Chapter 337: Comparison of National Strengths
Currently, the ranking of the total fiscal revenues of the world's major powers is as follows:
The total fiscal revenue of the British Empire's mainland is 200 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 198 million pounds, resulting in a fiscal surplus of 2 million pounds.
The total fiscal revenue of the British Empire's colonies is 185 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 173 million pounds, resulting in a fiscal surplus of 12 million pounds.
The total fiscal revenue of the United States is 151 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 153 million pounds, resulting in a fiscal deficit of 2 million pounds.
Germany's total fiscal revenue is 150 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 220 million pounds, resulting in a fiscal deficit of about 70 million pounds.
France's mainland total fiscal revenue is 145 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 200 million pounds, resulting in a fiscal deficit of about 55 million pounds.
The total fiscal revenue of France's colonies is 55 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 51 million pounds, resulting in a fiscal surplus of 4 million pounds.
Russia's total fiscal revenue is 130 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 185 million pounds, resulting in a fiscal deficit of 55 million pounds.
Austria-Hungary's total fiscal revenue is 75 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 110 million pounds, resulting in a fiscal deficit of 35 million pounds.
The total fiscal revenue of Island Nations is 53 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 60 million pounds, resulting in a fiscal deficit of about 7 million pounds.
Italy's total fiscal revenue is 40 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 55 million pounds, resulting in a deficit of about 15 million pounds.
The Ottoman Empire's total fiscal revenue is 26 million pounds, with total fiscal expenditure at 40 million pounds, resulting in a deficit of 14 million pounds.
Due to continuous naval and military expansions, most of the European powers are facing fiscal deficits. However, this situation is unavoidable because if a country stops expanding its military, the military gap between nations will only grow wider.
For the European powers, while fiscal deficits are undesirable, the thought of falling further behind their enemies is even more unbearable. If the war is won, everything can be obtained, so small fiscal deficits are not feared. However, if the war is lost, even a large accumulated wealth will be plundered by others.
The current situation in Australasia, where fiscal revenue consistently remains in surplus, is a good thing, as it implies that even if the country's fiscal expenditure grows rapidly in the future, the issue of fiscal deficits will not be too severe.
Industrial development has also progressed rapidly. Although the growth of steel production has slowed down, in 1912, Australasia's total steel production reached 1.701 million tons and 2.719 million tons, respectively. Australasia's steel production now ranks seventh in the world, below the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia, France, and Austria-Hungary.
The total steel production is now on par with that level, and in terms of steel production, Australasia has surpassed the island nations and Italy, the latter two being lower-tier powers.
While total steel production may not fully represent the level of industrial development, it is still one of the key indicators for evaluating industrial strength.
Currently, compared to Italy and the Island Nations, aside from having a clear disadvantage in population, Australasia has substantial advantages in economy and industry. Even in naval and military technologies, Arthur is confident that Australasia surpasses Italy and the Island Nations.
Related to industry, coal production in Australasia has also fully surpassed that of the Island Nations and Italy. Based on current data from various countries, the country with the largest total coal production is the United States, with an annual coal production of 530 million tons.
The next rankings are:
Second place: Russia, 360 million tons.
Third place: Germany, 277.2 million tons.
Fourth place: United Kingdom, 210.5 million tons.
Fifth place: Austria-Hungary, 54.2 million tons.
Sixth place: France, 40.8 million tons.
Seventh place: Australasia, 37.7 million tons.
Eighth place: Island Nations, 7.8 million tons.
Ninth place: Italy, 0.7 million tons.
Historically, the United Kingdom's coal production should have exceeded that of Germany. However, due to the separation of Australasia, the British Empire lost an important mineral resource area, which caused its coal production to be lower than Germany's.
Australasia's mineral resource reserves are comparable to any country, but the main limiting factor for Australasia's coal production is the relatively small domestic market.
Australasia's climate is not particularly extreme, with the hottest temperatures in summer generally around the mid-20s°C, and the coldest temperatures in winter near zero°C. As a result, the demand for coal heating is not very high in Australasia. Coal is primarily used for industrial purposes and electricity generation, but many of Australasia's industrial facilities use electricity, further reducing the demand for coal.
