WI - Best Russian Empire in WW1?

Agreed, I believe the Russian naval expenditure ordinarily equated to about 25% of its total military budget, through the necessity of maintaining multiple fleets in different theatre. I vaguely recall the naval budget was projected to reach closer to 30%, which seams ridiculous given Russian defense requirements.
So what would happen if more of the Russian budget went towards the army?
 
What was the best the Russian Empire could do in World War 1? If Russia had adopted a more defensive position against the Central Powers and limited itself to small-scale offensives with occasional large-scale offensives, how would this change its performance?

Bonus Question/Challenge: Could the White Russian forces have won the Russian Civil War? How?

Eastern Front: I guess stay a bit on the defence earlier.

Caucasus Front: It is as good as OTL. Can't get any better I suppose.
 

BooNZ

Banned
What do you recommend?
In the first instance, I would recommend Nicky continue the foreign policy of his father and avoid foreign entanglements. I would further recommend Nicky follow his father's advice and follow the counsel of Sergei Witte. This means Russia saves the treasures wasted during the Russo-Japanese wars and the vast amounts spent on subsequently preparing the military for some future conflict.

So what would happen if more of the Russian budget went towards the army?
Probably not a lot.

However, fast growing economies like imperial Russia are always hungry for capital and the vast sums spent on military matters could have been easily better spent developing Russian infrastructure, agriculture and human capital. The Japanese, Ottomans and A-H could all have been easily contained with parchment and ink.
 
If the Gallipoli landings were successful in forcing the straits, how much would that supply route improve the Russian situation?
 
The best Russia could have done was to fulfill the german ultimatum and demobilize. Best for Russia and best for everyone.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
Could Russia potentially knock either the Ottomans or AH out of the war?
With a different behavior of political leadership since 1905 and a different military leadership (drawing the 'right' conclusions from the lost war against Japan regarding tactics and training) :
sure it could have.

If the Gallipoli landings were successful in forcing the straits, how much would that supply route improve the Russian situation?
An awfull lot.

The russian railway system was almost only build for transporting goods to and fro the Black Sea.
The problems, that arose at i.e. Archangelsk (a flimsy singletrack line not even running up to the ships, there was some even flimsier narrow gauge line running across swamps to the places were the delivered goods from the entent were ... to quite some degree rotting) wound't be there. The delivered goods (shells and SHELLS AND ...)would be rather quickly distributed towards the front.
Though ... this might hamper the food distribution even more than it was IOTL.
 
With OTL capabilities, the best option in 1914 would be to make only a demonstration towards Germany (using only enough forces to keep the Germans guessing) and to concentrate fully against Austria-Hungary. From that point they should be on the defensive against Germany and to put greater pressure than OTL on Austria-Hungary and The Ottoman empire.
Austria-Hungary was in a very serious political situation in OTL on the winter of 1916/17.
The goal would be to make Austria-Hungary collapse before the Russian Empire does.
 
With OTL capabilities, the best option in 1914 would be to make only a demonstration towards Germany (using only enough forces to keep the Germans guessing) and to concentrate fully against Austria-Hungary. From that point they should be on the defensive against Germany and to put greater pressure than OTL on Austria-Hungary and The Ottoman empire.
Austria-Hungary was in a very serious political situation in OTL on the winter of 1916/17.
The goal would be to make Austria-Hungary collapse before the Russian Empire does.
How can Russia force the Austro-Hungarians to collapse? A more successful Brusilov Offensive?
 
I'd go for more capitalistic reforms aimed at improving competition and reducing inefficient state run monopolies. Allowing some basic workers rights wouldn't hurt either. This should increase GDP enough to invest the higher state income in education which would improve the quality of the average Russian soldiers and NCO's.

Also spend less on the navy and spend the savings on improving the railways. Russia starved in WW1 due to lack of locomotives and rolling stock not lack of food.

When war breaks out launch limited offensives into East Prussia and hold on the defensive elsewhere. The AH Empire was the worst culprit out there for the offensive is everything militarily madness. Let them attack and take massive casualties and then hit them for 6 with a ore planned counter offensive.

These changes might allow Russia to surive the war without the revolution at best and at worst its as OTL but the is over quicker due to an earlier AH collapse.
 
The best Russia could have done is sold Serbia up a creek. After all, they started it, it's only fair that they have to clean up their own mess as well. That avoids the Great War, and the deaths of countless young men at the front lines, and the Second World War and the horrors of the Holocaust as well.
 
The best Russia could have done is sold Serbia up a creek. After all, they started it, it's only fair that they have to clean up their own mess as well. That avoids the Great War, and the deaths of countless young men at the front lines, and the Second World War and the horrors of the Holocaust as well.
Wasn't it more Austro-Hungary which started the Great War?
 
