The effects of whatever hit Tunguska hitting somewhere in Eastern Europe instead would be of serious effect, both within and outside of Russia.
First, I would reject a "aimed shot" scenario where the detonation just happens to "bullseye" Moscow or St.Petersburg, either right overhead Red Square or the Tsar's Palace respectively. I'd accept a rough geographic area of those cities and maybe even a close by hit. But bullseye hits are simply too unlikely.
This means that the city is badly wrecked and in a bad way, but it will continue to exist.
Second, think back to the other times in modern history where a totally unexpected and unexplained natural event signifcantly struck a city. That right, hasn't happened. I'd suggest that in the short term, the rampant fears and paranoia between the nations of the world is going to get ratcheted up to levels like has never been contemplated. Bluntly put, Berlin, London, Paris, Rome, Toyko, Washington and every small power's capitols are all going to be going absolutely apeshit asking two very specific questions: Who did this and are we next? The Russians will be asking the first one and will be also running in circles trying to make sure that they don't get hit again.
That leads us to the most likely scenario: No matter what or who ends up in charge in Russia, the fact is that they will assume they have been attacked viciously and nearly fatally. Think back to the days right after 9/11. The fear of when and where the next attack would happen were quite prevalent. We had a pretty good handle on that in terms of understanding the mechanism of attack, this one would be totally confusing and much like the fear the Japanese had right after the A-bomb attacks. It would seem that an invisible and angry God had just struck them. So, what does the playbook call for when Russia is attacked? The answer at that time is simple and still true to this day: Total mobilization of military forces. So the Russians are at full on mobilization, not knowing who they are at war with, just knowing they need to be ready for it.
Now, we all know what the Germans are going to do when the Russians start their mobilization clock. They are going to sucker punch the French hard. This will be done for two reasons: First, they do not want an angry and mobilized Russia on their eastern frontiers. Second, the very real fear of every country that is not Russia is that the event in Moscow/St.Petersburg was not an attack, but either a false flag attack or an accidental discovery of a "wonder weapon" that the Russians will advance behind. When the Russians start massing troops, the second theory will gain a huge amount of credibility.
So, instead of WW1 kicking off in 1914, it comes in 1908.
The question of how this changes things is not easy nor easily defined. The first biggie would be the effects of Moltke's tinkering with the plan to shift resources eastward not being fully in place, combined with a Russia mobilizing merely because of reflex rather than an actual effort to assault Germany's eastern frontier, means that Paris probably gets captured and the French Army gets rolled up.
Second, a weakened and angry Russia would probably lash out at Germany once the Germans moved on the French, seeking to both fufill their treaty obligations, but also with a suspicion that the explosion was the work of the Germans somehow.
This leads to the Germans and the Russians fighting WW1 far more directly and viciously against each other without the French and British having any great involvement. The British might shut down the Germans on the high seas, but with the Germans engaged fully with the Russians, they wouldn't care overmuch. The British and possibly Americans might ship in troops to aid the Russians in the ground war, but for the most part, the British and Americans will be trying to get as many scientists into the blast area to study what happened and if it can be replicated.
Who wins? Eventually, Germany gets swamped under. Chances are, the trench warfare does unfold, but this time in Eastern Prussia rather than in France.
First, I would reject a "aimed shot" scenario where the detonation just happens to "bullseye" Moscow or St.Petersburg, either right overhead Red Square or the Tsar's Palace respectively. I'd accept a rough geographic area of those cities and maybe even a close by hit. But bullseye hits are simply too unlikely.
This means that the city is badly wrecked and in a bad way, but it will continue to exist.
Second, think back to the other times in modern history where a totally unexpected and unexplained natural event signifcantly struck a city. That right, hasn't happened. I'd suggest that in the short term, the rampant fears and paranoia between the nations of the world is going to get ratcheted up to levels like has never been contemplated. Bluntly put, Berlin, London, Paris, Rome, Toyko, Washington and every small power's capitols are all going to be going absolutely apeshit asking two very specific questions: Who did this and are we next? The Russians will be asking the first one and will be also running in circles trying to make sure that they don't get hit again.
That leads us to the most likely scenario: No matter what or who ends up in charge in Russia, the fact is that they will assume they have been attacked viciously and nearly fatally. Think back to the days right after 9/11. The fear of when and where the next attack would happen were quite prevalent. We had a pretty good handle on that in terms of understanding the mechanism of attack, this one would be totally confusing and much like the fear the Japanese had right after the A-bomb attacks. It would seem that an invisible and angry God had just struck them. So, what does the playbook call for when Russia is attacked? The answer at that time is simple and still true to this day: Total mobilization of military forces. So the Russians are at full on mobilization, not knowing who they are at war with, just knowing they need to be ready for it.
Now, we all know what the Germans are going to do when the Russians start their mobilization clock. They are going to sucker punch the French hard. This will be done for two reasons: First, they do not want an angry and mobilized Russia on their eastern frontiers. Second, the very real fear of every country that is not Russia is that the event in Moscow/St.Petersburg was not an attack, but either a false flag attack or an accidental discovery of a "wonder weapon" that the Russians will advance behind. When the Russians start massing troops, the second theory will gain a huge amount of credibility.
So, instead of WW1 kicking off in 1914, it comes in 1908.
The question of how this changes things is not easy nor easily defined. The first biggie would be the effects of Moltke's tinkering with the plan to shift resources eastward not being fully in place, combined with a Russia mobilizing merely because of reflex rather than an actual effort to assault Germany's eastern frontier, means that Paris probably gets captured and the French Army gets rolled up.
Second, a weakened and angry Russia would probably lash out at Germany once the Germans moved on the French, seeking to both fufill their treaty obligations, but also with a suspicion that the explosion was the work of the Germans somehow.
This leads to the Germans and the Russians fighting WW1 far more directly and viciously against each other without the French and British having any great involvement. The British might shut down the Germans on the high seas, but with the Germans engaged fully with the Russians, they wouldn't care overmuch. The British and possibly Americans might ship in troops to aid the Russians in the ground war, but for the most part, the British and Americans will be trying to get as many scientists into the blast area to study what happened and if it can be replicated.
Who wins? Eventually, Germany gets swamped under. Chances are, the trench warfare does unfold, but this time in Eastern Prussia rather than in France.