PC/WI: A much later WWI with an Austro-German-British-U.S. alliance?

CaliGuy

Banned
Had World War I been significantly delayed--indeed, for at least one or two decades--could an Austro-German-British-U.S. alliance (perhaps also with the Ottoman Empire and/or Japan being included in this alliance) have realistically emerged (to fight France and Russia) after this delayed WWI would have broken out?

Also, if so, what would the consequences of such an alliance have been? Indeed, how well would this alliance have fought against France and Russia in this TL's delayed WWI and what would this alliance's war aims have been?

Any thoughts on all of this?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Why would people want to gang up on France and Russia? Let's start from there.
They wouldn't so much want to gang up on France and Russia; rather, Russia's growing power would simply eventually make it and France sufficiently confident that they can quickly win a war against Germany and Austria-Hungary before Britain (and the U.S.) would be able to significantly help. However, Russia and France end up miscalculating in regards to this and then end up getting screwed over.

Indeed, that's the logic that I was operating on here.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Also, for the record, I am thinking of having the U.S. be neutral in this TL's delayed WWI until France and/or Russia does something--such as a desperate gamble on USW--to cause the U.S. to enter this TL's WWI on the Austro-German-British side.

Indeed, since Germany could provoke U.S. entry into WWI on the side of its enemies in our TL, why exactly couldn't France and/or Russia do the same in this TL?
 
Last edited:
I don't think you would be able to even get the Americans into this war at all but the Austro-German-British-Turkish alliance is very easy to get in this scenario, in fact it's the most likely outcome.
 

RousseauX

Donor
They wouldn't so much want to gang up on France and Russia; rather, Russia's growing power would simply eventually make it and France sufficiently confident that they can quickly win a war against Germany and Austria-Hungary before Britain (and the U.S.) would be able to significantly help. However, Russia and France end up miscalculating in regards to this and then end up getting screwed over.

Indeed, that's the logic that I was operating on here.
Splitting up Russia with UK is actually not that hard because the Russians could miscalculate and make a move at Afghanistan and India or something and the UK jump onboard with Germany

The main problem imo is that after 1905 the Russians weren't all that self-confident and probably wouldn't have done something that stupid over Central Asia which they cared limitedly about anyway
 

CaliGuy

Banned
I don't think you would be able to even get the Americans into this war at all but the Austro-German-British-Turkish alliance is very easy to get in this scenario, in fact it's the most likely outcome.
Couldn't France and Russia do something stupid--such as launching USW in a desperate gamble to knock Britain out of the war--to provoke U.S. entry into this war, though?

Also, would Japan enter this war on the Austro-German-British-Turkish side?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Splitting up Russia with UK is actually not that hard because the Russians could miscalculate and make a move at Afghanistan and India or something and the UK jump onboard with Germany

The main problem imo is that after 1905 the Russians weren't all that self-confident and probably wouldn't have done something that stupid over Central Asia which they cared limitedly about anyway
Agreed.

However, I was thinking of Russia and France waiting until much later--indeed, possibly until the 1930s or 1940s--before they feel sufficiently confident at sparking a war with the Austro-German-British alliance in this TL. After all, Russia was projected to become much more powerful over time.
 

RousseauX

Donor
Couldn't France and Russia do something stupid--such as launching USW in a desperate gamble to knock Britain out of the war--to provoke U.S. entry into this war, though?
yeah the main problem imo is that unless 1930s Russia is stronger than otl 1939 USSR I don't think the war last long enough for that

Also, would Japan enter this war on the Austro-German-British-Turkish side?
probably in fact they are very likely to do it if France is losing and they think they can grab vietnam or something
 

CaliGuy

Banned
yeah the main problem imo is that unless 1930s Russia is stronger than otl 1939 USSR I don't think the war last long enough for that

Russia would also have France on its side in this TL's WWI, though.

probably in fact they are very likely to do it if France is losing and they think they can grab vietnam or something

But not beforehand?
 

RousseauX

Donor
Russia would also have France on its side in this TL's WWI, though.
France is a declining great power by the 1900s, it's going to be even weaker vice-verse Germany in 1935 or w/e compare to 1914, there are core demographic issues with France that straitjackets it into a second-rate power as long as Germany exists


But not beforehand?

How confident does it feel about defending Korea vs Russia?
 
Couldn't France and Russia do something stupid--such as launching USW in a desperate gamble to knock Britain out of the war--to provoke U.S. entry into this war, though?

Also, would Japan enter this war on the Austro-German-British-Turkish side?
It would be hard with the terrifying level of Naval Power that an Anglo-Germam alliance would have and I mean also just in the issue of fairness, the combined industrial power of an Anglo-German-American alliance is insane.

And sure Japan would be more than happy to jump on the Russian bear with it is distracted and would love to take Indochina off of France.
 

