Optimal GERMANY post-World War I borders survey (Central Powers victory)

These aren't the optimum borders for Germany in any realistic world.
Here is how Europe should look after WWI:

BBrheVN.png

If the German Empire is willing to hold Trento, they will be more than willing to hold Briey-Longwy. So what if the local population complains? The German Empire never respected self-determination of peoples unless those peoples were German. By definition empires control foreign people within their borders. There will probably be Germans annexationists who justify their conquests on that the German Empire created by Bismark was TOO ethnically homogeneous and they were an empire "only in name" and they need subject peoples to be a "real empire," with French, Italian and Slav minorities like the good old HRE.

If the Austria-Hungary falls apart, the Czechs are going to be annexed outright, just taking the German majority areas and letting Greater Hungary annex the Slovaks won't pass.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 94680

If the German Empire is willing to hold Trento,

According to whom?

they will be more than willing to hold Briey-Longwy. So what if the local population complains? The German Empire never respected self-determination of peoples unless those peoples were German. By definition empires control foreign people within their borders.

No, by definition an Empire is a polity ruled by an Emperor. Or a collection of states ruled by one state. Nothing necessary about foreign people within the borders. Where are the foreign people within the borders of the British Empire?

There will probably be Germans annexationists who justify their conquests on that the German Empire created by Bismark was TOO ethnically homogeneous and they were an empire "only in name" and they need subject peoples to be a "real empire," with French, Italian and Slav minorities like the good old HRE.

Doubt it. Unless you're postulating a new POD. The Prussians (arguably the motivator for the Reich) didn't even want the Austrians because they were catholic. Doubtful they'll be rubbing their hands at the idea of unnecessary Slavs just for Reasons. Also, to many Kleindeutschland proponents (who had 'won' the German Question, remember) the HRE was an example of the failure of Empire building, not the success. Vienna may dream of rubuilding the HRE, not Berlin.

If the Austria-Hungary falls apart, the Czechs are going to be annexed outright, just taking the German majority areas and letting Greater Hungary annex the Slovaks won't pass.

Based on what?

The CP win and the Dual Monarchy falls apart? How's that panning out?
 
According to whom?

According to the Map Augenis posted on page 3. I was responding to it more than to you Stenz, but because I linked to your post you sprinted over here to refute me instead of looking at the map I was replying to.

Augenis was the one who posted the map with the lesser Czechia, and the spiting up of AH. I was just commenting on it.

The central powers winning WW1 would create a entirely different twentieth century. Instead of Imperialism being seen as bad, it would be seen as good. Instead of Self-determinism, Great Power realpolitik would decide the independence of countries. I do not agree with it, but there would be a total morality shift and who knows what ideologies would pop up, especially post-hoc after the annexations had time to settle in?
 
Last edited:
If the German Empire is willing to hold Trento, they will be more than willing to hold Briey-Longwy. So what if the local population complains? The German Empire never respected self-determination of peoples unless those peoples were German. By definition empires control foreign people within their borders. There will probably be Germans annexationists who justify their conquests on that the German Empire created by Bismark was TOO ethnically homogeneous and they were an empire "only in name" and they need subject peoples to be a "real empire," with French, Italian and Slav minorities like the good old HRE.

If the Austria-Hungary falls apart, the Czechs are going to be annexed outright, just taking the German majority areas and letting Greater Hungary annex the Slovaks won't pass.

Look at the second, zoomed in map of Austria. Trento is ceded to Italy but It looks like Sudtirol was retained by Austria. This is a good border based on ethnic grounds.

However, there are still Italians outside of Italia, notably Trieste and the rest of Istria. Italy will still desire Dalmatia etc... Other threads of similar subject matter have seen Trieste, Istria handed over to Italy on ethnic grounds but allowed Germany basing rights for a Mediterranean naval/merchant marine presence.
 
Here is how Europe should look after WWI:


And this is how Austria-Hungary should be split up:




Just so that nobody is confused: German-Austria gets integrated as a Kingdom and a Duchy into the German Empire while Hungary becomes an independent kingdom, as does Croatia. Both Hungary and Croatia get parts of Serbia. So do Bulgaria and Albania. Lithuania becomes a Duchy in alliance with Germany. Latvia and Estonia get merged into the Baltic confederation or the United Baltic Duchy or whatever which is in alliance with Germany. Poland becomes an independent Kingdom in a customs union with Germany. Ukraine and Belarus become independent states in which Germany has exclusive extraction rigths for certain ressources.

In the west Germany annexes Luxemburg and gets to occupy a part of the French border for 10 years. Germany limits the amount of coal and steel which may be extracted from cerain mines in northern France. Flanders gets annexed by the Netherlands. The Walloons become an independent duchy under the "protection" of Germany.

