What If The Lusitania Was Never Sunk?

The Actual History

On May 7, 1915, the RMS Lusitania, a British ocean liner operated by the Cunard Line, was torpedoed by the German submarine U-20 off the southern coast of Ireland. The massive passenger ship sank in just 18 minutes, resulting in the deaths of 1,198 passengers and crew, including 128 Americans. The vessel was en route from New York to Liverpool on its 202nd transatlantic crossing when disaster struck.

The sinking occurred in the context of Germany's expanded submarine warfare campaign. In February 1915, Germany had declared the waters around the British Isles a war zone, warning that Allied ships would be sunk without warning. The German embassy in Washington had even published warnings in American newspapers advising passengers not to travel on Allied ships. Despite these warnings, many Americans believed that deliberately targeting passenger liners violated the international laws of naval warfare, which required submarines to surface and allow for the evacuation of non-combatants before sinking merchant vessels.

The German government justified the attack by claiming the Lusitania was carrying munitions (which later evidence confirmed to some extent), making it a legitimate military target. They also pointed out that the vessel was officially listed as an armed merchant cruiser, though it was not serving in that capacity at the time of sinking.

The attack marked a turning point in American public opinion regarding the European conflict. While President Woodrow Wilson had pledged to keep the United States neutral in the war that had begun in 1914, the Lusitania disaster generated significant anti-German sentiment across America. Wilson sent a series of diplomatic protests to Germany, demanding an end to unrestricted submarine warfare. In response to American pressure, Germany temporarily restricted its U-boat campaign in September 1915, issuing the "Arabic pledge" that passenger ships would not be targeted without warning.

However, the damage to German-American relations was substantial. The sinking became a powerful symbol used in American propaganda and contributed significantly to shifting American public opinion in favor of the Allies. When Germany announced the resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare in early 1917 and American ships began to be targeted, the Lusitania sinking was frequently invoked as evidence of German brutality. On April 6, 1917, the United States declared war on Germany.

The Lusitania tragedy has remained a significant historical event, representing one of the most controversial maritime disasters of the 20th century. It accelerated America's path toward abandoning neutrality and entering World War I on the side of the Allies, ultimately helping to determine the war's outcome. The wreck site was designated a protected war grave in 1995 by the Irish government, acknowledging the Lusitania's pivotal role in the history of modern warfare and international relations.

The Point of Divergence

What if the Lusitania had never been sunk? In this alternate timeline, we explore a scenario where the British ocean liner successfully completed its journey from New York to Liverpool in May 1915, avoiding the deadly encounter with German U-boat U-20 that claimed nearly 1,200 lives in our timeline.

Several plausible variations could have prevented the disaster:

The most straightforward divergence involves the actions of Kapitänleutnant Walther Schwieger, commander of U-20. In our timeline, Schwieger spotted the Lusitania and made a split-second decision to fire. In this alternate scenario, he might have hesitated longer, concerned about the international repercussions of sinking such a famous passenger liner. By the time he overcame his doubts, the Lusitania could have moved beyond the optimal firing position, causing him to abandon the attack.

Alternatively, the British Admiralty might have taken different actions. In reality, the Admiralty knew about U-boat activity in the area but failed to provide the Lusitania with adequate naval escort or properly communicate the specific danger. In this divergent timeline, perhaps First Sea Lord Admiral Fisher, who had advocated for more protection of merchant shipping, prevailed in internal debates, resulting in a destroyer escort for the liner as it approached the Irish coast.

A third possibility involves Captain William Turner of the Lusitania. In our history, Turner slowed the vessel as it approached the Irish coast to time its arrival with the Liverpool tide schedule. In this alternate scenario, Turner—more acutely aware of the U-boat threat—might have maintained the ship's top speed and implemented a more aggressive zigzag pattern, making it significantly harder for U-20 to calculate a successful torpedo trajectory.

Finally, pure chance could have played a role. The torpedo that struck the Lusitania caused an unusually powerful secondary explosion (likely ammunition in the cargo). In this divergent timeline, perhaps the torpedo still strikes but in a different location that doesn't trigger the secondary explosion, allowing the ship to remain afloat long enough to reach the Irish coast or be rescued.

Whatever the specific mechanism, in this alternate timeline, the Lusitania safely docks in Liverpool on May 8, 1915. The 1,198 passengers and crew who perished in our timeline—including prominent Americans like Alfred Gwynne Vanderbilt and playwright Charles Frohman—continue their lives, unaware of the fate they escaped. The pivotal moment that helped turn American public opinion decisively against Germany never occurs.

Immediate Aftermath

American Reaction and Diplomatic Relations

Without the emotional catalyst of American deaths aboard the Lusitania, the Wilson administration's approach to the European conflict would likely have remained more measured in the short term. President Wilson, who had responded to the actual sinking with strong diplomatic protests but stopped short of calling for war, would have maintained his cautious policy of neutrality. The famous Lusitania notes, in which Wilson demanded that Germany respect the rights of neutral nations and non-combatants at sea, would never have been sent.

Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan, a committed pacifist, resigned in our timeline over what he perceived as Wilson's inappropriately hostile tone toward Germany following the sinking. In this alternate timeline, Bryan likely remains in office longer, continuing to advocate for strict neutrality and potentially influencing American foreign policy in a more isolationist direction throughout 1915 and 1916.

The American public, while still generally favoring the Allies due to cultural ties with Britain and France, would have lacked the visceral image of innocent American civilians being killed by German aggression. The famous propaganda posters depicting drowning women and children from the Lusitania would never have been created, removing a powerful emotional tool that helped shift American opinion toward intervention.

German Naval Strategy

The sinking of the Lusitania and the subsequent American outrage forced Germany to temporarily restrict its submarine warfare campaign. In September 1915, Germany issued the "Arabic pledge," promising not to sink passenger vessels without warning. Without the Lusitania incident, German naval commanders might have felt emboldened to continue more aggressive submarine tactics throughout 1915 and early 1916.

Admiral Henning von Holtzendorff, the chief of the German Naval Staff, and Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg were engaged in an ongoing debate about the risks and rewards of unrestricted submarine warfare. Without the diplomatic fallout from the Lusitania, Holtzendorff's arguments for a more aggressive submarine campaign might have prevailed earlier, potentially leading to more Allied shipping losses in the crucial middle period of the war.

However, this strategy carried significant risks. Even without the Lusitania incident, continued attacks on shipping would eventually have claimed American lives and property, creating diplomatic tensions. The difference is that these tensions would have built more gradually rather than crystallizing around a single dramatic event.

British Maritime Policy and Public Perception

The Lusitania disaster served as a powerful propaganda tool for Britain, helping to portray Germany as barbaric and willing to target innocent civilians. Without this incident, British propaganda efforts would have lacked one of their most effective narratives. The famous recruiting posters asking, "Remember the Lusitania!" would never have appeared in Britain or America.

From a naval security perspective, the survival of the Lusitania might have led to a dangerous complacency. The British Admiralty, which had been criticized for failing to provide adequate protection to the liner, might have continued its relatively lax approach to merchant shipping security in the war zone. Without the harsh lesson of the Lusitania, the convoy system that eventually proved effective against U-boats might have been implemented even later than it was in our timeline.

The Cultural Sphere

The sinking of the Lusitania resonated deeply in the cultural consciousness of America and Britain. Artists, writers, and musicians created works memorializing the tragedy and condemning German "frightfulness." Without this cultural touchstone, the artistic response to the war would have taken different forms.

Moreover, prominent victims of the disaster who perished in our timeline would have continued their lives and careers. Alfred Gwynne Vanderbilt, one of the richest men in America, might have continued his business and philanthropic activities. Elbert Hubbard, founder of the Roycroft artisan community and author of the famous essay "A Message to Garcia," would have continued his influential writing. Charles Frohman, the powerful theatrical producer known as "The Theatrical Syndicate," might have continued shaping American theater. Their survival would have created subtle but significant ripple effects throughout American business, arts, and society.

Impact on Irish Politics

The Lusitania sank off the coast of Ireland near Kinsale, County Cork. In our timeline, many Irish fishermen and residents participated in rescue efforts, and many victims were buried in Irish soil. This occurred shortly before the Easter Rising of 1916, a pivotal moment in Irish revolutionary history.

Without the Lusitania tragedy, the complex relationship between Ireland, Britain, and Germany during this period might have evolved differently. German attempts to supply arms to Irish republicans (most notably the failed mission of the Aud in April 1916) might have received less scrutiny from American intelligence services, which became more active in monitoring German activities after the Lusitania sinking.

Long-term Impact

America's Path to War

Without the Lusitania sinking, America's eventual entry into World War I would likely have followed a different trajectory. While the disaster wasn't the sole cause of American intervention—which ultimately came nearly two years later—it established a crucial psychological foundation for American opposition to Germany.

In this alternate timeline, German-American relations would still have deteriorated over continued submarine warfare, but more gradually and with less emotional intensity. When Germany announced the resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare in February 1917, American outrage would have been tempered by the absence of a dramatic precedent like the Lusitania.

President Wilson might still have severed diplomatic relations with Germany and asked Congress for a declaration of war after American merchant ships were targeted, but public support would have been more divided. The war resolution might have passed Congress by a narrower margin, potentially affecting military mobilization efforts and war bond sales.

A delayed American entry—perhaps by several crucial months—could have significantly altered the war's conclusion. The German Spring Offensive of 1918 might have made greater gains against exhausted Allied forces before sufficient American troops arrived to turn the tide. This could have resulted in a negotiated peace rather than the total Allied victory that occurred in our timeline, with profound implications for the 20th century.

The Peace Settlement and Interwar Period

A different conclusion to World War I would have dramatically altered the peace settlement. If the war ended in a negotiated peace rather than Germany's unconditional surrender, the Treaty of Versailles would have taken a substantially different form—if it existed at all.

Without the harsh reparations and territorial losses imposed on Germany in our timeline, the economic and political instability that plagued the Weimar Republic might have been mitigated. The extreme nationalist sentiment that fueled the rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party would have lacked some of its most powerful grievances.

