Would a quick CP Victory solve anything?

Let's say WWI comes to happen like OTL, except instead of dragging on for four years, it ends relatively early. Say France falls in 1914, and then Russia sues for peace either that same year or the next. Obviously the war wouldn't have been as bloody as OTL, but does this actually solve any of Europe's problems? Will the tide of socialist revolution be dampened, along with the inevitable reactionary response? Would the national rivalries that consumed the continent for centuries recede? Or is violent, chaotic change still inevitable?
 
Last edited:
It likely shifts tensions to Asia: France isn't challenging Germany again and with the Balkans occupied and the Tsar facing challenges after such a quick loss, Russia's attention returns East. The UK will still be there trying to contain German power. With Russian interests returning to Britain's Eastern sphere (the UK will build up Japan as an Asian ally further antagonizing Russia) and German animosity at English intervention in their hegemony, does Germany and Russia eventually find common ground to force a new war against the UK?
 
In the short term it will establish Germany as the dominant European power, leading to a generation of peace. Long-term though, French revanchism, Russian and Austro-Hungarian instability, Russian imperial ambitions, Italian irredentism, and British desire for a balance of power have not been solved. Furthermore, without the massive bloodletting of OTL WWI, the people will be less reluctant for a second round. The only issue "solved" is Germany's insecurity/inferiority complex, at the cost of aggravating other nation's problems.
 
Austria-Hungary has the most obvious future course. It is not possible for that empire to last. Princip did the Habsburgs a favor by taking a man with a morganatic marriage out of the line of succession, so that will help A-H a little. But not enough. I’m going to go so far as to say that, absent our WW1, the august Holy Catholic and Apostolic House of Habsburg meets the fate OTL reserved for the Romanovs. Complete with communist successors.

Overall, while I agree with the community on Sealion, I don’t think a CP victory means peace for our time. It’s utterly abhorrent to think that the end result of the 20th century would’ve been better if only everybody had been nice to Germany and not forced them to murder as many as 85 million people because they were sore losers.
 
In the short term it will establish Germany as the dominant European power, leading to a generation of peace. Long-term though, French revanchism, Russian and Austro-Hungarian instability, Russian imperial ambitions, Italian irredentism, and British desire for a balance of power have not been solved. Furthermore, without the massive bloodletting of OTL WWI, the people will be less reluctant for a second round. The only issue "solved" is Germany's insecurity/inferiority complex, at the cost of aggravating other nation's problems.
Russian and Austro-Hungarian instability is overstated - especially if the Balkans is settled swiftly. The consequences of French revanchism or Italian irredentism is also overstated, since neither have a realistic prospect of success in a second round.

The British desire for a ballance of power is often cited, except by British decision makers of the time. Many have suggested British diplomacy was influenced by perceived German weakness, not a desire for a balance of power. If Britain wishes to continue to be the global champion of free trade, it would need to come to terms with Germany being at the table with the grown ups. The Kaiser certainly had quite a few insecurity/ inferiority issues, but its not an accurate description of the German state.

Austria-Hungary has the most obvious future course. It is not possible for that empire to last. Princip did the Habsburgs a favor by taking a man with a morganatic marriage out of the line of succession, so that will help A-H a little. But not enough. I’m going to go so far as to say that, absent our WW1, the august Holy Catholic and Apostolic House of Habsburg meets the fate OTL reserved for the Romanovs. Complete with communist successors.
Curiously, on a concurrent thread a number of us were perplexed why people insist A-H was doomed without war. FYI - before the war A-H had the fastest growing economy in Europe, it prepared poorly for a war, which it continued to bungle for over three years, on three separate fronts - yet it still outlasted Imperial Russia. While A-H was certainly propped up by Germany, the same could be said about the British and French - by the USA to a greater extent.

Overall, while I agree with the community on Sealion, I don’t think a CP victory means peace for our time. It’s utterly abhorrent to think that the end result of the 20th century would’ve been better if only everybody had been nice to Germany and not forced them to murder as many as 85 million people because they were sore losers.
An early CP victory means substantially the status quo - with clearly the strongest continental power (Germany) on the winning side, the prospects of round two are greatly reduced. Long term peace requires Anglo-German diplomacy to get their shit together, but if hostilites are short term, or if the outcome of the war was due to British neutrality, then there are no major barriers to a reconcilation between those powers - IMHO.
 
