DBWI: Can someone help me identify the POD for a wikibox I found?

[Kirook]

I saw a really weird set of wikiboxes while I was browsing the forum the other day about a “First World War”. They were about some massive global conflict that occurred in the late 1910s, involving countries from all over Europe and Asia and even a few from the Americas. But it was a repost, and the original creator seems to have deleted their account. Can anyone help me puzzle out what the POD was?

Some details I remember:

• Italy and Germany had both unified somehow; the Holy Roman Empire was nowhere to be found.
• France and Britain were allied, bizarrely enough.
• Russia was much less powerful than IOTL. It had a civil war near the end of the conflict and was taken over by adherents of some radical ideology the author made up, whose name escapes me at the moment. It was something like “cooperatism” or “communalism”, I think.
• The Ottoman Empire still existed, with the borders it had in the OTL 1830s-40s.
• Instead of Britain and France fighting over North America like IOTL, there was a British dominion in the far north called Canada and some country called the “United States of America” controlling another huge chunk of it. I have absolutely no idea what it is or how the author had it come to be.

There were plenty of other differences, and I can try to remember them if anyone asks, but right now I’m just curious if anyone can help me figure out what’s going on with this TL.

OOC: I have a POD in mind for the ATL we’re supposedly posting in, but I’m willing to change it if necessary, so right now you can just let your imaginations run wild (and ask me for clarification if you want it). Obviously any POD that would create this is before 1900, but I chose to post it here since we’re discussing the lead-up to 20th century events.

 

[Darksider166]

Hmm. Germany being unified eh? That sounds interesting. Maybe Prussia was successful over Austria in the Seven Years' War and attained hegemony over Germany and defeated France in some later conflict.

Regarding the lack of the HRE? Well it's possibly the Republican War with France could've gone sour for the Monarchical Coalition and France invaded Germany and dissolved it. Hey maybe France formed a unified Germany as a buffer state against say Russia or Austria? But I have doubts about that since the French Army following the purges of most officers in the Terror was atrocious and a big part in its defeat of the war since fanatics often don't make good commanders.

The United States seems pretty easy. Have Britain mishandle the Colonial Troubles in the 1760s and thus the colonies declare independence and gain foreign support and they win their war.

The Ottomans continuing to survive would most likely require them to have a powerful foreign backer or maybe if you prevent the Succession crisis and Ottoman Civil War in the 1840s that saw the Empire splinter into multiple states I guess it could stay until then.

That's about as much as I got for this.

 

[Alternator]

Unified Germany just requires either Austria or Prussia to crush and absorb the other, while France is either bought off or busy, and do so early enough that Poland still insulates them from Russia. My money would be on Prussia - not because they're the more likely to win such a war, but because if Austria won, then the resulting country would be much larger than just Germany. Plus, a Prussian-led German state has no loyalty to the Holy Roman Empire and could just let it collapse.

If we take that as our POD, the rest mostly fall into line:

Venice takes advantage of a crumbling Austrian state to expand into the Balkans, and strikes up an alliance of opportunity with unified Germany. Between the increased population from the new territory and a strong foreign ally to prevent outside interference, it's quite plausible for Venice to claim additional territory over a century until it can unify the peninsula through force.

The United States is obviously an independent, wanked version of the original British colonies. British Canada means that France decisively lost a war fairly early on, and that might be why Britain and France are now allies - if France lost its colonial holdings, there's much less friction with Britain. How much territory outside Europe does France hold on this map?

The Ottomans existing explains a weakened Russia fairly well; obviously the Russians have been expending their strength in futile pushes toward Constantinople. If Austria was crushed early enough, then that could explain increased Ottoman stability and military power, only fighting one major European rival instead of two. Toss in a reforming Sultan and a weak Czar or three and you're good to go. On a side note, how's Persia in this map? I'd guess pretty weak, again just so the Ottomans could survive.


So, guessing the sides on this war: Germany + Italy + Ottomans vs. Britain + France + Russia, with the United States and Brazil (plus whatever other American powers the map shows) as neutrals? I'd guess China as neutral, or if forced to pick a side, aligned with the first bloc - nothing really to gain by supporting Russia and Britain, but plenty to gain from opposing them.

 

[Kirook]

How much territory outside Europe does France hold on this map?

They hold huge swathes of territory in Africa, plus some in Southeast Asia and a few scattered colonies in other locations. But their main colonial competitor in both places is...Britain, which—on further investigation of some of the author’s comments—apparently controls the entire Indian subcontinent as well.

