No World War I. Who gets the Atomic bomb?

[kernals12]

Let's assume Franz Ferdinand's driver doesn't make a wrong turn and the Archduke doesn't get shot. Europe's status quo remains largely the same through at least the 1940s. With no Nazis, Albert Einstein doesn't flee for America. But then again, I don't think he'd want the Kaiser to have nukes. So who gets the A-bomb?

 

[longsword14]

Let's assume Franz Ferdinand's driver doesn't make a wrong turn and the Archduke doesn't get shot. Europe's status quo remains largely the same through at least the 1940s. With no Nazis, Albert Einstein doesn't flee for America. But then again, I don't think he'd want the Kaiser to have nukes. So who gets the A-bomb?

1. Too hard to tell.
2. Einstein is not required for creation of the bomb. Even the theoretical work is not what clinches it, because the groundwork could be done by any advanced country.
3. A nation has got to need it badly to dump the resources required for the Bomb. This is what decides who gets it first.

 

[kernals12]

1. Too hard to tell.

That's the whole point of this website

3. A nation has got to need it badly to dump the resources required for the Bomb. This is what decides who gets it first

I don't see why a country wouldn't want such an effective weapon of war especially in a period when foreign policies revolved around desire for new land.

 

[DocJamore]

Everyone. Every power in the world that can afford to be will be a participant in the nuclear arms race.

 

[longsword14]

That's the whole point of this website

But some clues must be present in the question to narrow down the possible paths.

I don't see why a country wouldn't want such an effective weapon of war especially in a period when foreign policies revolved around desire for new land.

Conventional advances would always come first and take most of the money. OTL the Allied effort was greatly affected by the fear that the Germans might get it first. In a scenario where the world political climate is much milder who knows how it gets done.

 

[MichaelWest]

As much as I think Einstein's work helps he is not critical to get anyone an atomic bomb, if anything I think he continues to work on the theoretical side and publishes enough to help the other scientists working in applying this stuff. Without a war I think that science is more open and continues to be German dominated, a lot of the underlying science will be in German papers, patents and lectures. And without the war I do not see any greater fear of German militarism than the military of any other country, the Kaiser is a bit loose on deck at times but overall his government is a democracy and outwardly not less peaceful, in fact I would argue that few would fear giving this science to any industry or military as our capacity for self destruction has not yet been proven. That said I could argue that both France and Britain have the know how and the resources, the USA should be far more distant actually, it has a less robust linkage between science and industry, corporate or government money and university, that is a product of WWII. Oddly I see the science being published openly right up to the moment it gets very real, that likely levels the playing field in many ways. Without the horror of poison gases and terror bombing the atomic bomb either does not look worth while or looks like just a bigger sort of boom. You pick, implications cut both ways. But if I need to lay down money on a bet I think Germany has all the ingredients to build one first.

 

[GreggJulian]

France will probably start a program (still thirsting for revenge with Germany), other countries find out and start their own. Germany wins.

 

[kernals12]

One country I see with an advantage is Britain thanks to the large uranium reserves in Canada and Australia. IOTL the Soviets had problems due to the lack of uranium until large reserves were found in Kazakhstan in the 1950s.

 

[Catsmate]

Assuming there is no Great War and Europe plods along for a few decades (with some 'adjustments' in Russia, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire) then Germany.
However it's a long path with many necessary steps.

 

[kernals12]

A nuclear armed Kaiser isn't as scary as a nuclear armed Hitler, but it's still pretty terrifying.

 

[hms malta]

I personally think an Anglo French effort first. Germany second and the Russian empire third if the tsar is still around

 

[Derek Pullem]

Italy is an outside bet with Fermi but it depends on the direction of travel of the politics of Europe. If it is continuing as paternalistic capitalism with the odd splash of social democracy then he may stay in Italy and create the worlds first atomic pile. He'd need a shed load of money from someone then to develop the bomb.

 

[jlckansas]

If you don't have the push to make the bomb, you should see atomic piles and reactor types come first. Commercial power or use on a ship would be the emphasis. If the US finds Plutonium on schedule you might see someone figuring out how that would work in a bomb better than U 235.

Choices on Reactors:
1. Germany
2. France
3. UK
4. US
5. Italy

 

[Tanc49]

One country I see with an advantage is Britain thanks to the large uranium reserves in Canada and Australia. IOTL the Soviets had problems due to the lack of uranium until large reserves were found in Kazakhstan in the 1950s.

Massive reserves in French African colonies too!

 

[arod123]

This is a tough one I mean honestly I still think its the U.S. Frances people would not want a weapon of that destruction because that would start a war. UK would not have the resources even with their colonies it would take to long for them to get the recourses and with no reason for doing it many countries may threaten or warn Britain not to. Germany may but I think without WW1 there would be no WW2 and so the United States would have one enemy the Soviet Union and so they would be so on edge that they may just build the atomic bomb for they would have no great depression so they would be very wealthy. (sorry for bad grammar)

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Germany. Huge industrial power, lots of universities, center of much of the atomic research even iotl.

Britain and France with their empires.

The US is NOT going to be first, as the necessary government support for big military projects just isn't going to be there without the World Wars.

Oh, sure, they'll be third or fourth. Just not first.

