New partecipants to WW1

The really weird ones to me are a neutral Belgium that was left out of the war. Does it fall into the German orbit in time?
Even weirder Belgium as an ally of Germany in August 1914 after being promised compensation for allowing the German army to pass through its territory PLUS the creation of a Greater Belgium after the war by annexing Luxembourg and Flanders-Pas de Calais. The Germans might throw in the French Congo too.
 
Even weirder Belgium as an ally of Germany in August 1914 after being promised compensation for allowing the German army to pass through its territory PLUS the creation of a Greater Belgium after the war by annexing Luxembourg and Flanders-Pas de Calais. The Germans might throw in the French Congo too.

Greater Belgium is certainly not the sort of thing many try to conjure from the war and is indeed a weird one! Although I would think it is rather unlikely, the Belgians were proud of their independence and the neutrality they felt assured it, I could see a French blunder alienate Belgium and a token resistance to a more narrow use of Belgian territory. In any event a Belgium not directly occupied or engulfed in the war would be an odd piece of the puzzle indeed. I do not believe a Benelux emerges but having two neutrals betwixt and between the French and Germans reads for adventures aplenty.
 
Greater Belgium is certainly not the sort of thing many try to conjure from the war and is indeed a weird one! Although I would think it is rather unlikely, the Belgians were proud of their independence and the neutrality they felt assured it, I could see a French blunder alienate Belgium and a token resistance to a more narrow use of Belgian territory. In any event a Belgium not directly occupied or engulfed in the war would be an odd piece of the puzzle indeed. I do not believe a Benelux emerges but having two neutrals betwixt and between the French and Germans reads for adventures aplenty.
I think its very unlikely too (but not ASB) and a lot of fun.

Though I still see the possibility of Germany giving Nord-Pas de Calais and Luxembourg to Belgium in the peace settlement in the event of a Central Powers victory. That would be to weaken France and to compensate Belgium for being invaded and occupied. However, this Greater Belgium would also have join the Zollverein whether the Belgians wanted to be in it or not.

Strictly speaking it would be Belux plus NW France rather than Benelux because it wouldn't include the Netherlands.
 
The Spanish also have the problem that the renovation of their navy that was begun in 1908 wasn't complete. Their naval shipyards were run by a British consortium that included Armstrong Whitworth and Vickers (not Vickers-Armstrongs until the 1920s). IOTL many of the ships under construction in 1914 took longer than they should have to complete because for the duration of the war the parent companies weren't able to deliver components the Spanish subsidiary was unable to build itself.

The Balearics and Canaries are going to be very vulnerable, but what happens to them in practice depends upon what resources the Entente powers have to spare for their capture.

However, in addition to drawing French troops away from the Western Front Spain holds both sides of the Strait of Gibraltar. Much is made of the British coast artillery at Gibraltar itself, but I know that the Spanish had powerful batteries on both sides in World War II and I suspect that they had most of them (except the 15" guns at Cadiz) in World War One.

It also depends upon how many extra countries actually come in and when. For example if more countries like Italy join the Central Powers early on a band wagon effect might develop.
How about something like this?

Spain avoids the Spanish American War by selling its Pacific Empire to Germany. AFAIK the Germans were very keen on this IOTL and that Kaiser Wilhelm was furious when the Americans beat them to it. The Spanish Government uses the money (and the money saved by no SAW) to develop the Iberian economy.

The latter would include bringing the 1908 Navy Law of OTL forward by 5 or even 10 years to 1898 itself. Thus by 1914 the Spanish Navy would have been larger with more modern warships and have attained a greater degree of self-sufficiency in naval arms manufacture.

However, as I know nothing about Spanish domestic history in the 1897-1914 period I don't know if that's possible.
 
Last edited:
I think its very unlikely too (but not ASB) and a lot of fun.

Though I still see the possibility of Germany giving Nord-Pas de Calais and Luxembourg to Belgium in the peace settlement in the event of a Central Powers victory. That would be to weaken France and to compensate Belgium for being invaded and occupied. However, this Greater Belgium would also have join the Zollverein whether the Belgians wanted to be in it or not.

