Peace terms in a stalemate WW1

[King_Arthur]

Let's say that Zimmerman never sent his telegram and Walter Schweiger doesn't torpedo the Lusitania, causing America to not enter the war. As Framce and Germany are both near collapse, a treaty is signed in the second third of 1919.

A definite clause of the treaty would be all German troops leaving France and Belgium. That's the only thing I'm sure about. I can see Italy pushing for more of Austria, whether its successful depends on the state of collapse A-H is in at that point. Brest-Litvotsk will be upheld and a Soviet-German war will replace the Soviet-Polish war of otl. I doubt any naval restrictions will be placed upon Germany but the Washington Naval Treaty or something similar maybe passed if the UK is freaked out by Japan.

The key questions are Alsace-Lorraine, Italian Borders, Dividing up Austria-Hungary and potential naval restrictions. I don't think the situation in the Middel East will change from otl.

 

[El_Presidente]

I imagine that Germany would annex Luxembourg and retain Alsace-Lorraine. In the East probably Brest-Litovsk is implemented. Germany would lose it's Pacific colonies and SW Africa, maybe retaining a diminished Cameroon and East Africa.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Let's say that Zimmerman never sent his telegram and Walter Schweiger doesn't torpedo the Lusitania, causing America to not enter the war. As Framce and Germany are both near collapse, a treaty is signed in the second third of 1919.

A definite clause of the treaty would be all German troops leaving France and Belgium. That's the only thing I'm sure about. I can see Italy pushing for more of Austria, whether its successful depends on the state of collapse A-H is in at that point. Brest-Litvotsk will be upheld and a Soviet-German war will replace the Soviet-Polish war of otl. I doubt any naval restrictions will be placed upon Germany but the Washington Naval Treaty or something similar maybe passed if the UK is freaked out by Japan.

The key questions are Alsace-Lorraine, Italian Borders, Dividing up Austria-Hungary and potential naval restrictions. I don't think the situation in the Middel East will change from otl.

The Lusitania was torpedoed in 1915 and did not result in war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Lusitania#Sinking

The Germans promised not to use USW and war was averted. Later on it was the resumption of USW coupled with the ZT and Zimmermann's admission that it was real that provoked the US to war. Even without the ZT Wilson was being pushed into war by the resumption of USW. Even without the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915 some ship was going to get hit with Americans on board, which would provoke similar outrage and again the use of USW later in the war would provoke the US. The best POD is simply not have Germany resume USW, but that would require that H-L stay out of power in Germany. Any sort of POD that does that creates a ton of butterflies beyond the US staying neutral.

 

[Hvalrossen]

The key questions are Alsace-Lorraine, Italian Borders, Dividing up Austria-Hungary and potential naval restrictions. I don't think the situation in the Middel East will change from otl.

Some suggestions allthough i am not sure if some or any of them would be acceptable. If any of these suggestions area are to be agreed, it will influence and be influenced by the others.

Alsace-Lorraine:

• Plebiscite deciding whether to join France or Germany.
• Perhaps another Belgium could be created?

Italian Borders:

• Plebiscite deciding whether to join Italy or Austria(or Germany).

 

[Aphrodite]

The Lusitania was torpedoed in 1915 and did not result in war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Lusitania#Sinking

The Germans promised not to use USW and war was averted. Later on it was the resumption of USW coupled with the ZT and Zimmermann's admission that it was real that provoked the US to war. Even without the ZT Wilson was being pushed into war by the resumption of USW. Even without the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915 some ship was going to get hit with Americans on board, which would provoke similar outrage and again the use of USW later in the war would provoke the US. The best POD is simply not have Germany resume USW, but that would require that H-L stay out of power in Germany. Any sort of POD that does that creates a ton of butterflies beyond the US staying neutral.

And yet despite all that, 50 Congressmen and 14 Senators still wouldn't vote for war. Remove the Zimmerman Telegram or better yet, have the Americans believe it was a British fake and resistance would soar. If that's not enough for you, then add in the British not propping up the price of cotton making the Entente unpopular in the South.

Or you can take a different track. Have some racial incident lead to a major civil rights issue and the Americans absorbed in domestic affairs

there are plenty of PODs that get the Americans to be both neutral and willing to accept USW

Of course if they do, its unlikely that WWI ends in a stalemate

 

[SsgtC]

Alsace-Lorraine:

• Plebiscite deciding whether to join France or Germany.
• Perhaps another Belgium could be created?

That wouldn't fly in Germany in this scenario. Their soldiers are still in France. Giving up A-L would be seen as a defeat. A-L stays German in any stalemated WWI scenario.

Italian Borders:

• Plebiscite deciding whether to join Italy or Austria(or Germany).

The borders are likely to change in Italy's favor. How much they change will depend on how badly A-H is faring.

 

[machine3589]

That wouldn't fly in Germany in this scenario. Their soldiers are still in France. Giving up A-L would be seen as a defeat. A-L stays German in any stalemated WWI scenario.

