Additional participants in WWI--most likely candidate countries for this?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,827
SoCal
Which countries which didn't participate in WWI in real life were the most likely candidates to enter WWI at some point in the war?

So, far, I am thinking of Afghanistan with the Niedermayer-Hentig mission, but which other countries are plausible candidates for this?

For instance, had Morocco kept its independence until WWI (not completely impossible, since it was only colonized in 1912), would there have been a realistic chance of it entering WWI in order to capture some French North African territory?

Any thoughts on this?
 
Feb 2019
863
Serbia
An obvious choice is Mexico had the Zimmerman telegraph went according to plan, their effectiveness or fighting capacity is up for debate due to the fact Mexico was experiencing a revolution.

The Netherlands also, they suffered considerable losses in shipping and commerce due to the naval blockades and had their neutrality violated many times during the war. They mobilised their army and took wartime measures such as suspension of individual freedom and were pressured by both sides during the war. It's possible for them to enter the war on either side.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,827
SoCal
An obvious choice is Mexico had the Zimmerman telegraph went according to plan, their effectiveness or fighting capacity is up for debate due to the fact Mexico was experiencing a revolution.
True, but such a move would have been utterly suicidal on Mexico's part. It just didn't have the resources to fight the US even if it wasn't experiencing a revolution. The US would have whooped Mexico's butt in any new war! :D

The Netherlands also, they suffered considerable losses in shipping and commerce due to the naval blockades and had their neutrality violated many times during the war. They mobilised their army and took wartime measures such as suspension of individual freedom and were pressured by both sides during the war. It's possible for them to enter the war on either side.
I don't see the Dutch voluntarily being willing to lose a lot of their young men for very little gain. What is possible, though, is for Germany to invade the Netherlands as well as Belgium. This would have forced the Dutch into the war regardless of whether or not they actually wanted to be involved.
 
Apr 2017
1,636
U.S.A.
Few countries other than those involved had any reason to join either side. Aside from those mentioned above:
Scandinavia issued a joint declaration of neutrality during the war. Norway had nothing to gain, Sweden could possibly retake Finland but had to worry about Denmark/Norway siding against them. Denmark could retake german territory but would almost assuredly be crushed by Germany before that happened.
Spain had its own problems and had little to gain (maybe morocco but not worth making an enemy of france).
Switzerland was neutral and wanted to stay that way.
The other American countries had little to gain and wouldn't have made a difference one way or another.
Ethiopia wouldn't have made any effect.
Pretty much every other country in the world already was involved in the war in some capacity (maps were so simple back then, so few countries...).
 

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,964
Iowa USA
The Churchill memoir "The World Crisis, 1911-1918", poses the counterfactual which would have likely spelled an early defeat for Austria: the addition of both Greece and Bulgaria to the Entente prior to May, 1915.

Greece was dragged into the conflict on the side of the Entente.

To Sparky's post: Denmark joining the Entente would have been no less risky than Romania's entry. Can't win if you don't play the game, as Romania was about the biggest winner in a relative sense of all the victors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sparticulous
Apr 2017
1,636
U.S.A.
The Churchill memoir "The World Crisis, 1911-1918", poses the counterfactual which would have likely spelled an early defeat for Austria: the addition of both Greece and Bulgaria to the Entente prior to May, 1915.

Greece was dragged into the conflict on the side of the Entente.

To Sparky's post: Denmark joining the Entente would have been no less risky than Romania's entry. Can't win if you don't play the game, as Romania was about the biggest winner in a relative sense of all the victors.
Except Denmark did win by not playing, they got northern Schleswig.
 

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,964
Iowa USA
Except Denmark did win by not playing, they got northern Schleswig.
Well. Not the spirit of Harald Bluetooth there. A win by forfeit!

Is there really a comparison between gaining Moldova and Transylvania on Romania's part versus N. Sch.... (not worth spelling correctly?)?
 
Apr 2017
1,636
U.S.A.
Well. Not the spirit of Harald Bluetooth there. A win by forfeit!

Is there really a comparison between gaining Moldova and Transylvania on Romania's part versus N. Sch.... (not worth spelling correctly?)?
More of a win by doing nothing.
No, but they avoided being invaded, pillaged and occupied for two years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sparticulous