Strictly speaking it would be Belux plus NW France rather than Benelux because it wouldn't include the Netherlands.

It is plausible and I toy with what becomes of Belgium in an undefeated Germany end to the war. My most divergent scenario has Germany avoiding Belgium altogether and in that one I think Belgium is offered French territory but declines, albeit Germany occupies far less of it. More interesting is the shift towards the German orbit and Belgium joining the customs union while remaining a neutral. Germany might have frosty relations with France and cool relations with the UK but the Belgians leverage it to become a significant crossroads to Germany and Brussels becomes a significant market place for exchange of goods, services, finances and travel. Overall I think the customs union has more potential to aggrandize Germany than changes to borders. For example I have the French deny Germany any overflights of its territory, thus you fly to Brussels on Luft Hansa and then Sabena to Paris, things like that. I think this Belgium ends up just as important as it did under the EU as the neutral ground between the Germans and the French. So the customs union becomes a different path to continental unity as well as Belgian significance.
 
Question! What does Britain's old ally Portugal do and how is the Spanish war effort affected by having two fronts? (Three if things happen around Gibraltar.)

I could definitely see that as a problem,
Question! What does Britain's old ally Portugal do and how is the Spanish war effort affected by having two fronts? (Three if things happen around Gibraltar.)

Well since Spain's military isn't the best, especially the loss to the Americans, Portugal would be a problem, but since Italy, and Germany are advancing on France, Spain doesn't need to expend alot of forces against France, because France has bigger problems. If they can secure all of the Pyrenees, and start going into the lowlands, and then entrench themselves, France would have to get them past the mountains, while Spain fights Portugal.

Obviously, the Spanish military was very lackluster, but since Spain lost to America, if the government tries hard enough, they could unite Spain under restoring its former glory.

Portugal was also having a lot of internal issues, and economic issues. There was a ton of government changes during the war, but a war between the two is likely to weigh in Spain's favor. Spain has 3 times the population of Portugal, and more landmass, some Spain has more people to throw at Portugal. Spain just has to ware the Portuguese spirit, and war effort for long enough that Spain can just push at France.
 
Does the IJN of 1914 have the range to threaten the East Indies (British and Dutch)? Do they have the merchant shipping to carry the troops? Due to the massive expansion of the merchant marine during the course of the war they probably have by 1918, but in 1914 it's a different story.

Though it could mean that Australian, Indian and NZ troops are sent to reinforce Hong Kong and Singapore instead of the Middle East and France. A BEF without the 2 Indian infantry and 2 Indian cavalry divisions would be a lot weaker in 1914 and the first half of 1915. There might be no Gallipoli landings or invasion of Mesopotamia. That might free Turkish troops for the attack on the Suez Canal.

Is the assumption that all of these countries join the CP within the first weeks? The Ottomans didn't declare war until November 1914 and Bulgaria until October 1915, and on the other side Italy didn't join until 1915 and Romania until 1916 among others. I sort of assumed that the OP was along similar lines, with these new CP Allies trickling in as the war progresses.

As such, with the Anglo-French drawn into desperate fighting in Europe and the Mid East a Japan that declares for the CP should only face minimal opposition should it strike south, assuming that's what it does rather than strike into Russia or Manchuria.
 
Are we also assuming the war headed as OTL until the additional countries join? Or could we have some divergences such as Austria-Hungary choosing to put a division/army on defense against Serbia and send everything else to face the Russians which should have them do better. Combined with OTL German performance against the Russians that could be what is needed to swing Romania to CP-Neutral leaning, and then joining the CP shortly after Bulgaria does, and perhaps this time Bulgaria does early 1915, this would also have a neutral Italy so the CP seem like a better bet. Of course if we can make some more changes on the Western Front to have the Germans win the race to the sea and either capture or contest the Bethune coal fields it makes the French that much weaker which then makes it tempting for the Italians to join in.

