be the future colonies of Britain and France, as it was essentially occupied by 1918 anyway. Britain would also never, ever stand for Germany getting one scrap of Belgium. That was their entire reason for going to war, and they have no need to declare peace before it is liberated, especially as Germany's allies are falling like flies all around her.

France is a holdout and so doesn't gain much at peace talks. The UK and Italy agreeing to a peace deal that keeps Germany from annexing Eastern Europe forces them essentially into a forced peace, although this is cause for bitterness.

In short, Russia clearly loses and no one clearly wins. I'm sure that 20 years later, the deadlock will be revisited once again.

Your version of peace has Germany winning pretty big. France is probably going to be the first Allied nation to go, given that they were terribly exhausted by 1918. In 1918 historically France's army dropped by 1 million men in number even with American help. Russia is going to be the big loser for a number of reasons, but Germany's allies are going to lose big unless the war ends by mid-1918, which I doubt it would. Until Germany is ready to announce it is going to restore Belgium in full, the main hold out nation, Britain, has no reason to declare peace and every reason to pursue the war to the bitter end.
 
I think that if Caporetto had been followed thru by the Germans and Austrians, that the Italians could have been knocked out in 1917 and a negotiated peace would be possible. I recommend Caporetto, 1917 : victory or defeat? by Mario A. Morselli. There are a host of things altogether to carefully look at, the major one being that the Germans believed that victory could only be achieved along their Western Front.
 
Let's see - this is a late war TL, late 1917/early 1918, the US are not in, Russia is already out.
France is on its last leg, as is Austria-Hungary. Britain has just geared up and is in full war mode. Germany is war weary and most Germans want peace, nothing else.
Let's suppose that Caporetto has already happened, bringing Italy to the brink as well.
If in this situation the Entente (on France's instigation - okay, there's Clemenceau, but there also are no Americans to wait for) makes a sensible peace offer, which of course will be rejected by the puppets of Hindenburg/Ludendorff, which formed the German government. Now, you might have an early German revolution.
A new SPD led government might accept the loss of the colonies (they never were keen on them), a plebiscite in Alsace-Lorraine and a re-negotiation of Brest-Litovsk.
If, however, a more left combination comes to rule, they might accept nothing at all and call the French and British workers to revolution.
 

Deleted member 1487

I think that if Caporetto had been followed thru by the Germans and Austrians, that the Italians could have been knocked out in 1917 and a negotiated peace would be possible. I recommend Caporetto, 1917 : victory or defeat? by Mario A. Morselli. There are a host of things altogether to carefully look at, the major one being that the Germans believed that victory could only be achieved along their Western Front.

I doubt that Caporetto could have been followed up on. The Italians panicked and pulled back much further than necessary to the only line of defense they though could be held-the Piave. In reality the supply situation was extremely bad for the Central Powers once they moved out of their own territory into the North Italian plain. Already deficient in locomotives due to poor manufacturing and massive losses early in the war in Galicia, supply could not be maintained, leaving the Austrian forces in Italy starving. They had a very hard time bringing up food and war materials, which was part of the reason that the Piave offensive failed in 1918 (though the Italian army was vastly improved by then, and heavily motorized for quick reinforcement).

The Piave was as far as the Central Powers could reach at that point and had difficultly even reaching that river in a timely fashion. It was the high water mark for the Austrians and could not be sustainably crossed due to logistics.
 

Deleted member 1487

Let's see - this is a late war TL, late 1917/early 1918, the US are not in, Russia is already out.
France is on its last leg, as is Austria-Hungary. Britain has just geared up and is in full war mode. Germany is war weary and most Germans want peace, nothing else.
Let's suppose that Caporetto has already happened, bringing Italy to the brink as well.
If in this situation the Entente (on France's instigation - okay, there's Clemenceau, but there also are no Americans to wait for) makes a sensible peace offer, which of course will be rejected by the puppets of Hindenburg/Ludendorff, which formed the German government. Now, you might have an early German revolution.
A new SPD led government might accept the loss of the colonies (they never were keen on them), a plebiscite in Alsace-Lorraine and a re-negotiation of Brest-Litovsk.
If, however, a more left combination comes to rule, they might accept nothing at all and call the French and British workers to revolution.


Very interesting. Do you think that Clemenceau would still get the nod from Poincare without the Americans? How about the French mutinies and Petain's plan to only launch small, well supported attacks and wait until the Americans come?

Why do you think that Alsace-Lorraine would be even considered for plebiscite? I don't think that many Germans were willing to give up the spoils of previous war, but most were more than willing to be rid of Belgium. The conservatives' star was falling in the Reichstag, the failure of the U-boot offensive a further nail in their coffin.

Much depends on Ludendorff's plan for 1918. Though I think he could issue his own terms, he would only do it after a major battlefield success. If those fail on the level that OTL Kaiserschlacht did, then things are going to get ugly. The Hundred days may very well happen, though with less success than OTL without American manpower. As it was, 1 million Allied soldiers were killed or wounded (including Americans) and the German line held, though further back into Belgium. As I stated before, the French army fell from about 2.8 million men at the start of 1918, to 1.8 million in November and there were intense worries that it was about to shatter morale-wise. Without the Americans to shoulder some of the burden, Entente troops are going to have to make up for them with large casualties or not make the same gains as OTL. Either way, by the end of 1918 peace is going to be on the table for all.
 
maybe the germans could have better propaganda surrounding the lusitainia affair... ie get it more widely well known that it was carrying thousands of rounds of rifle ammunition and there were canadian soldiers on board thus making her a legitimate war target

without the americans petain might not bother with his 1917 verdun counter offensives because in his own words from the nivelle offensive "we lack 500,000 fresh troops to follow up any breaking of the german lines"
 
I actually put together an online serial based on this premise. The assumption was that the belligerents were so exhausted and discouraged at the end of 1916 that aggressive diplomacy by Woodrow Wilson could have led to a negotiated peace and a return to the pre-1914 borders. Some consequences were:

1) As a whole, Europe prospers, the 1920s arrive earlier, and the world experiences an unparalled period of peace and prosperity.
2) The US is proportionally less important. Phooey.
3) The Russian Revolution happens anyway because the Czarist regime was pretty much doomed, but Trotsky ends up in power while Lenin remains a bookseller in Zurich.
4) The Ottoman Empire still falls because that's the kind of thing Ottoman Empires do, and Britain still ends up with that tedious Palestine Mandate. Ick.
5) Germany becomes a constitutional monarchy, with the Kaiser, discredited by two years of useless war, remaining as a figurehead while the Crown Prince, disillusioned by Verdun, entertains the media with a succession of lurid affairs. But there is still a nationalist movement that feels the nation was betrayed. They wait...
6) The French are not too thrilled about Alsace. Or Loraine. They wait too...
7) Lacking the forcing ground of military need, aircraft development languishes and airships rule the skies. Though I must admit that this is at least in part because I Really Like Airships.
8) The hapless animators who would have died in the trenches during the Ludendorf Offensive survive to create Donald and Daffy Duck a decade earlier -- a crucial point of departure that will have unimaginable consequences on the future of civilization.

For those who are curious, I posted the whole thing on http://airships.paulgazis.com/. Enjoy!
 
Top