The Great Game gets violent

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Game
"The Great Game" was the strategic rivalry and conflict between the British Empire and the Russian Empire for supremacy in Central Asia.[1] The classic Great Game period is generally regarded as running approximately from the Russo-Persian Treaty of 1813 to the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907. A less intensive phase followed the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. In the post-Second World War post-colonial period, the term has continued in use to describe the geopolitical machinations of the Great Powers and regional powers as they vie for geopolitical power and influence in the area.[2][3]
What if prior to the Russo-Japanese war the British and Russians came to blows over Iran or Afghanistan?
 

Driftless

Donor
Using an altered middle portion of "Kim" as the pushoff point?

.... Kim obtains maps, papers, and other important items from the Russians working to undermine British control of the region. Mookherjee befriends the Russians under cover, acting as a guide and ensures that they do not recover the lost items

In the premise of the story, the Russian agents were completing military invasion route surveys.
 

Deleted member 1487

Any idea how a Anglo-Russian war would play out in 1901 in Iran and Afghanistan?
 

Deleted member 1487

Why 1901?
I gather that the moment when it was likelier to go hot was about 1884-85, when the Panjdeh Crisis occurred.
The suggestion of the Kim story as a jump off point. Earlier is fine too. What would that result have been?
 
Logistics in theater for both sides would have been a . . . challenge.

The British would have the better end of that stick, but not by a whole lot.
 
I doubt the British would start a war with Russia in 1901. London was really worried during the Boer Wars, because they had to move troops from India to southern Africa.
In December 1901 (shortly before Anglo-Japanese Treaty) they thought the Russians would be able to move 200.000 into Central Asia.
Of course the British constantly overestimated Russian capabilities before the Russo-Japanese War, but this still influences their decisions.

Best chance (from my perspective) for a Anglo-Russian war in this time period would be something around 1878~ late 1880s.
Otherwise I dont see anyone starting a war, the Russians would not bother to attack (can push other boundaries (China, Balkans)) and the British would not dare to attack (war is expensive, and maybe the French will join so outcome is always uncertain).
Edit: Just keep playing "the game"
 

Driftless

Donor
I doubt the British would start a war with Russia in 1901. London was really worried during the Boer Wars, because they had to move troops from India to southern Africa.
In December 1901 (shortly before Anglo-Japanese Treaty) they thought the Russians would be able to move 200.000 into Central Asia.

Were there any conditions where the Russians chose to take advantage of British distraction with the Boer War and make their move into Afghanistan/Iran? (They didn't OTL obviously)
 
Not to my knowledge, though I am not very informed about Central Asia in that time period.

I think the problem that a "Great Game turns hot TL" has to overcome is the following: OTL the Russians didn't want open war with Britian about some poor regions. They kept pushing, yes, but never too much at the same point or time.
On the other side the British never dared starting a other land war with russia after the crimean war for obvious reasons. It comes down to the fact that Britain had so much more to loose by going to war than by just accepting minor russian advances in these areas.

So two ideas from me: in 1878 or 1905 (just OTL examples) the British join an other power in their war with russia (could also start somekind of German/Austro/Russia conflict, but I think in that case the british would just watch their rivals kill each other.
Or change something in the Russian mentality of that time (really not knowledgeable in that area) and make them push to the Persian gulf through Persia / Herat or start an other war with the Ottomans.
 
But Great Game war over the region had already happened. Its name was the Crimean War. Why another?

Especially since Britain has its Iranian oil contract. And Athelstane's right about logistics.

The only plausible way for a repeat is to put them on opposite sides of WW1. Tou could plausibly swap Russia for the Ottomans.
 
Last edited:
But Great Game war over the region had already happened. Its name was the Crimean War. Why another?

Especially since Britain has its Iranian oil contract. And Athelstane's right about logistics.

The only plausible way for a repeat is to put them on opposite sides of WW1. Tou could plausibly swap Russia for the Ottomans.

Crimea wasn't the Great Game, though it was related. I don't see what the Iranian Oil Contract has to do with preventing an Anglo-Russian conflict in the region though, wouldn't that be more incentive for the British to defend Persia?

Any Russian encroachment on Persia could possibly trigger a war with the British because of the danger to India, while in the 19th century a border conflict might escalate into war in Afghanistan between the two powers.

However, I don't think the war would escalate out of the region because of its low value in real terms, and the difficulty of conducting conflict in Central Asia for both countries would probably lead to negotiated settlement after a few engagements. Maybe mediated by Bismarck if its early enough?
 
I agree with Hashoosh: The Crimean War wasn't really "The Great Game," since it was - as far as Britain was concerned - about control of the Straits, not control of Central and South Asia. Certainly it was connected to Great Game interests, but its Central Asian implications were indirect.

The Pandjeh Incident or (with an earlier POD) something like it in roughly the same time frame is probably the best bet. You'd need a more bellicose British regime in place.

And it would be a very difficult war, because of the logistics, brutal terrain, and Afghan tribes. It's also unlikely to result in anything really decisive as a result - neither side can easily establish themselves or project power over the Hindu Kush. The more likely path to (limited) success would be ultimately spurring some successful indigenous revolt in enemy territory - among the defunct Khanates of Central Asia under Russian rule, or some kind of Second Mutiny in Northern India to unravel the Raj. But even that would be challenging.
 

Driftless

Donor
Would there be any POD where the Russians see a compelling reason to go to war to find an warm-water port on the Persian Gulf? Or would that be just acquiring another bottleneck (Straits of Hormuz)
 
Top