Austria-Hungary has the most obvious future course. It is not possible for that empire to last. Princip did the Habsburgs a favor by taking a man with a morganatic marriage out of the line of succession, so that will help A-H a little. But not enough. I’m going to go so far as to say that, absent our WW1, the august Holy Catholic and Apostolic House of Habsburg meets the fate OTL reserved for the Romanovs. Complete with communist successors.

Overall, while I agree with the community on Sealion, I don’t think a CP victory means peace for our time. It’s utterly abhorrent to think that the end result of the 20th century would’ve been better if only everybody had been nice to Germany and not forced them to murder as many as 85 million people because they were sore losers.
How? OTL took 4 years of brutal warfare, if anything this galvanize cislethania and give a shot of much need power
 
With victory in the Balkans and against Russia, the biggest problem for Austria's stability for the immediate future could actually be Hungary and its reaction after Franz Josef is gone in a few years. Especially depending on whether or not his successor makes any drastic reforms at Hungary's expense. Without FF, the federalization plan should be more or less shelved, much to the relief of Budapest, so the war actually increases the empire's stability, just from that.

Of course, with Germany hegemon in Europe, there's really not much that the Hungarians could do to claw back any more influence. In the unlikely event of an uprising, it would probably turn the KuK into just the "K".
 
Last edited:
With victory in the Balkans and against Russia, the biggest problem for Austria's stability for the immediate future could actually be Hungary and it's reaction after Franz Josef is gone in a few years. Eapecially depending on whether or not his successor makes any drastic reforms at Hungary's expense. Without FF, the federalization plan should be more or less shelved, much to the relief of Budapest, so the war actually increases the empire's stability, just from that.

Of course, with Germany hegemon in Europe, there's really not much that the Hungarians could do to claw back any more influence. In the unlikely event of an uprising, it would probably effevtovely turn the KuK into just the "K".
I think The Magyars will learn they reached their apex of power, independance means they will be facing alone balkan country with an axe to grind against them...when the KuK give more security, in exchange of continued magyarization of transleithania,they would not bother more
 
Maybe. Or maybe you get the nazis but with competent leadership at the top instead of failed male prostitutes, drug addicts, ernst rohm and chicken farmers.
 
I mean, you've just handed total dominance over Europe to a bunch of reactionary absolutists and ensured that the republican French have been hit hard, possibly leading to that country going back to a government by dictator ala the Napoleons.

Somehow I doubt that this lends itself to much peace or stability.
 
Maybe. Or maybe you get the nazis but with competent leadership at the top instead of failed male prostitutes, drug addicts, ernst rohm and chicken farmers.
Heydrich, goring, a violent homosexual and himmler...amd what make hitler? failed artist? and goebbles? failed journalist/writer? nah there would not be nazi, the DAP would be irrelevant ITTL.
 
I mean, you've just handed total dominance over Europe to a bunch of reactionary absolutists and ensured that the republican French have been hit hard, possibly leading to that country going back to a government by dictator ala the Napoleons.
In 1912 the Germany Social Democratic Party was the largest party in the German with 35% of the vote. Imperial Germany was recognised as having the most developed social welfare system in the world. One of the key reasons Bismarck lost influence with Wilhelm were disagreements regarding Bismarck's reactionary outlook. Unlike the US, Britain, Serbia and Imperial Russia, Imperial Germany pursued war since the Franco-Prussian war and was in the process of remedying its own colonial mis-steps. But please, don't let the facts get in the way...

France's pre-war scheming and enabling of Russian/Serbian adventurism was scarcely condusive to enduring peace. With France's diminished capabilities, the strongest dictatorship the French could hope to muster, would be something resembling a French Il Duce, not another Bonaparte.
 
Let's say WWI comes to happen like OTL, except instead of dragging on for four years, it ends relatively early. Say France falls in 1914, and then Russia Sue's for peace either that same year or the next. Obviously the war wouldn't have been as bloody as OTL, but does this actually solve any of Europe's problems? Will the tide of socialist revolution be dampened, along with the inevitable reactionary response? Would the national rivalries that consumed the continent for centuries recede? Or is violent, chaotic change still inevitable?
Shucks, ANYONE winning quick would probably have been better. The damage WW1 inflicted is beyond imagining.

