I'm just not sure if taking that much territory is good for Germany as it just gives them a lot of bitter Frenchman who don't even live in France anymore, and Alsace-Lorraine was difficult enough to integrate into the Empire, this would increase those issues tenfold
 
I'm just not sure if taking that much territory is good for Germany as it just gives them a lot of bitter Frenchman who don't even live in France anymore, and Alsace-Lorraine was difficult enough to integrate into the Empire, this would increase those issues tenfold
I agree that it's not smart- but the Germans are pushing for vengeance. They WANT to shove France's nose in the dirt and don't really care if that costs them hundreds or even thousands of lives over a few years and a few million marks.

Plus, giving up territory to France, which was conclusively defeated, makes them look weak.

Finally, every square metre they occupy now is a square metre France can't use as a staging point for round 2... this gives them a buffer zone to fight in.
 
If that's the case, then i see it maybe working in the short-term. In the long-term however, the civil unrest is likely to outweigh the benefits, unless Germany wants its own time of troubles. I could probably see a return of the territory for an alliance with France, maybe? Depends on how France's government turns out in the end and its relationship with Germany
 
If that's the case, then i see it maybe working in the short-term. In the long-term however, the civil unrest is likely to outweigh the benefits, unless Germany wants its own time of troubles. I could probably see a return of the territory for an alliance with France, maybe? Depends on how France's government turns out in the end and its relationship with Germany
I intended for it to be a sort of bargaining chip- if France behaves itself, it might get a province back in ten years, if it allows German inspectors into its factories, another province, etc.

But it will make the Troubles look like a piece of cake, no doubt about that... I need to do a chapter about that...
 

Cryostorm

Monthly Donor
If that's the case, then i see it maybe working in the short-term. In the long-term however, the civil unrest is likely to outweigh the benefits, unless Germany wants its own time of troubles. I could probably see a return of the territory for an alliance with France, maybe? Depends on how France's government turns out in the end and its relationship with Germany
Maybe, or they might just do to French areas what was done to the Prussia and Western Poland, and other places east of the Oder, after WWII
 
Do you think I should retcon?
Either way, it'll only be a border between formally-annexed territory and the occupation zone; there's no way the Germans would give up territory conquered in the war.
on the other hand the germans not demanding South-west africa and their part of New-guinea back is equally unlikely (i recall that there was talk about handing the latter over to the dutch as a repayment of debts).
(since it means the british actually gain from the war, and status quo pro ante would likely the farthest the Germans would go, maybe handing french new caledonia to the british, but that is it)
 
Last edited:
I intended for it to be a sort of bargaining chip- if France behaves itself, it might get a province back in ten years, if it allows German inspectors into its factories, another province, etc.

But it will make the Troubles look like a piece of cake, no doubt about that... I need to do a chapter about that...
Personally, I think this would work. The army might like the increased funding they're getting from managing the occupied territory, but eventually the government's going to balk, and they can easily get the Kaiser to side with them by pointing out the money could go to flashier projects, such as Mittelafrika, the Baghdadbahn, a modern fleet of fast cruisers and next-generation U-Boats to make up for treaty limits on battleships, etc.

That said, I do think Germany would not want to simply return to 1914 borders, and would keep the Briey-Longwy region and its rich iron deposits. This increases the buffer between them and France, while also weakening France ever so much.

on the other hand the germans not demanding South-west africa and their part of New-guinea back is equally unlikely (i recall that there was talk about handing the latter over to the dutch as a repayment of debts)

IIRC, the German government made that as part of a deal with the British - well, more between Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg and Sir Edward Grey - to get the British to back down on Germany's other interests, such as Mittelafrika. In any case, the Kaiser being very sympathetic to the Boers means he could easily swallow the loss of Sudwest Afrika, while the Germans had the Australians and Japanese pay for keeping Germany's former Pacific colonies.
 
