Not so splendid isolation

I've been having internet trouble recently, so I haven't been able to do a lot on the board recently. Now that I have it pretty much taken care of, I'd like to post this idea I've had for awhile.

In the late 19th century, Britain was pretty much on it's own in terms of alliances. It also at odds with a number of countries such as France(The Fashoda Crisis), Russia(The Great Game), Germany(Anglo-German naval arms race), Portugal(Pink Map), the Boer Republics(The Boer Wars), The United States, and Venezuela(Venezuelan crisis of 1895). Is it possible to for some or all of these to combine into a World War scenario where Britain has to fight them on her own?
 
Here's a map to help visualize it.

FPnHH.png
 
In the late 19th century, Britain was pretty much on it's own in terms of alliances. It also at odds with a number of countries such as France(The Fashoda Crisis), Russia(The Great Game), Germany(Anglo-German naval arms race), Portugal(Pink Map), the Boer Republics(The Boer Wars), The United States, and Venezuela(Venezuelan crisis of 1895). Is it possible to for some or all of these to combine into a World War scenario where Britain has to fight them on her own?

Nobody's interested? :(

The problem may lie in that your premise is a bit confusing. For example a lot of your points of conflict are not actually contiguous in time, so for example Venezuela was already on the road to being left dissatisfied by the time Germany starts thinking about building a navy.

Also if you look at the interests of the powers involved in the disputes only one faced only Britain as an adversary so the Boer Republics went to war...and ceased to exist 21 months later. All the rest had bigger fish to fry. America finds enforcing the Monroe Doctrine much easier with the Royal Navy helping rather than committed to hindering, the French are more worried about the Germans who are more worried abut the French and Russians who are more worried about the Germans. The Portuguese find it more useful to have Britain as an actual ally than go to war for a hypothetical empire.

That said strange things do happen in international affairs but depending on who starts it if another power looks to join in then Britain would tend to cut a deal with a third power who opposes that second power.

Unless Britain did something truly egregious like start eating babies it is hard to see them truly alone, they were just too useful to too many people.
 
Its not a bad idea at all, but its one that would, as RodentRevolution points out, require some groundwork.

Fundamentally you are misunderstanding Splendid Isolation - whilst Britain avoided entangling alliances for much of the period it did not hesistate to play various factions in Europe especially against each other. It consistently took a divide and rule approach, trying to side-step any major conflicts, and you would need a serious error in judgement to overcome this.

I doubt you would ever see France and Prussia/Germany on the same side against Britain, for example, but you might conceivably see a Franco-Russian or Prusso-Russian alliance face off against Britain. Alternately you could see a scenario where Britain steps in to help the wrong side of a conflict and ends up with the odds against them - maybe supporting the Ottomans too vigorously against Russia and Austria-Hungary?

But as other posters have pointed out you need to overcome the reality that other countries had both a stake in British neutrality and distractions of their own.
 
We do have a thread on a hypothetical Anglo-American War in 1895, which has more or less descended into "He said, she said".

Portugal was Britain's Oldest Ally, war is unlikely.
(And Portugal is hopelessly outclassed with no obvious allies)

There have been several What If's about Britain and a German Invasion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_of_Dorking
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Invasion_of_1910
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Riddle_of_the_Sands
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_William_Came
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirty-Nine_Steps

France is the traditional enemy, but not very original.
However, it is a persistant theme
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_War_in_England_in_1897
and this one involves Russia.
The problem is that any such scenario would almost certainly require Britain allying with another continental power, such as Germany, when playing its traditional "Balance of Power" policy.

And Russia is the one which has almost no material. Just for the sake of originality it might be nice to explore the idea.
The Great Game might accidentally provoke a war. However, distances and logistics are an issue. The size of the Russian Army might not matter since it would be so hard to deploy anywhere it can be effective. The Russo-Japanese War showed that it could be defeated, and for Russia communications are even worse along the Afghan border than Siberia, and much better for British India.
The Russian Navy has no chance at all against the Royal Navy, even with a French Alliance. Which does not mean it could not happen, with the Tsar taking advantage of Britain being distracted by another crisis.
In theory a dispute over the Alaskan Border might lead to conflict, if the US purchase fails for some reason.
And then there's the old chestnut about the Second Pacific Squadron provoking a harsher response.
 
Top