Russo-German alliance by 20th century

[wiking]

What would it take for these two powers to be allied by the 20th century and agree to divide up the austro-hungarian empire? Would there be a world war 1 in these circumstances?

[Max Sinister]

Either a more realistic German leadership who decide that A-H is doomed anyway, so it'll be better to save what you can get, or worse relations between Germany and A-H either since 1866, or later (but that'd be a pre-1900 POD).

[Susano]

Russo-German Alliance to divide AH? Very unrealistic.
A continuinG Reinsurance Treaty - now that would be very plausible.

[Archdevil]

Originally Posted by Susano

Russo-German Alliance to divide AH? Very unrealistic.

Maybe somekind of intervention when the Austrian Empire is about to fail or something.

Germany takes Austria, Sudetenland and maybe Bohemia and Slovenia.

Russia gets Galicia.

Hungary the rest.

A continuinG Reinsurance Treaty - now that would be very plausible.

More probable I agree and more interesting.

Basically a WWI with the Ottomans and Russians switching sides. Bad news for the allies here. For the Germans and Austrians, losing the Ottomans is more than compensated by acquiring the Russians.

Germany can push all out against France. Much better odds than IOTL.

Austria can easily hold out against the Italians and take out Serbia if necessary.

Bulgaria might help against Serbia when needed and against the Ottomans.

Romania won't ever go for the Entente, it would be crushed like a bug. Not that it presented much of a problem for the central powers in real life...

Russia walks over the Ottomans in the Caucasus and might launch some kind of succesful assault on Constantinople. (They planned to IOTL, but the German battlecruiser Goeben meant that plan was no longer possible, as they only had predreads in 1914 in the Black Sea.)

[Max Sinister]

Russia certainly will insist that Romania gets Transsylvania and the like (being orthodox), and that Serbis gets Croatia and Bosnia, if not even Dalmatia and Slovenia too. And Italy might use the opportunity to claim South Tyrol and Istria.

[David S Poepoe]

The collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire is grossly overrated. The Empire didn't start to crumble until the defeat of the Army in the field.

[Max Sinister]

The country suffered under the sluggish administration, because every people had its special rights and wished for more. Forming coalitions in the parliament must've been a nightmare.

[Gladi]

Originally Posted by Max Sinister

The country suffered under the sluggish administration, because every people had its special rights and wished for more. Forming coalitions in the parliament must've been a nightmare.

Bright day
Only on K.K. levels. Imagine if evry US action had to be voted on in Mexico first.

In Cisleithanien every national party had coutnerpart of other nationalities and in Hungary government was Hungarian affair.

(And what special rights?)

[Archdevil]

Originally Posted by Max Sinister

The country suffered under the sluggish administration, because every people had its special rights and wished for more. Forming coalitions in the parliament must've been a nightmare.

It was.

And then there was the decennial renegotiation of the federal budget wich can only be desribed as 'deadlock' and there you have Austria-Hungary.

But there is also the fact the Austrain half was generally pretty advanced and had a very decent industry. Hungary however was pretty backwards and its ethnic make up and the Magyar way of dealing with it didn't improve things.

[Homer]

I think one way would be a different end of the peace of 1866. When AH is hostile against Prussia, that would certainly bring a Prussian/German-Russian alliance. And then you could add Italy, Serbia, Montenegro and Romania as well as nationalists in AH to that team and France to the AH-team. After all, it's quite surprising how well Bismarcks system worked: Dreibund, Dreikaiserbund... quite strange alliances he made out.

And the Reinsurance treaty? Come on! What if this gets public? Austria had one enemy: Russia. It had an alliance with Germany and no problems with France or Britain. But every Balkan crisis would see tensions between Austria and Russia. And every TL would see some balkan crisises.

So here's another way to get the alliance: reinsurance treaty gets public. Austria is enraged. Now add some minor tensions between Germany and Austria about anything before the publication of the treaty and let Austria make an ultimatum or just cancel its treatys with Germany. Then AH allies with France against those "treacherous" Germans, and here you are: russo-German alliance.

In my opinion, the German empire would be in a way better situation if not bounded to AH. Germany could win territories settled by ethnic Germans from AH. And it would loose the smallest of the five powers in Europe as an ally but winning a better one: AH was not at all able to defeat the Russians in WWI, only with German help they stopped them in the Carpatians.
Of course, German strategic situation would be even worse ITTL, thus the Germans must concentrate on ground troops - no fleet. So an alliance with Britain would be possible.

