The most plausible way for a Central Powers victory?

[Hnau]

I like the idea of a Central Powers victorious world, as many of us do, but so much depends on how and when they win.

So, what is the most plausible, easiest way for the Central Powers to win, with the POD occurring after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in the summer of 1914? Just so we can clear this up? Where did they come the closest, where one small decision could have led them to victory? I feel that it would be this POD, the easiest one, that should be used in speculating Central Powers victorious timelines.

I would like to say that the Schlieffen Plan is never changed, however, that would cause too many butterflies without the ascendence of Moltke. No, its got to be after the assassination. I would also think that success would be more likely had early in the war than later, but maybe I'll be surprised. If you could simply take out the Zimmermann Telegraph, maybe you could postpone American involvement long enough for the Russians to give up entirely and the French to mutiny.

Ideas? Thoughts?

 

[Michael B]

If you could simply take out the Zimmermann Telegraph, maybe you could postpone American involvement long enough for the Russians to give up entirely and the French to mutiny.

Both of the latter happened on OTL but they won't enough to lead to a Central Power victory

I read in a history (as opposed to an alternate history) book that Russia could have been knocked out of the war but for the Germans having to transfer troops to handle an attack on the Western Front. Therefore one way of winning the war obviously is to either not transfer the troops or not need to transfer the troops and thus get the 1916 knock out.

The Germans thus have an extra year to tap former Russian territory for resources and take the offensive against France and Britain before the Americans come in.

 

[Empror Mike]

If you could simply take out the Zimmermann Telegraph, maybe you could postpone American involvement long enough for the Russians to give up entirely and the French to mutiny.

Either no Zimmerman Telegraph, or more cautious submarine activity, or even both - would all lead the USA to join the war later, if at all. In the Spring of 1918 the Germans would push just a bit more. The Allies won't find it in their power to launch a massive counteroffensive like they did IOTL, and therefor the Germans would launch yet another offensiv, bringing the French armies into total collapse on both the tactical and strategic level.
Then the peace talks commence.

 

[Admiral Canaris]

Total submarine warfare could have been resumed in late 1915 but for the resistance of Bethmann-Hollweg. Assuming the British responded slowly (we have to remember, the majority of the Admiralty were against convoying ships, the one thing that did save the merchant marine from the U-boats in OTL 1917), a Central Powers victory would be all but inevitable with Britain starved into submission. Yes, Wilson would get the USA into the war, but it would be over before they could matter one way or the other. In 1915, the Americans had a 5th-rate army and a no more than decent navy. It took years of build-up to form anything even close to the European war machines.

In addition, a victory this early might well save the Entente powers from ultrapunitive peace measures. Russia wouldn't be collapsed, for example, giving them some more room for negotiations.

 

[Neroon]

The smallest PoD for a CP victory IMO would be Aleksei Brusilov getting killed early in the war.
Then an alternate version of Brusilov Offensive in 1916 happens in line with the stereotypical version of Russian WW1 offensives i.e. disaster with massive casulties. Followed by a CP counteroffensive against the depleted Russian lines. This might just be enough to convince the Tsar to cut his losses. Peace on the Eastern Front in 1916 already would do the trick IMO.

 

[Oweno]

Have Great Britain, France, Russia and America be called the Central Powers

 

[Hnau]

I think I am going to have to agree that the easiest POD for CP victory would have to be the death of General Brusilov, say, in June of 1915. General Evert becomes more influential without Brusilov in the picture, and the Tsar falls in line with his more defensive strategies. However, some kind of help must be provided to alleviate pressure on Verdun, so lets say the Evert Offensive is launched. The front is shortened to concentrate more troops, and its half-hearted (defensive, Evert would say). If it is successful, its through massive Russian casualties and only slight territorial advancement. This leads to even a quicker conflagration back in Petrograd and elsewhere.

Romania doesn't join Entente, which allows CPs to keep more men, but they don't get the oil and grain that kept the CPs going until the end of 1918, which is a huge deteriment, probably.

Does Verdun fall? I don't know... But I think the major point is that the Russian people are going to be so dissapointed in TTL's 1916 summer offensive in comparison to the Brusilov Offensive, that cities are going to be burning much hotter.

 

[DAv]

How about Belgium doesn't get invaded? That means no British intervention and Rusia and France are left largely on their own.