The 2 maps are a bit confusing as to what Serbia has lost. Bulgaria looks like it has gained macedonia region from Serbia. What has Albania gained? I'd say in this scenario, Kosovo would be appropriate. From what I can tell, it looks like Serbia has lost some portions of Banat and Vojvodina to Croatia and Hungary.
 
The 2 maps are a bit confusing as to what Serbia has lost. Bulgaria looks like it has gained macedonia region from Serbia. What has Albania gained? I'd say in this scenario, Kosovo would be appropriate. From what I can tell, it looks like Serbia has lost some portions of Banat and Vojvodina to Croatia and Hungary.

Bulgaria gained Macedonia. Albaina gained Kosovo and some lower border regions.

You are spot on regarding Hungary and Croatia.
 
Bulgaria gained Macedonia. Albaina gained Kosovo and some lower border regions.

You are spot on regarding Hungary and Croatia.

Seems like a fitting punishment for a Serbia on the losing side of WW1 and a peace treaty enforced by Germany.
 
If the Austria-Hungary falls apart, the Czechs are going to be annexed outright, just taking the German majority areas and letting Greater Hungary annex the Slovaks won't pass.

Germany doesn't need a big Slavic majority area in the heart of the country which would only be pissed off by German rule. It's way easier to give them "independence" while forcing them into a customs union like the EU and make them economically and militarily dependend on Germany. The best slave is the one who doesn't know he is a safe.
 

Deleted member 94680

According to the Map Augenis posted on page 3. I was responding to it more than to you Stenz, but because I linked to your post you sprinted over here to refute me instead of looking at the map I was replying to.

Augenis was the one who posted the map with the lesser Czechia, and the spiting up of AH. I was just commenting on it.

Ah, fair one. But we're supposed to be discussing Caliguy's map, aren't we? Any map having extensive annexations into Germany are a no-go, IMHO. Vassals and puppets, by all means. Spheres of influence and economic dominance, most definitely. Maybe even destruction of fortifications in a "demilitarised zone" would be a good one. I just can't see a SPD dominated Reichstag approving wholesale balkanisation of Central Europe and then absorbing parts of these antagonised nations into Germany. Gemany may exit a victorious alt-WWI as the most powerful nation on the continent, but in many of these maps they would be friendless. History teaches us no matter how iron the determination to keep enemies under the heel at the end of a War, the urge will fade given time. Tie that to revanchsim, which unless France ceases to exist post war is guaranteed, then you've brewed the perfect formula for round two.

The central powers winning WW1 would create a entirely different twentieth century. Instead of Imperialism being seen as bad, it would be seen as good. Instead of Self-determinism, Great Power realpolitik would decide the independence of countries. I do not agree with it, but there would be a total morality shift and who knows what ideologies would pop up, especially post-hoc after the annexations had time to settle in?

Agreed, but nationalism seems pretty prevalent no matter the scenario. Take 'core' areas, or regions seen as integral to a national identity, then you're going to have enemies who want to see you destroyed.
 
Germany doesn't need a big Slavic majority area in the heart of the country which would only be pissed off by German rule. It's way easier to give them "independence" while forcing them into a customs union like the EU and make them economically and militarily depended on Germany. The best slave is the one who doesn't know he is a safe.

I have heard that argument before it falls apart quickly. What is so special about the Czechs that makes them deserving of a rump state when the Slovaks get no say under Hungerian rule? What will the Germans do when the Czechs assert their sovereignty and start nationalizing German businesses and launching terrorist attacks, because they will. They are going to send an army in, that's what, and we will need a new definition for sovereignty. Who is going to stand up for the sovereignty of a small state surrounded by enemies? If the Germans cared about soft power they would not have annexed the German regions and make the same mistake Austria-Hungary did when they annexed Bosnia. A "soft power" solution would have no annexations, the Germans and Czechs live together with German "peacekeeping." But we are past the point of no return now so the Germans might as well treat the Czechs like the Russians treated Poland. "If you behave you can have autonomy, but under OUR sovereignty." There are times for using soft power and hard power, and a rump Czechia is not a case of soft power because it is not a viable state unless we bring suzerainty back Big Time.

All this talk of vassals and puppets, but you are in essence turning Germany into the "China" of Europe, where Germany has no reason to respect the smaller states around it and they have to tolerate German economic domination and meddling in their politics and I am not sure Europeans at this time period would be able to handle being treated that way. Imagine the resentment today by members in the EU and then multiply that by a hundred and mix in some populism, that is just the start of what we are dealing with here.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 94680

I have heard that argument before all it falls apart quickly. What is so special about the Czechs that makes them deserving of a rump state when the Slovaks get no say under Hungerian rule?

