German and Russian expansionism in the event of a German-Russian alliance

I was thinking of having German Kaiser Wilhelm II become a Pan-German nationalist in this scenario and thus drop Bismarck's policy of "no further expansion" as quickly as possible.

Also, sure, there would be German-Russian tensions. However, an German-Russian alliance has a lot to offer both sides. Germany can complete the process of German unification by annexing Austria, the Sudetenland, and Czechia while Russia can acquire Galicia and Subcarpathian Ruthenia and also expand in other directions--such as in the direction of the Ottoman Empire, Persia, Afghanistan, and China.

Well, in opposition to the "strange" picture of imperial germany,
in such situation i see germany do not grow at all.
Some lack the understanding that imperial germany was saturated after 1871.
They had no desire for any other area, they would like german speaking minorities beeing proteced or even treated "superior", but in such scenario AH will be the brave second to germany, because they have no hope to survive in a conflict.

This has huge positive butterflies.
Serbia does nothing. If germany and russia have agreed to zones of influence any hope of such "minor" states to start troubles for their own interests will be ended quickly.
Think about serbia facing germany AND russia if they try to kill Franz Ferdinand. If the russian ambassador explain slowly how the former serbian politicans get slaughtered, their families get the chance to dig some canals in say northeastern sibiria such things will die.
It would be basically a "cold-war" analogy, just 50-60 years earlier.

So in europe you have peace.
If some problems start, germany and russia check if they could be solved, if they are foreign "motivated" (better prey that france or UK are NOT involved, otherwise both would face significant punishment) or not.

Extremists around the world would be unhappy - they get no large nation to support em, france will do nothing or get wiped out, even UK will think twice, because if germany with allies and russia with allies start a war against UK even sealion could be a cakewalk...

Ironically in europe you cement peace. No war... not even the most stupid british (churchill) or french (who ever is president) politican would think about a war with this alliance. It is untouchable.

UK will face problems in the near of india, japan could prepare to learn russian, because if they try to expand they will get a russian occupation force...

germany would not gain colonies (they had no real interest in MORE colonies after 1900), but they would build up what they have.

In such scenario even a strong defence system (the german "maginot"-line) could happen, to reduce the need of a large army.

The only problem i could see is, if in both countries the rebellious (say socialists and more extremist "communists") would try to take over. Otherwise it is peace.

The USA will say out, but would do deals. If the british are no longer the ones who promise money, the USA will turn to the big block, i think latest around 1920-30. Then you have - in the best case scenario - the big three ruling the world, with UK and france building a block of "neutrals", with italy.

The osmans would either be in the german camp or russia and germany would share them. The typical scenario would be some german puppet on an osman throne and larger osman areas end in russian hands... maybe even persia is shared between both, again as usual some rebellion (financed by russia and/or germany) and in the aftermatch a separation...

british interests will vanish, because the big two rule by power... the great game on steroids with one side having all advantages, the other is the british empire.

Nope, the question was what would such german-russian-alliance (as it existed! till 1890) do!

It is your fantasy that include a german grab of european land... i told you once and i told you now - it is okay to have a (negative) opinion, but it would be nice to feed it with facts.

Germany after 1871 was finished with "land grab"... the plot start in 1890, long after Wilhelm I thought about territorital "interests" in AH-areas.
OTL germany had zero interest in european ground... they had chances to do so - say in 1905 with russia in revolution, they did not strike. They also did not enlarge their army or spent much money per head for their army... ironically they should have do so from 1890 on and they could have easily beat france and russia. 

So what is your evidence for all the stuff you repeat? 

Esp., in the colonies there was no conflict after the areas were shared.
We know that there existed talks about buying TOGETHER with the british portoguiese colonies, that isn´t some land grab in the common sense. 

So, bring evidence for what you claim is facts - and me saying that you repeat just silly lies of the british propaganda units of world war 1.

You claimed such nonsenses like "insulting my country". You should teach yourself one or 100.000.000 lessons about that, if you take it serious.

in no situation ever OTL the germans pre-ww1 had ever a "plan" to conquer belgium denmark or the netherlands as an opportunistic strike.