Moreover, France controls only a sliver of Alsace. The rest of it is firmly in German hands, so there's no chance Germany gives up A-L, or proposes a plebiscite.

The borders are likely to change in Italy's favor. How much they change will depend on how badly A-H is faring.

Only if Austria-Hungary has collapsed will the border go in Italy's favour.

 

[Catspoke]

I suspect that Kerensky Russia will make peace in the summer of 1917, In OTL there were pressured by the Americans to stay in the war and fight in exchange for USA loans, here there won't be loans and won't be USA pressure. The western Allies will also face financial crisis, so I suspect a general peace conference could take place in that summer, slightly central powers favorable.

 

[Hvalrossen]

That wouldn't fly in Germany in this scenario. Their soldiers are still in France. Giving up A-L would be seen as a defeat. A-L stays German in any stalemated WWI scenario.

In such a scenario Alsace-Lorraine may be split as Romance speaking municipalities would opt for France, while German speaking muncipalities would opt for Germany. I am not certain that a plebiscite in Alsace-Lorraine would neccesarily split the region by language.

The borders are likely to change in Italy's favor. How much they change will depend on how badly A-H is faring.

They would lose less than they did OTL.

 

[cpip]

I suspect that Kerensky Russia will make peace in the summer of 1917, In OTL there were pressured by the Americans to stay in the war and fight in exchange for USA loans, here there won't be loans and won't be USA pressure. The western Allies will also face financial crisis, so I suspect a general peace conference could take place in that summer, slightly central powers favorable.

Yup. If the Russians collapse out, and the Americans aren't coming, France is going to be willing to go to the table, and if France is going, Britain will come along.

 

[SsgtC]

In such a scenario Alsace-Lorraine may be split as Romance speaking municipalities would opt for France, while German speaking muncipalities would opt for Germany. I am not certain that a plebiscite in Alsace-Lorraine would neccesarily split the region by language.

I highly doubt it. The A-L region was considered vital as part of a strategic buffer zone between France and the rest of Germany. And at this point, it's been part of Germany for almost 50 years. I don't see them willingly giving it up. Surrendering such a large piece of territory would only be done if Germany was defeated. In a stalemate, France, the UK and Germany probably return to a Status Quo with relatively minor concessions given by both sides. Probably some sort of compensation for Belgium from Germany with security guarantees provided. Serbia probably loses a good chunk of territory to A-H to compensate for the death of the Archduke (and to backdoor compensate them for losing territory to Italy). France probably has to agree to perpetually abandon all claims to A-L. Germany would probably provide some sort of monetary compensation to France for the destruction if property and loss of life (obviously not nearly as much as IOTL). I'm not sure what else would be considered. Especially between the UK and Germany. Maybe the UK pays Germany for it's colonies in Africa?

 

[trajen777]

I think it comes to these choices :

A. If the German offensives go better in 18 (amiens) / USA cracks down on credit to allies / then u prob have this:
1. AL stays German
2. BL stays in place
3. Lux maybe German
4. Reduction in German fleet to xxx % of GB (even if Germany wins in France they cannot defeat GB at sea -- so exhaustion and lack of German Fleet success would give the Germans freedom to reduce their fleet
5. Middleeuropa financial system put in place
6. German colonies gone
7. OE split up
8. AH -- Hungry gone -- Italy gets nothing -- maybe loses some more of N Italy to Austria

B. Same is in 18 --- but Germany exhausted, and Allies do not have resources to move forward --
1. Lorr back to France -- Al to Germany
2. Lux to Germany
3. BL in place (but not as dependent as A above)
4. Italy gets nothing more but does not lose anything
5. German col gone

 

[King_Arthur]

Would Italy the turn fascist? I think it's a given that France will become revanchist. What form this takes is up for debate. Also, would the WNT or something similar be signed?

 

[Mr_Fanboy]

If Austria-Hungary still collapses, then Austria and the Sudetenland almost certainly join Germany.

 

[SsgtC]

Would Italy the turn fascist? I think it's a given that France will become revanchist. What form this takes is up for debate. Also, would the WNT or something similar be signed?

I really don't know about Italy, but yes, the WNT (or similar) would almost certainly still happen. The United States was interested in that as far back as 1912 (it was one of Theodore Roosevelt's campaign platforms). And the UK would certainly jump at it as a way to reduce their spending at a time when they strapped for cash. Of course, in this TL, Germany would also be a party to the treaty. You'd probably see Germany in the same bracket as Japan. Something along the lines of 20 capital ships each for the US and UK, between 12 and 14 for the IJN and HSF (that may be a little generous on my part) with France and Italy each being allowed anywhere from 8-10.

 

[Catspoke]

With No USA in, If Kerensky Russia in June 1917 says to Britain and France, we going to request a peace conference, we have to in order to survive, you can request one with us or not. Britain and France would also request one. Almost certainly they would all do it together to get better terms.

