Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3376
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 02:42
Location: illinois

Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

#1

Post by stg 44 » 24 Mar 2011, 20:32

What if the iron producing area of Longwy-Briey was discovered to have iron deposits prior to the Franco-Prussia war and the Germans then annexed the area during the peace treaty? More information is below, but to summarize Germany would have denied France of most of its iron ore and given Germany a massive boost in production of iron ore. Despite being filled with impurities, it was a major German war objective in WW1 and would already be occupied by the time that war, if it happens ITTL, would come around.
One of Germany's major war goals in WW1 would therefore already be achieved, somewhat reducing later war tensions.
Ultimately Germany would be economically strengthened while France would be significantly weakened.

On the border region, it would also deprive France of a border with Luxembourg, while placing the German border closer to Verdun. What does everyone else think this may lead to?

http://www.history.army.mil/books/ww...maps/MapII.jpg
http://www1.american.edu/ted/ice/saar.htm
"Lorrain's Longwy-Briey-Thionville triangle (see detailed map below) contains 90% of France's iron ore and was one of the six richest iron ore deposits in the world at the end of the 19th century. (Berglund, pp. 531-534)

In the production of pig-iron and steel it was the common practice of the late 1800's to locate foundries and steel mills in coal producing areas and transport the ore to the coal by rail. The bulk of Germany's iron and steel industries were therefore located around Saarbrucke in the upper Rhineland and in the Ruhr. French heavy industry was located in its own coal producing areas in the Pas-du-Nord along its northern frontier with Belgium. This was centered on the city of Lille, although some iron smelters were located in Lorraine. During times of peace, trade furnished each industry with the raw materials that were naturally lacking locally. For much of the 1800's and into the 1900's French ore fed the metallurgic industry of Germany, while German coal fueled the furnaces of French industry. This economic relationship was, however, often strained by protectionist policies and used as a tool in geopolitical struggles. In times of war, the resources of one country became a coveted prize for the other."

"While the goal of each antagonist in the Franco Prussian war of 1870-1871 was not explicitly the occupation of territory rich in natural resources, the purpose of the concluding Treaty of Frankfort of 10 May 1871 certainly was. Along with indemnity payments meant to hamstring French investments in industry, the French province of Alsace and most of Lorraine were annexed by a newly united Germany. This transferred an estimated 2 billion tons of iron ore into German hands along with Lorraine's iron smelters.(Berglund, 531) Freed fom having to pay high prices for imported French ore, German iron and steel production flourished between 1871 and 1918, outstripping French production by a factor of three.(Munro, 7) Germany's industrial take-off of the late 1800's in turn fueled its military might and geo-political influence, allowing it to pursue its dream of building a Mitteleuropa to challenge the erstwhile continental hegemony of France. (Soutou, 21)

The German victory in 1871 and subsequent annexation of Lorraine and Alsace did more than just cripple France's industry. France was forced to recognize the importance of coal and iron production for producing the armaments that were the primary lever of geopolitical power. (Munro, 9) This put France in an economic and strategic conundrum. It still possessed great iron ore deposits in the area of Lorraine not annexed by Germany. However, due to a relative dearth of coal and inefficiencies in its metallurgic industry, France could not use all of the ore that it could mine. To buy coal, France needed money and its easiest way to get money was to sell its surplus iron ore. Germany, with a surplus of coal relative to iron despite the annexed resources of Lorraine, was the obvious customer, yet to export iron ore to Germany was to fuel Germany's war-making capabilities. (Soutou, 180-189) While a stagnating French economy fed the French population's revenge fever for the humiliating annexation of "French" territory, the French administrative and political classes were developing a solution for France's relative lack of coal."

http://books.google.com/books?id=J4_Kox ... on&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=RkUZAQ ... &q&f=false

"The total supply estimated by Villain to be available in Luxemburg is 300 million tons. In France, taking the deposits at Nancy, Longwy, and Briey together, no less than 2500 million tons should exist. In German Lorraine the amount has been variously estimated at 1100 to 2200 million tons, but the former figure is regarded as the more accurate, while, inasmuch as the southern portions of the field contain poor siliceous ores which are practically unworkable, the estimate must be further largely reduced."
__________________

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Re: Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

#2

Post by Dave Bender » 24 Mar 2011, 20:41

France would be forced to import more iron ore. Perhaps they would invest in Spanish iron mines rather then investing in Russian munition factories and rail lines. Economically this may make little difference. However France will lose diplomatic leverage without the huge capital investments in Russia.


