ASB WI: Right after dying, Turkey's Ismet Inonu (Ataturk's sidekick) wakes up as Enver Bey 60 years earlier

[raharris1973]

Ismet Inonu... İsmet İnönü - Wikipedia

...was a companion of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk who had an even longer lasting impact on modern Turkey because of his personal longevity (1884 to 1973) which allowed him to be President and Prime Minister on more than one occasion. He was Turkish President during WWII for instance.

He died on Christmas Day 1973.

What if, upon death, Ismet Inonu's consciousness went back in time 60 years to Christmas Day 1913, to occupy the mind of Enver Bey at that time.

Enver Bey at this time is one of the CUP triumvirate effectively ruling the Ottoman Empire at the time. He is probably at the peak of his career popularity, having been credited with the recovery of Adrianople/Edirne from Bulgarian occupation a few months before.

OTL's Enver Pasha ran the Ottoman Empire into the ground and had a sense of priorities and instincts quite opposite of Ismet Inonu.

How will Ismet Inonu use his knowledge and judgement for the betterment of his country and himself?

Indeed, what does he see as his country? The political formula that brought him to power was secular Turkish ethnonationalism in the aftermath of the WWII defeat, and that is what he stuck with the rest of his career.

However, December 1913 is premature for that concept since the Ottoman Empire, although driven from Africa and almost entirely from Europe, still controls most of Southwest Asia including large Arabic speaking lands and has a diverse, ethnically and religiously mixed population.

Some big decisions are coming up, as WWI is about to break out this year. Staying out of the war seems the likeliest choice given Ismet's foreknowledge, experience and leadership record. At a minimum, he would not kick off involvement with the war in such an incompetent fashion.

But anything he does means the details of history start to rapidly diverge from the history he knew in the following few years.

What does he do in the ensuing years, and what goals is he aiming to achieve for the Turks, and the Ottoman Empire as a whole?

I would think the first thing Inonu/Enver does is try to stop the Ottoman slide into the world war he knows is about to start.

And he can act on this is within mere days of his consciousness arriving in 1913. His first step would be to stop the purchase of the Brazilian dreadnought Rio De Janeiro under construction in Britain. From wiki, "she was sold to the Ottoman Navy for £2,750,000 on 28 December 1913." The Rio De Janeiro in OTL was renamed the "Sultan Osman I". However, Britain seized it when WWI was imminent, and this outraged Ottoman opinion, and OTL's Enver used that to move closer to Germany. Britain ultimately brought it into the RN as the HMS Agincourt. HMS Agincourt (1913) - Wikipedia

So within a couple days of becoming Enver, Ismet Inonu has an opportunity to stop a costly purchase (that will never come into Ottoman service anyway), and a source of discord with Britain and opportunity for Germany.

Unfortunately for Inonu/Enver, the Ottomans had already purchased another dreadnought, the Resadiye, from Britain that was in OTL doomed to be impounded and renamed the HMS Erin by Winston Churchill at the same time as the Sultan Osman I.

The best Inonu/Enver could try to do about this would be to try to speed the delivery schedule for the Resadiye so it is delivered before the July Crisis starts. HMS Erin - Wikipedia. This might have been possible, and could, along with other changes, make prolonged Ottoman neutrality more tenable.

How would the mechanics of the straits under a neutral Ottoman regime in World War I work under the treaties of the day?

I assume, the "wartime" provisions of the straits convention applies to warring powers even when the Ottomans are themselves neutral.

So - no Entente or Central Powers warships can legally pass through the straits for the duration of the conflict?

Submarines can sneak their way through I presume.

However, merchant traffic of all nations can pass through the straits?

And this all helps the Entente more, because Russia did not need to send its fleet out of the Black Sea or get naval aid in the Black Sea, but it really could have benefitted from merchant traffic, non-war ships, exporting grain and importing weapons and machinery and vehicles that way?

Is this reading of the straits conventions correctly?

 

[WolfBear]

Be neutral in World War I and instead go for Saudi Arabia, especially the northeastern part where the oil reserves will later be found. And try to negotiate the return of Kuwait to the Ottoman Empire from Britain.

