The Allies enforce Versailles

[Aphrodite]

Just what it says. What happens if the Allies force German compliance with the treaty. They require that the Germans put all their tax revenue into an account controlled by the Allies. The reparation payments are taken off the top before the Germans can spend a dime on anything else. Any spending that the Allies think violates Versailles doesn't get paid for.


The thread assumes that the treaty is enforced. That means by whatever means necessary. It also means the allies are united on this

 

[Mackus]

Reparations are paid in full.

 

[Inferus]

Reparations are paid in full.

They still were in OTL.

 

[Inferus]

Just what it says. What happens if the Allies force German compliance with the treaty. They require that the Germans put all their tax revenue into an account controlled by the Allies. The reparation payments are taken off the top before the Germans can spend a dime on anything else. Any spending that the Allies think violates Versailles doesn't get paid for.

You strangle what recovery the Germans had accomplished and further radicalize them. Now if the Allies publicly void Versailles, especially in the face of the Depression in order to spur trade and economic growth...that would have ripples.

 

[Anchises]

Just what it says. What happens if the Allies force German compliance with the treaty. They require that the Germans put all their tax revenue into an account controlled by the Allies. The reparation payments are taken off the top before the Germans can spend a dime on anything else. Any spending that the Allies think violates Versailles doesn't get paid for.

Germany is thrown into a spiral of strikes terrorism and extremism. The tax revenues the allies are trying to collect melt like snow in the sunshine while people start paying their taxes to quasi-states organized by the various political groups(Soviet Republics, National Republics, Monarchist pockets etc). Freikorps and Socialists are battling all over the Republic while the official government losses all credibility. I doubt that the Reichswehr would follow them.

At this point the Allies either back off or attempt a large scale Rhineland occupation. If the Brits and more importantly the Americans are on board with this for some ASB reason the Occupation turns into a quagmire that wrecks the German and the European economy.
More realistically it is only France and America quickly exerts pressure to negotiate a withdrawal. Its questionable if there is a Central Government that they could negotiate with at this point.

Either way the long outcome is that Germany is 100% guaranteed to go either Ultranationalist or Communist and the Treaty of Versailles is probably broken more quickly than OTL.
The whole story ends with the Wehrmacht or the two Red Armies (Germany and the Soviets) marching into France hellbent on revenge.

 

[teg]

Most likely the same thing that happened in the Ruhr in OTL - the Germans refuse to co-operate, followed by an attempted occupation and then mass civil disobedience. Neither Britain nor France had the capacity to handle this and its questionable whether the US did either, even if they wanted to.

On a related note, it is actually possible that the best way to improve Versailles would to have not imposed armaments limitations on Germany at all. It has been demonstrated by Hantke and Spoerer that the German financial situation was actually improved by the troop limitations, even if one removed the reparations. (This does assume that the German military was given levels of spending similar to Britain and France but given how hung up the German right was on the troop limitations, it is likely that a right-wing Weimar government would have tried to build up a significant military force.) This would have weakened Germany's financial and military position in a much more organic way (thus, not requiring large troops commitments to enforce) while also keeping a lot of potential Nazi supporters off the streets.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/409298...y+counterfactual&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

teg

 

[Mackus]

You strangle what recovery the Germans had accomplished and further radicalize them.

Nah.
Paying reparations wouldn't strangle Germany.
Massive German resistance to paying reparations otoh, could've very well strangle Germany.
Germans spent more on resisting Ruhr occupation than they would spend paying reparations if they didn't resist.

 

[LHB]

Nah.
Paying reparations wouldn't strangle Germany.
Massive German resistance to paying reparations otoh, could've very well strangle Germany.
Germans spent more on resisting Ruhr occupation than they would spend paying reparations if they didn't resist.

And why would the Germans cooperate with a more stringently enforced Versailles when they went kicking and screaming with what was done OTL?