Last edited:
on the other hand the germans not demanding South-west africa and their part of New-guinea back is equally unlikely (i recall that there was talk about handing the latter over to the dutch as a repayment of debts).
(since it means the british actually gain from the war, and status quo pro ante would likely the farthest the Germans would go, maybe handing french new caledonia to the british, but that is it)
But how could the Germans force Britain to hand the two back? Better to let them keep it in an attempt to foster goodwill.
 
But how could the Germans force Britain to hand the two back? Better to let them keep it in an attempt to foster goodwill.
nah goodwill rarely plays a role in such treaties, the germans would see themselves as victors, and not getting their colonies back would throw a major spanner in the peace treaty.
colonies back in exchange for the the british POWs returning.

edit: and they could get some chunks of french colonies, plus both german colonies at this point are not seen as very valuable, but import to german from a pride perspective.
remember goodwill goes both ways, germans having to give them up will leave some lingering dissatisfaction, which sooner or later will come back to bite.
giving them french territory will be a much better idea, since that would sour anglo-french relations
 
Last edited:
Personally, I think this would work. The army might like the increased funding they're getting from managing the occupied territory, but eventually the government's going to balk, and they can easily get the Kaiser to side with them by pointing out the money could go to flashier projects, such as Mittelafrika, the Baghdadbahn, a modern fleet of fast cruisers and next-generation U-Boats to make up for treaty limits on battleships, etc.

That said, I do think Germany would not want to simply return to 1914 borders, and would keep the Briey-Longwy region and its rich iron deposits. This increases the buffer between them and France, while also weakening France ever so much.



IIRC, the German government made that as part of a deal with the British - well, more between Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg and Sir Edward Grey - to get the British to back down on Germany's other interests, such as Mittelafrika. In any case, the Kaiser being very sympathetic to the Boers means he could easily swallow the loss of Sudwest Afrika, while the Germans had the Australians and Japanese pay for keeping Germany's former Pacific colonies.
A withdrawal is certainly possible, but not only a year after the fighting ends.
You're right about Namibia and the Pacific.

Budgetary issues will be a major problem for the Germans in the years to come and they will need to make hard decisions about what to prioritise. However, the fact is that occupying northern France- even if it's a massive headache- is key for Germany's strategic interests because it shields the Fatherland from a potential French invasion. This way, if round 2 is fought it will be fought in territory populated by Frenchmen (even if there's some German immigration.)
nah goodwill rarely plays a role in such treaties, the germans would see themselves as victors, and not getting their colonies back would throw a major spanner in the peace treaty.
colonies back in exchange for the the british POWs returning.
I understand what you're saying, and the Germans could have gone down that route. However, they chose to gain other things in exchange for handing back the PoWs: namely, the right to kick France in the teeth, Britain accepting the Finlandisation of Belgium, and the foundations of a serious naval agreement.
 
while the Germans had the Australians and Japanese pay for keeping Germany's former Pacific colonies.
Hence my mentioning of the Netherlands, trade through the netherlands was hugely important in keeping germany afloat, and using New-guinea & the solomon islands to pay the outstanding dutch debt would make more sense than selling to australia.
 
Hence my mentioning of the Netherlands, trade through the netherlands was hugely important in keeping germany afloat, and using New-guinea & the solomon islands to pay the outstanding dutch debt would make sense
But again: Britain (or, rather, Australia) physically occupied those territories and could do what it pleased with them. It wasn't on the table to be offered as repayment- it was already in the Entente's wallet.
 
But again: Britain (or, rather, Australia) physically occupied those territories and could do what it pleased with them. It wasn't on the table to be offered as repayment- it was already in the Entente's wallet.
but then again gaining new caledonia would be of bigger importance to australia/nz, i think if it was clear that the german territory would to NL there would not be many issues, especially if it is clear that it is to repay debt. NL is already in the area, and them gaining that piece of territory wouldn't be a big issue.
adding new caledonia would make the entire territory between australian new guinea, new zealand and australia contiguous theirs, which from a control point is a big plus

edit: plus if germany will not sign a peace treaty until those territories are returned, that would be political suicide for the british government.
there economy is in tatters, their credit to pieces because of defaulting on the americans, plus the general public would wonder why they do not return 2 insignificant german possessions, after all the germans are the clear winner, so the publics view might be : get on with it, give them back their possessions and get the peace going.
it might not be a revolution, but politics def would become unpleasant for the current GB gov, and re-election chance zero.
and wilhelm likely would throw a fit too. anything worse than a status quo pro ante would mean the germans are not the winners, and that might not be acceptable to them (and willy especially)
 