I do think that the Italians and Bulgarians both joining the CP due to better performance on the CP part (Germans win the race to sea, AH focus against Russia, Ottomans not launching winter attacks in the mountains and just building up) is going to have knock on effects. Most notably Romania is likely to join after a failed Bursilov (the AH troops are facing the Russians and not deployed on the Italian front). The additional effects here, British needed to foot more war materials to the French since they have even less coal then OTL and likely more attacks going in to try to push the German lines back beyond the Channel ports they would control from wining the race to the sea means they may go more defensive on other fronts, preferring to move what divisions they can raise to the Western Front. So now we get into 1916 and the British have more forces concentrated in France then OTL, the French are weaker, the Russians are weaker, the CP are stronger and they have Italy pushing against France to the south and AH-German-Romanian units pushing on Russia to the East and Ottomans likely pushing into the Caucasus region.

At that point if it looks like the British and French are fully committed and if those divisions from Portugal are also deployed on the Western Front, Spain may chose to jump in (also assuming German diplomacy gets a lot better) which puts even more pressure on France from an area they have likely stripped of all but small amounts of troops.

Japan- would need a POD before the War to end their alliance with the British and go and side with the CP, maybe if they got less from the Russo-Japan war due to great power pressure leading them to want to get more pieces from Russia still and if they drag their feet like Italy then see the Entente doing poorly during 1914.

The other country not listed that has an easier POD for coming in is Sweden, who if Essen carried out his attack and Russia then bungled their diplomatic efforts could see their entry into the war in 1914.

The big thing is countries like Sweden and Romania aren't front winners but what they do is force the power on that side to stretch their forces even more, which could be enough since that is both additional losses thanks to fighting a power they did not have to OTL and also fewer forces facing the OTL CP forces letting the CP make more head way.
 
Portugal was also having a lot of internal issues, and economic issues. There was a ton of government changes during the war, but a war between the two is likely to weigh in Spain's favor. Spain has 3 times the population of Portugal, and more landmass, some Spain has more people to throw at Portugal. Spain just has to ware the Portuguese spirit, and war effort for long enough that Spain can just push at France.
If Spain is a Central Power, British-allied Portugal is an obvious place to send a British expeditionary force to.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
We all know that the central powers in WW1 were composed by Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman empire and Bulgaria. What I've been thinking is: what if Italy, Spain, Romania, Albania, Japan and Siam joined WW1 on the central power side? If I'm correct, all of them had some claims against the Entente. What if this leaded into a central power victory? How would the world look like? What would the map look like? Can someone make a map showing the territorial changes in cause of this central power victory?

WW1 was a war that the CP should have won but threw away victory. If you ran a Monte Carlo simulation, the CP wins at least 75% of the time. So, when you add country to the CP and randomize the decisions a bit, you will generally get some sort of CP win. Now to specifics.

  • The years the powers join makes a lot of difference.
  • Italy - Even neutrality lets the CP win easily. Italy joining the war is a huge help for the CP.
  • Spain - Easy CP win. By tying up French and UK troops, we get a much better German performance in Flanders in 1914/15. Spain will also mess with UK shipping routes and likely close the Med Sea to UK shipping.
  • Romania. Huge help. Allow supplies to Ottomans from day 1 of Ottomans entering war. Messes up Russian war plans which have to divert troops down there. Frees up German and A-H troops.
  • Albania - Main benefit is randomizing events to help CP win. We cutoff the Serbian retreat route. We cut off some supplies to Serbia. Frees up some A-H troops for use elsewhere.
  • Japan - Hard to see this one since UK ally. But anyway, it cause UK fits in Pacific. UK has plenty of ships to deal with if the UK can avoid the temptation to keep most of fleet in British Island. ANZAC forces only used in Pacific. Likely cancels Gallipoli. Likely cancels East African campaign. This is an Ottoman wank, but it does give you a CP win. You will see German do a bit better as some UK flanders forces are weaker. But starting about 1916, you will see the Ottomans get their game together and open offensives in various areas. Things like hold Palestine easily. Prevent Arab revolt. Retake Basra. Push into parts of Persia.
  • Siam. Not so sure important.
  • All of them. War is over by Christmas.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Isn't the problem with Italy joining the Central Powers that they depended to a large extent on British coal and iron? Also A-H stubbornness over Trento. Depending on when they join, they may have to resolve the issue with Libya and the Dodecanese, which they recently took off the Ottomans, so that might push the Ottomans to the Entente.

