World War One: American Front? Chinese Front?

I had a TL idea bouncing around in my head. It is as follows:

1898: Tensions escalate in the Fashoda crisis between France and Great Britian. While there is no war, skirmishes badly hurt the relationship between the two nations.

1899: Boer war. While Britian is victorious, her status is hurt in the eyes of the international community. It is to such an extent that the leaders of Britian re-evaluate their position and seek a continental alliance.

1900: Since both France and Russia are not options, the Anglo-German alliance is signed in early 1900. Both nations send more troops than OTL to supress Boxer Rebellion as first joint military action, rather than the Eight Nation Alliance. Germany is given more free trade zones and Naval bases in China.

1902: British and German warships are sent to Venezuela to collect on a debt. The President of the United State, Rosevelt, demands the ships leave. Due to the alliance giving Germany British backing, Germany insists on collecting Venezuelan debts, as well as Naval bases in the Caribbean. A small indecisive naval skirmish occurs, and war almost breaks out. It is avoided however, by British negotiations between Germany and America. However, both Germany and Britian are viewed negetivly in the eyes of the American public. The USA embarks on a missive Naval expansion program.

1904: Russo-Japanese War. Russia is defeated by the Japanese, who gain a greater presence in Korea and East Asia. Rosevelt does not negotiate as in OTL.

1905: Japan joins the Anglo-German Alliance due to fears of Russian expansionism. The Alliance now includes Great Britian, Germany, Austria, and Japan, although Italy and the Ottoman Empire are on friendly relations; Italy due to a prior relationship and a part in the Venezuela Crisis and the Ottomans due to fear of Russian expansion.

1906: Attempted Revolution in Russia. Although it fails, liberal reforms are introduced, although the Czar controls foriegn policy.

1907: Due to fears of being encircled by the rival bloc, France and Russia make appeals to the USA to join the alliance. While the USA declines,a friendly relationship develops, with increased American investment in Russia and France. Russia also makes friendly appeals to the Persians. Russian influence had diminished in Perisa since the Revolution, and relations between the two nations got better after Russia made diplomatic overtures to the Shah(?) Driven by American captial, Russia emarks on a massive military expansion program.

1908: Skirmishes occur between Russian and British backed soldiers in Afganistan. It is small, and it is taken care of diplomatically.

1909: China, worried by Japanese expansionism, joins in the alliance with Russia and France.

1911: First Balkans war. The Balkan league defeats the Ottoman Empire. The Great Powers(mainly Britian and Germany) intervene to make sure the Balkan states do not leap on the Ottomans to badly, and there is no second Balkan war. Russia feels to weak to intervene.

1913: The Chinese Revolutionary alliance attempts to overthrow China. They fail due to Western support of the Quing, namely, from Russia. The Quing Dynasty, attempting to gain more public support, takes an anti-Anglo-German stance.

1915: An American warship is fired upon by a Japanese warship. An an intense anti-Japanese, primarily racist, feeling develops in America. America drifts closer to the Entente.

1916: The "Great Game", as the preceding years have been called, comes to a head. The Balkan League declares war on a belligerant Bulgria, wanting more power and believing the Austrian Empire to be collapsing. Austria joins the war, and the alliance system is enacted when Russia backs the Balkans.

Central Powers:
Britian, Germany, Austria, Italy, The Ottoman Empire, and Japan

Entente:
France, Russia, China, Persia, and (in 1917) the United States.

The Great War

1916: Germany and Italy invade France. By the end of 1916, France is already on her last legs, and although the Italian army was mostly fought back, the Germany army marched through the Rhineland(Belgium was vetoed by GB) and almost reached Paris. A stalemate ensues.

On the Eastern Front, a more mobile Russia launches an attack first against Germany. Despite vast nu,erical superiority, Russian forces are fighting on serveral fronts. While it was fought back, and eventually defeated, it took pressure off France. The Austrians do poorly against the Balkans, but hold their own, while the Ottomans are almost defeated outright by a three front war with Persia, the Balkans, and Russia.

The main Russian force is in Europe fighting the Germans, however, some forces are sent, with Persian support, into Afganistan. They plan to try and start a second mutiny in India. Furthermore, some forces are sent to Siberia to aid the Chinese against the Japanese, but it is a token force at best. The Japanese do well against the Chinese forces and advance into Manchuria.