[Rasputin]

Bismark's diplomacy was concentrated on having a conciliatory attitude towards all nations except France, to paint it as continuously scheming to get Alsace-Lorraine back and so isolate it diplomatically. The reinsurance treaty was part of this in that it closed off France from an alliance with Russia. When Wilhelm II wrecked Bismark's diplomacy, he also wrecked his chance to have a conciliatory Russia.

It's a topic I'm interested in because it holds the possibility of a Great War in which both sides are materially capable of handling an extremely protracted war: Britain, France and Italy on one side and Germany, Russia and Austro-Hungary on the other. It would be the ultimate showdown between the 'bourgeois' west and the eastern despotisms.

How to bring it about is a tougher cookie.

[Andrei]

Originally Posted by Homer

Of course, German strategic situation would be even worse ITTL, thus the Germans must concentrate on ground troops - no fleet. So an alliance with Britain would be possible.

Why it would be worse? Germany's ally , Russia , would be more powerfull than Germany's ally from OTL , Austria-Hungary. I don't think the Germans would have needed more ground troops than in OTL if it had been allied with Russia and had had to fight France and A-H , instead of France and Russia.

In case of a war , the Germans would probably defend on the French border and would try to crush A-H fast , with Russia's help.

Since Britain's sphere of influence was overlapping with the German one in Africa and with the Russian one in Asia , a Ruso-German alliance against Britain seems more likely than an alliance with Britain.

[Max Sinister]

Yes... if it hadn't been for A-H, Germany and Russia could've been good buddies. But A-H and Russia clashed on the Balkan, that was the trouble.

[Burton K Wheeler]

A communist (or even leftist) government in Germany in the 1920's might have made an alliance with Russia against French aggression during the Ruhrkampf. In OTL, the Weimar Republic did some military exchanges with Soviet Russia, being surrounded by militarily superior France and its allies in Czechoslovakia and Poland. If an aggressively militaristic French government threatened Germany enough, Russia would be a logical ally.

I'm considering a German-Russian pact for "Cross of Fire, Hammer of Iron", but I'm still not sure exactly what the political situation would be in Germany with the Croix de Feu ruling France and the Night of the Long Knives and Hitler's takeover of the presidency eliminated.

[Homer]

Originally Posted by Andrei

Why it would be worse? Germany's ally , Russia , would be more powerfull than Germany's ally from OTL , Austria-Hungary. I don't think the Germans would have needed more ground troops than in OTL if it had been allied with Russia and had had to fight France and A-H , instead of France and Russia.

True.

compared to Russia, AH would be a far "easier" enemy to deal with, and Russia would supply hundrets of thousands of troops and any raw materials German industry would need. So in the long run, Germany would have a better strategic situation in a war. But in the short run, the German-AH border is longer then the German-Russian border and there are vital parts of Germany alongside this border (Bavaria, Upper-Silesia, Saxony). Austrian troops from Tyrol would only have about 200 km to the French border, whereas Russian troops would have to conquer the whole of Germany before meeting the French. this is the main reason I think that Germanies situation would be worse. They could loose large parts of Southern Germany in the first months of the war, thus connecting their enemies.

Then, of course, the benefits of the new alliance would pay off: The Russians invading Hungary over the Carpatians, the Germans striking back, Italy entering the war on Russo-German side...

Originally Posted by Andrei

In case of a war , the Germans would probably defend on the French border and would try to crush A-H fast , with Russia's help.

That's my guess, too. This would certainly mean no violation of Belgian neutrality - yet. Now in the first months, Russian movement would be still slow, Germany would face a very long border to attack. And the French would know that AH surviving would be vital for the ongoing war, thus they would press hard on Alsace-Lorraine.

Originally Posted by Andrei

Since Britain's sphere of influence was overlapping with the German one in Africa and with the Russian one in Asia , a Ruso-German alliance against Britain seems more likely than an alliance with Britain.

Hmm, dunno...

There were chances to establish a German-British alliance OTL but it failed due to the fleet and Wilhelm II. In this scenario, Germany would concentrate only on the army. No need for a fleet against a French-AH alliance. German colonial affaires would be mainly anti-French, OTL Bismarck encouraged French colonial expansion. Dependent on when the French and the AH form their alliance, the French would be the major competitor for German colonial interests, which would please Britain.