There existed the Schlieffen-Plan, that included in a war with russia and france a move through the netherlands with armies that did not exist and that was a "plan-spiel", but never a political serious plan.

Even in 1914 the germans were as stupid to think that belgium would stay away if the german armies move through the country to crush - yes - france in case of war. That was stupid and utterly wrong, but even in that scenario they had no plans to "conquer" belgium. 
Some idiots allways have an extreme opinion - would you say that the Kauffmann-plan was a serious allied plan to mass castrate and kill 30 million german males? Yes?

No, if germany and russia had stood together in an alliance NO war in europe had happened.

the idea of "evil russians allways invade the straits" is some pet-idea of empire-loving people around all alternate-history-forums. 
Naturally the russians wanted the liberty to unify their fleets, naturally the dardanelles were a problem for them.

But in the described scenario the russians could use political influence from germany, that is also allied with the osmans and the austrian-hungarians to allow the russians to move their naval units "at will".

That would be bad for the british empire - but i couldn´t care less about them in my thinking about what these two would do.

Infact i can only repeat that such alliance end any larger and brutal war... france would do exactly nothing - so no need for a large and expensive german army. They allways know they could destroy a french agressive war... that is a good thing.

UK also has to behave - that is even more important, overall you could see an earlier crash on colonialism, because russia had none, germany had some that weren´t producing money... so the moment the russians could help the suppressed and enslaved natives in india to get rid of the british tyranny, the whole "empire"-stuff will fell appart. Not because germany or others would want it to happen but because it is the evidence that you can get rid of tyranny... 

Also i answered the question of another user. If you want to "show failures", bring evidences... sometimes on person make mistakes, so it is good to discuss things that are not in the others person focus. Here - no such evidences are brought.. just another opinion. 

That is fine, but irrelevant

Yeah, I suspect that there was a Pan-German element to Wilhelm II's thinking in real life--with the idea of two German-ruled powers serving as hegemons in Central Europe. Of course, the downside of this approach is that Austria-Hungary is harder to control than a smaller country would be. In turn, what I am thinking of here is Kaiser Bill--perhaps as a result of a personality change triggered by a severe head injury--decides to partition Austria-Hungary together with Russia, Serbia, and Romania. Basically, the logic behind this is quite simple--in addition to boosting Germany's military power (after all, an independent Austria-Hungary could make a separate peace in the event of a future war--something which Germany would want to avoid), Germany could also force Hungary and Romania to ally with it. After all, Hungary would probably desire to reacquire Slovakia and Subcarpathian Ruthenia (which would have likely been lost to Russia in a partition of Austria-Hungary) and Romania would like to acquire Bessarabia from Russia. Thus, instead of having a large ally in Austria-Hungary, Germany would be larger and have smaller, more easily controllable allies in Hungary and Romania.

As for the Habsburg Crown, a lot might depend on whether or not Kaiser Bill is able to acquire a loyalty oath or something of that sort from the Habsburg monarch.

I do agree that, even with a personality change in Kaiser Bill, Germany doesn't have a lot of expansion options beyond Austria-Hungary. I mean, it could expand further into France--which is possible in the event that Russia is allied with Germany--but other than the iron ore of Briey and Longwy, I'm not sure that further expansion into France would provide anything meaningful for Germany. Briey and Longwy in themselves could be enough to trigger a German-French war, though. As for Italy, agreed that Germany would be unlikely to expand in Italy's direction in this scenario.

As for Russia, I don't think that even a very powerful Russia would actually be a significant threat to Germany. I mean, sure, it's going to be calling the shots in its alliance with Germany, but Germany doesn't really have many territories that Russia would want. After all, the Memelland is very small and Posen, the Polish Corridor, and Upper Silesia are full of Poles--who are a huge pain in the butt for Russia already. As for East Prussia and Danzig, they're both full of Germans--and I don't think that Russia would want to have German-majority territories inside of its empire. Thus, regardless of just how powerful Russia will become, the German-Russian alliance should be safe if both sides will desire to continue it.