1917: America joins the war on the side of the Entente do to a more militaristic standpoint than OTL. The Caribbean is quickly cleared of German and British naval bases, however, the Royal Navy is quicky deployed against the USA. American soldiers invade Canada.

Europe reaches a more or less stalemate, with the Germans transfering more and more soldiers to fight the larger Russian army. France, however, is defeated once the BEF moves to aid the Germans and Italians. the news is not all bad for the Entente, however: The Ottoman Empire, fighting on three fronts and facing an Arab rebellion, backs out of the war. The Balkans turn on the Austrians, whose multi-national army is poorly equipted, trained, and motivated. Nevertheless, the Balkan states are held back.

In Afganistan, more Persian soldiers join the front, which due to the difficult geography of the area, does poorly. However, the British are quickly becoming overstretched and have difficulty bringing supplies to the India. Rationing is implemented in India, and Indian soldiers fight against Russian ones. Mutiney becomes more and more likely.

In the Pacific, the American and Japanese Navies clash indecisivly. The last Germany and British enclaves are driven out of China. It is a great moral victory for China.



------------To be Countinued!

I don't really know where this is going. I thought it up an hour ago, doing research on the Internet as I went along. I will try to add more and update it, if there is interest and I am smart/willing enough!:D

Criticism is welcome.
 
It's pretty good, however I don't think the US would be able to gain naval superiority in the caribbean. The Royal Navy west indies station alone should be able to take care of the US navy, add in the German navy aswell...
 
Quick Question

What is the Casus Belli for America joining the War, I would have thought that the Anglo-Germanic Alliance would be desparate for stopping the Great Boiler from lighting.

Short of a unilateral declaration of war, which is unlikely due to the more isolationist movements in USA no matter who the white house is aligned with.

Nothing short of a Lusitania and Zimmerman events, and I doubt that the Germans would persue unrestricted Submarine warfare with no island nation to starve...

Other then that a nice start​
 
Leistungsfähiger Amerikan

Interesting ideas. A few possible problems to consider.

a) Actually the main power that expressed support, albeit only diplomatic, for the Boers was Germany - or more specifically Kaiser Wilhelm. As such would have to change his stance pretty quickly. Might however be practical if with worsening relations between France and Britain the German government is able to persuade him not to attack a potential ally.

b) I'm not sure at this point in time the US had that much surplus money for investment in Russia. It was developing very rapidly but as such was getting good returns from internal investment and also still the world's leading debtor because of the large amounts of foreign investment, chiefly of course from Britain. Not a major factor however as France for its own reasons invested heavily in Russia, especially in facilities that would allow the Russians to moblise and march westward quickly.

c) Given their deep historical disputes, not to mention hatreds I'm not sure you can have the various Balkan states operating in any meaningful alliance for any length of time. Especially if it involved them fighting both of their neighbouring great powers.

d) China could be a net loss for the Franco-Russians. That the Russians have propped up the Qing dynasty is likely to further discredit it in the eyes of many Chinese while the allies, especially the Japanese are likely to support the revolutionaries even more than they did OTL.

e) Actually, without the US intervention the Japanese might not have such a clear win as OTL in the war with Russia. It was facing economic exhaustion when Roosevelt's intervene helped bring the war to a favourable - for them result. If it had gone on much longer, although difficult to tell with the level of unrest in Russia, Japan might have overstretched itself.

f) I think as Nymain1 says the big problem might be getting the case for the US entering the war. Unless its changed its stance drastically as a result of the earlier clash with the allies, which might mean a pre-war alliance or agreement with the Franco-Russian bloc. Otherwise there is little likelyhood of the Americans clashing with the allies. As Nymain1 says there's going to be no point in Germany indulging in U boat warfare as its in the side with naval superiority.

One big point would be what is the naval situation? With an alliance with Britain Germany is likely to build a much smaller fleet. If the USN is really building up it would be the main rival to Britain. Doubt it would be able to challenge the RN by this time unless it virtually went on a war footing from about 1903 but could be pushing things by the time war comes. However more likely is a lesser challenge, just somewhat more than the US built OTL. In this case a lot depends on how Britain responds to the situation. It is potentially faced by Russia, France and the US. However Russia, apart from heavy losses from a historical Russo-Japanese war is in a terrible situation with three fleet, each blockaged by enemies [Germany, Japan and Turkey] that the British are supporting. France unless reformed politically is crippled by repeated changes of government. Also it has a smaller population and industrial base than Britain and is mainly concerned with the German threat to the east. The US would be the big unknown as it has the industrial capacity but historically lacked the political will for a prolonged arms race at this time.

