One of the most plausible ways right there. You also have the Holodomor and Doctors Plot, with no Holocaust on the other side, and with the US not allied with Russia, we don't have to gloss over Stalin's crimes.
A world war with a country other than Germany as the main "bad guy"?
- Thread starter HistoricalArthropod
- Start date
One of the most plausible ways right there. You also have the Holodomor and Doctors Plot, with no Holocaust on the other side, and with the US not allied with Russia, we don't have to gloss over Stalin's crimes.
HistoricalArthropod
Banned
So, what would happen to a soviet union that lost a world war in the 20s? Would the monarchy be restored? What territories would be split off?
I don't think so.
The problem is that WW1 could have been avoided but every one wanted that war. Read The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 by Christopher Clark in which he explains that every nation involved was guilty of starting the war. World War 1 was the logical conclusion of foreign policies of that time. With that in mind you simply have to change the Treaty of Versailles shifting the blame away from Germany. I think Austria-Hungary would be a good candidate because they ignored the Serbian acceptance of their own ultimatum. This would also prevent the rise of the right-wing parties (including the Nazis) in Germany and thus World War 2.
World War 1 was unavoidable and would always begin with a crisis on the Balkans. So every single nation involved there could be the "bad guy".
For World War 2 the Soviets could be the "bad guys" especially if Germany got a better treaty in Versailles and Trotsky and not Stalin succeeded Lenin.
@Barbarossa Rotbart: one small nitpick Serbia did no accept all the terms of the Austro-Hungarian ultimatum. They refused to allow Austrian police to operate on their soil and they also watered down some of the other demands in their response. Perhaps understandable, though given the political climate both the Austro-Hungarian ultimatum and the Serbian response could also be seen as deliberate (granted one was a bit more subtle) way to provoke the other.
The Serbian responce amounted to half measures, lies, deferrals, and rejection, all wrapped up in very diplomatic language.
Yes, this. The Austrian Empire shaped the diplomatic landscape of Europe after the Napoleonic Wars. If not for the terrible leadership, they might have been able to exploit their resources and triumph against Prussia, only to lose to a coalition of insurgent powers (Britain supporting a resurgent France in loose alliance with Russia which is in competition with Austria in the Balkans).
Ottomans might also work if they maintain their great power status but the POD is so far back that the world it would create would be effectively unrecognizable.
Do you think it might be possible to avoid Germany being the main "bad guy" in an alternate World War I if Frederick III had survived? Or if Wilhelm didn't have his withered arm, which a lot of historians have suggested had adverse effects on his emotional development?
There is a much easier way to achieve this: let the UK ally themselves with Germany instead of France when the UK ended the Splendid Isolation and was looking for allies. (BTW in OTL Germany was their first choice but was not interested so they allied themselves with the one country which was their archenemy for centuries: France!)
This alliance could prevent the Great War or just change the whole dynamic leading to this war.
And who would be the bad guy in this scenario? As always the one nation which declares war first. That would most likely be Russia believing that this helps Serbia and their own pan-slavic agenda. It would not be France because they know that this would lead to war against the UK in the colonies, a war which they cannot win.
This alliance could prevent the Great War or just change the whole dynamic leading to this war.
And who would be the bad guy in this scenario? As always the one nation which declares war first. That would most likely be Russia believing that this helps Serbia and their own pan-slavic agenda. It would not be France because they know that this would lead to war against the UK in the colonies, a war which they cannot win.
Albert.Nik
Banned
Russia being expansive instead of Germany could cause this. Russia would invade and take over some Slavic countries in Balkans and Baltic region and then knock the doors of Western Europe at Croatia-Italy border and Poland-Germany border. This could trigger the Western Powers who would become the Allied powers now.
Ottomon invasion of Italy/Germany in the same way could cause the same again.
Ottomon invasion of Italy/Germany in the same way could cause the same again.
Great book and really eye opaning of the diplomatic cluster f**k that was Europe gust be for ww1 but he did make the point that ww1 was not in anyway pre-ordand France supported Russia explicitly becuz there was a large fear that the Russian aliance was going to fall apart, the rosso-british agreement was not going to servive 1915, and many others show that ww1 was getting less likely not more before Sarajevo.