Yes, those are all issues. The coal will partially be made up by Germany. IMO, a neutral Italy is probably best for A-H. But one should not dismiss a Italy who joins the CP. It will look different if we start in August 1914 versus May 1915, but both are huge wins. The most notice impact of the early Italian entry will be tying down additional French Corp in the South which will make the German operations much more likely to win. We also could see Italian Corps showing up to fill holes in the line. While not the most likely scenario, the following will make it easier to visualize. Imagine the BEF is used to tie up Italian forces. Then imagine OTL battles. The Germans win the Battle of the Marne. Put in another few Italian corp somewhere else. Imagine the three German corps are not transferred east but used in the race to the Sea. By winter 1914/15, we have the Germans holding Flanders and the Somme river to the sea. The Germans have traded the Italian coal issues for winning all these additional lands.

A later entry means that the Med Sea is shut to merchant shipping around May 1915. The UK will be force to abandoned the Gallipoli idea/campaign and go on the defensive in the eastern Med. The UK can wreck havoc at Sea on the Italian Economy, but unless the UK pulls troops out of western Europe, it will not be able to do a major campaign against Italy. A-H can now move OTL troops in the Italian Front to the Eastern Front. This means Germany can begin series attacks to knock France out of the war in 1916, and these attacks will not stop.
 
If Spain is a Central Power, British-allied Portugal is an obvious place to send a British expeditionary force to.
As the British Empire's land forces were finite sending a British expeditionary force to Portugal produces an obvious reduction in the British Empire's military effort elsewhere.

A weaker British Expeditionary Force in Flanders would be a very bad thing.

However, if the need to send troops to Spain prevents the attempts to force the Dardanelles with pre-dreadnoughts, the Gallipoli landings and the Mesopotamian offensive that lead to the siege of Kut the Spanish diversion would have been a blessing in disguise.

However, there would be no need to send a British expeditionary force to Portugal because the Portuguese would not have sent the Portuguese Expeditionary Force of 2 divisions to Flanders.
WW1 was a war that the CP should have won but threw away victory. If you ran a Monte Carlo simulation, the CP wins at least 75% of the time. So, when you add country to the CP and randomize the decisions a bit, you will generally get some sort of CP win. Now to specifics.
  • Spain - Easy CP win. By tying up French and UK troops, we get a much better German performance in Flanders in 1914/15. Spain will also mess with UK shipping routes and likely close the Med Sea to UK shipping.
I agree about the French having to divert troops from Flanders to reinforce stop the Spanish crossing the Pyrenees. They Army of the Pyrenees might be larger than the Army of the Alps needed to guard against the Italians as the Franco-Spanish border.

Instead of a British expeditionary force being sent to reinforce the Portuguese directly it's a lot more likely that the OTL Mediterranean Expeditionary Force would be sent to southern Spain instead of Gallipoli to capture the Spanish coast artillery that would otherwise make the Strait of Gibraltar impassable. IIRC it started out as 6 divisions and grew to a total of 12. In combination with the Portuguese that might be enough to defeat Spain completely. However, I my be underestimating the Spanish Army as much as the Ottoman Army was underestimated IOTL.

Meanwhile the French forces in French Morocco will be doing their best to drive the Spanish forces out of Spanish Morocco with the objective of capturing the Spanish coast artillery batteries on the southern shore to the Strait of Gibraltar. I have no idea on the relative strengths of either. The French forces in Morocco might need the assistance of XIX Corps which in that case would miss the Battle of the Marne.
 