The best Russia could have done is sold Serbia up a creek. After all, they started it, it's only fair that they have to clean up their own mess as well. That avoids the Great War, and the deaths of countless young men at the front lines, and the Second World War and the horrors of the Holocaust as well.

That means Russia watches as an allied country gets pretty much destroyed...throws like 5-6 different countries into the arms of the Central Powers...loses all influence in the Balkans and maybe even beyond...clears Germany's road to the Ottomans...sits idly as the Central Powers foment rebellion in Russia itself...

Russia's decision to defend Serbia from A-H aggression might have been a gamble; but letting it happen would also be an extremely dangerous gamble. It would severely undermine Russia's own security, and it means Russia could get absolutely smashed a year or two down the road if the CP decide they'd like another war. ("If"? More like when...)
After all, they started it

Not really.
 
How can Russia force the Austro-Hungarians to collapse? A more successful Brusilov Offensive?
That was in 1916. In 1914/15 the Russians were highly engaged with the Germans. Without the initial Russians disasters against the Germans in 1914 they could have managed a fairly static front against the Germans or fought a defensive action in Poland and put much greater pressure on Austria-Hungary in the first year of the war. OTL the Russians tried to deliver strong blows against both Germany and A-H and they failed to get decisive results agianst A-H.
The risk in this is that without German forces going east EvF could have won at first Ypres, but that's another set of what ifs.
 

BooNZ

Banned
How can Russia force the Austro-Hungarians to collapse? A more successful Brusilov Offensive?
Doubtful, the A-H empire demonstrated amazing resilience during the war despite a lack of preparation, an woeful start and having to fight an ultimately losing war on multiple fronts.
I'd go for more capitalistic reforms aimed at improving competition and reducing inefficient state run monopolies. Allowing some basic workers rights wouldn't hurt either. This should increase GDP enough to invest the higher state income in education which would improve the quality of the average Russian soldiers and NCO's.
Increased competition would need to come from overseas manufacturers, either making Russia more dependent on imports or maybe reducing taraff income. By 1914 Imperial Russia was investing heavily in education, but pay back will take decades.

Also spend less on the navy and spend the savings on improving the railways. Russia starved in WW1 due to lack of locomotives and rolling stock not lack of food.
I agree naval expenditure was a poor use of scarce treasure and agree the Russian rail network failed. My understanding is Imperial Russia had prioritised spending on rail infrastruture for decades, but there remained administrative and qualitative issues with the Russian rail network.

When war breaks out launch limited offensives into East Prussia and hold on the defensive elsewhere. The AH Empire was the worst culprit out there for the offensive is everything militarily madness. Let them attack and take massive casualties and then hit them for 6 with a ore planned counter offensive.
The most powerful continental army shot 5/8ths of its load accross a neutral power, thereby creating a foe with the largest empire, largest economy and navy. The cult of the offensive continued to devastate the second most powerful continental army until its army was on the point of muntiny in 1917. The third most powerful continental army promptly lost its best two armies in east Prussia and then proceeded to squander the advantages of its early successes against A-H. The immediate neighbour of A-H had committed so many scarce resources to conflicts of choice prior to the war, that the early colapse of its neglected medical infrastructure resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands.

With the benefit of hindsight, sure a defensive posture for Imperial Russia makes sense from a military perspective, but this would not have been compatible with either its miltary doctrine or committments to France. What would be the consequences of Russia being 'unfriended' by France at the start of the war?

Wasn't it more Austro-Hungary which started the Great War?
How so? A-H had avoided foreign conflicts for decades and the annexation of Bosnia Herzigoverna (at the suggestion of a Russian representative) was merely formalising what was already the reality on the ground. Conversely, Serbia had committed to unsustainable levels of military funding (facilitated by Russia and France), had engaged in numerious conflicts (wars and freedom fighting) in neighbouring states for several years prior to the war. The ultimatum issued by A-H was purportedly mild if compared to NATO demands in the 1990s. A-H was explicitly not seeking to extend its terrotory and increasing the number of troublesome minorities. A-H was seeking a contained Balkan war or humilitating Serbian back-down, not a wider european war, which was mandatory if Serbia was to achieve its stated territorial goals.

Russian adventurism in the Balkans dated back to 1904 when Imperial Russia sponsored a reconciliation and secret alliance between Bulgaria and Serbia, for future use against the A-H and Ottoman Empires. I understand this was not consistent with earlier agreements/ understandings between A-H and Imperial Russia. Avoiding foreign entanglements makes more sense for a growing economy/industry that has better things to spend money on.
 

TheTuck

Banned
Wasn't it more Austro-Hungary which started the Great War?
The Black Hand was controlled by the Serbian military intelligence under Apis. Though the Serbian government didn't directly order the assassination, they knew who was responsible and could have handed them over immediately, but they didn't do so, so Serbia shares a hefty portion of the blame for the war.
 
