WI Russo-Japanese War becomes a world war?

BooNZ

Banned
All this takes is for the Germans to make the calculations that lead to Bjorko a year earlier

OTL the only reason Nicky [alone] would have entertained this fantasy is because Russia was already locked in a war with Japan that was not going as expected and Russia is getting no love from France, which is scared that any public displays of affection will incur the wrath of Britain. In 1903 the Russians have no incentive to flirt with the Germans, I mean its not as if the Russians need the input of Germany to crush a second rate Asian power... It would be like expecting SA to accept scrummaging advice from the Wallabies in 2014...

Or the Germans can decide that war with France, Russia and Britain is inevitable and allying with the Franco-Russian coalition to defeat Britain before fighting it out on the continent is the way to play

German diplomacy post Bismarck was predicated on an alliance between Germany and Britain being inevitable - the Germans were determined that they should extract a fair price from Britain for such an alliance. The rationale for this was that Britain had too many areas of disagreement with both France and Russia - that Britain jumped into bed with both was certainly not anticipated.

Further, in the first instance, France would never ally with Germany. The whole purpose of bankrolling Tsarist Russia was that France would have a crack at regaining A-L in the next war. Germany would not be giving France A-L to join the French-Russian alliance if it was expecting a Dowry from Britain for the same. In any case, what would Germany gain from a French-Russian alliance - the only beef with Britain was the Naval race and that was more of a courting ritual gone wrong.
 
The Dogger Bank incidident is a good one for expanding the conflict, but that just makes it a curbstomp if Britain comes in on the side of Japan. Germany would likely just sit on the sidelines laughing all the way to the bank unless the French tried to get involved, and I can't see them doing so because that would invite German intervention and they would get crushed.
 
OTL the only reason Nicky [alone] would have entertained this fantasy is because Russia was already locked in a war with Japan that was not going as expected and Russia is getting no love from France, which is scared that any public displays of affection will incur the wrath of Britain. In 1903 the Russians have no incentive to flirt with the Germans, I mean its not as if the Russians need the input of Germany to crush a second rate Asian power... It would be like expecting SA to accept scrummaging advice from the Wallabies in 2014...

1903? Björkö was signed in 1905, so a year earlier would make for 1904.

German diplomacy post Bismarck was predicated on an alliance between Germany and Britain being inevitable - the Germans were determined that they should extract a fair price from Britain for such an alliance. The rationale for this was that Britain had too many areas of disagreement with both France and Russia - that Britain jumped into bed with both was certainly not anticipated.

And yet by 1904 Britain had jumped into bed already with one of the two by signing the Entente Cordiale. By 1904 German diplomacy vis-à-vis Britain had clearly failed.

Further, in the first instance, France would never ally with Germany. The whole purpose of bankrolling Tsarist Russia was that France would have a crack at regaining A-L in the next war. Germany would not be giving France A-L to join the French-Russian alliance if it was expecting a Dowry from Britain for the same. In any case, what would Germany gain from a French-Russian alliance - the only beef with Britain was the Naval race and that was more of a courting ritual gone wrong.

France does lose an ally if it stays neutral. It's uncertain if and when Britain will commit to a formal alliance to replace Russia. As for joining the war, France doesn't need to give Germany anything. It's a matter of deciding whether or not to uphold their pre-existing commitment to Russia. They don't need German permission for that. As to what Germany would gain from an alliance with Russia and France: Germany would become Russia's primary source of industrial goods, Germany can take over the British market share in France, and Germany will be the leading power of this new 'continental system' à la Napoleonic France a century earlier.
 

BooNZ

Banned
1903? Björkö was signed in 1905, so a year earlier would make for 1904.

My bad, but the principle remains the same. Russia's position was deteriorating and there would have been proportionally less incentive reach an earlier agreement with Germany. In any case, Willy appeared to be one of the few enthusiastic supporters of the concept in either country.

And yet by 1904 Britain had jumped into bed already with one of the two by signing the Entente Cordiale. By 1904 German diplomacy vis-à-vis Britain had clearly failed.

Even ten years later, no-one was entirely convinced the British would actually join the war. The differences between Russia and Britain were also arguably more pronounced than France alone. If Germany thought its diplomacy vis-à-vis Britain had 'clearly failed' in 1904, why did it proceed in the same general direction for the best part of a decade?

France does lose an ally if it stays neutral. It's uncertain if and when Britain will commit to a formal alliance to replace Russia. As for joining the war, France doesn't need to give Germany anything. It's a matter of deciding whether or not to uphold their pre-existing commitment to Russia. They don't need German permission for that. As to what Germany would gain from an alliance with Russia and France: Germany would become Russia's primary source of industrial goods, Germany can take over the British market share in France, and Germany will be the leading power of this new 'continental system' à la Napoleonic France a century earlier.