Anyway, hope the above doesn't discourage you. Just trying to cover all the bases but some good potential and like to see how things develop.

Steve
 
Leistungsfähiger Amerikan

Interesting ideas. A few possible problems to consider.

a) Actually the main power that expressed support, albeit only diplomatic, for the Boers was Germany - or more specifically Kaiser Wilhelm. As such would have to change his stance pretty quickly. Might however be practical if with worsening relations between France and Britain the German government is able to persuade him not to attack a potential ally.

b) I'm not sure at this point in time the US had that much surplus money for investment in Russia. It was developing very rapidly but as such was getting good returns from internal investment and also still the world's leading debtor because of the large amounts of foreign investment, chiefly of course from Britain. Not a major factor however as France for its own reasons invested heavily in Russia, especially in facilities that would allow the Russians to moblise and march westward quickly.

c) Given their deep historical disputes, not to mention hatreds I'm not sure you can have the various Balkan states operating in any meaningful alliance for any length of time. Especially if it involved them fighting both of their neighbouring great powers.

d) China could be a net loss for the Franco-Russians. That the Russians have propped up the Qing dynasty is likely to further discredit it in the eyes of many Chinese while the allies, especially the Japanese are likely to support the revolutionaries even more than they did OTL.

e) Actually, without the US intervention the Japanese might not have such a clear win as OTL in the war with Russia. It was facing economic exhaustion when Roosevelt's intervene helped bring the war to a favourable - for them result. If it had gone on much longer, although difficult to tell with the level of unrest in Russia, Japan might have overstretched itself.

f) I think as Nymain1 says the big problem might be getting the case for the US entering the war. Unless its changed its stance drastically as a result of the earlier clash with the allies, which might mean a pre-war alliance or agreement with the Franco-Russian bloc. Otherwise there is little likelyhood of the Americans clashing with the allies. As Nymain1 says there's going to be no point in Germany indulging in U boat warfare as its in the side with naval superiority.

One big point would be what is the naval situation? With an alliance with Britain Germany is likely to build a much smaller fleet. If the USN is really building up it would be the main rival to Britain. Doubt it would be able to challenge the RN by this time unless it virtually went on a war footing from about 1903 but could be pushing things by the time war comes. However more likely is a lesser challenge, just somewhat more than the US built OTL. In this case a lot depends on how Britain responds to the situation. It is potentially faced by Russia, France and the US. However Russia, apart from heavy losses from a historical Russo-Japanese war is in a terrible situation with three fleet, each blockaged by enemies [Germany, Japan and Turkey] that the British are supporting. France unless reformed politically is crippled by repeated changes of government. Also it has a smaller population and industrial base than Britain and is mainly concerned with the German threat to the east. The US would be the big unknown as it has the industrial capacity but historically lacked the political will for a prolonged arms race at this time.

Anyway, hope the above doesn't discourage you. Just trying to cover all the bases but some good potential and like to see how things develop.

Steve


All very good points. I thought this up in my head very quickly, so it is subject to change.

A) This will change in the ATL. However, while the other nations didn't support the Boers, the war was still unpopular with the public of other nations to my knowledge, being seen as aggresive. The main reason for the Anglo-German Alliance is still the Fashoda crisis, however.

B) The idea was that the USA invests in Russia as a political manuver, not a economic one. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, so the USA wants Russia more powerful to take on GB.

C) I was thinking along the lines of the Balkan League, but for longer. Perhaps without Bulgaria, however. The reason their neighboring great powers are their enemies are why they are allied, however. It's a sort of do-or-die thing, with the Ottomans right on their boarder eager to take them back.

D&E) This is where I may outright change my timeline. China is the difficult country. 1898 seems almost to late to save the Quing. Perhaps instead of the Japanese, the Russians win the Russo-Japanese war. This butterflies away the revolution, however. Still, a more stable Russia would be more powerful. Powerful enough to keep the Quing up? Perhaps not. So instead, we have a Russia who wins the Russo-Japanese war allying with the revolutionary Chinese? In this ATL, the Chinese would hate the German-British-Japanese moreso than the Russians, so it could be a lesser of two evil kind of thing.