France almost certainly settles down to being a second-rank power in Germany's shadow, much as Austria-Hungary had since 1866. Violent Socialist uprisings aren't on the cards unless the war lasts into 1916 (which is shorter, but not what I'd call "quick"). Multiethnic empires as a concept aren't discredited. Austria-Hungary, having put in a poor showing in the war, will likely be forced to take major internal reforms, but it's pretty unlikely that it breaks up. If France falls in 1914, Italy is highly unlikely to join the war, so avoids many of the reasons for it's political woes in the interwar years.

Britain won't be happy, and could be the one to start the next war. I really wonder what would happen to Ireland too? On the other hand, Germany emerging as such a power in Europe combined with Britain not suffering much direct damage could well mean beneficial reforms to the empire.

Not sure what would happen to the Ottomans here, odds are Germany will be trying to make them a de facto colony, and once Russia recovers, an Ottoman-Russian war is a risk. On the other hand, the Ottomans have a real chance to develop some real strength again, and the Ottomans and the other powers in Europe will be throwing spanners at Germany and Russia.

China would be different, without the hope and disappointment of OTL's WW1. Not sure exactly how things would go there though. Japan and Spain (as well as Latin America) wouldn't experience such explosive growth fueled by war production, but they don't suffer the post-war crashes either. Probably that's a good thing on balance, leading to more political stability. World trade-patterns aren't so badly disrupted.

It would be a much less democratic world though. Without the old system being so thoroughly discredited, things will change more slowly.

fasquardon
 
I feeel like people always think avoiding nazism or the ussr means the world is fundamentally better, but such a world would likely see extended imperialism and forget the suffering of Europe's colonial subjects in africaand asia... people here tend to forget that these institutions weere maintained solely to benefit the colonial powers at the expense of millions... reform wasnt really there to uplift natives, it was always placating the locals underfoot to help european powers... i never like this question because people measure a "better world" by removing the wars and holocaust in Europe but that discredits the potential misery of extended colonialism... the world is different,but may not always be better for everyone. Its just fiction after a point in the end, saying it would be better always seems silly because we never really know,we only speculate
 
I don't think so, I think ww1 was a war about changed geopolitics and the emergence of superpowers. If the war ended in a single campaign season then the losers would take the lesson to be that their army needs to be better equipped and led, not that they have been demoted in the ranks of nations and to seek their niche in the second tier.
 
Russian and Austro-Hungarian instability is overstated - especially if the Balkans is settled swiftly.
"Settled swifty"...about that.

Not saying this makes a CP Early Victory automatically worse than OTL, just pointing out that the Balkans are kinda fucked no matter what.
 
Last edited:
I don't think so, I think ww1 was a war about changed geopolitics and the emergence of superpowers. If the war ended in a single campaign season then the losers would take the lesson to be that their army needs to be better equipped and led, not that they have been demoted in the ranks of nations and to seek their niche in the second tier.
That's more-or-less what happened to France for about 20 years following the Franco-Prussian war and I don't imagine the German terms are going to be any more generous in this scenario. Whatever their performance in the field, the Serbs are going to be thrown under the bus at the peace table. Without French empowerment, the Russians will be grounded and unable to go clubbing in the Balkans.

Is Britain going to choose to continue to hang out with that bunch of losers, or hang out with the cool kids with their shiny uniforms and epic facial hair?
 
Is Britain going to choose to continue to hang out with that bunch of losers, or hang out with the cool kids with their shiny uniforms and epic facial hair?
The continued existence of the KM and its potential to surpass the RN is an absolute no-no for the UK.
 
The continued existence of the KM and its potential to surpass the RN is an absolute no-no for the UK.
Yesterday's news - the KM efforts to surpass the Royal Navy had more-or-less passed in 1912.

After clinging to a two power naval standard during Anglo-German naval rivalry, the British gifted naval parity to the USA (among other things) following WW1, so the British were clearly capable of bending the knee. The price of German friendship would be far worse than naval parity - the British would instead need to be nice to the Kaiser.
 
Top