This is the Spanish Army's order of battle from the Spain in World War One article on Spanish Wikipaedia
On the other hand, the terrestrial army was antiquated with respect to the modern European armies. Its composition was the following:
8 Army Corps
16 Infantry Divisions.
1 Cavalry Division.
7 Cavalry Brigades.
3 Brigades of Mountain Hunters.
Commanders of the Canary Islands and the Balearic Islands (brigade size).
There were also Artillery regiments and Engineers.​

The main rifle of the Spanish army at this time is a version of the Mauser manufactured in Oviedo in caliber 7x57 mm known as Spanish Mauser rifle model 1893. To that was added a small amount of machine guns such as the Maxim Nordenfelt, Hotchkiss and even the Colt. But the number of machine guns per company or division was much lower than in the rest of the European countries. Most were being used in the Melilla conflict. The artillery consisted of cannons manufactured by Krupp or several versions of the Schneider cannon manufactured in Trubia and Seville....
From what I can make out using my GCSE Spanish the Spanish Army of Africa was incapable of offensive operations or defending Spanish Morocco from an attack by the French because it was far too busy protecting Spanish Morocco from the Moroccans.
 
The situation in Albania was VERY complex at the time and had a whole host of different factions vying for power within the nation. I recently did a video about Albania during WW1. Below is part of my script.


Albanian independence movements had been active for centuries, but their support grew after nations such as Serbia and Bulgaria gained their independence from the Ottoman empire. Several of these states saw Albanian land as their own and theirs for the taking. The Albanians largely supported the Ottomans during the Russo-Turkish war of 1877, and the treaty of San Stivano that ended the war, gave Albanian land to Montenegro and Greece. As the century turned, Albanian demands for greater rights, and autonomy within the empire grew, and came to their peak with the Young Turk Revolution in 1908. The changes to the Albanian section of the empire including the increase of taxes, forced conscription and other issues, caused the Albanians to rise up in revolt, once in 1910 and again in 1912. The revolt of 1912 was caused by not only the failure during the Italo-Turkish war, but also by the Balkan war. With Albanian land and cities being occupied in all directions by Serbs, Greeks, Montenegrins and Bulgarians. This led to the Albanian declaration of Independence on November 28th, 1912. A declaration that was completely ignored by the occupying powers. Serbia and Montenegro’s occupation of Kosovo and Macedonia in late 1912, coupled with Greece’s pestering throughout Southern Albania, set in motion a number of indigenous struggles. All these groups sought patronage from outside interests, including the Ottoman Empire, which still had considerable support among Albanians, least in compassion to their neighbors. The resulting scramble for influence in the region proved the critical element to the emergence of many new kinds of activism. Unfortunately most of the activism took Albania further and further away from political and economic stability. This further de-centralization meant it was difficult to create a viable local government to represent the region as a whole, leading to multiple competing factions who were beholden to the whims of foreign interests. These conditions opened the door for both outright occupation by rival neighboring for the first year of the war and gave the Great Powers an opportunity to dangle Albania as a prize to the most cooperative partner. But when the war ended in May of 1913, Albanian independence was recognized in the London Conference and Treaty of Bucharest. However, only about 40% of the ethic Albanian land was incorporated into this state, and most of the nation was occupied by great powers forces.

A government was eventually formed under German prince William Zu Wied with Essad Pasha as Minister of War, Tribal leaders pledged loyalty to Wied, but he lost a large amount of support through his policies and reforms such as the separation of Church and State, giving autonomy to the Greeks in Epirus who had proclaimed their own republic, and having Pasha arrested and sent to Italy for alleged double service and conspiracy. Days after this, central Albania was in open rebellion. Wien left the country on September the 3rd 1914, having lost control of most of the country. Essad Pasha returned to Albania and seceded most of Northern Albania, which was primarily catholic to Serbia in return for military support and financial aid. This region had been claimed and heavily influenced by the Austrians for years, who had established deep connections with the Catholics in the region. With some Austrian support, a group known as the kachcuz operated gurellia fighting against the Serbs in late 1915.

