alternatehistory.com

Granted, there seem to be a lot of CP victory WI's up lately, and yes this was inspired by them, but I think it has a different set of parameters then those, as I want a look into the future from all of your responses and maybe make this into a TL.

Using these posts as influence towards my decision to make this WI.

Actually I could see the French bailing on the Russians when they collapse / withdraw from the war. If the Germans continue the war then I could see the British stepping in. At this point Britain would play the role of the US in OTL - fresh troops and resources which defeat the '17 offensive.

I don't agree that Britain would inevitably enter the war in '15 or '16 - the threat to Europe balance of power just isn't great enough

It wouldn't be worth Germany pushing for a total defeat of France if it involved the British (and Americans? - presumably the Americans would be supplying the French so unrestricted submarine warfare against Franco-American trade could still bring the US in).

If Germany accepted a status quo ante in the West whilst reorganising the East then WW2 would still probably occur but be very different. A socialist France is not impossible - a communist USSR probable and a right wing Germany (after the socialists / SPD push the monarchists too far) quite likely too.

Austria would probably still evolve into a looser confederation of Kingdoms, more or less controlled from the centre.

Italy could go socialist or fascist - unlikely to be democratic

A Britain out of the war would be isolationialist and focus even more strongly on the Navy and air force - possibly the idea of an Imperial Federation will gain more traction.

The Wall Street crash might be more of a local (Americas) phenomenon as both Britian and Germany would be insulated to some degree by their respective satellite / Empire states.

I suggest you drop the idea of a German declaration of war on France entirely if you are considering the scenario of a German offensive on the Eastern Front against the Tsar.

It would not actually be far-fetched for Germany to have mobilised and gone on the offensive against Russia while remaining fully prepared but entirely on the defensive in Alsace-Loraine and not declaring war on France. The Russian decision to order a general mobilisation is what kicked the crisis into high gear and took it from being the Third Balkans War to being The Great War. So for Germany to declare war on Russia, which it did on the 1st of August 1914, and then follow that up with offensive operations in the east would make sense. Diplomatically it would place the odium of declaring war in the hands of the French. It would have allowed the Germans to portray their war as purely defensive in nature since the Tsar had already commenced general mobilisation even after they had warned that this would lead to war and had asked both Britain and France to exert as much influence as they could to restrain Russia.

The possibility of Germany having two mobilisation plans available in 1914 is not impossible; the Austro-Hungarians managed to do so. As long as the decision was made at the outset as to which plan to implement there isn’t any greater risk of confusion than there was with the single plan. It is a matter of the German High Command recognising that they actually had a need for two separate contingency plans.

Prior to the war Schlieffen and then Moltke the Younger had determined that while they would be facing a war against both France and Russia, but they could not afford to fight on two fronts at the same time so they would have to go for the knockout blow on one, France, before the other, Russia, was able to fully mobilise. Prior to Schlieffen’s appointment Moltke the Elder’s plan had been to remain on the defensive against France while attacking Russia, securing enough ground to force the Tsar to the negotiating table. Moltke had believed that Germany did not have the men or resources to actually defeat outright her opponents and would instead have to seize ground which could be used for bargaining during subsequent peace negotiations. If, for some reason, in the years leading up to 1914, it had been determined that diplomatic decisions may influence the purely military planning, you may have had two separate plans available, just in case.

The problem for the French is that they could not afford to let Russia be defeated. The French knew that without Russia to draw off German armies and material the French would be crushed, so they would have to declare war on Germany and attack before Germany was able to defeat Russia. The diplomatic situation necessitated that they had respect Belgian neutrality; they could not afford to upset Britain by taking the easy route through Belgium to invade Germany. So their attack would have to be into the rugged, fortified region of Alsace and Loraine where it would be unlikely to make much headway. The immediate benefit of this situation for France is that northern France, with all its industry, mining and manpower for recruiting would remain entirely in French hands, France’s armies will be bigger and they will have more artillery and ammunition with which to fight.

For the British the situation has become much more complicated; a war between Germany and Russia does not immediately threaten their interests. The Tsar also does not invoke any sympathy from the British people and parliament since firstly he is seen as an autocratic tyrant and secondly because he has meddled in a dispute between Austria-Hungary and Serbia where the Habsburgs were the wronged party, and furthermore he has mobilised his army and thereby expanded the war out of the confines of the Balkans and across Europe. But the French are not going to let Russia fall and the British cannot afford to let France fall. This is a decision that is going to have to be made in a matter of days, or at most weeks. All deliberations in 1914 were that the war would be one of weeks or months. If the British can be convinced that the Germans are fighting a purely defensive action, that they do not intend to weaken France or permanently undermine Russia’s position as a great power then they may possibly stay out of the conflict. Another factor in British deliberations is that while they had an entente with the French rather than an alliance, if they didn’t help the French it would embitter future relations between the two empires. One of the reasons the British entered abandoned their splendid isolation and entered into an entente with France, and to a lesser extent Russia, is because the British could no longer afford to protect the Empire from two potential challenges at once. A France and Russia that managed to defeat Germany and Austria-Hungary without British help is likely to be a very bitter and belligerent pair to deal with in future.

Mention of potential threats to the British Empire brings up another problem; the Ottoman Empire. An alliance between the Ottoman Empire and the Central Powers would broaden the war and would convince the British that this was not a defensive action at all but was instead aimed at territorial gains at the expense of the Russians. The potential of any such gains by the Ottomans would be a direct threat to British interests in Persia and India and would hasten British entry into the war. The Germans, in addition to guaranteeing Belgian neutrality would also have to rebuff the Ottoman requests for an alliance, or at least temporarily.


I'm thinking the PoD would be Wilhelm II going against von Moltke the Younger's advice and the Schlieffen Plan by declaring war on Russia citing preemptive defense/revenge for/with Austria. A-H answers Germany's call instantly, but the Ottoman Empire is dissuaded into neutrality so as to keep the British out of the conflict completely.

These are some ideas I have that could possibly occur due to butterflies, but they need not occur as a direct result of the PoD if they aren't plausible:

-Russia bows out in one year and France takes colony loss (Maybe French Congo/Gabon and/or French Indochina), war ends in 1916

-No violation of Belgian neutrality, the war is short enough so that Britain couldn't get involved anyways and the OE stays neutral so as to further negate British presence

-A-H devolves into "Kaiserreich-like" separation of the crowns confederacy, gives Transylvania and Bukovina to Romania
and eats Serbia

-Italy accepts its loss by its allies both accepting defeat, still goes Fascist, possibly under a healthier D'Annunzio?

-Isolationist USA with earlier, worse GD due to increased prosperity, increased spending, and inaccurate speculation
Top