WI WW1- The Dutch allowed Germany to pass troops through the Netherlands?

If nothing else that might give the Japanese (who are of course merely honoring their part of the alliance with the UK when they join the entente side in WWI and totally not being opportunistic at all) enough reasons to take the Dutch East Indies, which they also have a good chance of keeping regardless of who won WWI. The vast resources of the Dutch East Indies may also sate Japan's resource needs, or at least make their later wars against China much less susceptible to outside pressures (such as the US embargo of oil and scrap metal in otl)
I simply don't think GB(inc AUS) will allow this, its far to threatening for them. It also hits the issue of who owns the oil after all is at least some of it not run by Anglo-Dutch Shell?
 
I simply don't think GB(inc AUS) will allow this, its far to threatening for them. It also hits the issue of who owns the oil after all is at least some of it not run by Anglo-Dutch Shell?
Well, that depends on how desperate the situation in Europe becomes does it? Especially if Germany performs better than OTL yet not enough to gain a quick victory. With France in more desperate straits some horse trading will probably have to occur, perhaps with an earlier & bigger IJN presence in the Med on Japan's part in return for letting them taking on a bigger role in the Far East...
 
The image below has a fairly accurate depiction of the railways in the low countries in 1914. It lacks many of the urban areas, and the Dutch fortification system, but should make clear the railway connections. There was a railway serving Maastricht through the Maastricht appendix. Note how there is only one rail route between Germany & the Belgian plain not covered by the defense systems around Antwerp and Liege/Namur. Even if it were a high capacity route, and it was not, it would not be sufficient to supply more than a third of the German right wing. Further more if the Belgians have time to destroy the railway bridge across the Meuse river the route becomes useless for weeks, perhaps months.



Railways.jpg
 
The image below has a fairly accurate depiction of the railways in the low countries in 1914. It lacks many of the urban areas, and the Dutch fortification system, but should make clear the railway connections. There was a railway serving Maastricht through the Maastricht appendix. Note how there is only one rail route between Germany & the Belgian plain not covered by the defense systems around Antwerp and Liege/Namur. Even if it were a high capacity route, and it was not, it would not be sufficient to supply more than a third of the German right wing. Further more if the Belgians have time to destroy the railway bridge across the Meuse river the route becomes useless for weeks, perhaps months.



View attachment 397090
Uhm, there are railway bridges across the Meuse in the Netherlands. More specific map below, but at least there are crossings at Roermond, Gennep and Venlo, additional crossing if necessary from Arnhem/Nijmegen, and not sure on this map what the exact situation in Maastricht is but even there there's nothing for the Belgians to blow up (since it's all in the Netherlands).

http://www.nicospilt.com/scans/spoorkaart1910_groot.JPG
 
Thanks for that map.

Uhm, there are railway bridges across the Meuse in the Netherlands. More specific map below, but at least there are crossings at Roermond, Gennep and Venlo, additional crossing if necessary from Arnhem/Nijmegen, and not sure on this map what the exact situation in Maastricht is but even there there's nothing for the Belgians to blow up (since it's all in the Netherlands).

http://www.nicospilt.com/scans/spoorkaart1910_groot.JPG

Your are correct. I was referring to the bridge across the canal on the Hasselt Eindhoven route. The crossing further west at Harenvhals sits at the edge of the Antwerp defense zone. If that bridge is intact any Belgian artillery must be driven further west out of range.

My military training in logistics did not include a lot of technical knowledge of railways, but I do recognize potential choke points. If planning the operation described in the OP I'd want to know the practical capacity of these two routes/bridges, and the Maastricht crossing. If you are wanting to bypass the fortress/entrenchment zones the same level of railway capacity is needed as existed in the high capacity routes through the Liege area.


Screen Shot 2018-07-15 at 7.24.24 AM.png
 
Eh, I'd suggest bypassing it if necessary; striking to Hasselt is nice, but the real benefit is hitting Antwerp before all the defences are properly in place; it's a fight to take it, sure, but so was the historical Liege area - and if you take Antwerp quickly you can strike straight into the back of the Belgian army and of the BEF.
 

HJ Tulp

Donor
The germans in our timeline did use a road that was for a part dutch in 1914. The dutch government looked away, they didn't want to get involved. After the war Belgium made some big landclaims based on this incident and some other issues (Zeeuws Vlaanderen and the south of Dutch Limburg). But the other allies dismissed those immediately. It still soured Dutch-Belgian relationships for some years after the war.