Taking over the Arabian terra nullis will give the Ottoman Empire greater prestige, a lot of additional future oil reserves, and an opportunity to strangle the Wahhabist menace. Triple win for the Ottomans!

And if Russia still eventually descends into revolution, then and only then make a move for Kars region.

 

[Chiron]

He sends a team to take care of a few Serbian Terrorists by tipping off the police and ensuring they are arrested.

Next, oil infrastructure, oil infrastructure. And get factories up and running and get LMGs into the squad level and squad level communications gear plus more firepower at platoon, company, battalion, and regimental level.

Each year he can buy in delaying the war, allows the Ottomans to modernize ahead of the competition.

When war does come, strike quickly and decisively in order to repudiate the capitulations and break the British and French Empires financially.

But above all, ensure any future deals are in Ottoman Interests and Ottoman Interest alone.

 

[WolfBear]

He sends a team to take care of a few Serbian Terrorists by tipping off the police and ensuring they are arrested.

Not necessarily, since as cynical as this might sound, having everyone else bleed themselves dry while the Ottomans themselves remain neutral and conquer Saudi Arabia is actually a pretty good deal for the Ottoman Empire.

 

[Chiron]

Not necessarily, since as cynical as this might sound, having everyone else bleed themselves dry while the Ottomans themselves remain neutral and conquer Saudi Arabia is actually a pretty good deal for the Ottoman Empire.

Only if the Ottomans are in a position to do so. And Saudi Arabia was already under their suzerainty via direct control and vassals. The Sauds can be dealt with by some gold and assisting the Emirate of Jabal Shammar to clean them out.

Also buying Germany a few years to develop and produce more ships and military gear is a benefit.

 

[WolfBear]

Only if the Ottomans are in a position to do so. And Saudi Arabia was already under their suzerainty via direct control and vassals. The Sauds can be dealt with by some gold and assisting the Emirate of Jabal Shammar to clean them out.

Also buying Germany a few years to develop and produce more ships and military gear is a benefit.

Really the oil-rich northeastern part of Saudi Arabia matters most of all here.

And Russia will also get stronger over time.

 

[Chiron]

Really the oil-rich northeastern part of Saudi Arabia matters most of all here.

And Russia will also get stronger over time.

Russia was falling apart at the seams. If not the Serbian Terrorist, their will be a revolt somewhere in Russia, it will become a pre-text and shit goes down. WW1 accelerated what was already occurring in Russia. There were multiple powder kegs in Europe, pick one, light a match and toss it.

 

[WolfBear]

Russia was falling apart at the seams. If not the Serbian Terrorist, their will be a revolt somewhere in Russia, it will become a pre-text and shit goes down. WW1 accelerated what was already occurring in Russia. There were multiple powder kegs in Europe, pick one, light a match and toss it.

Russia could fall apart eventually, though @Skallagrim disagrees with this analysis and in any case, even if it would have actually eventually occurred, it wouldn't have necessarily occurred before or even during the 1920s.

 

[Skallagrim]

And Russia will also get stronger over time.

Russia was falling apart at the seams.

Russia could fall apart eventually, though @Skallagrim disagrees with this analysis and in any case, even if it would have actually eventually occurred, it wouldn't have necessarily occurred before or even during the 1920s.

Russia was absolutely getting stronger by the year. Every delay of an ATL Great War favours Russia the most. In fact, it favours Germany the least, because Britain was already ludicrously out-performing the German naval build-up by this time. In fact, the German economy was stalling due to Wilhelm II's prior mismanagement (of which his over-investment in the navy, with zero benefits to show for it, was a major part). Also, giving France more time to get its strategy in order is good for France. That Idiot Joffre was set to be removed from command in 1914! Only the outbreak of the war prevented it! Delay the war and you have given France one of the greatest possible boons.

In summary, the nations who profit from delaying the war are:

1. Russia
2. Britain
3. France

...and the rest is barely relevant.