Moreover, without the clear precedent of American intervention following the Lusitania sinking, American political culture might have evolved in a more isolationist direction during the 1920s and 1930s. President Wilson's ability to promote his vision for the League of Nations might have been further compromised by stronger isolationist sentiment in Congress, potentially weakening the organization even more than in our timeline.

Evolution of International Maritime Law

The Lusitania disaster profoundly influenced the development of international maritime law, particularly regarding submarine warfare. The incident highlighted the tension between new military technologies and traditional rules of naval engagement, which required warning before attacking merchant vessels.

Without this pivotal case, the legal evolution might have taken a different path. The international community might have been slower to develop explicit protections for passenger vessels during wartime. The London Naval Treaty of 1930, which included provisions about submarine warfare directly influenced by the Lusitania experience, might have taken a different form.

This could have created a more permissive legal environment for submarine warfare in future conflicts, with significant implications for naval strategy in World War II. The restrictive "cruiser rules" that initially hampered submarine effectiveness in the early stages of that conflict might never have been codified so explicitly.

Cultural and Memorial Absence

The Lusitania sinking has inspired countless books, films, museum exhibits, and commemorations. Without this tragedy, a significant chapter in maritime and military history would be absent from our cultural memory.

In our timeline, the wreck of the Lusitania lies approximately 11 miles off the Old Head of Kinsale, serving as both a war grave and an underwater archaeological site. In this alternate history, the aging liner would likely have been retired and scrapped in the 1920s or 1930s, like its sister ship Mauretania. Ocean liner enthusiasts might remember it as a magnificent but otherwise unremarkable vessel from the golden age of transatlantic travel, rather than as a powerful symbol of war's tragedies.

Technological Development and Naval Strategy

The Lusitania sinking accelerated naval innovation on both sides. The Royal Navy developed improved anti-submarine tactics and technologies in response to the disaster. Without this catalyst, certain developments in anti-submarine warfare might have progressed more slowly.

Conversely, German U-boat design and doctrine might have evolved differently without the diplomatic consequences of the Lusitania sinking. The restrictions placed on submarine operations following the incident forced adaptation and innovation. In this alternate timeline, U-boat development might have followed a more linear path, potentially resulting in different submarine designs and tactics by the time of World War II.

Impact on Transatlantic Travel

The Lusitania disaster, along with the sinking of the Titanic three years earlier, shook public confidence in the safety of ocean travel and accelerated changes in maritime safety regulations. Without the Lusitania sinking, the evolution of passenger ship design might have proceeded differently, with safety innovations potentially developing more gradually.

The great passenger liners might have maintained their dominance of transatlantic travel slightly longer into the 20th century before being superseded by air travel. The psychological impact of two major liner disasters within a few years significantly damaged the public perception of ocean travel's safety and glamour. In this alternate timeline, the golden age of ocean liners might have enjoyed a slightly extended twilight.

Expert Opinions

Dr. Margaret Jenkins, Professor of Diplomatic History at Georgetown University, offers this perspective: "The Lusitania sinking created what we might call an 'emotional infrastructure' for American intervention. Without that powerful symbol of German aggression against innocent civilians, including Americans, President Wilson would have faced a much steeper climb in building public support for entering the war. While submarine attacks on American shipping in early 1917 would still have provoked outrage, they wouldn't have resonated against an established narrative of German brutality. This could have delayed American entry by crucial months, potentially allowing Germany's 1918 Spring Offensive to succeed before sufficient American forces arrived in Europe. The entire 20th century might have unfolded on a different trajectory, with a negotiated peace rather than the punitive Versailles Treaty that contributed to the rise of fascism and World War II."

Admiral James Harrington (Ret.), Naval Historian and former instructor at the U.S. Naval War College, suggests a different view: "While the Lusitania was certainly important symbolically, I believe America's entry into World War I was ultimately determined by broader strategic and economic considerations. Germany's resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare in 1917 and the Zimmermann Telegram were the proximate causes of American intervention, not the Lusitania sinking two years earlier. Without the Lusitania incident, American-German relations would still have deteriorated as U-boat attacks continued. The critical difference might have been in submarine warfare doctrine itself. Without the diplomatic fallout from the Lusitania, German naval commanders might have pursued more aggressive submarine tactics throughout 1915-16, potentially shortening the war through more effective blockade of Britain before America could mobilize effectively. Ironically, in this scenario, Germany might have achieved a better outcome by being more aggressive rather than less."

Dr. Elena Rothschild, Curator of Early 20th Century History at the Smithsonian National Museum of American History, provides a cultural perspective: "The absence of the Lusitania disaster would have created a fascinating cultural void in American and British war memory. Many of the most iconic propaganda images of the war depicted drowning women and children from the Lusitania. Without this powerful emotional touchstone, anti-German sentiment in America would have lacked a central organizing narrative. Furthermore, the prominent Americans who died aboard the Lusitania—including Alfred Vanderbilt, Elbert Hubbard, and Charles Frohman—would have continued influencing American business, literature, and theater throughout the late 1910s and 1920s. Their contributions might have subtly but significantly altered the development of American culture during this pivotal period, particularly in how Americans processed and represented the war experience through art and literature."