Semi-Fair Entente-Central Powers Armistice signed in circa 1917

This is a big what if but interesting. Had Germany achived a Major victory in 1917 evening out the war convincing and The Entente Alliance and Central Powers agreed to a peace treaty before the U.S entry into World War I what would have come of the time periods following?

Alternate 1917 Treaty of Versailles
-All nations pay some amount war debts
-Germany maintains most of territory lost in real life World War I
-Less strict rules on military size, but a limiting agreement is signed.

I personally think that while yes the poor economic quality of Germany aftermath of World War I was a major point for Hitler's campaign for Nazism that he would have found a way regardless to gain control and start World War II close to around the same time (circa late 1930's -mid 1940's.) I think he would have used the stock market crash of 1929 and the failure to achieve total victory in World War I in the 1910's as reasons of why the Nazi doctrine must take hold for a successful ''perfect'' world. The reasoning being that Jews caused the Great Depression crash and used back room politics (or something like this) to not allow the spread of Greater Germany ending the War and not allowing the nation to attain victory. Now let's say he does gain control in the circa 1930's. Germany starts mass-military build up breaking the treaty of Versailles (much like in real life). Germany retains the territories it lost in real life World War I and instead starts the early stages of the second World War by declaring Poland too ''Soviet friendly'' and starts the War by invading Poland and the Soviet Union in 1939. Causing British/French-German relations temporarily cool. Eventually the war would turn out the same in Europe just in reverse order of real life (Barbarossa then the invasion of the rest of Europe leading to failures on both sides due to stretching forces to thin). The Pacific theater and convergence of the War and its end as a whole happens the same more or less.

 

You are on the right track in identifying the economic problems of the interwar years as a unavoidable event. The details would have been different, but the overall malaise would have occured.

One variable here is the power of the German government postwar. a earlier armistice may have allowed the Kaiser to remain popular and in power. Or perhaps a replacement. Were a stable government to remain it is much less likely a demagoge like Hitler could attain any traction.

 

True about the Kaiser maintaining power but I still maintain the theory Hitler would still ascend to power possibly by using the Stock Market crash of 1929 as his main goal, and then say that the Kaiser did in inadequate job in purging Germany of the Jews thus making Europe still unsafe. You are correct to say details would be different though.

 

The stock market crash of 29 was a big deal in the US, but just a newspaper story in Europe. The Roaring Twentys never happened in Europe. That decade had been marked by frequent bank collapses, falling business and government revenues, unstable currencys, weak stock markets...

But I see your point. The nearly inevitable economic malise of the 1920s resulted in many demogoges leading radical political movements, The communists gained a lot of votes in those days for the same general reasons as the facists. How far Hitler or anyone else could go with this depended on how strong and confident the government actually was. If the Kaiser had retained the same degree of power as prewar Hitler would not have recived the easy prison sentence after the Putch in the 1920s. He and the other nazi leaders would have been lucky not have been shot or hanged for treason. A weak figurehead Kaiser might not have that sort of power, but then that would be little different from the Weinmar government.

The Kaisers absolute control of the German army would be another issue. Much of Hitlers power derived from his gaining control of the army early on. Were the same prewar arraigment to exist then there is no chance of that. It was the Kaisers loss of control of the army in 1918 that perciptated so much of the political instability and opportunity after the war.

 

How was Europe's economy in the 1920's? I know Germany's suffered from hyper-inflation due to the aftermath of World War I.

 

This is an interesting topic. I would imagine that much of Europe was dependent on the industrialism of Germany and in the post war years they were hurting for production capability for many reasons (economic, as well as a shortage of working age males). Some scholars believe that the economic downturn was the direct result of the weakening of European economies and the war-time expenditures. While times would have been tough one way or another, the war severely exacerbated the situation.

Personally, I think there's some truth to this. Although, had such an armistice been signed, I could definitely see how the Nazis would still come to power through the use of their propaganda machine. I'm no fan of them, but the whole Aryan Invasion Theory was some pretty solid basket weaving. Hitler might also have been able to convince his people even more that Germany was to be the world power based on their successes in WWI.

 

Overall it was bad. There was a brief upswing circa 1920-1922 as the pent up demand for consumer goods and other defered items was satisfied. The downward pressure came from:

Elimination of government securitys of the Russian, Austrian, and German Empires. Those became worthless eliminating the capitol of the investors who held them, and the related cash flow of the banks. The other governments held to much debt themselves further screwing up the availablity of capitol for reinvestment in rebuilding and new business ventures.

Fragmentation of the Austrian Empire. complicating the tax policy, cash flow or capitol distribution in central Europe.

