Early end to the Great war?

[Gurkhal]

I was reading in another forum and it mentioned that Germany was close to become unable to persecute the war already in 1914 due to a lack of ammonia. And that got me thinking If the Great War ended already in 1914 or early in 1915 due to a German production collapse of munitions, what consequences would that have?

I know that some may think of "Yeah, less people would need to die!" which is true but I'm thinking about the lessons of revulsion for war and insight into how horrible war is which came from the four years of the Great War, and together with the Second World War caused Europe to abandon chavunistic nationalism, at least officially, for over half a century and the creation of the EU as a way to integrate and keep peace in Europe. Would that insight still have been won or would a shorter and less horrible war lead to more nationalistic chest-beating and politicians thinking that "War is a great way to solve conflicts"?

Eagerly awaiting ideas into this possible scenario.

 

[Graf Zeppelin]

Considering how it ended I think it can only be better.

 

[Gil galad]

Probably more like the earlier Franco Prussian war but in reverse in the west at least. It also means the Ottoman empire would not have participated. So the sick man of Europe keeps dithering. God knows what would have happened to Austro-Hungary and Russia though.

 

[JodelDiplom]

Austria-Hungary was done for. The Russians planned to cut huge pieces away from it, and would have looked with glee at the total implosion of Habsburg power in the rump that would be left after Serbs, Italians and Romanians were done taking their share.

 

[Geriander]

What about the peace terms for Germany? Alsace Lorraine is a given but would the Entente still dismantle the German colonial empire and demand large sums if the war was shorter and less bloody? Russia probably wouldn't want an independent Polish state so the question is if they would take the territories Germany historically lost to Poland for themselves.

 

[JodelDiplom]

What about the peace terms for Germany? Alsace Lorraine is a given but would the Entente still dismantle the German colonial empire and demand large sums if the war was shorter and less bloody? Russia probably wouldn't want an independent Polish state so the question is if they would take the territories Germany historically lost to Poland for themselves.

I doubt the Russians would be very interested in grabbing much land from Germany. East Prussia wasn't worth much and Germany would be most unwilling to part with it due to its political and historian significance to the Prussian state. Poznan would have made sense as an addition to their polish territories but it wasn't worth much in terms of industry or strategy. Upper Silesia was very valuable, maybe they would have tried for that too.

Mostly though what the Russians wanted was a free hand in the Balkans and against Turkey.

 

[LordTempest]

There would be much fewer war poems for students to be forcibly exposed to at school.

 

[Herbert West]

There would be much fewer war poems for students to be forcibly exposed to at school.

Boom
Boom
Boom
Boom
Boom

More seriously: I struggle to imagine an early peace scenario that does not result in a German victory.

 

[LordTempest]

Boom
Boom
Boom
Boom
Boom

 

[Gurkhal]

Considering how it ended I think it can only be better.

True in a way. The political system would most likely not be as dramatically shaked that forces like Fascism and Communism would have gained such a shot at power without a long war. And given the great many conflicts after the Great War maybe a more jingoistic victorious Entante would not have made such a difference tro the situation in regards to new conflicts and wars.

Probably more like the earlier Franco Prussian war but in reverse in the west at least. It also means the Ottoman empire would not have participated. So the sick man of Europe keeps dithering. God knows what would have happened to Austro-Hungary and Russia though.

True that, Germany would probably have come easier from it but its probably impossible to say how Germany would have taken a defeat like that. But hopefully it would have been better than how they took the defeat in the actual Great War.

Austria-Hungary was done for. The Russians planned to cut huge pieces away from it, and would have looked with glee at the total implosion of Habsburg power in the rump that would be left after Serbs, Italians and Romanians were done taking their share.

My big question is, would the Romanians have gained any wins since they only entered the war in mid-1916, if the war ended in early 1915? They might naturally have entered earlier in order to wins some scraps for themselves. Same with Italy which only entered in May 1915. Would they have been in time to take part in the spoils?

What about the peace terms for Germany? Alsace Lorraine is a given but would the Entente still dismantle the German colonial empire and demand large sums if the war was shorter and less bloody? Russia probably wouldn't want an independent Polish state so the question is if they would take the territories Germany historically lost to Poland for themselves.

I would assume that the French and British would have wanted to keep their colonial domination and if we look at it, it looks to me like the only significant European colonial power which wasn't at war with Belgium was Holland, so the western parts of the Entante would most likely have loved divided the Germnan colonies between each other.

As I think was mentioned I don't think that the Russians were really interested in winning lands from Germany on a big scale. I think that more likely they would have focused on the Balkans with a restored prestige of the tsar from a victorious war, they may have re-opened their ambitions in the Far East in a longer perspective to vie with the Japanese over that sphere.

But then again, Nicholaus II, not perhpas being the shrewdest of men may have fallen for the temptation to get German lands on a large scale and so get even more angry minorities into the Russian Empire. This time with an industrial power house right on Russia's border which would be sympathetic to these Germans complaints about being in the Russian Empire. But then again, maybe it would have worked out just fine like with the Baltic Germans in the Russian Empire.

