WI: Bulgaria remains neutral in WWI

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

I tried to do a search, but the search function was on the fritz again.

So, the question here is what if Bulgaria decides not to join the Central Powers?

For Starters, I would Imagine this makes it harder for the Germans to ship materials to the Ottomans, while it probably keeps the Serbian and Romanian fronts open a little longer, but that's all I can come up with.

What other effects might this have?

 

[Magnum]

off the top of my head regarding Romania:

The Germans have a much harder time crossing the Carpathians in time in 1916, very likely failing (there is a chance that Rommel might die during the fighting). Then winter sets in, followed by spring floods and mud, meaning it isn't until late spring that they can take another shot at forcing a breach. However, by then the Romanian army will have fortified the passes and gotten some experience fighting actual battles, and thus has a shot at stopping German attacks (like OTL in Moldova) IF they still receive support from the French. The Russians don't have to send troops and ammo into Dobrogea, meaning they'll fare a little bit better against the Germans/Austrians in Poland.

The underlying weaknesses of the Russian army and state are still there though, meaning a collapse is still likely around the same timeframe, with or without Lenin. Brest-Litovsk borders might be marginally more westward. Once that happens, Romania HAS to sign a separate peace and supply the CP's with grain etc, since it's unlikely they'll last from March to November, even with the army in better shape.

 

[yulzari]

Assuming that Bulgaria has previously signaled it's intentions to remain neutral, then this would impact upon the Turkish decision to join in with the Central Powers; as German supply will be more difficult. They too may choose to remain neutral making a whole new TL for the Near East.

 

[Dementor]

off the top of my head regarding Romania:

The Germans have a much harder time crossing the Carpathians in time in 1916, very likely failing (there is a chance that Rommel might die during the fighting). Then winter sets in, followed by spring floods and mud, meaning it isn't until late spring that they can take another shot at forcing a breach. However, by then the Romanian army will have fortified the passes and gotten some experience fighting actual battles, and thus has a shot at stopping German attacks (like OTL in Moldova) IF they still receive support from the French. The Russians don't have to send troops and ammo into Dobrogea, meaning they'll fare a little bit better against the Germans/Austrians in Poland.

The underlying weaknesses of the Russian army and state are still there though, meaning a collapse is still likely around the same timeframe, with or without Lenin. Brest-Litovsk borders might be marginally more westward. Once that happens, Romania HAS to sign a separate peace and supply the CP's with grain etc, since it's unlikely they'll last from March to November, even with the army in better shape.

However, might the absence of a threat on their southern flank make the Romanians join earlier? If this coupled with the Russian 1916 offensive, the Austro-Hungarian position might become very precarious.

Assuming that Bulgaria has previously signaled it's intentions to remain neutral, then this would impact upon the Turkish decision to join in with the Central Powers; as German supply will be more difficult. They too may choose to remain neutral making a whole new TL for the Near East.

Considering that Bulgaria had still not decided whether to join the Central Powers until at least the summer of 1915, it's very unlikely that this had any effect upon the Ottoman decision.