RousseauX

Donor
One of the basic problems imo is that I don't see Russia+France choosing to fight against those odds unless the Russians are really really confident in themselves (I think they have to be above otl ussr power level for this)

The other thing is the war probably wouldn't last long enough for USW to come into play, France in this scenario would probably fold in under a year

I guess a lot of it pretty much comes down to how powerful do you think Russia will be, are they US level superpower without communism and the civil war?
 
One of the basic problems imo is that I don't see Russia+France choosing to fight against those odds unless the Russians are really really confident in themselves (I think they have to be above otl ussr power level for this)

The other thing is the war probably wouldn't last long enough for USW to come into play, France in this scenario would probably fold in under a year

I guess a lot of it pretty much comes down to how powerful do you think Russia will be, are they US level superpower without communism and the civil war?
They still wouldn't be strong enough, The USSR wouldnt have made it through without land lease and this is the Kaiser's Reich not Nazi Germany, its a different beast entirely.
 

RousseauX

Donor
They still wouldn't be strong enough, The USSR wouldnt have made it through without land lease and this is the Kaiser's Reich not Nazi Germany, its a different beast entirely.
Yeah that's true but what I'm saying is that if they were USSR level power they might have decided they had a chance and chose to fight
 

CaliGuy

Banned
France is a declining great power by the 1900s, it's going to be even weaker vice-verse Germany in 1935 or w/e compare to 1914, there are core demographic issues with France that straitjackets it into a second-rate power as long as Germany exists

France, Yes. However, Russia's power would likely be steadily increasing during this time period:

http://www.historytoday.com/charles-emmerson/russia-eve-first-world-war

"In May 1913 a prominent French economist, Edmond Théry, travelled to Russia to investigate an economic miracle: the unruly transformation of a financially backward empire into a modern agricultural and industrial superpower. The conclusions of his whistle-stop tour were dramatic and far removed from the kind of gloomy prognostications one might have expected. By 1948, Théry wrote, Russia’s population would be 343.9 million – three times that of Germany, six times that of Britain and eight times that of France. ‘If things continue between 1912 and 1950 as they have between 1900 and 1912’, he argued, ‘Russia will dominate Europe by the middle of the current century, politically as much as economically and financially.’"

How confident does it feel about defending Korea vs Russia?

Very confident, no? After all, Japan would be able to focus all of its energies on Russia while Russia would have to simultaneously focus on several of its enemies.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
It would be hard with the terrifying level of Naval Power that an Anglo-Germam alliance would have and I mean also just in the issue of fairness, the combined industrial power of an Anglo-German-American alliance is insane.

Agreed about the naval power part (even if the U.S. initially remains neutral--which is likely--and only enters the war later (if at all). However, Russia's main strength would be on land; indeed, if the Anglo-Germans blockade Russia but Franco-Russian troops are already in Berlin and the Ruhr, then Russia and France would win the war in spite of this blockade.

And sure Japan would be more than happy to jump on the Russian bear with it is distracted and would love to take Indochina off of France.

OK.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
One of the basic problems imo is that I don't see Russia+France choosing to fight against those odds unless the Russians are really really confident in themselves (I think they have to be above otl ussr power level for this)

Agreed; in turn, this is why exactly I talked about a significantly delayed WWI here. However, by 1948 (as per the information from my link above), Russia's population--almost 350 million--would be 3 times that of Germany, 6 times that of Britain, and 8 times that of France. With those odds, Russia might feel sufficiently confident that it can quickly defeat Germany and Austria-Hungary (together with France's help, of course) before Britain (and the U.S.) is able to send significant numbers of its own troops to continental Europe.

The other thing is the war probably wouldn't last long enough for USW to come into play, France in this scenario would probably fold in under a year

Disagreed. After all, as our TL's WWI showed, France certainly had a lot of fight inside of her. Thus, I expect France to hold out at least for a couple of years.

I guess a lot of it pretty much comes down to how powerful do you think Russia will be, are they US level superpower without communism and the civil war?

If Russia's per capita GDP would be, say, between one-half and two-thirds of the U.S. level in the late 1940s in this TL, then I could see Russia being close to being a U.S.-level superpower in this TL.
 
Agreed about the naval power part (even if the U.S. initially remains neutral--which is likely--and only enters the war later (if at all). However, Russia's main strength would be on land; indeed, if the Anglo-Germans blockade Russia but Franco-Russian troops are already in Berlin and the Ruhr, then Russia and France would win the war in spite of this blockade.



OK.
Maybe if they do everything right the Russians can be in Berlin before the French fold but the French won't be occupying much of anything.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Maybe if they do everything right the Russians can be in Berlin before the French fold but the French won't be occupying much of anything.
For the record, whether or not the Franco-Russians actually end up winning this TL's WWI is a completely separate question.

However, in response to your point here, I would like to point out that, in this TL's WWI, most of Germany's army will be stationed on the eastern front to fight against Russia. Thus, France will probably only have to fight against a fraction of the German Army in this TL's WWI.
 
Top