So how does France get AL back? I stated that Germany would likely have to give the French AL before the French would consider such an alliance (i.e. is not going to happen). From what you are saying France loses both Russia as a primary market for its industrial goods (to Germany) and Germany also gets license to dump its industrial goods in France? Instead of signing up to such an alliance, France might as well formally surrender?

In times of war a German-Russia alliance is a royal wank, but in all other times those economies are starved of funds required for growth.
 

LordKalvert

Banned
The nitrates provided from the coking process were generally not suitable for military purposes, so this remains an issue. However, that lack of any serious land conflict means that existing stocks would suffice. So the result is the same.

The Russians certainly made explosives from the stuff. There's always cow dung. In any event, there's hardly any need for massive explosives budgets. Its not going to be a land campaign- just a bunch of commerce raiding and seizing of British ships at anchor.


The Germans and the Russians traditionally enjoyed good terms, but Russia and A-H were on a collision course.

In 1904? Not at all. They were enjoying the best relations they had since the ingrate had been installed in the Vienna. FF was gaining control over Austrian policy and the future looked bright for both of them

The Germans would have happily thrown the Russians under the bus during the Triple Intervention in favour of the British (based on reference material you have previously provided on the subject). The proposed 1904 agreement between Willy and Nicky was strongly opposed by both the German and Russian diplomatic departments, let alone the French. The Russians simply could not afford a formal alliance with Germany (literally).



Bizarre. The German diplomatic dispatches clearly state that the Kaiser intended to protest with sufficient force and was actually angling for a far more forceful intervention. How you twist a declaration, in the Kaiser's own hand of (in reference to Taiwan) "then we can claim it", to mean that they were interested in confronting Russia is beyond me.

The Germans were biding their time. If the British offered them more (like Taiwan) than the Germans might have gone with the British. The British weren't interested, the Russians were

Sure, there are portions of the Diplomatic corp opposed to Bjorko but ultimately Willy and Nicky have the final say. The French might not like it but if the choice is between a settlement with Britain and the loss of the Russians, plenty of French diplomats (and the French government that demanded Delcasse's resignation) might have gone with the Russo-Germans.

The situation in June 1904 is much more favorable to the Russians- the naval war for example is going decently (two Japanese battleships sunk to one Russian), Russian finances aren't under much strain and the prospect that the Russians would ultimately prevail aren't all that grim. So yes, Bjorko offered in June of 1904 would be a much different affair than in 1905

Finally, the thread has its assumptions. You might not like them, but they are there. The assumptions aren't preposterous- that the Germans move to ally with the Russians and force the French to abandon their flirtation with the British. Alsace may be a wound to France but so was Fashoda

And what are the British offering anyway? Diplomatic support in Morocco and a settlement of outstanding grievances? Not much to what Germany and Russia can offer- a secure border guaranteed by the Russian Army- much more than the British and their little fleet that doesn't work on wheels
 

LordKalvert

Banned
The nitrates provided from the coking process were generally not suitable for military purposes, so this remains an issue. However, that lack of any serious land conflict means that existing stocks would suffice. So the result is the same.

Got a reference for this?

Because if you go to

Iron Age, Volume 97, Issue 2 over at google books and look up "The proposed Government Nitrate plant" They'll be happy to explain how wrong this is.

Making explosive from coking residue is cheap and easy. Its just that the Germans needed their nitric acid for fertilizer
 

LordKalvert

Banned
Did France show any interest in joining Bjorko? Its not a question of Russia and Germany allowing them to join, it's whether they would accept such an offer and become allies with sworn enemy Germany against Britain, the country which historically saved France's life in 1914. If they do, they are leaving themselves completely open to being back stabbed by the Germans, only this time there won't be any BEF and no Miracle on the Marne. I will say though, that if we accept the premise that it is possible to trick France into going along with this, there certainly is a strong case to be made for it from the German point of view.

EDIT: perhaps someone might want to do a TL on this? It would be an interesting contrast to the one I'm doing.

The Entente is signed in April 1904 so you might need to move the offer up before that which is about a year before Bjorko. The French have a history of cooperation with the Germans against the British- in the Triple Intervention and the Congo crises. The French would like to reconcile with the British but at the expense of Russia? That becomes a lot less appealing

Remember- the offers between Britain and Russia towards France- Russia is offering a hundred divisions, the British are offering not to quarrel but no alliance. The British have a long history of fighting France as well and are as traditionally an enemy of France as Germany

In 1904, Russia is in a much stronger place both financially and militarily than she is in July 1905. So yes, this POD is plausible
 
The Dogger Bank incidident is a good one for expanding the conflict, but that just makes it a curbstomp if Britain comes in on the side of Japan.