So, now we could have China falling in the early 1900's due to a tougher Boxer crushing angering the population. Japan, wanting to extent into the reigon, moves in. Starts a war with Russia. Russia wins, but Japan still ahs some holdings on the mainland. More powerful Russia in WW1 due to modernization and no attempted revolution. I am clueless, however, as to the end result of a defeated Japan. And if nothing else, when WW1 comes around, CHina will at least provide manpower.

F) Your right, there should be a casus belli. I think the most likely is the USA wanting to reextent her influence in the Caribbean, by force. And BTW, the RN is just not in the Caribbean when the war starts, which is why the USA does well. The USA will take a smashing...you havn't seen the American front yet!

Thanks for the input, now let me think on the TL.
 
By this time if British-US relations are getting bad enough war looks possible I'd imagine Canada would decide to make clear its a independant nation and somewhat break free. They don't want to get themselves conquered over something thats not down to them and Britain would be more than happy about this. Whether the US would respect it though....
Just musing there though of course. IOTL the situation never came anywhere close to appearing.

And the US being upset at Britain for the Boer war would be very, very...ok, brain fart, can't remember the word. But considering they make a habit of doing the same thing not good.
 
I doubt it. As I understand the Canadians were extremely loyal to the UK before and during the Great War. I also do beleive they had a plan in place for a pontential war with the US, were basically they would commit everything to slowing down the Americans while waiting for help from Britain. Might have been during the interbellum though.
 
I doubt it. As I understand the Canadians were extremely loyal to the UK before and during the Great War. I also do beleive they had a plan in place for a pontential war with the US, were basically they would commit everything to slowing down the Americans while waiting for help from Britain. Might have been during the interbellum though.

bernard patton

True on the question of loyalty although political expedience might also play a role. As Leej said its in Britain's interest as well as Canada's to have the latter neutral as defending it against a tooled up US would be very difficult, especially given the extra decade since the time of the 'They called it Civilisation' TL. Also don't forget as a federal state unity is important and while the conservative state in Quebec may not have close links with republican France there will be tensions over a war between Britain/Canada and France.

However I suspect the question is fairly irrelevant, other than as a matter of propaganda and consolidating Canadian unity as I can't see a US determined to go to war with the UK respecting Canadian neutrality.

Steve
 
And the US being upset at Britain for the Boer war would be very, very...ok, brain fart, can't remember the word. But considering they make a habit of doing the same thing not good.

Leej

Hypercritical is probably the word your after.;) However it is virtually a condition for most politicians isn't it? The US is possibly more guilty than most because it often claims the moral high ground but just about every nation has behaved that way - objecting to someone else does what they do - when national/political interests come into play.

Stevep
 
Really? I was under the impression they almost did IOTL in the triple alliance, but the reason they defected was the British bribes. The Italians have border and colony disputes with both the Austrians and the French, why is it ASB to ally with the Austrians?

Leistungsfähiger Amerikan

Probably less British bribes, although the allies as a whole offered then a lot of Austrian lands. More British naval power meant that the Italian coastlines and coastal traffic would have been very exposed.

Would agree that given a choice the Italians may prefer to fight with the French against the Austrians than vice versa. However they may not feel they have much of a choice if both Germany and Britain are on the Austrian side.

Steve
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Really? I was under the impression they almost did IOTL in the triple alliance, but the reason they defected was the British bribes. The Italians have border and colony disputes with both the Austrians and the French, why is it ASB to ally with the Austrians?

Italy also had a secret non- agression pact with France, and they hated Austria much more. They were friendly with Germany, but the reason why they entered the Entente OTL was because they had asked Austria and Germany to hand over Dalmatia in exchange for an alliance, when the Central Powers declined Italy chose to take their land with force instead.
 
Leej

Hypercritical is probably the word your after.;) However it is virtually a condition for most politicians isn't it? The US is possibly more guilty than most because it often claims the moral high ground but just about every nation has behaved that way - objecting to someone else does what they do - when national/political interests come into play.

Stevep

Hypocritical, yeah.
 
Top