What if the Germans won the Battle of Verdun?

[Dylan Cakes]

I'm writing a timeline with this POD and I've run into some trouble. To start, I Imagine a German victory at Verdun looking something like Fort Souville and Fort Vaux falling relatively early, like sometime in March or April with Falkenhayn's original idea of a meat grinder becoming true. With this in mind, it raises some questions.

Does Falkenhayn still get replaced? If not, what effects does keeping Hindenburg and Ludendorff in the east have? The two could be listed as at least partially responsible for the resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare, sending Lenin to Russia and of course the Hindenburg Programme.

Does the Somme happen earlier? French mutinies?

If and when Falkenhayn is replaced, who by? Does he have his own Nivelle Offensive?

 

[Simreeve]

It was expected at the time that if Verdun fell this would have a serious effect on French morale. The Battle of the Somme took place when it did in the hope that this Entente offensive would draw some of the German forces away from that fortress.

 

[Dylan Cakes]

It was expected at the time that if Verdun fell this would have a serious effect on French morale. The Battle of the Somme took place when it did in the hope that this Entente offensive would draw some of the German forces away from that fortress

So they probably would have attacked at the Somme earlier if the Germans made more gains at verdun?

 

[Riain]

A few things off the top of my head.

If the Germans reduce the Verdun salient there will be no need for the Hindenburg Line withdrawal in 1917 as the line will be shorter and can be held with less men.

I can't imagine the Victor of Verdun will be replaced, especially if the Brusilov Offensive knocks the prestige off Hindy and Ludy. Falkenhayen had a better concept of modern war than H & L, he would do better if he remained in command.

The British wanted to undertake their offensive in Flanders, they agreed on a joint offensive with the French at the Somme but Verdun reduced the number of French divisions available for the Somme. If Verdun was over by May then the French might have more divisions for the Somme, which even IOTL was shocking for the Germans in terms of the casualties it generated.

 

[Rinasoir]

French morale would plummet. I don't see it leading to any massive break out of the Germans, but it might not need to as the effect on French morale might see the 1917 mutinies happen earlier, and without the Americans on the way to serve as a useful morale booster, the possibilities are pretty wide open for what would happen next.

I doubt you'd see a revolution or anything, but if the Germans achieved another big victory after taking Verdun, and the Eastern front goes as per OTL, you could see the French and British negotiating an armistice in 1917 with a sort of white peace that all sides try to sell to their domestic populations as a win.

 

[Disraeli's Ghost]

Does Falkenhayn still get replaced? If not, what effects does keeping Hindenburg and Ludendorff in the east have? The two could be listed as at least partially responsible for the resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare, sending Lenin to Russia and of course the Hindenburg Programme.

Falkenhayn was generally far more lucid in his peace plans than Ludendorff. As much as I think Wilhelm is an unforgivable turd for agreeing to the sealed train decision, he wouldn't have allowed it if Germany's position wasn't completely dire.

I'd imagine in this scenario Bethman and Falkenhayn are strengthened and so are able to negotiate the settlement they often talked about in late 1916/early 1917. It wont be a white peace though, from what they often posited:
Return of German colonies
Military occupation of Belgium
Annexation of Luxembourg and Briey because of its industry.
Depending on how well the French cope after Verdun there may be a token amount of Alsace handed back to them.
In the East, without the revolution the annexations will be a lot less grand. Probably Poland, Lithuania, Courland, and maybe a rump Ukraine though that really depends.
Control of Romanian Oil Fields if they still join the war.

 

[UnaiB]

What would be the specific POD for the German victory at Verdun?

 

[Dylan Cakes]

What would be the specific POD for the German victory at Verdun?

There were plenty of variables that contributed to Germany's failure. I don't know how many you'd have to change to inch them over the finish line but chiefly among them, German artillery must keep up with the infantry and suppress French guns on the west bank. The failure to do so both stalled the German advance and lead to them taking enormous casualties. Basically, Fort Souville must fall, ideally in April or May.

 

[Dylan Cakes]

Falkenhayn was generally far more lucid in his peace plans than Ludendorff. As much as I think Wilhelm is an unforgivable turd for agreeing to the sealed train decision, he wouldn't have allowed it if Germany's position wasn't completely dire.

Does Lenin still find his way into Russia even without the German's support? If France and Italy become more unstable, perhaps he could go to either of those places.

