WI: Russo-German alliance continues into 20th Century?

POD: Kaiser Wilhem is convinced by Bismark that an alliance with Russia is more valuable than a potential alliance with Britain and actual alliance with Austria-Hungary, and the Reinsurance Treaty continues.

(This is probably the follow-on from some earlier change, but it's the important end-result.)

Austria-Hungary quickly forms an alliance with France, and with her two greatest rivals part of the opposing alliance, Britain follows suit. The Italians are either German-friendly neutrals (if cautious) or allies (if aggressive), depending on how well they think they can protect their coastline. The assorted Balkan states join Russia, seeking to expand at the expense of Austria-Hungary. The United States quite happily sells to anyone with money, while Japan is already allied to Britain and the Ottomans happily sit this one out and work on strengthening and modernizing.

My first thought is that this should prevent anything closely resembling an alt-WW1, as Austria-Hungary is surrounded on three sides by hostile powers, unable to effectively help set off the Balkans powder keg. There's still too much tension in Europe to be held off forever, though, so something's going to give at some point - and I'd guess it'd be Austria-Hungary suffering from it, with three powers looking to expand at its expense.

Thoughts?
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Yes and no; there were two "sick men" during the last decades of

POD: Kaiser Wilhem is convinced by Bismark that an alliance with Russia is more valuable than a potential alliance with Britain and actual alliance with Austria-Hungary, and the Reinsurance Treaty continues.

(This is probably the follow-on from some earlier change, but it's the important end-result.)

Austria-Hungary quickly forms an alliance with France, and with her two greatest rivals part of the opposing alliance, Britain follows suit. The Italians are either German-friendly neutrals (if cautious) or allies (if aggressive), depending on how well they think they can protect their coastline. The assorted Balkan states join Russia, seeking to expand at the expense of Austria-Hungary. The United States quite happily sells to anyone with money, while Japan is already allied to Britain and the Ottomans happily sit this one out and work on strengthening and modernizing.

My first thought is that this should prevent anything closely resembling an alt-WW1, as Austria-Hungary is surrounded on three sides by hostile powers, unable to effectively help set off the Balkans powder keg. There's still too much tension in Europe to be held off forever, though, so something's going to give at some point - and I'd guess it'd be Austria-Hungary suffering from it, with three powers looking to expand at its expense.

Thoughts?

Yes and no; there were two "sick men" in Europe during the last decades of the Nineteenth Century, and Austria-Hungary and the Turkish empire were both equally open to being dismembered by their neighbors.

A Russo-German alliance that begins with slicing up Austria-Hungary at some point from 1860 to 1900 - Germans to Germany, Slavs to Russia, most likely as proxies but potentially some direct annexations, odds and ends to the smaller neighboring powers that presumably would join in, notably Italy and Greece) has an interesting result - the Russians, while digesting what they have, are looking to the southeast in the Balkans and southwest in the Caucausus (guess who's in the way?) while the Germans can look north and west, and both have (presumably) a mutual interest in a secure alliance and a deep borderland between each other in Central Europe.

France is the odd one out, but given French ambitions in the Mediterranean in (roughly) this period, they may be as interested in cleaning up against the Turks and their vassals/proxies as the Russians are...

This leaves the British as odd man out, and/or alligned with the Austrians and Turks; given their absolute inability to do anything for the Danes (despite the importance of the Baltic exits) or even their onetime allies the French when Prussia became Germany, presumably they will sit back in splendid isolation - they may try and frustrate the French in the Med, but that simply drives the French into the arms of the Germans and Russians, and - given the example of 1866 - presumably the Italians are alligned with the Germans against the Austrians.

Not much left in terms of continental allies for the British to throw at their enemies, is there?

Best,
 
Austria-Hungary quickly forms an alliance with France, and with her two greatest rivals part of the opposing alliance, Britain follows suit. The Italians are either German-friendly neutrals (if cautious) or allies (if aggressive), depending on how well they think they can protect their coastline. The assorted Balkan states join Russia, seeking to expand at the expense of Austria-Hungary. The United States quite happily sells to anyone with money, while Japan is already allied to Britain and the Ottomans happily sit this one out and work on strengthening and modernizing.