Last edited:
but then again gaining new caledonia would be of bigger importance to australia/nz, i think if it was clear that the german territory would to NL there would not be many issues, especially if it is clear that it is to repay debt. NL is already in the area, and them gaining that piece of territory wouldn't be a big issue.
adding new caledonia would make the entire territory between australian new guinea, new zealand and australia contiguous theirs, which from a control point is a big plus

edit: plus if germany will not sign a peace treaty until those territories are returned, that would be political suicide for the british government.
there economy is in tatters, their credit to pieces because of defaulting on the americans, plus the general public would wonder why they do not return 2 insignificant german possessions, after all the germans are the clear winner, so the publics view might be : get on with it, give them back their possessions and get the peace going.
it might not be a revolution, but politics def would become unpleasant for the current GB gov, and re-election chance zero.
and wilhelm likely would throw a fit too. anything worse than a status quo pro ante would mean the germans are not the winners, and that might not be acceptable to them (and willy especially)
Well, you have valid points-- but I wrote it this way. I could've done something like what you proposed but I decided not to go with that.

For Germany, with northern France under its rule, proxies in eastern Europe, and Mittelafrika all gained from the war, Namibia and the Pacific territories are expendable. This is seen as a massive gain from the status quo ante.
Somehow, I get the feeling that Nigeria's screwed.
Why? Because it's surrounded by German colonies?
 
I'd not say "implausible;" I am familiar enough with the idea of the Border Strip and why the high command wanted to pursue it (reasons which will still be prevalent among them ITTL). On the other hand, there's also a sound point to be made that this is a Poland that will never be anything but incensed towards its new overlords, so an argument exists as well for giving the Poles a slightly better deal.

This was more a pure expression about the visual appearance of that Poland, which is very much reduced and rather painful to look at. The same applies for Belorussia.
I think the Germans would have done to the Poles what they did to the Belgians, taken territory adjacent to Germany but given them territory on the other side, so Poland didn't get any smaller.
 
but then again gaining new caledonia would be of bigger importance to australia/nz, i think if it was clear that the german territory would to NL there would not be many issues, especially if it is clear that it is to repay debt. NL is already in the area, and them gaining that piece of territory wouldn't be a big issue.
adding new caledonia would make the entire territory between australian new guinea, new zealand and australia contiguous theirs, which from a control point is a big plus

edit: plus if germany will not sign a peace treaty until those territories are returned, that would be political suicide for the british government.
there economy is in tatters, their credit to pieces because of defaulting on the americans, plus the general public would wonder why they do not return 2 insignificant german possessions, after all the germans are the clear winner, so the publics view might be : get on with it, give them back their possessions and get the peace going.
it might not be a revolution, but politics def would become unpleasant for the current GB gov, and re-election chance zero.
and wilhelm likely would throw a fit too. anything worse than a status quo pro ante would mean the germans are not the winners, and that might not be acceptable to them (and willy especially)
In OTL, SE New Guinea was unclaimed with the Dutch in the West and the Germans in the NE. The Australian colonies were desperate for the mother country to take SE New Guinea. Queensland annexed all the Torres Strait Islands and then said they annexed SE New Guinea in the name of the British Empire. London accepted the TSI but refused to claim SE NG. Eventually the British agreed to annex SE NG providing the Australian colonies paid for it. Part of the federation deal was that Australia would administer SE NG and administration was transferred to Australia in 1905. Australia would have done what the mother country wanted, but it was Australia that wanted New Guinea and not Britain.
 
Top