I have the ambition to write a semi-parodic TL on this theme, perhaps titled 'No Good Deed Goes Unpunished' or perhaps 'War: A Comedy', but I doubt I'll get around to it. Salient features would be:
1. The Sarajevo assassins miss completely (possibly shoot each other by mistake). July 1914 Crisis averted.
2. Civil War breaks out in Ireland by the end of 1914, straining not so much London's resources as her relationships. The situation is under control by 1916, but the diplomatic fallout encourages the CP to believe Britain will not/ cannot intervene in a Continental conflict. A Conservative government replaces the Liberals, who have torn themselves apart (again) over the Irish Question. The sale of the Dreadnoughts to Turkey goes ahead as planned. The French Army gets rid of its red trousers and extends its conscription period. Russia double-tracks a lot more of its railway lines by the end of 1916.
3. Franz Ferdinand becomes Emperor in 1916 (FJ dies as OTL). He begins an ambitious project of political restructuring in A-H, perhaps announced in a Christmas Message to His Faithful Peoples.
4. His Faithful Peoples respond enthusiastically. By summer 1917 A-H is ungovernable as restructuring gets a little out of hand. (Some may recall that the Russian for restructuring is perestroika.)
5. Italy, Serbia and Romania start rubbing their hands and choosing tasty-looking morsels of territory. Sometime in August 1917, one of them goes too far and it's on like Donkey Kong. Germany feels forced to mobilise in support of A-H, but with great foreboding; France and Russia have improved their armies considerably in the last 2-3 years.
6. Russia mobilises in support of its Balkan allies, France follows suit. London makes it very, very clear to Berlin that Belgium is off-limits. Berlin decides that fighting Russia and France at the same time, with A-H effectively out of the game (at least for the time being), is quite enough to take on without risking British intervention; so they stand on the defensive in the West and launch their main offensive in Poland. French offensives in Alsace make little progress.
7. The Balkan states amuse themselves carving up A-H. London gets nervous about Sofia and Athens and asks for assurances that they will not backstab Serbia. They provide the assurances. London then becomes nervous about Istanbul's attitude and asks for assurances that Turkey will not backstab the Balkan states; the Young Turk regime declares itself committed to peace.
8. Turkey backstabs the Balkan states.
9. By Christmas 1917, the Germans have overrun Russian Poland, forcing a Russian withdrawal from Galicia (and creating a power vacuum there), but A-H has fallen apart decisively, with FF being derisively nicknamed 'the Mayor of Vienna'. Hungary declares independence, and celebrates this by fighting Serbia and Romania. Italy seizes Dalmatia; the Croats demand that Budapest resists this, but the new Hungarian regime is too busy already; the Croats therefore declare independence from Hungary. The Czechs declare independence, but are invaded by the Germans. The British press, never known for its commitment to logic in foreign affairs, decides that this is Unacceptable, and that Something Must Be Done.
10. Britain intervenes in early 1918. A British operation at Gallipoli goes badly, with several RN battleships lost to a combination of mines and the (British-built) Turkish battleships. A French landing at Alexandretta goes much better, severing Istanbul's connections to the Middle East.
11. During 1918 Berlin realises that the situation is unlikely to improve. Germany still holds Alsace-Lorraine, but Britain has now joined the war so the balance of forces in the West has turned against them. Berlin has gained Bohemia and Poland, but Vienna is no longer a viable ally. By the end of 1918 Berlin is putting out peace feelers. France - which has not been invaded, but has lost a lot of men for little gain in territory - is receptive.
12. The peace deal of 1919 infuriates St. Petersburg but is actually (compared to OTL) massively to its advantage. It restores the status quo ante in the West and pacifies Britain and France with vast chunks of the Middle East, taken from Turkey. Germany annexes the German-speaking parts of Bohemia. Russian Poland and Galicia form a new independent Poland as a client state of Berlin (thus providing a buffer against Russia). Hungary gains its independence; the rest of the Balkans remains too confusing to describe briefly. Russia has therefore lost Poland, but avoids the Revolution and gains time to develop. The reverses of the war weaken the Tsarist regime and create the political space for a more liberal regime to succeed and get the credit for the economic boom of the 1920s.
The TL would end with a distant postscript describing the flight of Soyuz 1, in which Sergei Komarov survives; because in this ATL Russia there are at least a few happy endings.
 
If there is to be a war, I think one out-of-the box solution Russia could have adopted would have been to leave mostly covering forces opposite Galicia and East Prussia, and concentrate their main force for an attack towards Berlin. If the Germans overreact to this, it could have massive implications for the opening battles in the west, even if the entire Russian force is wiped out in the process. A Germany that fails to take Antwerp and its nitrate stockpiles isn't going to last very long...
 
Top