Seeing as IOTL Ludendorff became a nationalist politican after the war, he'd probably do something similar ITTL. Maybe becoming the figurehead of a faction in the Germany Army much more keen on things like the Polish border strip and such.

 

[raharris1973]

Falkenhayn was generally far more lucid in his peace plans than Ludendorff. As much as I think Wilhelm is an unforgivable turd for agreeing to the sealed train decision, he wouldn't have allowed it if Germany's position wasn't completely dire.

I'd imagine in this scenario Bethman and Falkenhayn are strengthened and so are able to negotiate the settlement they often talked about in late 1916/early 1917. It wont be a white peace though, from what they often posited:
Return of German colonies
Military occupation of Belgium
Annexation of Luxembourg and Briey because of its industry.
Depending on how well the French cope after Verdun there may be a token amount of Alsace handed back to them.
In the East, without the revolution the annexations will be a lot less grand. Probably Poland, Lithuania, Courland, and maybe a rump Ukraine though that really depends.
Control of Romanian Oil Fields if they still join the war.

So in this settlement the Germans and CPs are holding on to pretty much everything they stand, plus maybe the Ukraine (which they aren't standing on), the end of Allied attacks, all their colonies back, the end of the blockade, their POWs in exchange for the Allies getting, what?

The remaining bulge of occupied France besides Briey, an end to German attacks on, and end to German attacks at sea and undersea with submarines, and the return of their POWs?

It doesn't seem very even to me, especially the gains in Ukraine. It is not quite a sweeping German knockout win, but a clear German victory on points, where they are ahead of the status quo ante bellum and status quo at that stage of the bellum. (Although, in 1917 international real estate prices, maybe retroceded northern France (Artois-Picardy) is higher priced than all German overseas colonies plus Ukraine.

I assume the "token amount of Alsace handed back" to the French is whatever sliver of ground the French grabbed in OTL 1914 that they are still standing on at the time of the ATL armistice.

This settlement also calls for quite uneven levels of sacrifice for Entente members.
Compared with *what they possess at the moment* Britain, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and Russia all have territorial concessions to to make to the CPs in exchange for France redeeming territory north of Paris.

Compared with *what they had at the start of the war* Belgium (and presumably Serbia, and maybe Romania) lose biggest, Russia loses substantially, France gets an economically disadvantageous territorial exchange, and the British Empire and Japan lose nothing.

 

[Michel Van]

Von Falkenhayn and Joffre turn the battle of Verdun into bloody mead-grinder were 317000 soldiers died senseless
Allot errors were made, special by Von Falkenhayn (who embellishment the battle in his memoirs)
But had he manage to keep the offensive up and lured the British into that Mead-grinder too he could have change the War

A german victory would have hit moral of French deeply and in French Army rise the question: why i have to died for France ?
Joffre successor Nivelle had after his offensive a revolt under French Army
This revolt would already happen under Joffre and disrupt there operations seriously
Since in Revolt the Soldiers refuse any offensive operation and dit only defensive action.
would Nivelle be so stupid and bloody suppress that Revolt by executing randomly french Soldiers to bring the others to obedience ?
if yes that Revolt could end in revolutions and death of Nivelle and military putsch in Paris !

The British would face also heavy losses, in fact Haig wanted to intervene in Battle of Verdun, but Joffre manage persuade him not do so.
With BEF losses in a Verdun the British government would start to questioning to continue this war and face more deaths or pull out ?
Here is interesting Pod were Britain and Germany get to agreement, BEF retreat and Germany once they finish with France retreat out Belgium after war ended.

But biggest wildcard is here Germany it self !
Had Von Falkenhayn complete his strategy, allot more Germans Soldiers would have died for victory in Verdun!
and in German Army rise the question: wieso muss ich for deutschland sterben ?
Germany could face also a revolt in army just like 1918 that ended in revolution...

 

[Disraeli's Ghost]

It doesn't seem very even to me, especially the gains in Ukraine. It is not quite a sweeping German knockout win, but a clear German victory on points, where they are ahead of the status quo ante bellum and status quo at that stage of the bellum. (Although, in 1917 international real estate prices, maybe retroceded northern France (Artois-Picardy) is higher priced than all German overseas colonies plus Ukraine.

Of course it's not very even, the Germans refused to consider even status quo ante bellum when they were losing (1916 proposal was a disingenuous sham), if they've just triumphed at Verdun there is no way they are leaving the war without substantial concessions.
As A.J.P Taylor writes in Struggle for Mastery in Europe, compromise for Bethman meant Germany retained Belgium and Briey.