Moreover, the government does not need to sell mineral resources for funding, so Australasia's coal production has remained at a sufficient level. Based on the total coal reserves in the country, the mining rate is sustainable for thousands of years.
However, as the domestic population and industrial development continue to grow, the demand for coal will inevitably increase. Still, with the current reserves, Australasia's coal resources will last for centuries, if not longer.
Apart from the fundamental coal and steel production, with the completion of the second phase of the Leonora Industrial Base and the encouragement of various industries, Arthur believes that Australasia's industrial strength now matches or even surpasses Italy. At least in terms of industrial and economic capabilities, Australasia has the power of a great nation.
From the share of global industrial production, it is clear to see the influence of major powers on the world. The global industrial share of these nations is as follows:
United States: 31.8%
Germany: 14.8%
United Kingdom: 13.6%
Russia: 8%
France: 6%
Austria-Hungary: 4.4%
Australasia: 3.7%
Italy: 2.2%
Island Nations: 1%
Together, these nine countries account for 85.5% of global industrial production, with the remaining 14.5% divided among dozens of other countries and regions.
By comparing all the rankings, it is clear that besides the German Empire, there are significant disparities between other Central Powers nations and the three major Allied Powers nations.
While Germany has been catching up with the UK in terms of industrial and economic power, the challenging issue is that the combined industrial economy of Austria-Hungary and Italy is still not a match for France's.
When considering population scale, industrial scale, and economic depth, the gap in strength between the Central Powers and the Allied Powers is significant. If not for the formidable strength of Germany's army, World War I might have ended much sooner.
With the expansion of armies and navies among the major European powers, the total number of land and naval forces in Europe has significantly increased compared to just a few years ago.
The current total army strength ranking among major countries is as follows:
Russia: 1.468 million
France: 967,000
Germany: 944,000
Austria-Hungary: 726,000
United Kingdom: 640,000
Italy: 600,000
Ottoman Empire: 450,000
Island Nations: 370,000
Australasia: 222,000
Romania: 200,000
United States: 164,000
Russia, with its abundant population, naturally has the largest army among the major powers. However, Russian soldiers are generally under-trained, and many soldiers have outdated equipment, making their overall combat effectiveness weaker.
Meanwhile, the United States, with the smallest army among the major powers, has historically not placed much emphasis on maintaining a large standing army. Due to its geographical advantages, the United States can ensure its security as long as its navy is sufficiently large.
This is especially true after Canada in the north and Mexico in the south have weakened. Given its position as the most powerful country in North America, the United States has no real need to expand its army.
One important factor is that the United States' military technology is not highly developed, meaning that its army and navy combat effectiveness are not as strong. Even if the United States has several hundred thousand troops, it would not necessarily be able to compete with the several hundred thousand European soldiers.
From these rankings, it's clear that Australasia's overall strength has already reached the level of a great power, which is why European media and some countries have officially called Australasia the eighth great power.
Aside from comparing with island nations and favoring white populations, Australasia's own strength is a major contributing factor.
Of course, when discussing the strength of the army, the recognized combat capability of the army is also an important measure. The current world's strongest army is undoubtedly the German Empire, with its unrivaled combat strength.
Following the German army, France's army is widely regarded as the second strongest in the world. Although defeated by Germany decades ago, France was once the dominant European power with the strongest army.
For a long time, France's army was regarded as the world's second, and although it had suffered some setbacks, it remained an important military force.
Next, the army strength of the countries ranked third remains uncertain, as media outlets have various opinions, with some supporting Russia's vast army numbers, others backing Austria-Hungary, and some even favoring Australasia.
But if we look purely at combat effectiveness, Russia certainly does not deserve the third position. Austria-Hungary's army is also flawed due to the ethnic divisions within it, making their military cooperation quite complicated.
For these reasons, Arthur would confidently rank Australasia as the third strongest army in the world, based purely on combat capability. If not for France's historic military strength, Arthur might even place Australasia's army as second in the world.
After Australasia, the next strongest army would likely be Austria-Hungary, followed by Island Nations, with Russia ranked sixth.
This ranking reflects the current state of military strength, taking into account not just army size, but also the training and quality of the forces.
