Ottomans in the Allies

WeisSaul

Banned
Simply put, what if the Ottoman Empire joined the allies in 1917 following the collapse of Russia, staying neutral prior to that, in an attempt to:

A- Reconquer Bosnia from Austria-Hungary
B- Conquer portions of Bulgaria
C- Become on good enough relations with the Western powers to the point that if it were to invade the collapsed and anarchic Russian Empire the western powers would just ignore it. Especially after the communists become the leading force.

I'm guessing it not only butterflies away the Turkish wars of independence, especially the Greco-Turkish war, but also means Greece is getting more of Bulgaria, perhaps all of north Thrace if Turkey doesn't get it.
 
Last edited:
Your gonna need them to stay neutral in WWI, I doubt they will be allowed to invade willy nilly though. everyone wanted some peace after the years of war and the Ottomans would become international pariahs if they started going to war with a whole bunch of people in blatant land grabs.
 

WeisSaul

Banned
So no Bosnia or parts of Bulgaria? I know the British promised it to Serbia, but it wouldn't be the only time in the war the British screwed someone over. Ask the Italians, Jews, and Arabs.
 

Cook

Banned
Simply put, what if the Ottoman Empire joined the allies in 1917 following the collapse of Russia...
I assume you mean that Turkey remains neutral prior to that, in which case the Bosporus remains open to allied shipping. This massively changes Russia’s situation; Half of Russia’s foreign pre-war trade went via the Bosporus, including fully 90% of Russia’s wheat exports, vital for the foreign capital necessary to maintain the war and wider economy. If Russia’s vital trade is not interrupted the revolution in February 1917 is at the very least postponed, possibly indefinitely.
 

WeisSaul

Banned
If the war continued to go on, which it likely would have, how long would it have taken for Russia to collapse then?

Also the German Empire was supporting Lenin in an attempt to crush the Russian Empire. There were multiple attempts to cause revolutions in the enemies' countries, with Lenin's communist revolution being just one of them. Would communist revolution have occurred when the war ended? With all of the soldiers returning home and not enough food to feed the people, along with a great sense of "Why the hell did we just go to war?", "Was it worth it?", "What did we gain from that!?", and "Who's to say we won't just randomly go to war again anytime soon?", a single man shouting revolutionary words could cause quite a bit of trouble
 

Philip

Donor
If the war continued to go on, which it likely would have, how long would it have taken for Russia to collapse then?
I don't think you can assume the war will go on or that Russia will collapse. Removing the OE from the CP frees slews of Russian and British (and Commonwealth) troops. If the British troops are deployed in Thessaloniki instead of Gallipoli and (at least some of) the Russian troops are redirected to the Eastern Front, A-H is going to be much more likely to collapse than Russia. A-H could be knocked out early, Russia takes Galicia, and Serbia is saved. The Russians are not left wondering, "Why the hell did we just go to war?".
 

Hoist40

Banned
I assume you mean that Turkey remains neutral prior to that, in which case the Bosporus remains open to allied shipping. This massively changes Russia’s situation; Half of Russia’s foreign pre-war trade went via the Bosporus, including fully 90% of Russia’s wheat exports, vital for the foreign capital necessary to maintain the war and wider economy. If Russia’s vital trade is not interrupted the revolution in February 1917 is at the very least postponed, possibly indefinitely.

Also with Russian wheat available, the British and French can use their dollars and gold to buy more machinery and weapons from the USA instead of using them to buy American wheat. So it would also help the British and French war effort
 

Cook

Banned
If the war continued to go on, which it likely would have, how long would it have taken for Russia to collapse then?
Anything that delays the Russian Revolutions is going to shorten the war simply because more German material is going to be expended on the Russian Front and more Germans are going to die there. The later the Bolsheviks are able to carry out a coup and replace Kerensky’s Provisional Government, the later that the Germans can conclude a peace treaty with Russia and transfer their forces to the Western Front for one last desperate offensive towards Paris.

With the Bosporus open to Russian shipping, which it would be if Turkey is neutral, the Russian treasury would be on a much better footing, exports would be generating far more foreign capital and allowing the purchase of goods from the United States. They may be enough alleviate the economic chaos and inflation that overcame the Tsarist state and caused the revolution in February of 1917. Even if they are not enough to totally avoid revolution than they would likely postpone the February revolution for several months, perhaps half a year. Until the provisional government was in power Lenin would not be able to return to Russia and start organising a coup and with the Provisional government assuming power in a country not totally in collapse and still trading with the west, it is more likely to be able to get a firm grip on the country, perhaps enough to prevent Lenin seizing power.

Even if the Bolsheviks are still able to seize power it will be later than October 1917, which means that Germany will not be able to transfer her troops from the Russian Front to the Western Front until later, perhaps not before the Americans start arriving in significant numbers in France. The Germans aren’t going to get anywhere near as close to Paris and the allies will drive them back sooner, perhaps crossing the Rhine before November 1918.

Also of significance are the British forces that fought in the Middle East; instead of fighting the Ottomans they’d be employed on other fronts, the Western Front, Italy or Salonika.
 
Bulgaria would probably not join the war if the Ottoman Empire was neutral. And without both of those countries in the war there is a good chance of the war ending before any revolution.

but also means Greece is getting more of Bulgaria, perhaps all of north Thrace
Quite unwise, but then the Greeks did invade the interior of Anatolia...
 
Neutral Ottomans may mean Entente victory in early 1918. An Entente that includes Russia as an active belligerant.
 
If the Ottomans remain neutral in 1914 nothing says Russia will collapse by 1917. They'll have more troops to put against both Germany and Austria-Hungary, which in itself will dramatically alter that war in a few ways, as will the Russians being able to trade with their allies from 1914-6.
 
Anything that delays the Russian Revolutions is going to shorten the war simply because more German material is going to be expended on the Russian Front and more Germans are going to die there. The later the Bolsheviks are able to carry out a coup and replace Kerensky’s Provisional Government, the later that the Germans can conclude a peace treaty with Russia and transfer their forces to the Western Front for one last desperate offensive towards Paris.

With the Bosporus open to Russian shipping, which it would be if Turkey is neutral, the Russian treasury would be on a much better footing, exports would be generating far more foreign capital and allowing the purchase of goods from the United States. They may be enough alleviate the economic chaos and inflation that overcame the Tsarist state and caused the revolution in February of 1917. Even if they are not enough to totally avoid revolution than they would likely postpone the February revolution for several months, perhaps half a year. Until the provisional government was in power Lenin would not be able to return to Russia and start organising a coup and with the Provisional government assuming power in a country not totally in collapse and still trading with the west, it is more likely to be able to get a firm grip on the country, perhaps enough to prevent Lenin seizing power.

Even if the Bolsheviks are still able to seize power it will be later than October 1917, which means that Germany will not be able to transfer her troops from the Russian Front to the Western Front until later, perhaps not before the Americans start arriving in significant numbers in France. The Germans aren’t going to get anywhere near as close to Paris and the allies will drive them back sooner, perhaps crossing the Rhine before November 1918.

Also of significance are the British forces that fought in the Middle East; instead of fighting the Ottomans they’d be employed on other fronts, the Western Front, Italy or Salonika.

Well, let's not forget that the *Russians* who fought in the Caucasus won't be fighting there, they'll be fighting either Germany or Austria-Hungary. How General Yudenich would have done in that war is an interesting question. Germany will have more men for the war with Russia, but Russia will also have more for the war with Germany.
 
Top