The Germans don't create an independent Poland in 1916; what effects does this have?

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Futurist
Member
Posts: 1774
Joined: 24 Dec 2015 00:02
Location: SoCal

The Germans don't create an independent Poland in 1916; what effects does this have?

Post by Futurist » 09 Jan 2019 00:26

If the Germans, for whatever reason, don't create a nominally independent Poland in 1916-1917, what effects is this going to have later on?

Wm said in another thread here that the Poles benefited from having the Germans build a proto-state for them during WWI. Thus, I am wondering just how much worse the Poles would have fared in the aftermath of WWI and especially in their war with the Soviets if they would have needed to build a new state from scratch in 1918-1919 (instead of relying on the state infrastructure that the Germans already built for them).

Thoughts?

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 4902
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: The Germans don't create an independent Poland in 1916; what effects does this have?

Post by wm » 09 Jan 2019 18:44

Everything would be "less" or "worse". Fewer taxes collected, a smaller and even more rag-tag Army than in reality. Less successful conscription.
Later elections so less time to achive politcal consesus.
The negatives could have been negated by a signing a truce or even a peace treaty with the Soviets early on - because they were willing.
The Baltic states would pay for that with their freedom - because the Soviets would have the means and time to "take care" of them.

User avatar
henryk
Member
Posts: 2320
Joined: 27 Jan 2004 01:11
Location: London, Ontario

Re: The Germans don't create an independent Poland in 1916; what effects does this have?

Post by henryk » 09 Jan 2019 20:59

The other new post WW1 countries quickly started, despite the so-called head start of Poland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... dence_days
Independence Days:
Czechoslovakia: 28 Oct 1918
Estonia: 24 Feb 1918
Finland: 6 Dec 1917
Georgia: 26 May 1918
Latvia: 18 Nov 1918
Lithuania: 16 Feb 1918
Poland: 11 Nov 1918
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/ ... a_01.shtml
Yugoslavia: 1 Dec 1918

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 4902
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: The Germans don't create an independent Poland in 1916; what effects does this have?

Post by wm » 09 Jan 2019 21:59

The dates mostly indicate when the old political order collapsed creating a political vacuum, not the strength of the new countries. They were mostly dictated by external circumstances.

Even more, Finland and Czechia enjoyed autonomy, their own institutions, schools, administration, language for at least half a century before the Great War - Poland didn't.
Similarly Yugoslavia - its member states existed for a long time and even fought a few major wars earlier.
Georgia was quickly reconquered.

The Baltic States survived mostly thanks to external circumstances, and German protection and support, their frequently heroic resistance was insufficient alone.

Futurist
Member
Posts: 1774
Joined: 24 Dec 2015 00:02
Location: SoCal

Re: The Germans don't create an independent Poland in 1916; what effects does this have?

Post by Futurist » 10 Jan 2019 00:19

wm wrote:
09 Jan 2019 18:44
Everything would be "less" or "worse". Fewer taxes collected, a smaller and even more rag-tag Army than in reality. Less successful conscription.
Later elections so less time to achive politcal consesus.
The negatives could have been negated by a signing a truce or even a peace treaty with the Soviets early on - because they were willing.
The Baltic states would pay for that with their freedom - because the Soviets would have the means and time to "take care" of them.
Why were the Soviets initially willing to sign a peace treaty with the Poles only to later try conquering all of Poland?

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 4902
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: The Germans don't create an independent Poland in 1916; what effects does this have?

Post by wm » 10 Jan 2019 01:01

They were willing because they were weak and needed time to consolidated their power, the negotiations failed, and the war resumed. Later it was a case of an unplanned, opportunistic conquest of Poland.
According to one of the latest Piłsudski's biographers, the reasons were he wanted to destroy the Red Army and to create a bourgeois Ukrainian state.

Futurist
Member
Posts: 1774
Joined: 24 Dec 2015 00:02
Location: SoCal

Re: The Germans don't create an independent Poland in 1916; what effects does this have?

Post by Futurist » 10 Jan 2019 02:11

wm wrote:
10 Jan 2019 01:01
They were willing because they were weak and needed time to consolidated their power, the negotiations failed, and the war resumed. Later it was a case of an unplanned, opportunistic conquest of Poland.
According to one of the latest Piłsudski's biographers, the reasons were he wanted to destroy the Red Army and to create a bourgeois Ukrainian state.
What were the borders that the Soviets initially offered to the Poles? The Curzon Line?

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 4902
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: The Germans don't create an independent Poland in 1916; what effects does this have?

Post by wm » 10 Jan 2019 17:08

I suppose it's not known. Lenin gave his negotiators almost a free hand but the negotiations were terminated quickly.
Piłsudski's enemies claimed and claim even today it was more or less the same borders he would win later.

Return to “What if”