WI: The Zimmerman telegram was not intercepted by british intelligence?

The trick is to reword the question.

Would, in the middle of post-revolutionary chaos and civil war, Mexico ally with a power it had no historic links with who was cut off by a British blockade and unable to supply Mexico with any necessary armaments, so that Mexico could attack a neighbor that was vastly more powerful in terms of numbers, equipment and training and with a strong expansionist lobby?

No.
 
Nope. They'd probably just hand it over to the Americans. Mexico would never be so suicidely stupid as to attack the US in 1918, they could expect no help from Germany and their economy and military is in shambles. They'd get their arse kicked into the next century and they knew it.
 
The telegram didn't just fall out of the sky, it came in the wake of the 1914 US invasion of Vera Cruz and the 1916 Punitive Expedition, which penetrated some 500 miles into Mexico and resulted in fighting between US cavalry and Mexican troops and the new Constitution was adopted in early 1917 when the telegram was sent. The US was looking to invade the Tamlico oilfields (which supplied 75% of the RNs oil and the Mexicans were going to burn in the event of invasion) and the Tehuantepec route and the telegram lead to the recognition of the Carranza government and kept the US from invading.

So if the telegram isn't intercepted does the US keep interfering in Mexico and possibly go to war in Mexico much like their other interventions in Latin America in the era without the telegram focusing their attention onto Germany? Do the Mexicans burn their oilfields as a result and do the British go ballistic because of that?
 

Deleted member 1487

No Mexico wouldn't have joined. They got the telegram as it was IOTL. Just because the Brits intercepted the transmission didn't mean the message was stopped.
And it not being revealed wouldn't have stopped US entry into the war either. It would have delayed it and made US entry somewhat more politically messy and things like the Creel Commission perhaps tougher to pull off politically.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimmermann_Telegram#Mexican_response
 
What about the US fighting Mexico for their own reasons and with no reference to the telegram and Germany, is that possible?
 

cpip

Gone Fishin'
What about the US fighting Mexico for their own reasons and with no reference to the telegram and Germany, is that possible?

Well, given the invasion of Veracruz, the Punitive Expedition, and everything that had gone on since Taft massed troops on the border to contain the Revolution... it's entirely possible. There were some banging the drum for a war -- Hearst was the loudest voice, but not the only one. Wilson, Bryan, and Lansing were hell-bent on avoiding a war in Mexico; it's entirely possible that a different administration (possibly Taft or Roosevelt) would have seen it differently.
 
Mexico would be slaughtered by the US. The major impact would be that the US may not be so keen on war in Europe after seeing their people being killed at home.
 
I'm not sure if Mexico ever seriously considered a war with the US. They were well aware of their own weaknesses.

This was another fantasy scheme of Kaiser Wilhelm II's government that simply was out of touch with the real world. This scheming ended up alienating a powerful nation. Just as the German Empire had been doing with regular blunders in international diplomacy and creating powerful enemies everywhere since dismissing Bismarck.
 
So if the telegram isn't intercepted does the US keep interfering in Mexico and possibly go to war in Mexico much like their other interventions in Latin America in the era without the telegram focusing their attention onto Germany? Do the Mexicans burn their oilfields as a result and do the British go ballistic because of that?

I do think that is a possibility and be a good read.
 
What about the US fighting Mexico for their own reasons and with no reference to the telegram and Germany, is that possible?
If I remember correctly by the time the telegram arrived the US had already withdrawn/was withdrawing. The intervention had been anything but successful and I don't think there was any appetite to continue.
 
I'm no expert on the matter, but apparently the US was unhappy with the 1917 Constitution which impinged on US interests, which is why I suppose the US was looking to invade the Tehuantepec route and Tamlico oilfields since they probably had heavy US investment. The constitution was enacted on Feb 5th, just after the US Army withdrew, so the US would be angry with Mexico all over again without the telegram and USW to snap their attention toward Germany might attack Mexico again.
 
Also, Britain not intercepting the telegram is very, very improbable.

The telegraphic cables went through Britain, and they read EVERYTHING the Germans sent. IIRC.
 
Well, given the invasion of Veracruz, the Punitive Expedition, and everything that had gone on since Taft massed troops on the border to contain the Revolution... it's entirely possible. There were some banging the drum for a war -- Hearst was the loudest voice, but not the only one. Wilson, Bryan, and Lansing were hell-bent on avoiding a war in Mexico; it's entirely possible that a different administration (possibly Taft or Roosevelt) would have seen it differently.


Neither was even remotely possible, but there were rumours that a Hughes administration might withdraw recognition from the Carranza government, which might have led to war. That however is far from certain.
 
Also, Britain not intercepting the telegram is very, very improbable.

The telegraphic cables went through Britain, and they read EVERYTHING the Germans sent. IIRC.

Yes - the telegram was sent via three separate routes (including via the US Embassy). The British intercepted all three of them.

Cheers,
Nigel.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Would Mexico join WW1?
No. Mexico had only just come out of a very tumultous era, i.e. the Mexican revolution, and thus was in no shape to do anything. The Zimmermann telegram was idiotic, since there was no way Mexico would do something that stupid.

The best chances for a US- Mexican war was the Pershing expedition. When it was resisted by Carranza's forces things could have gone very different with someone else in the White House.
 
Does anyone know about the US plan (maybe 'idea' is more accurate) to invade the Tehuantepec route and Tamlico oilfields? I think it may have something to do with the 1917 Constitution somehow impacting on US interests, did the Constitution nationalise these things or put them under tighter control or something?
 
The real question here is: Why didn't Mexico send a reply entirely consisting of utter derision against the unworkable proposal sent by Zimmerman?

ex.


Re: Alliance proposal

[Several pages of laughter interspersed with reasons attacking America would be suicidal]
 
Mexico wasn't attacking the US, some or the revolution spilled over into the US but mostly it was the US invading Mexico. Perhaps Mexico can reply that if the US attacks again then yes Mexico will ally with Germany and as such cut off oil shipments to Britain. Britain would be screaming for US restraint in Mexico.
 
Top