I'm pretty sure that the Germans using the a Dutch road for the 1914 attack is a misconception based on the Netherlands allowing Germany to retreat it's forces through Limburg in 1918. :)
 
Let's say that in this timeline, the Dutch allow Germany troops use of their railways and that as a result, the Germans do not get held up in Belgium. The Dutch do not join the Central Powers, they merely allow troop access. How does this affect WW1? Would the quicker advance to Paris result in an early victory? What might Germany be able to offer the Dutch in exchange for this favor?
Doubt the British will see it this way, allowing German troops to cross the Netherlands will be consider a violation of Netherlands Neutrality.
 
I'm pretty sure that the Germans using the a Dutch road for the 1914 attack is a misconception based on the Netherlands allowing Germany to retreat it's forces through Limburg in 1918. :)
No, it is definitely not based on that. There are persistent rumors already in newspapers in 1914 of bordercrossings. But there were also some highly unreliable stories among them. From highly unlikely to more believable: Zepelins above Maastricht, German Troops in Eysden, Use of a smal road on the border by Moelingen. I decided to look at my sources again. My most reliable source, Nederland Neutraal in de eerste wereldoorlog, Wim Klinkert,Paul Moeyes&Samuel Kruisinga. states that the Dutch army did an investigation to any passing of the border in 1914, They directly asked the German high command about an incident. The reply was a very strong denial (there's a footnote at this point). The writer than writes that a further investigation by the army proved that that was indeed the case. He concludes that the German Army did respect the border. The rumor of a breach of neutrality in 1914 are still persistent though, in my search i saw the story on many places.
 
Eh, I'd suggest bypassing it if necessary; striking to Hasselt is nice, but the real benefit is hitting Antwerp before all the defences are properly in place; it's a fight to take it, sure, but so was the historical Liege area - and if you take Antwerp quickly you can strike straight into the back of the Belgian army and of the BEF.

I'd have to review the mobilization of the Belgian Army. Its been near four decades since I read much on the subject. The reservist depots were scattered across the country, but the assembly areas into larger formations seem to have been near Ghent, Brussels or Louvain, & Liege/Namur. The OTL deployment of the two field corps in the Gembloux region was not set in stone & was in response to the mass of the German 1st & 2d Armies marching west out of Liege towards Brussels.
 
I'd have to review the mobilization of the Belgian Army. Its been near four decades since I read much on the subject. The reservist depots were scattered across the country, but the assembly areas into larger formations seem to have been near Ghent, Brussels or Louvain, & Liege/Namur. The OTL deployment of the two field corps in the Gembloux region was not set in stone & was in response to the mass of the German 1st & 2d Armies marching west out of Liege towards Brussels.
The deployment was not in Gembloux but along the Gete river. It was decided as a compromise between those who wanted to bring the army forward against the Germans on the Meuse and support the defenders of Liège, and the ones who wanted to retreat directly around the Antwerp national redoubt. There is little doubt that second option would have been retained if the Germans are allowed to cross The Netherlands unopposed.
 
No, it is definitely not based on that. There are persistent rumors already in newspapers in 1914 of bordercrossings. But there were also some highly unreliable stories among them. From highly unlikely to more believable: Zepelins above Maastricht, German Troops in Eysden, Use of a smal road on the border by Moelingen. I decided to look at my sources again. My most reliable source, Nederland Neutraal in de eerste wereldoorlog, Wim Klinkert,Paul Moeyes&Samuel Kruisinga. states that the Dutch army did an investigation to any passing of the border in 1914, They directly asked the German high command about an incident. The reply was a very strong denial (there's a footnote at this point). The writer than writes that a further investigation by the army proved that that was indeed the case. He concludes that the German Army did respect the border. The rumor of a breach of neutrality in 1914 are still persistent though, in my search i saw the story on many places.

For a good idea of the problems the Dutch had to stay neutral, take a look at this (a. Free, b. in English) book: http://arno.uva.nl/cgi/arno/show.cgi?fid=171954xxxxx (remove xxxx)

The Art of Staying Neutral by Maartje M. Abbenhuis

Nb. The "Bordercrossing" is mentioned on page 84/85.
 
Last edited:
Top