There would be much fewer war poems for students to be forcibly exposed to at school.

I don't feel that would have been a win. I like poetry.

Boom
Boom
Boom
Boom
Boom

More seriously: I struggle to imagine an early peace scenario that does not result in a German victory.

Really? Germany gambled on a quick win and didn't have the power to fight a world war against most of the world. Not to mention that it was under blockade and all. I really don't see it as impossible that for example a Russian victory in Eastern Prussia instead of Tannenberg could have caused a total collapse early on in combination with no scientific advances to for example provide Germany with synthetic alternatives to materials and other stuff they couldn't import any longer, like leading to a lack of fertilizers to keep the German population alive and a ammonia to produce munitions.

 

[JodelDiplom]

True in a way. The political system would most likely not be as dramatically shaked that forces like Fascism and Communism would have gained such a shot at power without a long war. And given the great many conflicts after the Great War maybe a more jingoistic victorious Entante would not have made such a difference tro the situation in regards to new conflicts and wars.



True that, Germany would probably have come easier from it but its probably impossible to say how Germany would have taken a defeat like that. But hopefully it would have been better than how they took the defeat in the actual Great War.



My big question is, would the Romanians have gained any wins since they only entered the war in mid-1916, if the war ended in early 1915? They might naturally have entered earlier in order to wins some scraps for themselves. Same with Italy which only entered in May 1915. Would they have been in time to take part in the spoils?



I would assume that the French and British would have wanted to keep their colonial domination and if we look at it, it looks to me like the only significant European colonial power which wasn't at war with Belgium was Holland, so the western parts of the Entante would most likely have loved divided the Germnan colonies between each other.

As I think was mentioned I don't think that the Russians were really interested in winning lands from Germany on a big scale. I think that more likely they would have focused on the Balkans with a restored prestige of the tsar from a victorious war, they may have re-opened their ambitions in the Far East in a longer perspective to vie with the Japanese over that sphere.

But then again, Nicholaus II, not perhpas being the shrewdest of men may have fallen for the temptation to get German lands on a large scale and so get even more angry minorities into the Russian Empire. This time with an industrial power house right on Russia's border which would be sympathetic to these Germans complaints about being in the Russian Empire. But then again, maybe it would have worked out just fine like with the Baltic Germans in the Russian Empire.



I don't feel that would have been a win. I like poetry.



Really? Germany gambled on a quick win and didn't have the power to fight a world war against most of the world. Not to mention that it was under blockade and all. I really don't see it as impossible that for example a Russian victory in Eastern Prussia instead of Tannenberg could have caused a total collapse early on in combination with no scientific advances to for example provide Germany with synthetic alternatives to materials and other stuff they couldn't import any longer, like leading to a lack of fertilizers to keep the German population alive and a ammonia to produce munitions.

A Russian victory in East Prussia just means the Germans hold them at the Vistula. That's what von Prittwitz had been planning all along until he was replaced by Hindenburg.

Economically and strategically, east Prussia isn't very valuable. It wouldn't have changed the course of the war that much of the Russians had held it for a while.

 

[Herbert West]

Really? Germany gambled on a quick win and didn't have the power to fight a world war against most of the world. Not to mention that it was under blockade and all. I really don't see it as impossible that for example a Russian victory in Eastern Prussia instead of Tannenberg could have caused a total collapse early on in combination with no scientific advances to for example provide Germany with synthetic alternatives to materials and other stuff they couldn't import any longer, like leading to a lack of fertilizers to keep the German population alive and a ammonia to produce munitions.

A peace at any time in 1915 finds Germany in control of all of Belgium, a significant chunk of France, not yet feeling the blockade. It finds Russia at the very best bogged down at the Vistula and the Carpathians.

Crucially, Germany is not exhausted by neither the blockade, nor the Spanish Flu, so while the frontline looks the same in 1915 as in 1918, the home situation is totally different.

The Haber process was known by the turn of the century, and scaled up to industrial scale by 1913. So you need alien space bats for Germany to run out of ammonia.

 

[gagenater]

I had always thought that a more likely ‘quick’ WWI would have been one where the Germans successfully took Paris after they won at the first battle of the Marne in the fall of 1914. The UK didn’t yet have major forces available to commit to the cause on land, Italy would either stay out of the war or join the central powers, Romania will stay out of the war, the US will never have any reason to get involved, and with Paris taken, France cannot defend itself effectively. The Germans can quickly force France out of the war, on terms very favorable to them, (but leaving a state in France) then set about reorganizing eastern Europe, the Balkans, and deconstructing the Russian empire.

 

[ramius3443]

Considering how it ended I think it can only be better.

Aye. Its rather difficult to imagine realistic scenarios that end up WORSE then what actually ended up happening.

 

[Graf Zeppelin]

Aye. Its rather difficult to imagine realistic scenarios that end up WORSE then what actually ended up happening.

The only thing I can think of are some lukewarm conflicts until lthe 60s or so and then a full scale nuclear war because none of the lessons of ww2 been learned.
But yeah, its really sad.

 

[Acheron]

IMHO, an early Entente victory is quite realistic. Just like an alternative end to WWI would in all likelihood have been better than what happened for real, an alternative French plan to their actual Plan XVII would probably have been an improvement.

