[WW1 AH] - Would a Central Powers Russia have risked an OTL collapse?

[EnglishCanuck]

If the Russians cut railroad spending because of the lack of foreign investment, the trans-siberian would be the first one cut. They spent over a billion rubles on it and then 3 billion more on the Manchurian War. There's another 2 billion spent on the 1905 revolution. If the Russians are forced to concentrate on Europe and India, they are going to be far far stronger

I'm sorry, but why is Russia suddenly deciding to abandon the Far East by not building the railroad? If they never build it the Japanese have a pretty big incentive to attack them and seize Port Arthur, and the Russians simply can't allow that. The railroad has to be built for strategic reasons, they can't afford not to.

But would Austria, France and Britain still be so formidable at sea? OTl spending on new construction, is Austria, France and Britain- 34,000,000 pounds versus 26,000,000 pounds for Russia, Germany and Italy. If Austria abandons naval spending as suggested, the figures would drop to 30,000,000 pounds. A very small reed to grasp

Yes. Full stop. The Royal Navy trumps any combination of two other naval powers, and you add France and there's jack and squat anyone else can do about it. If the Russian Baltic Fleet doesn't steam to its doom at Tsushima then it would most likely be blown out of the water by the Grand Fleet somewhere in the North Sea here.

 

[Aphrodite]

I'm sorry, but why is Russia suddenly deciding to abandon the Far East by not building the railroad? If they never build it the Japanese have a pretty big incentive to attack them and seize Port Arthur, and the Russians simply can't allow that. The railroad has to be built for strategic reasons, they can't afford not to.

You cant pick and choose the effects. It was asserted that Russia would be cut off from French loans in which case the Trans-Siberian is the railroad they cut first. Economically they would boom

Alternately, the Russians have German cover. There is no need to keep a Baltic Fleet in which case they throw the Japanese back like toys. Either way, the Russo-Japanese War is butterflied away and Russia is booming

Yes. Full stop. The Royal Navy trumps any combination of two other naval powers, and you add France and there's jack and squat anyone else can do about it. If the Russian Baltic Fleet doesn't steam to its doom at Tsushima then it would most likely be blown out of the water by the Grand Fleet somewhere in the North Sea here.

This is simply wrong. Britain had been the premier naval power in the 1800s but by the turn of the century she is in rapid decline. The destruction of the Russian fleet, which is butterflied away, is the only thing that is keeping it in the ballpark. Russian naval spending was always higher than Germany except for a brief lull after the Russo-Japanese War

Your other alternative is that the Russians and Germans go to war with this weak, worthless alliance in 1904 when the British engineer the attack on Russia. This actually makes a lot of sense. With no fear of a German attack there would be no need for Russia to waste its time fighting Japan. Instead it marches through Afghanistan and into India

 

[EnglishCanuck]

You cant pick and choose the effects. It was asserted that Russia would be cut off from French loans in which case the Trans-Siberian is the railroad they cut first. Economically they would boom

That circle doesn't square. The Railway was a strategic/economic objective to help control Siberia and Manchuria, without that control the Russians can't exploit the resources of the Far East and are open to an attack by the enemy there and their Pacific Fleet will rot from lack of supplies due to the long overland route and the vulnerable sea route. And if their economy is somehow booming, why can't they build it? This is illogical on the face of it.

Alternately, the Russians have German cover. There is no need to keep a Baltic Fleet in which case they throw the Japanese back like toys. Either way, the Russo-Japanese War is butterflied away and Russia is booming

Ah yes, just like they threw them back like toys historically. It is just all too easy to beat those inferior Asians...a short victorious war indeed!

This is simply wrong. Britain had been the premier naval power in the 1800s but by the turn of the century she is in rapid decline. The destruction of the Russian fleet, which is butterflied away, is the only thing that is keeping it in the ballpark. Russian naval spending was always higher than Germany except for a brief lull after the Russo-Japanese War

Your other alternative is that the Russians and Germans go to war with this weak, worthless alliance in 1904 when the British engineer the attack on Russia. This actually makes a lot of sense. With no fear of a German attack there would be no need for Russia to waste its time fighting Japan.

You offer no evidence for this. The German HSF despite Herculian effort never even came close to challenging the RN for dominance of the seas, let alone a combination of the RN and the French Navy. The Russian's don't stand a chance.