Because under Hungarian rule the Slovaks had no real national identity. The Czechs, meanwhile, had their own political parties, regional parliaments (when they weren't shut down), language schools and military units. There was already a "Czech Nation" in all but name prior to the collapse of A-H. Hungarian restrictions prevented the Slovakians from really asserting their own identity until independence - which, by no coincidence, they achieved in union with the Czechs.

What will the Germans do when the Czechs assert their sovereignty and start nationalizing German businesses and launching terrorist attacks, because they will. They are going to send a army in, that what, and we will need a new definition for sovereignty. Who is going to stand up for the sovereignty of a small state surrounded by enemies? If the Germans cared about soft power they would not have annexed the German regions and make the same mistake Austria-Hungary did when they annexed Bosnia. A "soft power" solution would have no annexations, the Germans and Czechs live together with German "peacekeeping."

The soft power solution would be the better choice by far. All depends on the course of the war and how far Germany has had to go to win to know what kind of Germany rules after. The Kaiserreich is not the Third Reich, remember.

But we are past the point of no return now so the Germans might as well treat the Czechs like the Russians treated Poland.

How are we past the point of no return? Are you working from a different TL, because the OP hasn't determined the course of the War that results in German victory.

"If you behave you can have autonomy, but under OUR sovereignty." There are times for using soft power and hard power, and a rump Czechia is not a case of soft power because it is not a viable state unless we bring suzerainty back Big Time.

Maybe the Czech Crownland under a German Prince instead? Suzerainty would still be possible post-WWI, even an alt-WWI. OTL, the British Empire interwar was pretty big on suzerainty one could say.
 
I just can't see a SPD dominated Reichstag approving wholesale balkanisation of Central Europe and then absorbing parts of these antagonised nations into Germany.

Yet in 1918 the SPD abstained on the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, and mostly voted for the Treaty of Bucharest. They didn't dare vote against either one. So why would they object to the annexation of German speaking areas of AH, many of whose inhabitants would probably vote for them?
 
Germany doesn't need a big Slavic majority area in the heart of the country which would only be pissed off by German rule. It's way easier to give them "independence" while forcing them into a customs union like the EU and make them economically and militarily dependend on Germany. The best slave is the one who doesn't know he is a safe.
The Sorbs exist you know... The common idea was that Sorbs are just slavized Germans so eh, who cares. you can expand that to Czechs as well.

Sorbian_State_map.png
 

Deleted member 94680

Yet in 1918 the SPD abstained on the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, and mostly voted for the Treaty of Bucharest. They didn't dare vote against either one. So why would they object to the annexation of German speaking areas of AH, many of whose inhabitants would probably vote for them?

Fair point but they abstained as a method of protest and the Treaty of Bucharest was not wholesale annexation to Germany, was it? Romania exited larger than she entered, so one could say she was compensated for territory transferred.
 
The Sorbs make up about 20.000 people... that's not comparable with nearly 9 million Czechs.
6 and a half million, in a 100 million German Empire they'd be the biggest minority, still a smaller share of the population than Algerians under French rule in Algeria which they considered to be part of the French core lands, not just a random colony.

Also the Sorbs numberd in the hundreds of thousands but assimilation takes its toll over time.
 
6 and a half million, in a 100 million German Empire they'd be the biggest minority, still a smaller share of the population than Algerians under French rule in Algeria which they considered to be part of the French core lands, not just a random colony.

Also the Sorbs numberd in the hundreds of thousands but assimilation takes its toll over time.


According to Wikipedia there were 8,7 million Czechs in 1921.

According to the official webiste of the Sorbians in Saxony there are 60.000 Sorbians in Germany.

According to the Sorbian institute there were about 7000 speakers of the Sorbian language in 1860.

I can't imagine that there hundreds of thousands of Sorbians in 1919.
 
According to Wikipedia there were 8,7 million Czechs in 1921.

According to the official webiste of the Sorbians in Saxony there are 60.000 Sorbians in Germany.

According to the Sorbian institute there were about 7000 speakers of the Sorbian language in 1860.

I can't imagine that there hundreds of thousands of Sorbians in 1919.
The 1911 census gives 6.5 mil speaking Czech as first language, you're most likely also counting the Sudeten Germans/Austrians/whatever.
60k might be today for the Sorbs but numbers for earlier times have them above 200k+.
Wiki:
Year 1700 1750 1880 1900 1945
Population
250,000 200,000 166,000 146,000 100,000
 
Last edited:
Top