The complete elimination of the Russian Empires economy. Between the civil war and the communits policys a significant bloc of prewar trade vanished from Europes economy during the 1920s. The attempts of Lennins governemnt to keep the flow of raw materials and finished goods flowing were clumsey at best. European businessmen who had made a good living trading with Russia had to find other opportunitys.

Effect of repartrations on Germany and Austrians economy. The attempts to pay these diverted capitol from their economy. The unrealistic expectation by the French and other governments for reciving these payments led to distorted investment policy.

Both inflation and deflation were a problem everywhere. Currencys lost their prewar stability so goverments and business had to deal with infationary pressures one month and collapsing currencys the next.

Industrial expansion in American and Asia and been accelrating before the war. As the Europeans converted their industry to weapons production they created a incentive for even faster industry expansion, particualry in South America and the US. When the war ceased this eliminated a portion of the prewar export markets overseas and the former income for Europe.

Changing technology. The expansion of the railroads and coal energy was approaching its limits or effciency and employment and investment returns on those industrys. that was aggravated by the disruptions in post war economic policy. ie: Fragmentation of the Austrian Empire, and repartrations. Ordinarily investment and employment in new industrys, automobiles, oil energy, or aircraft in this case soon makes up for the decline in older industry. But, in the 1920s the severe disruption of the banking system and capitol flow stalled the necessary investment.

Demographics. Since the turn of the century there had been a increaase in the survival of children into adults adding several percentage points of young adults to the work force. The bloodletting of WWI as bad as it was had not been enough to relive this pressure particualry since the birth classes of 1905 thru 1910 had not been affected by the battle losses.

Displacement of agricultural workers to urban centers peaked in Europe about this time. Some nations like Britian had this occur earlier perhaps before the turn of the century. Others like Germany (or the US) hit the critical 50% zone in the 1920s. As the polulation shifts from more than half living and working in agriculture areas to the majority in urban centers the migrants find themselves lacking the skills for comparable work. So most have to start nearer the bottom at menial lower paying jobs. These jobs tend to be unstable as well. This trend expands the marginal economic group in the cities with all the problems that follow.

So in simple terms you have laborers and businessmen who are faced with a capitol shortage, unstable currencys and employment, who never know if in the next week they will be hit with monetary inflation or price collapses, or no wages. The leaders of government and business had learned their craft in the realatively stable and prosprous times of 1895 thru 1914. They were faced with a economy beyond their understanding and had a lot of diffciulty coping. The mistakes they made had a lot to do with contiuation of the economic troubles dragging on into the 1930s.

The flashy prosperity in the US in the 1920s was based on a crumbling foundation. The problems of workforce transfer, new technology, investment and tax policy, and a inability to move beyond the sucessfull methods of 1905 or 1910 were at work here as well.

 

Here here. Well done!

 

2 great posts there Carl .S, I learned a lot from them.


​

 

So which German Offensive in 1917 lead to this "Victory"?
I can't think of one.
Maybe if the March Offensive in 1918 had lead to a German Victory this "What If " might have more credence.
Also " if " the Germans had an Armistice in 1917 would the Russian Revolution still have happened?

 

It's a what if, a fictional offensive that would even out the war and convinced the Entente Alliance to end it, it's always possible that if either side had the edge the one winning wouldn't offer armistice. And this scenario is pre-U.S involvement.

 

Lets say the Germans learn of the French mutiny in 1917 and launch a offensive in the West rather than vs Russia. The French army begains to collapse and the Allies ask for a armistice. Germany is suffering from the British blockade, Russia is colaping into revolution, Austria-Hungary is on the verge of disintigration, France is threatend with a collapse of its army, and the British are contemplating the failure of just about every land operation it has undertaken. Perhaps everyone could agree to declare victory and cease the killing?

Conversely the French might execute a sucessfull offensive in the Spring of 1917 breaking the deadlock...

Either way one side or the other feels threatened enough to ask for a armistice and the other does not feel strong enough to turn it down.

 

Anyway what happens after depends on so many different things. Germany retaining a reasonablly strong government is important. So is what happens to the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. And, the course of revolution in Russia. If a sense of social order can be retained, at least in Germany and Austria-Hungary then just maybe Europe can muddle through the economic problems of the next two decades without another general war.

Then again there is no guarantee this alternate Germany will be any smarter at forigen policy than those of pre 1915. Or the British for that matter.

Turning back to my earlier post about the economics of 1918-1940 here is link to a site explaining part of what went wrong in those decades.

http://www.kwaves.com/kond_overview.htm

 

ter.

 

Good posts.