------------------------------------------


Anyway, as to the best move for the Ottoman Empire: just stay out of it. Don't get involved. Let them all kill each other, while you focus on getting your own house in order. If you know where the oil fields are, secure those regions. Invest in industry, build up oil fields, diversify industry... profit. Great Success.

 

[Earl]

Anyway, as to the best move for the Ottoman Empire: just stay out of it. Don't get involved. Let them all kill each other, while you focus on getting your own house in order. If you know where the oil fields are, secure those regions. Invest in industry, build up oil fields, diversify industry... profit. Great Success.

Agreed, but the question is will the rest of the boys agree with this assessment? They didn't OTL and payed dearly for it.

 

[WolfBear]

Russia was absolutely getting stronger by the year. Every delay of an ATL Great War favours Russia the most. In fact, it favours Germany the least, because Britain was already ludicrously out-performing the German naval build-up by this time. In fact, the German economy was stalling due to Wilhelm II's prior mismanagement (of which his over-investment in the navy, with zero benefits to show for it, was a major part). Also, giving France more time to get its strategy in order is good for France. That Idiot Joffre was set to be removed from command in 1914! Only the outbreak of the war prevented it! Delay the war and you have given France one of the greatest possible boons.

In summary, the nations who profit from delaying the war are:

1. Russia
2. Britain
3. France

...and the rest is barely relevant.


------------------------------------------


Anyway, as to the best move for the Ottoman Empire: just stay out of it. Don't get involved. Let them all kill each other, while you focus on getting your own house in order. If you know where the oil fields are, secure those regions. Invest in industry, build up oil fields, diversify industry... profit. Great Success.

It's worth noting, though, that if Germany doesn't use the Schlieffen Plan, then a British entry into the war on the Franco-Russian side isn't guaranteed. And I have heard that the Anglo-Russian Convention might not have been renewed in 1915 without World War I.

BTW, where did you read that Joffre was about to be fired in 1914?

 

[Skallagrim]

BTW, where did you read that Joffre was about to be fired in 1914?

I'd have to look up an exact source, but I know for a fact that the new French government (came to power three months before the war broke out) had already appointed Maurice Sarrail as Joffre's replacement, with Sarrail set to take over later that year. When war broke out, this didn't come to pass.

 

[WolfBear]

I'd have to look up an exact source, but I know for a fact that the new French government (came to power three months before the war broke out) had already appointed Maurice Sarrail as Joffre's replacement, with Sarrail set to take over later that year. When war broke out, this didn't come to pass.

Interesting. So, had WWI broke out just several months later or more, then there's a chance that Sarrail could have created a worse French performance at the start of the war relative to Joffre? Joffre, for all his flaws at the Battle of the Frontiers, was able to quickly realize the German threat in the Belgian direction and thus quickly redirect his forces accordingly. Would Sarrail have actually had the same luxury.

And do you think that France's three-year service law would have actually remained in place?

 

[Chiron]

Russia was absolutely getting stronger by the year. Every delay of an ATL Great War favours Russia the most. In fact, it favours Germany the least, because Britain was already ludicrously out-performing the German naval build-up by this time. In fact, the German economy was stalling due to Wilhelm II's prior mismanagement (of which his over-investment in the navy, with zero benefits to show for it, was a major part). Also, giving France more time to get its strategy in order is good for France. That Idiot Joffre was set to be removed from command in 1914! Only the outbreak of the war prevented it! Delay the war and you have given France one of the greatest possible boons.

Russia was a backwards nation with 1/20th of Germany's manufacturing capability, and a rifle centric army that Germany blew to shreds on the battlefield by having more and better artillery. Unless you can show substantial reforms were actually taking place. Russian Elites start turning on each other followed by class warfare and separatist movements.

Britain is an incompetently led nation that spent itself dry for no benefit and dragged us in the US into its mess. Germany had a larger economy than Britain did, which when one considers India alone should have made Britain invincible and instead was a net drain due to British incompetence, is damning of their leadership. Unless they were going to stop exploiting their colonies, industrialize them, grant equal rights to the colonial subjects, remove the Angelic Church from Parliament and adopt a truly secular monarchy which is not also head of the Church, then they are on the out.

