Alternate History WI British Great War ‘Westerners’ strategically prevailed (no Gallipolli, Salonica, or substitutes)?

[raharris1973]

WI British Great War ‘Westerners’ strategically prevailed (no Gallipolli, Salonica, or substitutes)?

What if the advocates of western front primacy won out consistently in Britain- the kitcheners and the Haigs successfully blocking proposals of the Churchills, the Fishers and the Lloyd George’s for sideshow’ landings beyond France?

i imagine British Empire and French and Japanese forces would still grab German African and Pacific colonies, and that Mesopotamia at the end of the Persian Gulf would still be seen as the easiest place to use Indian troops and safeguard the Gulf and that the defense of Sinai and Suez will naturally turn into a counteroffensive on Palestine.

But no Gallipolli 1915, no substitution of Alexandretta, no garrisoning of Salonica, just building up BEF France.

What are the knock-on effects of giving up those campaigns?

How much earlier does Germany get defeated on the western front? Do the British and French suffer the same casualties as OTL, just faster? Do they suffer fewer casualties by shortening the war? How are the details of the surrender of the other CPs, the Bulgarians, Ottomans, and Austro-Hungarians, changed? Any changes to the postwar settlement, postwar map of Europe?

 

[WolfBear]

I'm not sure that more British troops on the Western Front would have actually made a cardinal difference here if they will be simply mowed down by German machine guns.

As a side note, if the Entente needed more troops, why not have Japanese troops participate in the war against the Ottoman Empire? Japan had a lot of spare troops, presumably, and it wasn't busy doing very much after conquering Germany's Chinese colonies, so why not invite the Japanese to help defeat the Ottoman Empire? Maybe promise them some oil concessions in Mesopotamia or Persia or Kuwait in exchange for this?

 

[stevep]

I would agree with WolfBear that more troops being sent to the western front is most likely to increase the butcher's bill. Especially before 1917-18 when the British army had a decent doctrine for offensives - albeit that Haig refused to use it resulting in the bloodbath of Passchendaele. Early on Britain had neither the doctrine for attacks on prepared defences nor the equipment.

I don't think Japan would have been that willing to engage heavily in WWI, even in the ME theatre. Plus I doubt that Britain would be willing to offer them something like their Kuwait protective.

Plus not sure the issue in either western front or assorted other 'eastern' options was lack of troops, although the western front generals did everything they could to draw in every man they could to their areas. It was more lack of suitable equipment and leadership. Gallipoli is the big option that could have shortened the war drastically but would have needed far better organisation and leadership. The men in charge were making no attempt to get decent maps of the peninsula or even talking to men who knew the area. It was being openly talked of in bars and cafes in Cairo so there was no chance of strategic surprise - although they did get some tactical ones by persuading the Turks their target was the neck of the peninsula rather than its lower reaches. Cargo for the operations was loaded haphazardly with no real order. Very much a lack of decent organisation.

Having said that the lack of troops was a factor in limiting choice of options. For instance for Gallipoli the decision was taken to concentrate on the peninsula rather than the Asiatic shore because of the limited number of troops available in the initial attack compared to the broader front that would have been present there.

 

[raharris1973]

Having said that the lack of troops was a factor in limiting choice of options. For instance for Gallipoli the decision was taken to concentrate on the peninsula rather than the Asiatic shore because of the limited number of troops available in the initial attack compared to the broader front that would have been present there.

Might this apply in the west too? With an even greater first call on troops, might Haig get clearance for his proposed D-Day op against the occupied section of the Belgian coast? Likely in 1917 or 1918. If successful it could significantly hamper U-Boat operations and cross-channel air operations and push the Entente front up against the Netherlands border at the Scheldt. On the other hand, it could have been a big failure. Alternatively, an effort from the ground, possibly aided by a seaborne feint, might have recovered the Flanders coast earlier.

 

[stevep]

Might this apply in the west too? With an even greater first call on troops, might Haig get clearance for his proposed D-Day op against the occupied section of the Belgian coast? Likely in 1917 or 1918. If successful it could significantly hamper U-Boat operations and cross-channel air operations and push the Entente front up against the Netherlands border at the Scheldt. On the other hand, it could have been a big failure. Alternatively, an effort from the ground, possibly aided by a seaborne feint, might have recovered the Flanders coast earlier.

The problem was that he had the forces for that OTL but it required a level of progress on the land offensive which, especially given his policies did not occur. I think that was mentioned in the WWI day by day post on the other site or the video I reference you to you. IIRC this day it was recognised that insufficient progress was being made to make such an operation possible and the resources committed to it were sent elsewhere. Checking its not in the day-by-day so it was probably in the video, direct link there. - Sorry late here and haven't had time to do everything I need yet.

Steve

PS I lied, I had time for a quick look. See the video about 5:40 into it. The amphibious assault was planned to be triggered by the capture of a certain point and the commentary is stating that it was "pretty much obvious that [that location] wouldn't be achieved and the force was quietly disbanded."