User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3376
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 02:42
Location: illinois

Re: Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

#3

Post by stg 44 » 24 Mar 2011, 20:47

Here is a bit more information:
"Dr. Schlenker proceeds to remark that there is no need of further argument to show that Sweden was not, and could not be, in a position to make good the deficiency arising thereby of 23.55 per cent; and continues: "It must therefore be described as a special stroke of good fortune that at the very commencement of the war Germany came into possession of the Briey ore basin, as without the French iron-ores it would have been impossible for the German iron industry to cover our own and our Allies' enormous requirements of munitions. Further, the great advantages which come to us from the occupation of the ore basin mean the reverse for France." As already shown above, the share with which the Department of Meurtheet-Moselle participated in the total extraction of iron-ores in France in 1913 was no less than 19,813,572 tons, whereof again the greater part came from the Briey basin, where the extraction of ores in 1913 soared up to 15,023,740 tons.
Seeing that even the iron mines in the districts of the Department still held by France, and which are situated chiefly in the neighborhood of Nancy, are scarcely likely to have remained at work, France has lost, through the occupation, no less than roughly 90 per cent of her normal output of ironore, or, if we make allowance for the higher percentage of metal contained in the other French iron-ore, fully 85 per cent.
According to a report submitted by Dr. Schroder, of Diisseldorf, on January 31, 1915, to the general meeting of the Association of German Metallurgists (Verein Deutscher Eisenhuttenleute) no less than 95 of the roughly 127 blast furnaces which were in blast at the commencement of 1913 out of the 170 altogether existing in France, are situated in the war zone, and even the furnaces situated behind the trenches are scarcely likely to have been kept in blast in view of the shortage of ores and the existing conditions in general, so that only some 30 blast furnaces remain which could continue to work uninterruptedly. As the later number includes some small furnaces of 30 to 60 tons daily output, while the large furnaces are situated mainly in the East of France, at least 80 per cent of the entire pig-iron production of France is likely to have been stopped by the war, and more especially by the rapid thrust forward beyond the Briey ore basin."

With this information, it is obvious that France will be VERY hard pressed to recover from the Franco-Prussian war, perhaps allowing the indemnity to actually serve its purpose and prevent French rearmament. This obviously has massive implications for the future: France not really a threat to German military power, Russia potential won't get its rail way loans from France, meaning its own industrialization is set back significantly. WW1 is butterflied away, especially if Germany is the premier power on the continent militarily. Of course all this serves to increase Anglo-German hostilities and may actually serve to increase the naval arms race. Germany itself could be significantly richer if it has to import less iron from other nations and can export more to its neighbors (France, who has to pay for both coal and iron from Germany, instead of OTL where they were able to pretty much offset coal purchases with iron sales).

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

serves to increase Anglo-German hostilities

#4

Post by Dave Bender » 24 Mar 2011, 22:40

Why?

Britain got along fine with Germany for hundreds of years. No reason that shouldn't continue throughout the 20th century. Especially with a Kaiser who considered himself to be a member of the British Royal Family.

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3376
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 02:42
Location: illinois

Re: serves to increase Anglo-German hostilities

#5

Post by stg 44 » 24 Mar 2011, 22:45

Dave Bender wrote:Why?

Britain got along fine with Germany for hundreds of years. No reason that shouldn't continue throughout the 20th century. Especially with a Kaiser who considered himself to be a member of the British Royal Family.
Except during the naval race, which I am positing increases as Germany becomes wealthier and possessing more resources with Longwy-Briery.

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Except during the naval race

#6

Post by Dave Bender » 25 Mar 2011, 03:07

There won't be a naval race if Britain does not turn hostile towards Germany.