Once the European war started in 1914, the tensions that had barely been silenced by the Treaty of Bucharest the previous year and the London Conference reignited in the Balkans. These separate spheres of influence became areas of complex local politics where competing external forces shaped the extent to how each zone functioned. The Italian influences over local affairs were limited in those areas deemed essential to Rome’s strategic concerns. Similar territorial limitations existed for the Austrians which had already established connections within areas that were pre-dominatly Catholic. As for Serbia and Greece, while seemingly in agreement over the extent their spheres of influence would take, Macedonia was still an area of heavy dispute between the two.

The rivalries inside the loose central Albanian coalition claimed by Essad Pasha formed the "Central Albanian Senate." It is this body that attempted to deal with all the major powers and particularly the Ottoman Sultan, seeking recognition in order to negotiate a viable solution to the political conflict. For the most part, this group failed due to Pasha forging multiple alliances with seemingly contradictory partners.

Factions did break from Essad Pasha, creating an entity in the Kruja region that ultimately overthrew Essad’s administration. It is largely understood that this Serbian expansion into Essad’s region accounts for why the Italians responded to Serbian encroachments. This intervention led to a larger scramble for Albanian territories by all the regional states.

The Greeks had formed a deal with British Foreign secretary Edward Grey that allowed Greece to officially invade Southern Albania. Shortly after, Muslims leaders, as well as political factions opposed to Pasha, rose up in Central Albania near Kurja. These forces managed to pin Pasha at the nations Capitol, Durazzo by late November of 1914. Pasha was rescued by Italian war-ships and Italy itself invaded Valonea in late December, soon holding the coast line from Valonea to Durazzo. No great power opposed this move, as they wished Italy to join their side.

When the pact of London was signed in April of 1915, that saw Italian entry into the war, they were given central Albania as a protectorate controlling the whole region south of Vlora, while the Serbs occupied the Northern section, and the Greeks the southern section. Tensions between the Serbs and Greeks in the region grew steadily and the French had to send troops into the region to prevent all out fighting from occurring. This occupation hoped to assure that the advancing armies of Bulgaria and Austria-Hungary did not entirely overrun the Entente positions in Salonika while also trying to get Greece to join their side.
 
The situation in Albania was VERY complex at the time and had a whole host of different factions vying for power within the nation. I recently did a video about Albania during WW1. Below is part of my script.


Albanian independence movements had been active for centuries, but their support grew after nations such as Serbia and Bulgaria gained their independence from the Ottoman empire. Several of these states saw Albanian land as their own and theirs for the taking. The Albanians largely supported the Ottomans during the Russo-Turkish war of 1877, and the treaty of San Stivano that ended the war, gave Albanian land to Montenegro and Greece. As the century turned, Albanian demands for greater rights, and autonomy within the empire grew, and came to their peak with the Young Turk Revolution in 1908. The changes to the Albanian section of the empire including the increase of taxes, forced conscription and other issues, caused the Albanians to rise up in revolt, once in 1910 and again in 1912. The revolt of 1912 was caused by not only the failure during the Italo-Turkish war, but also by the Balkan war. With Albanian land and cities being occupied in all directions by Serbs, Greeks, Montenegrins and Bulgarians. This led to the Albanian declaration of Independence on November 28th, 1912. A declaration that was completely ignored by the occupying powers. Serbia and Montenegro’s occupation of Kosovo and Macedonia in late 1912, coupled with Greece’s pestering throughout Southern Albania, set in motion a number of indigenous struggles. All these groups sought patronage from outside interests, including the Ottoman Empire, which still had considerable support among Albanians, least in compassion to their neighbors. The resulting scramble for influence in the region proved the critical element to the emergence of many new kinds of activism. Unfortunately most of the activism took Albania further and further away from political and economic stability. This further de-centralization meant it was difficult to create a viable local government to represent the region as a whole, leading to multiple competing factions who were beholden to the whims of foreign interests. These conditions opened the door for both outright occupation by rival neighboring for the first year of the war and gave the Great Powers an opportunity to dangle Albania as a prize to the most cooperative partner. But when the war ended in May of 1913, Albanian independence was recognized in the London Conference and Treaty of Bucharest. However, only about 40% of the ethic Albanian land was incorporated into this state, and most of the nation was occupied by great powers forces.