The Russian fleet's performance against the Japanese was pitiful, and somehow they are supposed to do better against the premier naval fleet on the face of the planet? They nearly started a war with the British in 1904 from sheer incompetence.

Instead it marches through Afghanistan and into India

You're serious?

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Really depends on the POD. The Russian army without the lessons learned in 1905 would be one that even Austria-Hungary could have beaten up it was so riddled with inefficiency and poor planning.

What if our PoD is the Ottomans doing better in 1877? Throw in Alexander II living for another decade, and Russia could well be in comparatively better shape circa 1900 then they were OTL.

 

[EnglishCanuck]

What if our PoD is the Ottomans doing better in 1877? Throw in Alexander II living for another decade, and Russia could well be in comparatively better shape circa 1900 then they were OTL.

Because we're in post-1900 I've been assuming that. However, even if Alexander II lives longer he's still struggling with land reform, nationalism, and potentially a volatile European situation. Alexander III will still probably take the cautious middle road, and he has to deal with Wilhelm II, who didn't do a great job with Russo-German relations historically.

There are numerous factors which were poorly addressed in Russia from 1861-1917, chief amongst them being the inequality between the peasants and the landowners(thanks to the complications in the abolishment of serfdom), the burgeoning economic class in the cities (which was prone to radicalism) and the nationalities developing within Russia itself. At some point that will boil over, and it will take a very competent government to deal with it. Unfortunately the government tended to do this with half assed reform and a heavy dose of repression. It's a combination that will probably lead to long term problems.

If there's a lack of French investment, Germany cannot hope to fill that void. Russia will probably be poorer for it which probably retards Russian industrial growth compared to OTL.

 

[Beedok]

The Russian fleet's performance against the Japanese was pitiful, and somehow they are supposed to do better against the premier naval fleet on the face of the planet? They nearly started a war with the British in 1904 from sheer incompetence.

Yeah, considering the Russians managed the Dogger Bank incident when they were in the wrong ocean (and almost the wrong hemisphere), fighting against the UK with Germany sending out ships too will almost certainly result in the Russians sinking the first German fleet they come across...

Also, depending on when this war starts, there remains the massively pressing issue of nitrate supplies. Anything before about 1910 and the Germans are starved of ammonia and unable to produce explosives on a large enough scale to hold back the Entente more than a year. That's just feeding the war machine. Feeding the population would also be a crisis. German agriculture was responsible for about 40% of the world's nitrate consumption before the war, and Entente blockades OTL cut them off completely. Even though Russia could help a bit, there's only so much you can do when fertilizer supplies collapse (as Austria-Hungary saw OTL, where per-area production fell by 30-40%). While AH would probably fall before the German munitions situation went truly sideways, the efforts to feed a war ravaged Austria (which 'German Liberation and Unity' propaganda likely to exist in such a world would pretty much require) would just make the situation worse. The Western Front would just have to hold out long enough for Germany to either run out of munitions or run out of food, and neither of those would take long. (Though obviously a desperate Germany launching a spring offensive type 11th hour assault and knocking France out is quite plausible.)

If we're going for a 1914 war around Serbia and Archduke Ferdinand (killing more than a few butterflies)... the only way I could see Austria possibly doing that is if the Italians are securely on the Entente side (and I mean securely). You don't give grandiose ultimatums when you're surrounded by enemies (unless you're crazy), and by that. Otherwise it just becomes a particularly loud version of the Moroccan crises.

Also, I see a lot of talk about French and German investment, but very little about the UK. Considering the British had very rocky relations with Russia for decades beforehand, and their views on the importance of preventing a European hegemony to threaten them, I think the UK would almost certainly provide massive investments in Austria-Hungary (and to a lesser degree the Ottomans and Bulgaria) to help hold back the Russians.

I still see almost no way for Austria-Hungary to make it through the war in one peace (and low odds on political stability for the Ottomans too), but an early war can see the Russian-German alliance lose the war, while the later one delays the war the more a war starting relies on giving the Entente more members (be it Italy or the Americans) in order for them to see the war as at all winnable. To be honest, I think a Russian alliance would see the Kaiser acting a lot more aggressive in earlier crises, dragging Germany into an almost certainly lost war, buoyed by overconfidence at having mighty Russia to back them up.