WI: Franz wasn't assassinated?

[BlondieBC]

Actually if things remain stable until 1917 they reach a "deadline" by which point Germany will not be able to offer its support because that is when Russia would have completed a modernization of its military that would have forced Germany into a defensive posture.

It is also important to remember that by 1917, A-H would have also finished modernizing its artillery units, and that France was reducing its active army by 1/3 (2 year, not 3 year conscription). And these are the know changes. Without WW1, major legislation in some of the powers is likely to occur. Once can't simply take WW1 in 1914 and add a stronger Russian Army to get a realistic 1917 WW1.

Britain also like to play the balance of power, and if it looked like the Entente was much stronger than the Central Powers, the UK might just sit out the war.

I could see them finding some excuse for war, therefore preempting before Russia finishes modernizing its military in 1917, because if they allowed that to happen and war later broke out, they would face a war they could not win, and essentially be trapped between their neighbors. Alternatively, they could seek to defuse tensions by proposing non-aggression treaties to the French and Russians. Like in modern times, when they allied with France and began working on the integration of Europe.

The German GHQ looked at a preemptive war in 1905/06 and decide not to do it, and them doing it in 1915-1917 is extremely unlikely.

Yes, Germany might chose a diplomatic strategy if scared, but they might also increase their Army by 50% in size to match the French expenditures. A lot of Germany's can't win problems will disappear with 12, not 8, field armies.

 

[BlondieBC]

Heck, there's a fair chance Austria-Hungary finds some other excuse to attack Serbia, which brings in Russia, which brings in Germany, which brings in France and the UK. Serbia had other terrorists. But more importantly, Austria had Balkan ambitions.

Most likely the Central Powers lose anyway--but who knows how a delay in WWI would affect Italian and/or US entry.

Not likely. A-H needs a strong enough excuse to get two parliaments to approve and unqualified support from the Kaiser. What kind of excuses do you think A-H could have manufactured that would work?

maybe one of the entente powers starts the war?
that could be interesting because then the allies cannot blame Germany for the war;

Serbian intelligence was involved in the plot. So Serbia really started the war, along with A-H and Russia. So even with an Entente start to the war, they will blame the CP, and many people in neutral countries will blame the CP.

Take a modern example of countries with bad history of diplomatic relations. If Iran assassinated VP Biden, how long until the USA attacks. Or if Castro killed VP LBJ? The fact the Germany is blamed for WW1 is a testament to the quality of the propaganda effort by the UK.

 

[Snake Featherston]

The German GHQ looked at a preemptive war in 1905/06 and decide not to do it, and them doing it in 1915-1917 is extremely unlikely.

Yes, Germany might chose a diplomatic strategy if scared, but they might also increase their Army by 50% in size to match the French expenditures. A lot of Germany's can't win problems will disappear with 12, not 8, field armies.

Not without the logistics problem *also* being resolved they don't.

 

[BlondieBC]

If it does get delayed, what would be the status of the High Seas Fleet come 1915 or 1916, would they ever have achieved parity with the Royal Navy? That would be an entirely different war.

No, and by 1913/14, they never intended to. It was the "risk fleet" concept. Germany was looking for a fleet about 65% the size of the RN in capital ships. If the war is delayed/prevent, it is likely the British and German fall into a official or defacto naval arms limitation treaty due mostly to both sides being exhausting with the costs and learning to live with the existing strategic situation.

Austria-Hungary causes World War I in 1917 when the combination of Franz Ferdinand's Magyarophobia and the Ausgleich in post-FJ Austria-Hungary causes the whole thing to start disintegrating and leading to an even bigger trainwreck in terms of the kind of trainwreck it'd be of a WWI than IOTL.

Agreed on could, but not the would. There decent chance something that could work for another 25-50 years longer could be agreed to.

 

[BlondieBC]

Not without the logistics problem *also* being resolved they don't.

When researching for my TL, i came across it was seriously considered. Now considered does not mean it would work well, but that was the logical time to strike if one wanted to strike first. If a preemptive war is too risky when Russia is in revolution, it will be massively to risky anytime Russia is not in revolution/disorder.

 

[BlondieBC]

If I were the Kaiser I'd just choose the simpler route of keeping the alliance with said militarily incompetent Russia, so I get the prospect of a "two front" war against only one enemy properly deserving the name and my biggest supposed "threats" are either Austria-Hungary or Italy. Alienate Russia and that leads to an encircling alliance that can only lead to a two-front war. Keep the DKB going and Russia will be too beholden to me to ever raise its hand in a war.....