If the 3 got together and presented the following terms, I believe the Central Powers would accept.

a) Luxembourg to Germany
b) Belgian Congo to Germany
c) Portuguese Angola to Germany
d) France at pre-war boundaries
e) Italy at pre war boundaries.
f) Bulgaria gets favorable border adjustments in Serbia and Romania
g) Austria gets 2 year occupation of remainder of Serbia, Romania, Montenegro, Albania
h) Kars area to Turkey (otherwise Russia at pre war boundaries).
i) Otherwise pre war boundaries
j) Germany to establish a fund to reimburse private property losses in France and Belgium.
h) Germany to limit naval construction at 50% of Britain
i) Germany to scrap some submarines right away in exchange for Allied food shipments.

The Central Powers pick up minor gains, mostly at minor power expense. But Britain gets security back (naval limitations, the Germans out of Antwerp). France and Russia gets unoccupied. Austria handled her Balkan problem.

Its not a big victory. But Germany gets a big central African colonial empire. Germany can't really press for a big victory because the blockade is still in place, and even with a financial squeeze, the Allies could just remain in the line, not attacking anywhere, until the blockade really begins to hurt.

 

[Evil Crusader]

As Framce and Germany are both near collapse, a treaty is signed in the second third of 1919.

A definite clause of the treaty would be all German troops leaving France and Belgium. That's the only thing I'm sure about. I can see Italy pushing for more of Austria, whether its successful depends on the state of collapse A-H is in at that point. Brest-Litvotsk will be upheld and a Soviet-German war will replace the Soviet-Polish war of otl. I doubt any naval restrictions will be placed upon Germany but the Washington Naval Treaty or something similar maybe passed if the UK is freaked out by Japan.

Status quo in the West, with minor concessions depending on whether Germany is rocked by revolution at home or not - essentially how many colonies are retained.

The key questions are Alsace-Lorraine, Italian Borders, Dividing up Austria-Hungary and potential naval restrictions. I don't think the situation in the Middel East will change from otl.

A-L can't change unless Entente victory, as already stated. If A-H pops as hard as OTL, with one more year of warfare and no Wilson around, Italy may well get London Pact Borders. If A-H doesn't break, then status quo with minor or no concessions. Greece gets all of Thrace, and maybe even the Smirne area.

 

[El_Presidente]

If Austria-Hungary still collapses, then Austria and the Sudetenland almost certainly join Germany.

I would say that not only the Sudetenland, probably the whole Bohemia (plus the german populated parts in Hungarian Burgenland and Pressburg). In fact, if the Italians collapse as well, maybe even Trento and Slovenia, Adriatic Coast included.

Another reflexion on the Italian issue: maybe a Trieste for Dalmatia deal could take place? What I mean is that Germany would annex Slovenia, Pola, whole Trento, Trieste, egc., and in exchange allow Italy to get the whole Dalmatia, not just Zara.

 

[El_Presidente]

With No USA in, If Kerensky Russia in June 1917 says to Britain and France, we going to request a peace conference, we have to in order to survive, you can request one with us or not. Britain and France would also request one. Almost certainly they would all do it together to get better terms.

If the 3 got together and presented the following terms, I believe the Central Powers would accept.

a) Luxembourg to Germany
b) Belgian Congo to Germany
c) Portuguese Angola to Germany
d) France at pre-war boundaries
e) Italy at pre war boundaries.
f) Bulgaria gets favorable border adjustments in Serbia and Romania
g) Austria gets 2 year occupation of remainder of Serbia, Romania, Montenegro, Albania
h) Kars area to Turkey (otherwise Russia at pre war boundaries).
i) Otherwise pre war boundaries
j) Germany to establish a fund to reimburse private property losses in France and Belgium.
h) Germany to limit naval construction at 50% of Britain
i) Germany to scrap some submarines right away in exchange for Allied food shipments.

The Central Powers pick up minor gains, mostly at minor power expense. But Britain gets security back (naval limitations, the Germans out of Antwerp). France and Russia gets unoccupied. Austria handled her Balkan problem.

Its not a big victory. But Germany gets a big central African colonial empire. Germany can't really press for a big victory because the blockade is still in place, and even with a financial squeeze, the Allies could just remain in the line, not attacking anywhere, until the blockade really begins to hurt.

No way Great Britain is going to allow to a German Angola, much less a German Congo, and much less in what amounts to a draw, not a CP victory.

 

[Mikestone8]

Germany can't really press for a big victory because the blockade is still in place, and even with a financial squeeze, the Allies could just remain in the line, not attacking anywhere, until the blockade really begins to hurt.

To stop attacking would be seen as an admission that the war was unwinnable, since the Germans stood almost everywhere on Entente territory, and if they could not be dislodged from it, what were the soldiers getting killed for? That would risk a collapse of the soldiers' morale, leading to a CP victory. It would also cause a furious reaction from the civilian populations, probably causing the fall of the governments concerned.

Saying that "Oh we'll just hang in until the blockade causes them to collapse some unknown number of years from now" would impress no one and be seen as a counsel of despair.