 

[Aphrodite]

Most likely the same thing that happened in the Ruhr in OTL - the Germans refuse to co-operate, followed by an attempted occupation and then mass civil disobedience. Neither Britain nor France had the capacity to handle this and its questionable whether the US did either, even if they wanted to.

Actually, the Germans would have no choice but to comply. Tax collections have to go somewhere and the Allies have given themselves the German checkbook. If the Germans refuse to pay their taxes, they would have no government at all: no police, no schools, no pensions, nothing.

Worst case, the allies simply blockade the ports.

Just because OTL, the Americans go home and the British stupidly don't help France enforce Versailles, doesn't mean this is inevitable.

Nah.
Paying reparations wouldn't strangle Germany.
Massive German resistance to paying reparations otoh, could've very well strangle Germany.
Germans spent more on resisting Ruhr occupation than they would spend paying reparations if they didn't resist.

Indeed, the Germans could have paid half the reparations from reduced military spending and royal pensions. After a few years of economic growth, the burden would become even less

And why would the Germans cooperate with a more stringently enforced Versailles when they went kicking and screaming with what was done OTL?

Because this time, the allies have devised an effective enforcement means. If the Germans don't pay the allies, they don't get any government at all. Nor do they have a chance to spend anything on arms

 

[LHB]

Because this time, the allies have devised an effective enforcement means. If the Germans don't pay the allies, they don't get any government at all. Nor do they have a chance to spend anything on arms

The Soviet Union is going to love having one of the industrial superpowers of Europe on their side because that guarantees you're either going to get a fascist or communist revolution really quick.

 

[Mackus]

And why would the Germans cooperate with a more stringently enforced Versailles when they went kicking and screaming with what was done OTL?

Because ITTL, kicking and screaming doesn't work.

In 1945 Allies were far more brutal against Germany they were in 1919. They occupied their country, after they firebombed their cities, annihilated their armies, and dissolved their government.
And Germans went along with the occupation. Because they quickly figured out that Allies aren't gonna put up with any nonsense.

OTL, the more Germans were kicking and screaming, they more Allies caved in, and they kept renegotiating Versallies in German favor. Of course Germans kept throwing tantrum. Why wouldn't they, if it worked!

But if throwing tantrum ITTL gets Germany occupied, well, you bet they start to cooperate. It's nice to go on strike for a week or two if you're coal miner or steel mill worker... but if there is no German government to pay your salary while you strike, what are you gonna do when you run of of money to pay for food?

 

[Inferus]

Nah.
Paying reparations wouldn't strangle Germany.
Massive German resistance to paying reparations otoh, could've very well strangle Germany.
Germans spent more on resisting Ruhr occupation than they would spend paying reparations if they didn't resist.

It is the image of paying reparations that inflamed German rage (a very bad thing). The reparations actually were curtailed but Weimar failed to tell the nation which kept up the illusion of the "crushing" punishment of Versailles. Now if the Allies actually not only push for payment but are belligerent about it, which they would likely be, then the Nazis still rise and they still challenge Versailles. After the Great War and the Depression, the Allies were in no mood to threaten war and Germany was not willing to accept perpetual second class status. So the Allies demand payment, Germany says no and...the Allies invade Germany? Not happening save under a fascist France.

 

[LHB]

But if throwing tantrum ITTL gets Germany occupied, well, you bet they start to cooperate. It's nice to go on strike for a week or two if you're coal miner or steel mill worker... but if there is no German government to pay your salary while you strike, what are you gonna do when you run of of money to pay for food?

For one the only country that actually was interested in doing that was France and they wouldn't be able to effectively occupy Germany long enough to make it work. Britain wasn't interested in helping France become the pre-eminent power in Europe or totally destroying the German economy and the US was completely disinterested in having anything to do with the whole mess.

For two this is a Germany that hasn't been firebombed, seen every man from age 15-50 drafted into and chewed up by the army in a war that Germany clearly, unquestionably lost.

