Assume a POD late in the war. France capitulates in late 1918 or so. What are the consequences for the political and social status quo in Britain? What about the British Empire?
Well economically Britain is going to be in a lot of trouble, because they borrowed from the US on behalf of their allies and loaned that money to them, so when the Russians, Italians, and French default then Britain is left holding the bag. If Germany gets Belgium and potentially back colonies there is going to be a lot of problems in Britain; then there is the Irish situation. Britain might end up going fascist in the end as a result of a diminish standard of living and a lot of bitterness.Assume a POD late in the war. France capitulates in late 1918 or so. What are the consequences for the political and social status quo in Britain? What about the British Empire?
Assume a POD late in the war. France capitulates in late 1918 or so. What are the consequences for the political and social status quo in Britain? What about the British Empire?
Assume a POD late in the war. France capitulates in late 1918 or so. What are the consequences for the political and social status quo in Britain? What about the British Empire?
Britian does what it always does under these situations.
Retreats to its island fortress and bides its time and then continues the fight at a later and more advantageous date - ie when its Allies are in a better condition.
The Germans were defeated by exhaustion. This could as easily have happened to the Allies. When you read the diaries and reports of the French and British on the Western Front from early 1918, the writers seem to be perfectly lucid and in full command of their faculties. What the Americans noted when they started to arrive at about that time was that everyone at the front was not only dirty and malnourished, but half asleep.
In addition to their other deleterious effects, the terrible trench warfare battles of that conflict were remarkably exhausting, and the capacity of the Allies to rotate out survivors diminished with the passage of time. Even with American assistance, France and Britain were societies that were slowly falling apart from lack of ordinary maintenance. Both faced food shortages from the diversion of farmers into the army and from attacks on ocean borne supplies. Had the Germans been able to exploit their breakthrough in the spring, or if the German Empire had held together long enough for Luddendorf's planned autumn offensive to take place, its quite likely that either the French or British would have sued for peace. Had one or the other even raised the question of an armistice, the same process of internal political collapse which destroyed Germany would have overtaken both of them.
Re the empire, depends on how bad it is. If the British armies are defeated in the field, that will, by necessity, mean that the Imperial contingents are as well. So if we have tens of thousands of Canadian, Australian, Newfoundland, Kiwi etc men dead or in POW camps in Germany, that will have massive repercussions back in those countries. Especially those who had Conscription Crises.
I could see it would be possible for governments to fall, with fresh elections to be called. I don't think any would have revolution or the like, but at least in some of these countries the incipient labour movements were still a bit raw.
NZ for example had a pretty rough period immediately before WW1 with regards to strikes and those strikes being put down by the government and special policemen. The proto Labour Party types who would go onto form the first Labour government in the 1930s and lead us through WW2 were still radicals who were often imprisoned over refusing to be conscripted. A lot of their supporters were home working in essential industries like the West Coast mines too. Whereas a lot of the right leaning types had long been off to war, or dead.
If the stars aligned, you could see either Labour winning an election - they entered parliament in the 1919 election. Or, worst case, some sort of coup could be attempted.
Which allies? The USA is likely to become more isolationist than OTL and would not participate in a round 2. Britain is broke and in debt. France and Italy would have their military limited.The POD is a French Capitulation and a political not a field defeat of the British Army - therefore then the war ends, the Commonwealth forces pick up their footballs and come home.
In every aspect therefore Britain does what I said in the earlier Post
It bides its time and waits for German Weakness and for it Entente allies to recover.
For France to fall, the BEF had to be defeated, "le surrender monkeys" aren't going to fall without struggle.
Also, are you saying Britain is going to remain in state of war until its allies recover? In a CP victory in continent means Germany is the only functioning great power in the mess. France and Italy are defeated and probably occupied, Russia is in a civil war and isn't going to get back until the late 1920's, A-H is on life-support by Germany.
Not necessarily. The POD could be no USW and then a 1918 offensive that breaks the Franco-British lines a Amiens and in the wake of that defeat the French capitulate.The POD is a French Capitulation and a political not a field defeat of the British Army - therefore then the war ends, the Commonwealth forces pick up their footballs and come home.
In every aspect therefore Britain does what I said in the earlier Post
It bides its time and waits for German Weakness and for it Entente allies to recover.
Not necessarily. The POD could be no USW and then a 1918 offensive that breaks the Franco-British lines a Amiens and in the wake of that defeat the French capitulate.
The German Spring offensive Failed in its objective in OTL for good reasons ie the Entente in 1918 was too strong for them in the West
Also it was a fairly desperate roll of the dice to knock out the Entente before the US Army arrived in Strength.
No USW which I take in your post = no US Military Involvement then why would the German High Command be so desperate to Launch Op Michael and his freinds upon the British and French?
They already held the cards ie they occupied French and Belgium Land in any subsequant 'peace talks' why risk such an offensive?
US divisions in 1918 were as big as an entire French corps, so they effectively were as big as a weak French army that could be in reserve, but won't be at the front in Spring 1918 ITTL.At the beginning, during the Spring of 1918, the four battle-ready U.S. divisions were deployed under French and British command to gain combat experience by defending relatively quiet sectors of their lines.
The POD is a French Capitulation and a political not a field defeat of the British Army - therefore then the war ends, the Commonwealth forces pick up their footballs and come home.
In every aspect therefore Britain does what I said in the earlier Post
It bides its time and waits for German Weakness and for it Entente allies to recover.
As a result of the US being in the war, giving them unsecured loans, and providing some manpower to free up French soldiers to fight, none of which would be the case ITTL; politically they'd break down due to lacking the financial backing of US, not to mention the psychological boost of millions of US soldiers moving into the country and training.
As it was IOTL by holding all the cards and attacking they win, vs. getting a negotiated peace. By breaking the Entente they have total victory, especially without US money and manpower propping up the French (US troops held a quiet front and enabled a the French to amass a reserve in March-April 1918).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Expeditionary_Forces#1918
US divisions in 1918 were as big as an entire French corps, so they effectively were as big as a weak French army that could be in reserve, but won't be at the front in Spring 1918 ITTL.
Yes, that is what Ludendorff was going for IOTL in 1918. Total victory is peace via dictate. It probably wouldn't be as bad as in 1940, but not much better. If France is asks for an armistice first and the British then are drive off the continent before the French get the final terms, as happened IOTL to Germany in 1918 and then at Versailles in 1919, that is likely to be what happens so they cannot resist the dictate.So you are suggesting that rather the French would be ready to deal but the Germans would risk an offensive (which OTL was Tragically costly for them and robbed them of their best units) in order to get a Total victory despite the Risk - nothing is certain in war.
What is Total Victory for Germany in 1918 as opposed to an advantageous peace?
If France has been placed in a position where a capitulation leaves them with nothing left to lose then they have nothing to lose and then therefore they fight on.