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3376
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 02:42
Location: illinois

Re: Except during the naval race

#7

Post by stg 44 » 25 Mar 2011, 05:52

Dave Bender wrote:There won't be a naval race if Britain does not turn hostile towards Germany.
The German naval build up was considered, along with the German bellicosity during various diplomatic crises, the shot across the bow. It wasn't just the build up to match the Russians and French combined, but rather the expansion above and beyond this level that made it easily the second largest navy in the world and no signaled interest in stopping the build up. This obviously scared British naval planners, as they had their doctrine of the two fleets. Sure it was a red herring to a degree, as hostility vis-a-vis colonial, economic, and other disputes were the primary issues, but that coupled with a large build up of heavy, short ranged dreadnoughts allowed the inference that the Germans were challenging British naval superiority (which they were). The naval race was started by the Germans. It was won by the British.

In this scenario, with less French funds for the army and less funds to loan Russia, Germany can focus more resources on her fleet, especially as she won't have to import as much iron and can still export all of her resources for profit, which in turn means more money to devote to her navy.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

Re: Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

#8

Post by Tim Smith » 25 Mar 2011, 11:54

Except the advance of technology quickly renders new ships obselete in this era. HMS Dreadnaught was a quantum leap over all pre-dreadnought battleships, rendering the entire world's battle fleets obselete overnight. HMS Queen Elizabeth (fast battleship with 15" guns) did the same thing again.

If Germany spends far more money on her navy between 1871 and 1906, most of that effort will be wasted in producing obselete ships. I'm not sure this leaves Germany any better off than historically.

User avatar
Baltasar
Member
Posts: 4614
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 16:56
Location: Germany

Re: Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

#9

Post by Baltasar » 25 Mar 2011, 13:25

The British Admirality knew full well that Germany could not keep up with the UK in regards of shipbuilding, neither in quality nor in numbers. Plus, Germany had to maintain a large field army vis a vis the French and Russians at the same time, so they had neither the funding nor the dock capacities available to really challenge the RN.

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2776
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 13:24
Location: London

Re: Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

#10

Post by Gooner1 » 25 Mar 2011, 13:49

stg 44 wrote: With this information, it is obvious that France will be VERY hard pressed to recover from the Franco-Prussian war, perhaps allowing the indemnity to actually serve its purpose and prevent French rearmament. This obviously has massive implications for the future: France not really a threat to German military power, Russia potential won't get its rail way loans from France, meaning its own industrialization is set back significantly. WW1 is butterflied away, especially if Germany is the premier power on the continent militarily.
Germany was the continents premier military power. That Russia would become the continents premier military power was inevitable.

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3376
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 02:42
Location: illinois

Re: Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

#11

Post by stg 44 » 25 Mar 2011, 16:17

Gooner1 wrote:
stg 44 wrote: With this information, it is obvious that France will be VERY hard pressed to recover from the Franco-Prussian war, perhaps allowing the indemnity to actually serve its purpose and prevent French rearmament. This obviously has massive implications for the future: France not really a threat to German military power, Russia potential won't get its rail way loans from France, meaning its own industrialization is set back significantly. WW1 is butterflied away, especially if Germany is the premier power on the continent militarily.
Germany was the continents premier military power. That Russia would become the continents premier military power was inevitable.
Was it? Eventually perhaps, but it had a poorly managed economy that developed as quickly as it did because of French loans. In the absence of these Russia will develop more slowly, which allows Austria-Hungary a chance to continue their very high rate of growth, while German control of one of the largest ore deposits in the world makes it that much richer vis-a-vis historically.

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2776
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 13:24
Location: London

Re: Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

#12

Post by Gooner1 » 25 Mar 2011, 17:16

stg 44 wrote: Was it? Eventually perhaps, but it had a poorly managed economy that developed as quickly as it did because of French loans. In the absence of these Russia will develop more slowly, which allows Austria-Hungary a chance to continue their very high rate of growth, while German control of one of the largest ore deposits in the world makes it that much richer vis-a-vis historically.
Russia had three-times the population of Austro-Hungary and abundant natural resources.

I don't quite follow that if Longwy-Briey is not part of France, there will be no French loans to Russia. Did the financiers who provided the capital to develop the iron ore mines reinvest the profits in Russia?

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Germany can focus more resources on her fleet

#13

Post by Dave Bender » 25 Mar 2011, 17:25

Why would Germany want to do that if Britain remains friendly?