Then of course there are British-Russian tensions in Inner-Asia and the Ottoman empire. But OTL, they still allied with the Russians against Germany. This TL, Germany would have no Hochseeflotte - or at least a much smaller fleet. So it's possible that Britain stays neutral at least some months, maybe until AH falls. Anyway, with Russia on the German side, the blockade would be of no concern for the Germans.

[Rasputin]

I'm not too sure that Germany would give up its naval ambitions if it sided with Russia against Austria. After all, Russia was a greater 'continental' threat than A-H was in 1914 and yet Germany still insisted on building up a navy. Plus, even with a Franco-Austrian scenario you still have the matter of a quickly mobilising power with a small border siding with a slowly mobilising power with a large border. So we may possibly still have a Schlieffen plan to knock out France quickly before turning to A-H, considering France to be the greater threat. And of course with the Schlieffen plan comes British entry into the war.

If anything they may be more enthusiastic about joining the Franco-A-H side. I've read through the parliamentary dispatches at the outbreak of war in 1914 for fun and found that many MPs, although supportive of action against Germany, were highly reluctant to support Tsarist Russia, often considering it a more menacing nation than Germany. In this TL we have no such moral contradictions, since Austro-Hungary was always more comedy than tragedy to British policy-makers.

So we have the scenario unfolding thus: Archduke Ferdinand is shot, resulting in an A-H ultimatum to Serbia and threats of war. Russia stands up in support of Serbia. In response to Russian mobilisation against France's ally, A-H, France gets involved in the dispute, and consequently Germany threatens that unless France stops mobilising, war will be declared. The declarations of war follow and Germany sweeps through Belgium, bringing a British declaration of war. The Germans get bogged down in northern France, while the Austro-Hungarians make a surprisingly quick push into Poland and southern Prussia (an effect of the French alliance: strong offensive philosophy). The Prussian thrust is crushed by Hindenburg, but positions in Poland take longer to expunge, due to lethargic Russian mobilisation. Feeling threatened by Russia, the Ottomans enter the war in October on the side of the Entente, while the British plan to persuade Greece to enter the war in order to advance into Serbia (which due to flukes of this TL ends up on the Russo-German side). Italy enters the war with the promise of Dalmatia and the Savoy, quickly running into the sand but nevertheless provoking a severe supply crisis for A-H as the Adriatic is cut off, leading to a botched naval assault to open up the sea.

Okay, this is where the parallels end and real life begins to intrude.

[Homer]

Of course, Britain is still a problem.

I think, a French-Austrian alliance would bring another German military doctrine prior to 1890 when Wilhelm II. took power and supported the fleet. This completely other strategic situation would lead to a concentration on ground troops.
OTL, only in 1894 there was a coalition against Germany, that is 20 years later. 1898-1901 there were British-German talks about an alliance OTL. Thus the Germans believed at least until 1901 that they could ally themselves to Britain. ITTL the German empire would face a hostile coalition a lot earlier. That would have a major effect on German politics. Germany thought, it can choose it's allies. This TL, they'd have to get Britain. Thus they would be a lot more willing to listen to British concerns about the fleet or colonies or economics. Dependent on when the Austrian-German animosity begins, even Bismarck could start to try for a German-British alliance.
Additionally, Germany would probably compete more in colonial affaires - no matter what Bismarck says OTL. This would increase the need for a cruiser-fleet, not for a fleet in the North sea.

That's why I personally think that there would not be a fleet program in Germany, or I'd better say: not the fleet program we say OTL.

When it comes to war, I think Greece and Italy would never fight against Britain, because their coastal areas are far too vulnerable to the British fleet. But as soon as Britain is against Austria-France, Italy would join the war to regain the territories lost to Napoleon III and to gain Istria, Dalmatia and South Tyrol.
I don't see a quick austrian push in any direction but towards the French border via South Germany. OTL, they had major problems with Serbs and Russians. ITTL, they'd face additional German armies from Vorarlberg to Cracow. I think they'd concentrate on purely defensive positions on their other frontiers.

Another Question is: would France give the Austrians a "blankoscheck", that is a promise of support in any case when Archduke Ferdinand is shot as Germany gave it OTL?

[Midgard]

I think G.Bone already wrote a rather lengthy and otherwise excellent timeline on the topic - link is here...