As Kaiser, how would you resolve Russia's Pan Slavic tendencies, the issues in the Balkans, and the Slavs in Germany and A-H?

 

[Snake Featherston]

When researching for my TL, i came across it was seriously considered. Now considered does not mean it would work well, but that was the logical time to strike if one wanted to strike first. If a preemptive war is too risky when Russia is in revolution, it will be massively to risky anytime Russia is not in revolution/disorder.

No, massing 12 field armies into France on an attempt to secure a double envelopment will not solve a problem that was unworkable enough with 8 field armies IOTL. 1910s Russia, bluntly put, isn't suited for a modern war no matter how strong it is, so it changing the details of its defeat doesn't really do anything. 1910s Russia's issues of factionalism and inability to co-ordinate the steamroller will still screw it up against Germany, which no matter what always has superior logistics. Three years isn't going to pony up what Russia would really need to kick German ass in a WWI timeframe.

 

[Snake Featherston]

As Kaiser, how would you resolve Russia's Pan Slavic tendencies, the issues in the Balkans, and the Slavs in Germany and A-H?

Well, first of all I'd try actually negotiating with Russia instead of acting like a man with compensation issues all the time. It might actually go somewhere with Alexander III. Pan-Slavism is no more a major motivating force of Russian actions than Pan-Germanism is of the German Empire, so what the Hell do I care about that crap?

 

[eliphas8]

It is also important to remember that by 1917, A-H would have also finished modernizing its artillery units, and that France was reducing its active army by 1/3 (2 year, not 3 year conscription). And these are the know changes. Without WW1, major legislation in some of the powers is likely to occur. Once can't simply take WW1 in 1914 and add a stronger Russian Army to get a realistic 1917 WW1.

Britain also like to play the balance of power, and if it looked like the Entente was much stronger than the Central Powers, the UK might just sit out the war.

Thats my point, things will change and the powder keg will be unbuilt.

 

[eliphas8]

As Kaiser, how would you resolve Russia's Pan Slavic tendencies, the issues in the Balkans, and the Slavs in Germany and A-H?

I would give Austria-Hungary a short change and only support them diplomatically rather than in war, I would give up any dreams of being a massive naval or colonial power so as to stay friendly with Britain, and I would try to fund the reform of the Ottoman military in order to have them be a much stronger counterbalance to Russian influence.

 

[BlondieBC]

OK, how about this: No Ferdinand assassination. Austria-Hungary comes up with a much better excuse to annex Serbia--maybe even Serbia goes completely nuts and DOWs Austria. Russia declines to intervene, so none of the rest of the dominoes fall. No Great War for now.

Then what?

Still war, most likely. A-H had a really good excuse/reason for war in OTL. Ask yourself this, if today, the number #2 man in Russia was assassinated by a foreign national with help of the foreign government, how long to war? If Taiwan assassinated the #2 in China, how long til war?

It was the mobilization plans and the lack of understanding of these plans that lead to war. Russia started mobilizing a few hours BEFORE Serbia replied to the ultimatum. War could have still happened in OTL, even if A-H spends a few days considering the Serbian reply and intends to make a counter offer. It was believe back then that mobilizing sooner was a key to victory. So if one caught another hostile major power mobilizing, it would automatically mobilize and go to war. The closest modern analogy is nuclear weapons. If the USA caught Russia doing first strike, it would tend to counterstrike immediately and then figure out why the war was happening. Now today, it is minutes to figure out if a strike is real, then it was hours (24-48). It was believed a delay of only 10's of hours could cost ones country its freedom or its existence. Now unfortunately, the Kaiser and Tsar did not understand the full implication of this in the month leading up to the war, or at least ignored the implication of this in many of the decision leading up to the war.

 

[BlondieBC]

No, massing 12 field armies into France on an attempt to secure a double envelopment will not solve a problem that was unworkable enough with 8 field armies IOTL. 1910s Russia, bluntly put, isn't suited for a modern war no matter how strong it is, so it changing the details of its defeat doesn't really do anything. 1910s Russia's issues of factionalism and inability to co-ordinate the steamroller will still screw it up against Germany, which no matter what always has superior logistics. Three years isn't going to pony up what Russia would really need to kick German ass in a WWI timeframe.