 

[Dylan Cakes]

Of course it's not very even, the Germans refused to consider even status quo ante bellum when they were losing (1916 proposal was a disingenuous sham), if they've just triumphed at Verdun there is no way they are leaving the war without substantial concessions.
As A.J.P Taylor writes in Struggle for Mastery in Europe, compromise for Bethman meant Germany retained Belgium and Briey.

What concessions would the western Entente be willing to consider? In the scenario where much of the French Army is effected by some sort of mutiny post loss of Verdun, would that be enough for them to accept? It is safe to assume Briand's government would fall earlier and Joffre would be out of a job, do we know what Briand's successor (likely still Ribot) stance is on peace?

 

[Peabody-Martini]

The taking of Fort Souville might lead to the fabled breakthrough during the First World War and a brief period of rapid movement before the lines stabilized again. The Somme Offensive, if it had progressed at the same rate as OTL could well turn into a headlong retreat because the British would have their right flank dangerously exposed and entire German Armies moving into their rear areas. There might have been a timeline or two based on this very POD.

 

[Dylan Cakes]

The taking of Fort Souville might lead to the fabled breakthrough during the First World War and a brief period of rapid movement before the lines stabilized again. The Somme Offensive, if it had progressed at the same rate as OTL could well turn into a headlong retreat because the British would have their right flank dangerously exposed and entire German Armies moving into their rear areas. There might have been a timeline or two based on this very POD.

I mean it seems unlikely the Germans would press this into a headlong advance deep into French territory. I would imagine then pushing up to the Meuse and taking the city of Verdun, a deeper advance would need a proper collapse of the French Army around Verdun. WORST case scenario, they retreat to the Aisne.

 

[BELFAST]

As the German goal was to kill as many of the French army as possible that depends on how many the Germans killed vs their own losses.

 

[RedSword12]

As the German goal was to kill as many of the French army as possible that depends on how many the Germans killed vs their own losses.

They suffered less losses than the French IOTL. Presumably the same would hold true for a successful attack.

 

[BELFAST]

They suffered less losses than the French IOTL. Presumably the same would hold true for a successful attack.

There needs to be a very big difference as the French had a lot more men that the Germans.

 

[Noblesse Oblige]

Falkenhayn was generally far more lucid in his peace plans than Ludendorff. As much as I think Wilhelm is an unforgivable turd for agreeing to the sealed train decision, he wouldn't have allowed it if Germany's position wasn't completely dire.

I'd imagine in this scenario Bethman and Falkenhayn are strengthened and so are able to negotiate the settlement they often talked about in late 1916/early 1917. It wont be a white peace though, from what they often posited:
Return of German colonies
Military occupation of Belgium
Annexation of Luxembourg and Briey because of its industry.
Depending on how well the French cope after Verdun there may be a token amount of Alsace handed back to them.
In the East, without the revolution the annexations will be a lot less grand. Probably Poland, Lithuania, Courland, and maybe a rump Ukraine though that really depends.
Control of Romanian Oil Fields if they still join the war.

I doubt the annexations in the east will include Ukraine here. Assuming the Russians don't straight up collapse by 1917, I could see any portions of Ukraine (a relatively small portion at that) be directly annexed into Austria probably rather than a Ukrainian rump state. Poland, Lithuania and Courland I could definitely see though, the latter two either as a united Ober Ost territory or split into two or three (with a rump Belarusian state in Grodno).

As for military occupation of Belgium, any idea on what that may entail? A client state (or states if they choose to split it into Flanders and Wallonia), imposition of a German prince, annexation?

 

[BELFAST]

I doubt the annexations in the east will include Ukraine here. Assuming the Russians don't straight up collapse by 1917, I could see any portions of Ukraine (a relatively small portion at that) be directly annexed into Austria probably rather than a Ukrainian rump state. Poland, Lithuania and Courland I could definitely see though, the latter two either as a united Ober Ost territory or split into two or three (with a rump Belarusian state in Grodno).

As for military occupation of Belgium, any idea on what that may entail? A client state (or states if they choose to split it into Flanders and Wallonia), imposition of a German prince, annexation?

no need.
I think German resources will be going east to control the resources and farmland there.
This would make Germany almost immune to any blocked by sea in the future.