I think the possibilities inherent in the Dogger Bank incident get overestimated on the forum. The incident would have made a decent excuse if Britain was already planning on making war on Russia, but an actual, honest to god casus belli? Remember that St. Petersburg acted very reasonably after the incident, accepted international arbitration and paying reparations. If Britain is gung ho for war despite the sensible attitude of the Tsar's government, this would in turn cause further problems, especially with the French and I think London knew this as well.

So in my view that the Dogger Bank incident actually leads to war between Britain and Russian means we need an earlier POD that makes one or the other ready to go to war against the other, and this in turn leading to either Russia not being ready consider any arbitration and reparations or Britain making unreasonable demands. As things stood, open war was in neither's interest and this was why it was avoided.
 

LordKalvert

Banned
I think the possibilities inherent in the Dogger Bank incident get overestimated on the forum. The incident would have made a decent excuse if Britain was already planning on making war on Russia, but an actual, honest to god casus belli? Remember that St. Petersburg acted very reasonably after the incident, accepted international arbitration and paying reparations. If Britain is gung ho for war despite the sensible attitude of the Tsar's government, this would in turn cause further problems, especially with the French and I think London knew this as well.

So in my view that the Dogger Bank incident actually leads to war between Britain and Russian means we need an earlier POD that makes one or the other ready to go to war against the other, and this in turn leading to either Russia not being ready consider any arbitration and reparations or Britain making unreasonable demands. As things stood, open war was in neither's interest and this was why it was avoided.


Agree completely here. Incidents weather they be minor like Dogger Bank or major like the German invasion of Belgium may provide a convenient excuse for an already made decision but rarely change minds.

Contrast British reaction to Dogger with LBJ's response to the Gulf of Tonkin
 
My bad, but the principle remains the same. Russia's position was deteriorating and there would have been proportionally less incentive reach an earlier agreement with Germany. In any case, Willy appeared to be one of the few enthusiastic supporters of the concept in either country.

That doesn't add up :confused:. You said yourself "OTL the only reason Nicky [alone] would have entertained this fantasy is because Russia was already locked in a war with Japan that was not going as expected and Russia is getting no love from France, which is scared that any public displays of affection will incur the wrath of Britain. ..."

In 1904 the entire matter of the war with Japan not going as expected is still at play.

Even ten years later, no-one was entirely convinced the British would actually join the war. The differences between Russia and Britain were also arguably more pronounced than France alone. If Germany thought its diplomacy vis-à-vis Britain had 'clearly failed' in 1904, why did it proceed in the same general direction for the best part of a decade?
The Germans didn't know yet that it had clearly failed. They lacked 20/20 hindsight. We now know that Britain becoming BFFs with Kaiser Bill's Germany is highly unlikely.

So how does France get AL back? I stated that Germany would likely have to give the French AL before the French would consider such an alliance (i.e. is not going to happen). From what you are saying France loses both Russia as a primary market for its industrial goods (to Germany) and Germany also gets license to dump its industrial goods in France? Instead of signing up to such an alliance, France might as well formally surrender?
You're right about France I suppose.

In times of war a German-Russia alliance is a royal wank, but in all other times those economies are starved of funds required for growth.
Well, now there are times of war... ;)
 

BooNZ

Banned
That doesn't add up :confused:. You said yourself "OTL the only reason Nicky [alone] would have entertained this fantasy is because Russia was already locked in a war with Japan that was not going as expected and Russia is getting no love from France, which is scared that any public displays of affection will incur the wrath of Britain. ..."

In 1904 the entire matter of the war with Japan not going as expected is still at play.

Agree entirely and that was the point I was trying to make - obviously badly - the earlier you go, the less incentive there is for Russia to be receptive to overtures from Germany.

The Germans didn't know yet that it had clearly failed. They lacked 20/20 hindsight. We now know that Britain becoming BFFs with Kaiser Bill's Germany is highly unlikely.
I think we agree, but then the point I was rebutting, which you made, does not reconcile. However, even with the benefit of hindsight, I still struggle to see any strategic barriers to a Anglo/German reconciliation, aside from comical sub-optimal diplomacy on both sides - not just Willy. As an aside, I apologise for ignoring the OP - i.e. focusing on the likelihood rather than outcomes...
 
Top