For three the stab in the back myth did a wonderful job of convincing many Germans they lost because of treachery at home and not genuine battlefield defeat. A full-on attempt at occupation under such conditions would be guaranteed to inspire fierce, unending resistance.

Fourth and finally the Allies were able to hold the whip hand after 1945 because the German economy had ceased to exist and resistance meant starvation. In 1919 the Allies don't have such a massive disparity of power or resources over the Germans and the Germans would know it especially since the point of the occupation would be seizing as much in the way of economically useful material as possible.

You're comparing apples to oranges and assuming "getting tough" would somehow paper over the massive differences between the two occupations.

 

[teg]

Actually, the Germans would have no choice but to comply. Tax collections have to go somewhere and the Allies have given themselves the German checkbook. If the Germans refuse to pay their taxes, they would have no government at all: no police, no schools, no pensions, nothing.

Worst case, the allies simply blockade the ports.

Just because OTL, the Americans go home and the British stupidly don't help France enforce Versailles, doesn't mean this is inevitable.

Why would the Americans not go home? The 1918 and 1920 elections saw big wins for the anti-interventionists and even during the war, American intervention in Europe was not popular. And if the Allies are not physically occupying Germany, then what exactly is going to stop the Germans just circumventing this system? A blockade will work for a while but in the long run all it will cause is revolution and then a German-Soviet alignment.

Because ITTL, kicking and screaming doesn't work.

In 1945 Allies were far more brutal against Germany they were in 1919. They occupied their country, after they firebombed their cities, annihilated their armies, and dissolved their government.
And Germans went along with the occupation. Because they quickly figured out that Allies aren't gonna put up with any nonsense.

OTL, the more Germans were kicking and screaming, they more Allies caved in, and they kept renegotiating Versallies in German favor. Of course Germans kept throwing tantrum. Why wouldn't they, if it worked!

But if throwing tantrum ITTL gets Germany occupied, well, you bet they start to cooperate. It's nice to go on strike for a week or two if you're coal miner or steel mill worker... but if there is no German government to pay your salary while you strike, what are you gonna do when you run of of money to pay for food?

You do understand how violent Weimar Germany was between 1918 and 1924? This system just means that the street violence that was focused on other Germans will be used against the Allies, which will cause support for an occupation to go down the drain. The Allies in 1918/19 simply cannot do what they did to Germany in 1944/45 - the technology isn't there, most of the Allied powers are exhausted and the only one that isn't won't stay committed to the war if it starts to become a long slog, and there aren't vast numbers of Soviet troops swamping Germany from the east.

teg

 

[Aphrodite]

The Soviet Union is going to love having one of the industrial superpowers of Europe on their side because that guarantees you're either going to get a fascist or communist revolution really quick.

Really? And what are the Germans doing to help the Soviets? They have no army and the allies have all their money. I'm sure Poland is going to like not having two fronts and a boatload of cash. The Czechs will be better off as well without the German occupation

It is the image of paying reparations that inflamed German rage (a very bad thing). The reparations actually were curtailed but Weimar failed to tell the nation which kept up the illusion of the "crushing" punishment of Versailles. Now if the Allies actually not only push for payment but are belligerent about it, which they would likely be, then the Nazis still rise and they still challenge Versailles. After the Great War and the Depression, the Allies were in no mood to threaten war and Germany was not willing to accept perpetual second class status. So the Allies demand payment, Germany says no and...the Allies invade Germany? Not happening save under a fascist France.

Really, since the thread assumes that the treaty is enforced- reparations paid and no military spending- I see little hope for the Nazis. As the thread says:

All German finances are controlled by the allies. They can't spend a dime on anything until they pay the reparations and no military spending is approved at all. The notion that the allies have to be sissies about the collections is specifically rejected.

 

[Mackus]

For one the only country that actually was interested in doing that was France and they wouldn't be able to effectively occupy Germany long enough to make it work. Britain wasn't interested in helping France become the pre-eminent power in Europe or totally destroying the German economy and the US was completely disinterested in having anything to do with the whole mess.

