OTOH Britain can't let France and Russia die at the hands of Germany, while the declaration of war would be delayed they would still join WW1.
What if the German Empire had no colonies -> Better performance in WWI?
- Thread starter Moctezuma1466
- Start date
I was talking about a no wars scenario. If a war between France/Russia and Germany/Austria breaks out in 1914 Britain will join France and Russia.
If there is no German colonization of Africa, Oceania, who would take the OTL German colonies? Also, if Germany had no colonies, all the money spent colonizing could be diverted into the German navy.
Mostly would be taken by the British, with some minor border changes in favor of neighboring nations and Shandong probably isn't a colony.
The colonies if anything helped Germany because the forces they deployed there were paltry and often did way more damage in proportion to their opponents. And it's not as if Germany not having these colonies will mean someone else won't either. It's easy to see how France and Britain with Germany's colonies would have more resources, manpower, and an easier time of it overall
I think the Ottomans collapse a bit earlier in this scenario and Germany will as well.
The lack of colonies doesn't necessarily mean no HSF but any situation where Germany isn't engaging in USW is one that is different - the Allies may have less material losses, but they also may not get America to join
I think the Ottomans collapse a bit earlier in this scenario and Germany will as well.
The lack of colonies doesn't necessarily mean no HSF but any situation where Germany isn't engaging in USW is one that is different - the Allies may have less material losses, but they also may not get America to join
Depends when the war starts. Ireland was on the brink of a civil war. If WW1 does not kick off until the autumn then the Irish civil war could break out before then. In that case no BEF in France before 1915.
That's also true. Plus, if the war is delayed for much longer, Britain might start to reevaluate its alliances in light of Russia's planned naval and railway buildups. While I highly doubt Russia would've surpassed Germany by 1917*, nobody would know just how problematic the Russian military actually was, and treat Russia as a far greater threat that it actually would be. Add to that the Anglo-German detente from 1912 onwards, which would likely have returned relations to a cordial state, and Britain's allignments might be in doubt by TTL's 1917 or so. And who knows, maybe armored cars and motorization would've allowed one side to blunder their way to a costly victory within a few months to a year had the war been pushed back, preventing a devastating four-year stalemate.
*People misunderstand Germany's fears at the time and mistake their comments for evidence that Russia would've become a superpower by 1917. Germany's comments need to be understood on the context of Russia's railway buildup, which would've improved their mobilization enough to make the Moltke Plan unworkable. Russia didn't have a chance in hell of surpassing Germany by 1917. And on a larger scale, the 20th century was terrible to both countries. Without the wars, Russia would probably have some 400 million people and a GDP per capita similar to OTL's Greece by TTL's 2024. Germany would have a population of around 150 million and a GDP per capita similar to OTL's Denmark by TTL's 2024.
If Germany had no colonies, it could have avoided a couple of situations that would have been caused trying to get colonies or land somewhere.
On one hand, this would have freed up a lot of money for different purposes, for example building railroads like the railroad to Bagdad and get influence through economic means. On the other hand, the pressure on the polish provinces and an idea of germanification might take place instead.
One thing to consider: would the Entente really be created? Without colonies good terms with Russia become the most important thing for Germany...would things really go that way?
On one hand, this would have freed up a lot of money for different purposes, for example building railroads like the railroad to Bagdad and get influence through economic means. On the other hand, the pressure on the polish provinces and an idea of germanification might take place instead.
One thing to consider: would the Entente really be created? Without colonies good terms with Russia become the most important thing for Germany...would things really go that way?
The Entente wasn't created as an anti-German alliance. Indeed, only the Franco-Russian alliance was a true defensive alliance. The Entente Cordiale was intended to reduce Franco-British tensions over Africa by recognizing French influence in Morocco and British influence in Egypt. The Anglo-Russian accord was similar.