The specific situations may vary slightly, but the overall differences should not be significant. In fact, in this era, the land forces of European powers, except for France and Germany which are considered truly elite, the combat capabilities of other nations' armies are somewhat lacking and each has its own shortcomings to some extent.
However, for European countries, having a large population is also an advantage.
If we calculate the overall strength of an army based on its active and reserve troops, expected combat strength, equipment level, and training level, the rankings would be as follows:
Germany still undeniably holds the number one position in the world with its active army of over 900,000 troops and millions in reserves, making Germany the strongest army in the world, with no competition.
France remains in second place. France has a slightly larger active army than Germany's, along with millions of reserve troops. Although their combat strength is somewhat inferior compared to Germany, they still hold an advantage over other nations.
The third-place ranking for overall army strength goes to Russia, with over 1.4 million active troops and tens of millions in reserve forces. Even though the equipment and training quality are poor, Russia's sheer manpower is enough to secure it the third spot in the world for army strength.
Of course, if we disregard the domestic turmoil in Russia, its overall military strength could surpass France. Unfortunately, as Arthur sees it, Russia's domestic situation is far from stable, which heavily impacts its army's combat effectiveness. After all, if the government collapses, who will the army fight for?
Austria-Hungary, Germany's only reliable ally, ranks fourth for overall military strength. Austria-Hungary has over 700,000 active troops and millions in reserves, with fairly advanced military equipment. If it can resolve the communication issues caused by its many ethnic groups, Austria-Hungary could truly become Germany's invaluable ally.
Arthur places Australasia in fifth place for overall military strength. Though Australasia only has 220,000 active troops, if they were to recruit without restrictions, they could easily muster over a million troops. Additionally, Arthur's hidden military technologies contribute to Australasia's solid placement in fifth.
The sixth-ranked nation in overall military strength is the United Kingdom. This is due to the vast population of the British Empire, including its colonies, which adds up to hundreds of millions, providing a nearly endless supply of cannon fodder. With this, the United Kingdom's army is able to rise significantly in strength, competing with the other five nations for victory in war.
The seventh-ranked army belongs to the Island Nations. Although many European media outlets and countries have removed the Island Nations from the great powers list, it cannot be denied that the Island Nations' army is of medium strength among the great powers, much stronger than countries like Italy and the United Kingdom. If the Island Nations could solve their outdated equipment issues and limited industrial scale, their army strength would be quite impressive.
Italy, ranking eighth, barely makes it into the list of top military powers. Italy's army is not actually as strong as its rank suggests; it owes its position to the weakness of the other countries ranked below it. In other words, Italy's ranking is only bolstered by the competition.
After Italy, the ninth and tenth spots for army strength go to the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria, respectively. While Bulgaria defeated the Ottoman Empire in the previous Balkan War, this victory relied heavily on the cooperation of the Balkan League and the distraction caused by Italy's involvement. If we were to compare Bulgaria's army with the Ottoman Empire independently, Bulgaria's combat strength would indeed be superior, though the Ottoman Empire boasts a larger population.
Without significant technological gaps, the power of sheer numbers should not be underestimated.
Outside the top ten, countries like Romania, Serbia, Montenegro, Greece, and others that performed well in the Balkan War would qualify for positions in the top fifteen for military strength.
However, this ranking primarily records the great powers and European countries. Otherwise, a large Asian country with the world's largest population could easily make the list due to its sheer numbers.
As for the United States, despite its great power status, its overall army strength is actually weaker than countries like Serbia and Bulgaria.
Assessing the overall strength of armies is difficult, but judging naval strength is much easier.
Simply put, naval strength can be judged by the total tonnage of warships and the number of capital ships. The total tonnage represents the number of ships, while the number of capital ships determines a navy's true combat strength.
Currently, the world's top naval powers based on total tonnage are:
United Kingdom: 2.51 million tonsGermany: 1.17 million tonsUnited States: 840,000 tonsFrance: 800,000 tonsRussia: 600,000 tonsIsland Nations: 510,000 tonsItaly: 390,000 tonsAustria-Hungary: 190,000 tonsAustralasia: 150,000 tons
Although Australasia has a significant gap in total naval tonnage compared to the European powers, when considering only the number of dreadnoughts and super-dreadnoughts, Australasia ranks among the top five globally.