Austria still exists ITTL, by the way, holding its core territories in Bohemia and Hungary as well as Galicia and some Balkan territories. It’s just the HRE that’s gone. (It’s also calling itself Austria-Hungary now, possibly because of some kind of concession to the Hungarians?)

And the sides of the war, according to the Wikibox, were Germany/Austria/Ottomans/Bulgaria vs Britain/France/Russia/Italy, with a number of other countries (such as the United States, Brazil, and China) joining the latter faction late in the war.

Edit to add: Persia does seem much weaker as well, with the Ottomans still holding Mesopotamia and British India grabbing parts of Balochistan.

 

[Alternator]

They hold huge swathes of territory in Africa, plus some in Southeast Asia and a few scattered colonies in other locations. But their main colonial competitor in both places is...Britain, which—on further investigation of some of the author’s comments—apparently controls the entire Indian subcontinent as well.

Austria still exists ITTL, by the way, holding its core territories in Bohemia and Hungary as well as Galicia and some Balkan territories. It’s just the HRE that’s gone. (It’s also calling itself Austria-Hungary now, possibly because of some kind of concession to the Hungarians?)

And the sides of the war, according to the Wikibox, were Germany/Austria/Ottomans/Bulgaria vs Britain/France/Russia/Italy, with a number of other countries (such as the United States, Brazil, and China) joining the latter faction late in the war.

Edit to add: Persia does seem much weaker as well, with the Ottomans still holding Mesopotamia and British India grabbing parts of Balochistan.

OK, does Poland still exist? Prussia absorbing Poland-Lithuania (peacefully - think a dynastic marriage) would give them the strength to unify the assorted German states, and if Austria remains existent it HAS to be Prussia that unified Germany. The only other thing I can imagine is Prussia expanding during the Seven Years War and later uniting Germany by force, buying off either France or Austria and fighting the other to a standstill. Probably buying off Austria, since they're allies now, especially since I have an idea for how Austria could cache in that favor.

Dynastic unification could explain Italy, perhaps, with some family becoming like the Hapsburgs and just marrying them all together.

Hard to imagine France being both colonially-powerful and friendly with Britain, though. That German-Austrian alliance would certainly be enough to give France reason to make nice, but not so much Britain - at least, not when there's a French-Russian alliance to keep the continental powers balanced. Maybe I'm just undervaluing the Ottomans, or maybe the French and Russians are co-belligerents rather than allies? Still doesn't explain the French-British relationship in the past, though - those colonies being intermingled suggests it's a long-term thing, not recent.

Giving it some thought, Austria and the Ottomans allied does suggest that this war started out as, "Let's go kill some Russians," and that might be a recurring theme - SOMETHING had to keep Russia weakened. Maybe it's actual the British and the Russians that are allies? An Ottoman Empire less focused on the Balkans might have been able to play nice with the Austrians, as long as there's another threat for both to gang up on. Bulgaria would make a decent buffer state for both.

So, maybe...Russia invades Bulgaria, and the Ottomans and Austrians declare war to protect their interests. Austria sees an opportunity and calls in the debt owed by Germany, and then Britain sees this growing beyond Ottoman-Austrian Alliance vs. Russia, Take Ten and joins her ally. Italy joins in out of opportunism, hoping to grab bits of Austrian and Ottoman territory, while France joins in for some revenge on Germany. The rest of the world's leading nations join in at the end, either wanting a place at the victory's table (if the British-Russian alliance is winning) or to limit the victor's gains (if the Austrian-Ottoman-German alliance is winning).

Without knowing just how much weaker the Russians are, and how strong the Ottomans are, it's hard to tell who wins out. The modern German states IOTL are quite powerful for their size, so a united Germany should be a heavyweight, and this France is obviously much-weakened.

 

[Deleted member 94680]

Britain, which—on further investigation of some of the author’s comments—apparently controls the entire Indian subcontinent as well.

As in all under the British flag? That’s a stretch, but the cynic in me would say it’s not that different from OTL - the Hyderabad State, Tamil Confederacy, Sindh and plenty of the Principalities, although all independent nations, rely on British military exports, advisers and even finance (not Hyderabad, obviously) to the state you could say they’re ‘British’ - in the British sphere at least. I mean, have you been on holiday to Mysore recently? Last time I was there, my Sterling was accepted everywhere, no problems.