 

[dummnutzer]

Alexander Heinrich Rudolph von Kluck is wounded a year earlier and not in command of the 1st Army during the battle of the Marne. Even the modified Schlieffen Plan might have worked without the erratic behavior of said Army.

-----

Leaving Belgium alone would not have secured British neutrality. The UK forbade (!) German naval attacks on French shippings and its Navy before Germany issued its ultimatum to Belgium and refused to list the conditions under which it would remain neutral.

Belgium was a pretext, not the reason for British intervention.

All IMHO, of course.

 

[stevep]

How about Belgium doesn't get invaded? That means no British intervention and Rusia and France are left largely on their own.

Belgium was a factor in the British dow but not the only one and quite possibly not the most important. It was more important in mobilising public opinion and hence making it easier for the government to unite most of the country [and the government] behind the decision.

Also what does Germany do if it doesn't follow the plan? Charge headlong into the French border fortresses in which case it meet the French counter-charges head to head and massive losses on both side for minimal gains?

Most of all however Germany had planned the invasion for years. To change things that late would have caused massive confusion and widespread disruption. Which means either no war or Germany is at a significant disadvantage in the early months.

Steve

 

[Viscount Stanthorpe]

Well, the British cabinet was, as I recall, divided about the prospect of going to war without an explicit treaty that committed them to wage war in the defence of France. Lloyd George said in his memoirs (iirc, I'm writing this from memory) that it was a very narrow vote and there was a real danger that the government could have fallen.

Had that happened, then a general election would have been called & it would have been (pretty much) constitutionally impossible for British forces to be deployed to the fight for the few weeks that the campaign would have taken.

Which means that France could have been knocked out of the war fairly quickly - before any British forces set foot on the continent...

S

 

[stevep]

Well, the British cabinet was, as I recall, divided about the prospect of going to war without an explicit treaty that committed them to wage war in the defence of France. Lloyd George said in his memoirs (iirc, I'm writing this from memory) that it was a very narrow vote and there was a real danger that the government could have fallen.

Had that happened, then a general election would have been called & it would have been (pretty much) constitutionally impossible for British forces to be deployed to the fight for the few weeks that the campaign would have taken.

Which means that France could have been knocked out of the war fairly quickly - before any British forces set foot on the continent...

S

The 1st part is possible but a couple of points:

a) If the Liberal party is split apart by the decision on whether to support France against a German attack then the Tories will very likely win the following election.

b) If the Germans don't go through Belgium then how likely are they to knock France out quickly?

Steve

 

[Viscount Stanthorpe]

Well, the reason Lloyd George gave for the decision to go ahead with the war was that the Tories would have trounced the Liberals in the ensuing election. At that point it was a political calculation, rather than a strategic assessment of what was right for the country.

Advice to aspiring Great Powers: Avoid expensive wars

S

 

[Michel Van]

one PoD

Chief of the General Staff Helmuth von Moltke, made NOT several changes to the Schlieffen Plan.
(like weakening the invasion force in favor of defense.)

second PoD
The First Battle of the Marne
the German force made the mistake to send radiomessage in clear and not encoded!
the French Radiostation (Eiffel Tower) pict up the messages and translate them.
make "the Miracle of the Marne" possible

note
had the french voted for dismantled the Eiffel Fower in 1909
they had no antenna for they radiostation in Paris
only one vote save the Eiffel Tower!

third PoD
the USA stay neutral or is delayed in sending soldiers to France
like the spanish flu outbrake ?

 

[David S Poepoe]

one PoD

Chief of the General Staff Helmuth von Moltke, made NOT several changes to the Schlieffen Plan.
(like weakening the invasion force in favor of defense.)

Poor mismaligned von Moltke always blamed for doing the best with the terrible plans left behind by von Schlieffen. The over arching problem is that the Germans simply couldn't have won even with an unmodified war plan. Von Moltke's did make several changes to the enrealistic plan of Schlieffen, all of which were perfectly logical when one also calculates in politics.

A possible PoD would be not having the German General Staff stop its development of a war plan for the Eastern Front in 1911 or 1912 IIRC.

 

[Hnau]

The Point-Of-Divergence must be after the Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in the summer of 1914, my friends.

Looked up that idea on the Miracle of the Marne... didn't say anything about a 'decisive radio message'.