My first thought is that this should prevent anything closely resembling an alt-WW1, as Austria-Hungary is surrounded on three sides by hostile powers, unable to effectively help set off the Balkans powder keg. There's still too much tension in Europe to be held off forever, though, so something's going to give at some point - and I'd guess it'd be Austria-Hungary suffering from it, with three powers looking to expand at its expense.

Thoughts?

Considering Italy is also surrounded by this alt Entante, its likely to remain neutral until (if) the conflict seems decided, and then jump aboard. Russia+Germany is in a pretty strong position-a blockade is much less effective (I think Russia had an agricultural surplus), and Germany would likely be a better industrialization partner than France for Russia. I don't know if France would even want to commit itself to Austria in this scenario-it'd be overrun fairly quickly. Agree that UK and France are formally allied much sooner. As per OTL the US is likely to lean towards them. If a war broke out, it'd be a world war-much more so than OTL WWI. Japan vs. Russia in Manchuria in the far east, Germany vs France+UK in the west, and conflicts in Afghanistan and Iran to the south. That plus the OTL confrontations in Africa. Possibly a larger middle eastern front if the Ottomans get involved.
 

Don Quijote

Banned
Yes and no; there were two "sick men" in Europe during the last decades of the Nineteenth Century, and Austria-Hungary and the Turkish empire were both equally open to being dismembered by their neighbors.

A Russo-German alliance that begins with slicing up Austria-Hungary at some point from 1860 to 1900 - Germans to Germany, Slavs to Russia, most likely as proxies but potentially some direct annexations, odds and ends to the smaller neighboring powers that presumably would join in, notably Italy and Greece) has an interesting result - the Russians, while digesting what they have, are looking to the southeast in the Balkans and southwest in the Caucausus (guess who's in the way?) while the Germans can look north and west, and both have (presumably) a mutual interest in a secure alliance and a deep borderland between each other in Central Europe.

France is the odd one out, but given French ambitions in the Mediterranean in (roughly) this period, they may be as interested in cleaning up against the Turks and their vassals/proxies as the Russians are...

This leaves the British as odd man out, and/or alligned with the Austrians and Turks; given their absolute inability to do anything for the Danes (despite the importance of the Baltic exits) or even their onetime allies the French when Prussia became Germany, presumably they will sit back in splendid isolation - they may try and frustrate the French in the Med, but that simply drives the French into the arms of the Germans and Russians, and - given the example of 1866 - presumably the Italians are alligned with the Germans against the Austrians.

Not much left in terms of continental allies for the British to throw at their enemies, is there?

Best,

Underestimating the British as usual I see. So the BEF did nothing in OTL WW1? France was defeated by Germany and the Americans came and liberated it? If you're referring to the Franco-Prussian War, the Entente Cordiale didn't exist at that time, and Prussia, while a threatening force on the continent, didn't pose the same threat to Britain as a united Germany did.
Why would the British antagonise the French in the Med if Germany, Russia and possibly Italy are all working together to bring down A-H and the Ottomans, and France is in a good position to stop this? Not to mention the rather incredible assumption that France is likely to side with its greatest enemy, which humiliated it in 1870-71, and still holds Alsace-Lorraine, for the sake of grabbing a bit of the disintegrating Ottoman Empire. Certainly it would be welcome, but it isn't a top priority of the French when Russia, Germany and Italy are in an alliance, and the last two, particularly Italy, would like another piece of some of France's territory.
Also the British have rather more influence in the Med than in the Baltic (Malta, Gibraltar, Egypt, possibly Cyprus), so it's not as if Britain has to follow the Napoleonic Wars model of financially backing continental powers to maintain the balance of power. Also, while the Turks were certainly in decline in the late 19th century, it doesn't matter to Britain if they lose most of their European territory, at least I've never heard of direct British intervention in the Balkan Wars. On the other hand, with their naval strength they could probably help the Ottomans if it comes to defending the Straits, although the Ottomans did a good enough job of that themselves in 1915-16.
 
Top