A government was eventually formed under German prince William Zu Wied with Essad Pasha as Minister of War, Tribal leaders pledged loyalty to Wied, but he lost a large amount of support through his policies and reforms such as the separation of Church and State, giving autonomy to the Greeks in Epirus who had proclaimed their own republic, and having Pasha arrested and sent to Italy for alleged double service and conspiracy. Days after this, central Albania was in open rebellion. Wien left the country on September the 3rd 1914, having lost control of most of the country. Essad Pasha returned to Albania and seceded most of Northern Albania, which was primarily catholic to Serbia in return for military support and financial aid. This region had been claimed and heavily influenced by the Austrians for years, who had established deep connections with the Catholics in the region. With some Austrian support, a group known as the kachcuz operated gurellia fighting against the Serbs in late 1915.

Once the European war started in 1914, the tensions that had barely been silenced by the Treaty of Bucharest the previous year and the London Conference reignited in the Balkans. These separate spheres of influence became areas of complex local politics where competing external forces shaped the extent to how each zone functioned. The Italian influences over local affairs were limited in those areas deemed essential to Rome’s strategic concerns. Similar territorial limitations existed for the Austrians which had already established connections within areas that were pre-dominatly Catholic. As for Serbia and Greece, while seemingly in agreement over the extent their spheres of influence would take, Macedonia was still an area of heavy dispute between the two.

The rivalries inside the loose central Albanian coalition claimed by Essad Pasha formed the "Central Albanian Senate." It is this body that attempted to deal with all the major powers and particularly the Ottoman Sultan, seeking recognition in order to negotiate a viable solution to the political conflict. For the most part, this group failed due to Pasha forging multiple alliances with seemingly contradictory partners.

Factions did break from Essad Pasha, creating an entity in the Kruja region that ultimately overthrew Essad’s administration. It is largely understood that this Serbian expansion into Essad’s region accounts for why the Italians responded to Serbian encroachments. This intervention led to a larger scramble for Albanian territories by all the regional states.

The Greeks had formed a deal with British Foreign secretary Edward Grey that allowed Greece to officially invade Southern Albania. Shortly after, Muslims leaders, as well as political factions opposed to Pasha, rose up in Central Albania near Kurja. These forces managed to pin Pasha at the nations Capitol, Durazzo by late November of 1914. Pasha was rescued by Italian war-ships and Italy itself invaded Valonea in late December, soon holding the coast line from Valonea to Durazzo. No great power opposed this move, as they wished Italy to join their side.

When the pact of London was signed in April of 1915, that saw Italian entry into the war, they were given central Albania as a protectorate controlling the whole region south of Vlora, while the Serbs occupied the Northern section, and the Greeks the southern section. Tensions between the Serbs and Greeks in the region grew steadily and the French had to send troops into the region to prevent all out fighting from occurring. This occupation hoped to assure that the advancing armies of Bulgaria and Austria-Hungary did not entirely overrun the Entente positions in Salonika while also trying to get Greece to join their side.
can you show a link or something?
 
Well, since nobody is posting a map, here's my idea:
immagine per sito 3.png

To you to understand the map:
1) this is the world in 1939. So that's why Italy has Ethiopia.
2)I followed NOMISYRRUC idea, and decided to make spain sell its Pacific empire to Germany, and the Carraibean to America.
3)Italy historically owned a small concession in Tianjin. Several power decide to sell their concession in the city, so italy controls it completely now.
4)Romania and Bulgaria have now a small colonial empire.
5) Iran has been split between soviet union and UK.
6)UK conquered Afghanistan
Edit: Added Poland as German puppet.
 
Last edited:
I don't see a surviving Ottoman Empire being happy about Russia or Soviets in Persia, and would expect the Ottomans to have the northern half in their sphere of influence with the British in the southern half.

Also very good chance Soviet union does not form as the extra participants means no need to send Lenin to Russia by the Germans. And a russia/Soviet without Ukraine is a lot weaker.

And no puppet Poland/Lithuania?

Edit and why is modern day Pakistan not part of the Raj?
 
Top