As for the results, if Russia aggressively expands, won't that worry the British? I can see them pushing for lenient terms to balance out the Russians.

 

[olm]

With an early Entente victory I think British and French would be quite interested in keeping Austria-Hungary around in some form to avoid giving Russia a completely free hand in Balkans, and also to reduce the threat of Austria getting swallowed by Germany. So you could have Russia taking Galicia+Bukovina, and Serbia/Montenegro taking Bosnia+Dalmatia, but the rest of the country remaining mostly intact.

 

[bz249]

I had always thought that a more likely ‘quick’ WWI would have been one where the Germans successfully took Paris after they won at the first battle of the Marne in the fall of 1914. The UK didn’t yet have major forces available to commit to the cause on land, Italy would either stay out of the war or join the central powers, Romania will stay out of the war, the US will never have any reason to get involved, and with Paris taken, France cannot defend itself effectively. The Germans can quickly force France out of the war, on terms very favorable to them, (but leaving a state in France) then set about reorganizing eastern Europe, the Balkans, and deconstructing the Russian empire.

Just as Italy, Romania had free valances to join the Central Powers have the war developed that way. Sure Transylvania is a much better real estate than Bessarabia, but if you can get it for bargain price why not go for Bessarabia?

 

[JodelDiplom]

With an early Entente victory I think British and French would be quite interested in keeping Austria-Hungary around in some form to avoid giving Russia a completely free hand in Balkans, and also to reduce the threat of Austria getting swallowed by Germany. So you could have Russia taking Galicia+Bukovina, and Serbia/Montenegro taking Bosnia+Dalmatia, but the rest of the country remaining mostly intact.

A-H was already brittle when they entered WW1. I don't think the Habsburgs would have been able to contain Hungarian and Czech nationalism any longer had the Entente humiliated them and truncated their empire like that.

It has often been written that the Entente, especially Russia, didn't want the Habsburg empire to fall apart because of nationalism. Russia in particular did not stand to gain a lot from a massive upsurge of nationalism in Eastern Europe. However if forced to choose between walking away from a WW1 peace conference with token gains but leaving the Habsburgs be, and grabbing a real booty at the cost of making life really difficult for the Habsburgs, I think the Russians would have chosen the latter option. The Russian government were not really in control of their destiny at that point, they had a bunch of humiliations to make up for (1905, 1908) and themselves needed a big dose of victory-glory to restore the prestige and stability of the monarchy.

So what I think would have happened is that the Russians would not have pushed for dissolution of the Habsburg empire, but they would willingly have accepted a fatal weakening of the A-H monarchy if that was the price for giving the Russian state a huge boost in prestige among its ethnically Russian population. If a side result of a fatal weakening of the Habsburg empire were a rise in nationalism among the minorities within Russia, the Czars could always counter that by allowing the chauvinistic Russian nationalists a greater role within the Empire.

Further empowering the ethnochauvinists and their Russification policies would be a step towards populist or even fascist rule, giving more influence towards demagogues and reducing the influence of aristocratic dilettantes, but reducing their influence was a necessary step anyways. The czars could not continue to rule the Empire in the way they had done until 1914, they needed to take a step back and give professional politicians more influence. The dilettantes who had backed the czar's autocratic rule before 1914 had been discredited by their failures in the war so this transformation would already be in progress. Everyone with a bit of insight would have seen this and Nicholas II wasn't be the kind of man who could stand in the way of a big trend like that. The populist would call for Russification and harsh oppression of minorities, and they would get it if they in exchange pledged loyalty to the monarchy. Resistance from the minorities would lead to harsh reprisals and Russia would slowly drift into proto fascism and suffer protracted instability among the border regions. The Czars would take a back seat to populist politicians like the Italian king did to Mussolini and his fascists.

My 2 cents anyways.

 

[Gurkhal]

A Russian victory in East Prussia just means the Germans hold them at the Vistula. That's what von Prittwitz had been planning all along until he was replaced by Hindenburg.

Economically and strategically, east Prussia isn't very valuable. It wouldn't have changed the course of the war that much of the Russians had held it for a while.

Well, the way I see it is that if one factor is changed, the entire equation becomes changed. If the Russians hold East Prussia and haven't had an entire army destroyed, Germany may have needed to pull even more forces from the west in order to feel secure in the east and a lack of Tannenberg would, at least as I see it, that the Russians would be left more in peace to pummel the Habsburg army with Germany not having as much ability to aid the Habsburg forces, which would have had effects on the war and so on.

A peace at any time in 1915 finds Germany in control of all of Belgium, a significant chunk of France, not yet feeling the blockade. It finds Russia at the very best bogged down at the Vistula and the Carpathians.

Crucially, Germany is not exhausted by neither the blockade, nor the Spanish Flu, so while the frontline looks the same in 1915 as in 1918, the home situation is totally different.

The Haber process was known by the turn of the century, and scaled up to industrial scale by 1913. So you need alien space bats for Germany to run out of ammonia.

Thank you for taking the time to make this post.