 

[Milo]

Germany has the advantage, especially with R and D which Britain always lagers behind in buy the tide was turning prewar and I could see Britain slowly catching up. Also pre-war Germany isn't the most stable place (not Weimar levels) and many a scietist could make more outside Deutschland.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

Honestly, without The Great War nuclear weapons probably fall by the wayside in favor of continued development on chemical weapons as the mainstay of WMDs, if only because their research naturally compliments/comes out of industrial development in an era where electricity and fossil fuels are cheap as dirt, easier to handle/ship, ect. These lethal compounds are biproducts of your factory processing after all and are still incredibly destructive, and until we have a major war that shows their weaknesses/develops countermeasures and creates the sense of horror around them I fail to see why the theoretical and highly expensive nuclear development project would find traction in the highly competitive fight for military budgets

 

[1940LaSalle]

Try this on for size:

• There will still be upheavals in middle/eastern Europe: Austria-Hungary may find some means to federalize / spin off more troublesome areas once Franz Joseph is gone, since Karl is considerably more contemporary; all it would take for Rasputin to get booted would be a minor household accident that turns out fatal for Alexis, and then Russia has a revolution leading to (let's say) a constitutional monarchy with a collateral Romanov branch; Germans say "why not us?" when viewing liberalization in the other continental empires, and force a significantly more liberal constitution on the Kaiser (say, very close to the British model).
• Revolution in Russia leads to the loss of Finland, Poland, the Baltic republics, and Ukraine.
• In the late 1920s/early 1930s a man-on-horseback type kindles a sort of counterrevolutionary move in Russia, seeking to regain lost territories and blaming both Germany and Austria for the loss (gotta have at least one scapegoat...)
• Diplomatic relations deteriorate between Russia on the one hand with Germany, Austria, and Russia's old nemesis, Great Britain, on the other.
• Meanwhile in the Far East Japan is building its Co-Prosperity Sphere, having gobbled Korea and Manchuria. While neither trusts nor likes the other, Japan and Russia sign a non-aggression pact so that each can pursue its own agenda while not having to watch backs.
• Japan's increasing aggressiveness raises US concerns about the Philippines, and British and Dutch concerns about their Far Eastern possessions.
• The US, attempting to stem the tide moving south, cuts off Japanese access to US scrap metal and petroleum.
• Meanwhile in the west, Russia is secretly mobilizing for a major push west to regain "lost" territory. Tokyo and St. Petersburg agree on a secret jump-off day to lash out at the would-be enemies.
• On the same day, Russia launches an offensive against the Baltic republics, Poland, and the Ukraine--as well as East Prussia--while Japan attacks Pearl Harbor to cut off US involvement.
• While German research on nuclear fission has been going on, there is well-founded fear of the information falling into Russian hands. The Allies (GB, Germany, A-H, US) move the research and the scientists/engineers to the US, well out of the line of fire, where US industry can go full bore on the project.
• US aircraft development yields the longer-range bombers needed to deliver the weaponry.

Now the question is who gets hit first: maybe Hiroshima or Nagasaki as IOTL, which serves as a warning to Russia?

 

[kernals12]

Try this on for size:

• There will still be upheavals in middle/eastern Europe: Austria-Hungary may find some means to federalize / spin off more troublesome areas once Franz Joseph is gone, since Karl is considerably more contemporary; all it would take for Rasputin to get booted would be a minor household accident that turns out fatal for Alexis, and then Russia has a revolution leading to (let's say) a constitutional monarchy with a collateral Romanov branch; Germans say "why not us?" when viewing liberalization in the other continental empires, and force a significantly more liberal constitution on the Kaiser (say, very close to the British model).
• Revolution in Russia leads to the loss of Finland, Poland, the Baltic republics, and Ukraine.
• In the late 1920s/early 1930s a man-on-horseback type kindles a sort of counterrevolutionary move in Russia, seeking to regain lost territories and blaming both Germany and Austria for the loss (gotta have at least one scapegoat...)
• Diplomatic relations deteriorate between Russia on the one hand with Germany, Austria, and Russia's old nemesis, Great Britain, on the other.
• Meanwhile in the Far East Japan is building its Co-Prosperity Sphere, having gobbled Korea and Manchuria. While neither trusts nor likes the other, Japan and Russia sign a non-aggression pact so that each can pursue its own agenda while not having to watch backs.
• Japan's increasing aggressiveness raises US concerns about the Philippines, and British and Dutch concerns about their Far Eastern possessions.
• The US, attempting to stem the tide moving south, cuts off Japanese access to US scrap metal and petroleum.
• Meanwhile in the west, Russia is secretly mobilizing for a major push west to regain "lost" territory. Tokyo and St. Petersburg agree on a secret jump-off day to lash out at the would-be enemies.
• On the same day, Russia launches an offensive against the Baltic republics, Poland, and the Ukraine--as well as East Prussia--while Japan attacks Pearl Harbor to cut off US involvement.
• While German research on nuclear fission has been going on, there is well-founded fear of the information falling into Russian hands. The Allies (GB, Germany, A-H, US) move the research and the scientists/engineers to the US, well out of the line of fire, where US industry can go full bore on the project.
• US aircraft development yields the longer-range bombers needed to deliver the weaponry.

Now the question is who gets hit first: maybe Hiroshima or Nagasaki as IOTL, which serves as a warning to Russia?

Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem like the only practical options. Any cities in Russia would involve flying several hundred miles over well defended territory with the exception of St Petersburg, and well they need a surviving government to negotiate terms of surrender. Another option is to use it in the battlefield.