France, is a mess just as likely to implode as do something smart. Unless Petain is taking command, the French will continue on with an unbalanced army with too little firepower and too light of an artillery arm at regimental and division level. And that will fuck them on the battlefield.

Germany had a solid economy, not reliant on looting African or Asian possessions to paper over weaknesses, and not reliant on financing. If they did one thing totally wrong in WW1, it was to not aggressively seize the Baltic Sea from the Russian Navy and open up a Baltic Front and even threaten Saint Petersburg in 1914 instead of seeking a fight with the irrelevant Royal Navy. Tirpitz really fucked up in thinking there. He had a clear and obtainable goal to defeat the Russian Baltic Fleet, and put the Russian Capital under threat in Saint Petersburg.

 

[Skallagrim]

Interesting. So, had WWI broke out just several months later or more, then there's a chance that Sarrail could have created a worse French performance at the start of the war relative to Joffre? Joffre, for all his flaws at the Battle of the Frontiers, was able to quickly realize the German threat in the Belgian direction and thus quickly redirect his forces accordingly. Would Sarrail have actually had the same luxury.

And do you think that France's three-year service law would have actually remained in place?

If war breaks out just as Sarrail has taken over, the French get caught at the worst possible time.

In general: it should be noted that Joffre wasn't immediately convinced that the Germans were coming through Belgium, and it took repeated reports from Lanrezac before he accepted it was actually happening. These reports came in quick succession, but it was thanks to Lanrezac's insistence that the French could respond rapidly, not thanks to Joffre. I don't see anyone else reacting in a worse way when the truth is revealed, really.... The exception being that, as per the above, the war breaks out just as Sarrail is newly-installed. That could critically delay reaction time.

If the war breaks out a few years later, things could be massively different. Probably in France's favour. A lot depends on the French government. Keep in mind, "attack, attack, attack" was a doctrine the reactionaries favoured. Sarrail was appointed by the left-wingers, whose policy was inclined towards favouring defensive strategy. Joffre was appointed in the first place after Michel was sacked for proposing a defensive strategy. (Which was based on an highly accurate prediction of the Schlieffen Plan.) If Sarrail has enough backing and swings back to a defensive strategy before war breaks out, France is going to do much better in the war.

Russia was a backwards nation with 1/20th of Germany's manufacturing capability, and a rifle centric army that Germany blew to shreds on the battlefield by having more and better artillery. Unless you can show substantial reforms were actually taking place. Russian Elites start turning on each other followed by class warfare and separatist movements.

Britain is an incompetently led nation that spent itself dry for no benefit and dragged us in the US into its mess. Germany had a larger economy than Britain did, which when one considers India alone should have made Britain invincible and instead was a net drain due to British incompetence, is damning of their leadership. Unless they were going to stop exploiting their colonies, industrialize them, grant equal rights to the colonial subjects, remove the Angelic Church from Parliament and adopt a truly secular monarchy which is not also head of the Church, then they are on the out.

France, is a mess just as likely to implode as do something smart. Unless Petain is taking command, the French will continue on with an unbalanced army with too little firepower and too light of an artillery arm at regimental and division level. And that will fuck them on the battlefield.

Germany had a solid economy, not reliant on looting African or Asian possessions to paper over weaknesses, and not reliant on financing. If they did one thing totally wrong in WW1, it was to not aggressively seize the Baltic Sea from the Russian Navy and open up a Baltic Front and even threaten Saint Petersburg in 1914 instead of seeking a fight with the irrelevant Royal Navy. Tirpitz really fucked up in thinking there. He had a clear and obtainable goal to defeat the Russian Baltic Fleet, and put the Russian Capital under threat in Saint Petersburg.

At this point, after a few threads, I'm just struck with the inescapable impression thay your entire view is based on a dogmatic "Germany always BESTEST, Germany's opponents always IDIOTS".