Please read OP. It clearly states "Allies", as in plural. No just France. AT very least France and UK, probably also USA.

You're comparing apples to oranges and assuming "getting tough" would somehow paper over the massive differences between the two occupations.

You're assuming an outrage over real or imagined grievances would somehow on its own paper over massive differences in military power. Germany was in no position to resist Allies united in desire to get Germany to pay.

 

[Aphrodite]

The Thread assumes that the Allies have the will to enforce the treaty. If the Germans resist, they are blockaded, the Rhine bridges blown and whatever else is needed.

 

[Anchises]

Actually, the Germans would have no choice but to comply. Tax collections have to go somewhere and the Allies have given themselves the German checkbook. If the Germans refuse to pay their taxes, they would have no government at all: no police, no schools, no pensions, nothing.

Worst case, the allies simply blockade the ports.

Just because OTL, the Americans go home and the British stupidly don't help France enforce Versailles, doesn't mean this is inevitable.

Sorry but this seems to me like on of this threads where we have some kind of revanchist fantasy where the strict allies crush Germany in 1919-1920. Its not stupid to not engage in mindless revanchism.

The Germans would stop paying their taxes, they would sabotage the industry and their would be a wave of terror. And is there an ASB that bestows Britain and France with the means and the political will to occupy Germany and to run the German economy WITHOUT completely wrecking the European economy?

Indeed, the Germans could have paid half the reparations from reduced military spending and royal pensions. After a few years of economic growth, the burden would become even less

That's just blatantly false.

The Thread assumes that the Allies have the will to enforce the treaty. If the Germans resist, they are blockaded, the Rhine bridges blown and cities destroyed if needed.

So the German State is destroyed, the Allies engage in large scale war crimes in Germany and once both sides are exhausted the Soviet New Men come marching in greeted as liberators and heroes by the Germans ?

Having the will and having the means are two VERY different things....

 

[Aphrodite]

Sorry but this seems to me like on of this threads where we have some kind of revanchist fantasy where the strict allies crush Germany in 1919-1920. Its not stupid to not engage in mindless revanchism.

The Germans would stop paying their taxes, they would sabotage the industry and their would be a wave of terror. And is there an ASB that bestows Britain and France with the means and the political will to occupy Germany and to run the German economy WITHOUT completely wrecking the European economy?

So the Germans would prefer living in anarchy than paying a small reparation. Rather doubt that one. Is it stupid to allow the Nazis to stop paying reparations and building up a huge army to invade their neighbors? The answer is obvious

The notion that a beaten and defeated Germany without any weapons at all is going to be some valiant resistance is just silly. The Germans exploited divisions in the allies to regain their position of strength. There's no reason to need ASB to get the allies to take a different course

That's just blatantly false.

Not at all. The reparations were 132,000,000 marks At 4% interest that would be 5,000,000,000 per annum. Before the war, the Germans spent 2 billion on their military and that doesn't include the forgone wages of the soldiers

 

[LHB]

Please read OP. It clearly states "Allies", as in plural. No just France. AT very least France and UK, probably also USA.

So how are you going to do that short of ASB intervention or handwavium?

You're assuming an outrage over real or imagined grievances would somehow on its own paper over massive differences in military power. Germany was in no position to resist Allies united in desire to get Germany to pay.

The Allies haven't utterly crushed Germany like they did in WWII.

They don't have the technology to really effectively hold the country down even if they wanted to.

They certainly don't have the military manpower to do so.

OTL the French occupation of the Ruhr was a major drain on French finances. Occupying the whole country will be ten times worse for everyone involved and yield nothing but more dead soldiers, angrier Germans and an even angrier post-occupation government that will be gearing up to tear the Allies a new one at their first excuse. If it's a Communist government then they'll have the resources of the USSR to back that up.