The Kaiserlich Marine needs to control the Baltic plus some cruisers for shipping protection. Anything else is a waste of money and likely to be disapproved by the Reichstag.

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3376
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 02:42
Location: illinois

Re: Germany can focus more resources on her fleet

#14

Post by stg 44 » 25 Mar 2011, 18:00

Dave Bender wrote:Why would Germany want to do that if Britain remains friendly?

The Kaiserlich Marine needs to control the Baltic plus some cruisers for shipping protection. Anything else is a waste of money and likely to be disapproved by the Reichstag.
Have you read history??? The Germans DID do that and finally dropped out of the naval race in 1912 when they couldn't afford it any more and had to start spending more on the army. The Reichstag approved massive loans for the naval laws starting in the late 1890's. I am suggesting that the historical naval arms race continues because Germany had more resources to devote to it thanks to the extra iron, not needing to purchase abroad, and her foe, France, not having enough money to makes loans to Russia and spend on her army.

Gooner1 wrote:
stg 44 wrote: Was it? Eventually perhaps, but it had a poorly managed economy that developed as quickly as it did because of French loans. In the absence of these Russia will develop more slowly, which allows Austria-Hungary a chance to continue their very high rate of growth, while German control of one of the largest ore deposits in the world makes it that much richer vis-a-vis historically.
Russia had three-times the population of Austro-Hungary and abundant natural resources.

I don't quite follow that if Longwy-Briey is not part of France, there will be no French loans to Russia. Did the financiers who provided the capital to develop the iron ore mines reinvest the profits in Russia?
Without foreign money and expertise, those resources won't be easily exploitable. Part of Russia's problem is her vast population: it was uneducated and really didn't engage in commerce that helped improve the national economy. Instead they were focused on subsistence farming. The French loans ultimately proved crucial in developing the Russian economy and military, as vast tracks of rail roads could be built, the military financed (especially to recover from the Russo-Japanese war), and support industries built (metallurgy, chemical, manufacturing, etc.).

The French were wacked with a massive war indemnity for the time after the Franco-Prussian war, not to mention large amounts of damage and the loss of much of their mining industry. Historically they were able to recover in a large part to the vast iron resources in the remaining part of Lorraine, 90% of which was concentrated on the Longwy-Briey-Thionville triangle. They were able to export the iron, whose profits enabled the nation to maintain a favorable balance of trade and accumulate enough taxes to make up for losses elsewhere. Without that iron, France cannot sustain a large industry in her own country. That makes it harder and more expensive to develop a large army. Every resource would have to be imported, costing industry to make those purchases and ship them to their factories. When buying from local suppliers that money would stay in the country, or as historically happened, balanced out with trade to Germany for coal. Once every industrial resource had to be imported, it becomes much more expensive, relative to foreign competition, to do business, especially if tariffs are a factor. This means fewer taxes for the central government. Potentially it also means paying German industries more money for these resources, draining France of money and pumping it into their foe.
Industry remains stunted, so France is financially weaker and has a smaller tax base. Additionally, as was pointed out above, France may well focus her international loans on building up mining in Spain, so that a friendly nation gets access to her money and France can have a financial stake in foreign mining.

Either way something suffers. It probably means a smaller army, less money available for foreign loans, especially to Russia when financial concerns are more pressing, and less leverage in roping Russia into her foreign policy.

In contrast Germany can sell her extra iron to whomever she pleases, making a tidy profit off of the deal, while also needing to import less. More capital stays in her economy and more jobs are created in the mining industry. Plus, nice bonus, her coal and iron centers are really close to one another, as is manufacturing in the Ruhr. Transportation costs are ridiculously low, as all these centers are within a few hundred miles of each other.

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5862
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Longwy-Briey annexed in 1871

#15

Post by glenn239 » 25 Mar 2011, 18:41

What if the iron producing area of Longwy-Briey was discovered to have iron deposits prior to the Franco-Prussia war and the Germans then annexed the area during the peace treaty?
Depending on exactly where the border was, Germany might be able to invade France without going through Belgium. Alternatively, assuming that Verdun and Toul were annexed, Germany could stand on the defensive in the west at the start of the war without risking strategic jeopardy in the form of losing her iron ore resources around Metz.

Post Reply

Return to “What if”