Ok, yes, your are right on this part. Eight armies is about the most that can be used in France. Maybe a 9th can be used 4-8 weeks after the start of the campaign. IMO, and this is from a thread a few months ago, the 9th Army would have been stationed in Posen, and the 10th would have been stationed in West Prussia. Now added an army adds some massive butterflies, but if one looks at what happens, all other things being equal, these extra armies move Russia from Plan Austria to Plan Germany, which means the A-H does not have the fiasco in Galicia in 1914, and Italy does not enter the war in 1915.

But what I was mainly trying to pointout in the original quote was Germany had other options besides becoming friendly with Russia, one of which was much larger military spending. And with the Kaiser track record, it is probably the most likely option. Not probable, just most likely among all the options.

 

[Anderman]

Ok, yes, your are right on this part. Eight armies is about the most that can be used in France.

IOTL seven armies were used in France the eight army was in the east.

 

[BlondieBC]

IOTL seven armies were used in France the eight army was in the east.

yes, I know, slight typo.

 

[Mikestone8]

The fact the Germany is blamed for WW1 is a testament to the quality of the propaganda effort by the UK.

Well, the Germans did help by being the first to declare war against major powers (against Russia on August 1, against France on August 3). Until August 6, iirc, Austria-Hungary was not at war with any country except Serbia.

 

[Delvestius]

After reading some comments, I found a few things missing...

France would not care to ally with Germany due to the history of the two countries, first and foremost, especially after the Franco-Prussian war. The French were utterly humiliated, and would never have been allied with Germany. Perhaps and only perhaps, if Germany relinquished Alsace-Lorraine, but this is pretty implausible. Germany was still banking on getting tight with the U.K, a country that they thought hated France just as much as the Germans.

Although Germany may have been stronger in the long run for it, I don't think Germany would relinquish Austria-Hungary as an ally. They were directly on their Southern Border, and Germany pretty much had the power to tell Austria to do whatever the hell Germany wanted. Germany was actually tight with Russia in the League of Three Emperors, but this fell apart due to Germany's preference of Austria's interference in the Balkans, rather than Russia's, which pissed them off enough to seek an alliance with France, who was equally as afraid of Germany.

My main thought is that it they chose Russia of Austria Hungary, the way may have been a little different. And by a little I mean completely different.

 

[Janprimus]

I would give Austria-Hungary a short change and only support them diplomatically rather than in war, I would give up any dreams of being a massive naval or colonial power so as to stay friendly with Britain, and I would try to fund the reform of the Ottoman military in order to have them be a much stronger counterbalance to Russian influence.

I suppose you mean Wilhelm II and not Franz Joseph?

Giving Austria-Hungary too much of a 'carte blanche' wasn't too smart, the colonial and naval dream was also leading to tensions; however there also was a German public opinion. Giving up the colonies and navy would appease the British public opinion (but for how long), but it would be felt as an insult in the German Empire. Having colonies and a navy was a part of being a Great Power at the time; Germany was a bit too aggressive in pursuing that ambition, but the UK's reaction exaggerated and hypocrite. The public in both countries had different views; however Germany was too late in the 'colonial race' and the best it could hop for was a navy, whch was best of the rest (2nd behind the UK). Especially since the German Imperial army wasn't always pleased with teh funds going to the German Imperial Navy.
Repairing that spiral would probably have too start early in the reign of Wilhelm II.

 

[BlondieBC]

Well, the Germans did help by being the first to declare war against major powers (against Russia on August 1, against France on August 3). Until August 6, iirc, Austria-Hungary was not at war with any country except Serbia.

True technical point, well used by Entente propagandist. But mobilization was understood to mean war.

 

[Vingilótë]

Well, the Germans did help by being the first to declare war against major powers (against Russia on August 1, against France on August 3). Until August 6, iirc, Austria-Hungary was not at war with any country except Serbia.

However it can be said that Russia, by mobilizing first, was the first to begin offensive overtures. Frankly, after a certain point, no Great Power can be labeled as being as fault.

 

[Snake Featherston]

However it can be said that Russia, by mobilizing first, was the first to begin offensive overtures. Frankly, after a certain point, no Great Power can be labeled as being as fault.

Not quite. You see Germany went to general mobilization 24 hours before Russia did......