You just blithely ignore that Russia had dramatically improved since its poor showing in 1905 -- a trend that was set to continue. As such, you doggedly focus on a fixed point ("Germany could beat Russia in the Great War"), and ignore the actual matter being discussed (that Germany was yet stronger, relative to Russia, at earlier points, and that Germany's advantage would decline as time passed. Population growth alone, if nothing else, would favour Russia. But of course it wasn't just population growth.)

As for Britain and France... for as much as you childishly lambast them, they did actually end up winning. Germany ended up losing. Things can't be as clear-cut as you would apparently like them to be.

Ultimately, I just can't take your opinion on matters pertaining to Germany altogether seriously, and will no longer reply in-depth to your biased diatribes. It would be a waste of effort, since your opinion presumably wouldn't change, no matter what.

 

[WolfBear]

If war breaks out just as Sarrail has taken over, the French get caught at the worst possible time.

In general: it should be noted that Joffre wasn't immediately convinced that the Germans were coming through Belgium, and it took repeated reports from Lanrezac before he accepted it was actually happening. These reports came in quick succession, but it was thanks to Lanrezac's insistence that the French could respond rapidly, not thanks to Joffre. I don't see anyone else reacting in a worse way when the truth is revealed, really.... The exception being that, as per the above, the war breaks out just as Sarrail is newly-installed. That could critically delay reaction time.

If the war breaks out a few years later, things could be massively different. Probably in France's favour. A lot depends on the French government. Keep in mind, "attack, attack, attack" was a doctrine the reactionaries favoured. Sarrail was appointed by the left-wingers, whose policy was inclined towards favouring defensive strategy. Joffre was appointed in the first place after Michel was sacked for proposing a defensive strategy. (Which was based on an highly accurate prediction of the Schlieffen Plan.) If Sarrail has enough backing and swings back to a defensive strategy before war breaks out, France is going to do much better in the war.


At this point, after a few threads, I'm just struck with the inescapable impression thay your entire view is based on a dogmatic "Germany always BESTEST, Germany's opponents always IDIOTS".

You just blithely ignore that Russia had dramatically improved since its poor showing in 1905 -- a trend that was set to continue. As such, you doggedly focus on a fixed point ("Germany could beat Russia in the Great War"), and ignore the actual matter being discussed (that Germany was yet stronger, relative to Russia, at earlier points, and that Germany's advantage would decline as time passed. Population growth alone, if nothing else, would favour Russia. But of course it wasn't just population growth.)

As for Britain and France... for as much as you childishly lambast them, they did actually end up winning. Germany ended up losing. Things can't be as clear-cut as you would apparently like them to be.

Ultimately, I just can't take your opinion on matters pertaining to Germany altogether seriously, and will no longer reply in-depth to your biased diatribes. It would be a waste of effort, since your opinion presumably wouldn't change, no matter what.

Agreed with your general analysis here, but what about France's Three Year (Service) Law? Would it remain in place?

And while Russia would undoubtedly become stronger over time, one thing that could significantly help Germany would be if Britain will defect from the Anglo-French side in the years after 1914. Of course, this would only really matter in a long alt-World War I.

 

[Skallagrim]

Agreed with your general analysis here, but what about France's Three Year (Service) Law? Would it remain in place?

I don't know how support for that was distributed in French politics, so I don't know how that would work out.

And while Russia would undoubtedly become stronger over time, one thing that could significantly help Germany would be if Britain will defect from the Anglo-French side in the years after 1914. Of course, this would only really matter in a long alt-World War I.

Do you see any impetus for Britain to do this? I can, of course, see it with an earlier POD, but here, we start the changes in 1913. I think it's too late to mend fences between Britain and Germany, since any war is likely to break out before this can be managed. You'd need a lot of time, and you're not likely to have it.

 

[WolfBear]

Do you see any impetus for Britain to do this? I can, of course, see it with an earlier POD, but here, we start the changes in 1913. I think it's too late to mend fences between Britain and Germany, since any war is likely to break out before this can be managed. You'd need a lot of time, and you're not likely to have it.

If the 1907 Anglo-Russian Convention will fail to be renewed in 1915, then maybe? Though there is also the fact that Germany won't be invading Belgium if this alt-World War I breaks out after 1916 or 1917 or so.