In terms of true naval combat power, Arthur is confident that Australasia surpasses Austria-Hungary and Italy. The reason is that these two countries lack many dreadnoughts, and their naval combat strength is greatly diminished compared to their tonnage.
Even without support from the British Empire, the Island Nations, although possessing older battleships, have yet to deploy their own dreadnoughts. Australasia's three dreadnoughts and two battlecruisers could potentially rival the eight older battleships of the Island Nations.
If we consider the combat power of a single battleship to be equal to two old battleships, Australasia's naval combat power may surpass that of the Island Nations.
This shows the significant advancements in naval technology. With the advent of dreadnoughts, the role of old battleships has been greatly diminished. As super-dreadnoughts emerge, the importance of dreadnoughts also decreases.
Currently, when evaluating a nation's naval combat power, the number of super-dreadnoughts and dreadnoughts is a priority. The quantity of these ships is essentially a reflection of a country's true fleet strength.
Nations with dreadnoughts may not be the strongest naval powers, but the strongest naval powers certainly have dreadnoughts. These two types of capital ships have become essential naval weapons for European powers and global naval powers.
To become a recognized naval power, possessing a significant number of dreadnoughts and super-dreadnoughts has become a standard.
The Island Nations lost their place as a great power and their title of the eighth great power to Australasia primarily because they have yet to possess a single dreadnought.
In contrast, Australasia has long equipped its own dreadnoughts and is even building super-dreadnoughts for other countries. The gap between the two nations is now significant, and it's clear that the Island Nations have lost their great power status.
For Australasia, there is some bad news. By the end of 1912, the country's per capita arable land area has decreased from 2.3 acres to 2.1 acres.
This is understandable, as with the development of cities and various industries, many immigrants and rural populations have been drawn into cities to become urban residents.
Aside from the few established private farms, only about a quarter of the immigrants are engaged in agriculture.
Although the per capita arable land has decreased, Australasia's total arable land area has still reached 25.43 million acres, which is an increase of nearly 6 million acres compared to three or four years ago.
Thanks to Arthur's emphasis on the importance of food, Australasia's food production and total arable land area are continuously growing.
With the expansion of total arable land, the total food production in Australasia in 1912 reached more than 11.58 million tons, setting a new record after surpassing 10 million tons last year.
Australasia's strategic food reserves have also grown from 2 million tons a few years ago to 10 million tons.
Of course, such a high food reserve is due to the government's suspension of many food export plans. This has lowered the government's fiscal revenue and required significant funding to purchase food from farmers.
In general, only food that has been stored for an extended period will be considered for export. Other food will be kept in reserve, waiting for the potential European war to break out, after which it will be sold to European countries at higher prices.
How exaggerated is a 10 million-ton food reserve? Considering that Australasia's total annual food consumption is under 3 million tons, this reserve would be enough to feed the entire population for three years.
And within those three years, Australasia's food production will continue to grow, meaning there will be more than enough to last indefinitely.
Fortunately, since the people of Australasia have only recently emerged from poverty and hunger, food waste is still rare.
Large-scale waste is essentially non-existent, which has helped reduce the consumption of food among the public.
In 1912, the total food exports were only about 2 million tons, while over 2 million tons were consumed domestically. This year, the government's strategic food reserves increased by nearly 7 million tons.
Currently, the reduction in food exports from Australasia has little impact on the world's food prices. Europe, with its vast colonies, is largely unaffected. Even if food prices rise, the increase will be minimal.
Countries like the UK and France, with their extensive colonies, will likely welcome such a situation, as it only increases transportation costs and does not pose a real shortage.
However, Germany is in a different situation. If they want enough food, they will have to pay high prices to surrounding countries.
Despite the reduction in food exports, the export of meat has not decreased significantly, as Australasia's livestock industry is too large to worry about a lack of meat exports.
Given that Australasia currently has over 200 million sheep, tens of millions of cattle, and numerous other livestock, meat will never be in short supply.
(End of Chapter)
Thank you for the support, friends. If you want to read more chapters in advance, go to my Patreon.
Read 30 Chapters In Advance: patreon.com/Kira1997