The post-WWII peace settlement if the German invasion of France fails in 1940 and the Schwarze Kapelle later overthrow Hitler and the Nazis?

[WolfBear]

What would the post-WWII peace settlement be if the German invasion of France fails in 1940 and the Schwarze Kapelle (SK) later overthrow Hitler and the Nazis? Let's say that the SK does this as early as it reasonably can, so either in late 1940 or in early 1941.

AFAIK, the SK were German nationalists, as evidenced by their 1944 peace platform/agenda:

Claus von Stauffenberg - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

On D-Day, 6 June 1944, the Allies had landed in France. Stauffenberg, like most other German professional military officers, had absolutely no doubt that the war was lost. Only an immediate armistice could avoid more unnecessary bloodshed and further damage to Germany, its people, and other European nations. However, in late 1943, he had written out demands with which he felt the Allies had to comply in order for Germany to agree to an immediate peace. These demands included Germany retaining its 1914 eastern borders, including the Polish territories of Wielkopolska and Poznań.[40] Other demands included keeping such territorial gains as Austria and the Sudetenland within the Reich, giving autonomy to Alsace-Lorraine and even expansion of the current wartime borders of Germany in the south by annexing Tyrol as far as Bozen and Meran. Non-territorial demands included such points as refusal of any occupation of Germany by the Allies, as well as refusal to hand over war criminals by demanding the right of "nations to deal with its own criminals". These proposals were only directed to the Western Allies – Stauffenberg wanted Germany only to retreat from western, southern and northern positions, while demanding the right to continue military occupation of German territorial gains in the east.[41]

Some of these demands (such as South Tyrol) would not have worked at all given the geopolitical realities of late 1940-early 1941 in this TL, but would there have been any room for compromise in regards to this? Because if not, then the war between the Anglo-French and the SK will continue. I certainly don't see the Anglo-French actually be willing to allow Germany to keep its 1914 borders in the East, for instance. And having the surviving Nazi war criminals be tried in German courts could be risky given the experience with the extremely light punishment that Adolf Hitler previously got from the Weimar German judiciary for his role in the 1923 Munich Beer Hall Putsch.

 

[History Learner]

The Anglo-French meet the Red Army on the Elbe. In the West, a Germany very similar to OTL BDR is formed, while in the East you get a hybrid Nazi-Communist entity, perhaps under Goebbels or Otto Strasser.

 

[WolfBear]

The Anglo-French meet the Red Army on the Elbe. In the West, a Germany very similar to OTL BDR is formed, while in the East you get a hybrid Nazi-Communist entity, perhaps under Goebbels or Otto Strasser.

I'm highly skeptical that the Soviets would have actually wanted to work with any Nazis, even Red-flavored ones. Also, I think that the Anglo-French would strongly prefer to avoid this scenario since it would leave Poland under Communist rule, which they would NOT want. They did go to war to protect Poland, after all. Bleeding themselves dry only so that Poland would go Communist doesn't look very attractive from an Anglo-French perspective.

 

[History Learner]

I'm highly skeptical that the Soviets would have actually wanted to work with any Nazis, even Red-flavored ones. Also, I think that the Anglo-French would strongly prefer to avoid this scenario since it would leave Poland under Communist rule, which they would NOT want. They did go to war to protect Poland, after all. Bleeding themselves dry only so that Poland would go Communist doesn't look very attractive from an Anglo-French perspective.

Stalin funded the SRP in the Post War era, briefly flirted with allowing the Nazi party paper to continue to flourish, allowed an explicitly Fascist oriented party in the GDR and said GDR had large numbers of former NSDAP officials within it, as well as in the NVA. Stalin had no issue with working with Nazis even after the horrors of the Great Patriotic War, and here would have less objections to it given the Soviets would be the aggressors from 1942 onward.

As for the Anglo-French, they didn't declare war on the USSR in September of 1939 and I see no reason they would in ~1943 after years of warfare weakens them while the Soviets are relatively undiminished and thus much better prepared for a fight.

 

[WolfBear]

Stalin funded the SRP in the Post War era, briefly flirted with allowing the Nazi party paper to continue to flourish, allowed an explicitly Fascist oriented party in the GDR and said GDR had large numbers of former NSDAP officials within it, as well as in the NVA. Stalin had no issue with working with Nazis even after the horrors of the Great Patriotic War, and here would have less objections to it given the Soviets would be the aggressors from 1942 onward.

As for the Anglo-French, they didn't declare war on the USSR in September of 1939 and I see no reason they would in ~1943 after years of warfare weakens them while the Soviets are relatively undiminished and thus much better prepared for a fight.

What caused him to change his mind on the Nazi Party paper?

They didn't declare war on the USSR in 1939 because:

1. They were already busy fighting the Nazis and getting another large enemy to fight at the same time would be suicidal for them.
2. The Polish territories that the USSR conquered had more Eastern Slavs than Poles.

 

[WolfBear]

There's also one tiny thing to consider: If the SK are able to overthrow Hitler and the Nazis before the war is over, then the Soviet Union wouldn't actually have very many Nazis in the East whom it would actually be capable of sponsoring even if it wanted to. They'd all be dead, after all.

 

[History Learner]

What caused him to change his mind on the Nazi Party paper?

They didn't declare war on the USSR in 1939 because:

1. They were already busy fighting the Nazis and getting another large enemy to fight at the same time would be suicidal for them.
2. The Polish territories that the USSR conquered had more Eastern Slavs than Poles.

Opposition from large elements of the Soviet bureaucracy, and I find most of those applicable here too just as they were in 1945 historically. Presumably there will be no Pacific War either, so FDR doesn't have the means of jumping the U.S. into the fray directly either.

 

[History Learner]

There's also one tiny thing to consider: If the SK are able to overthrow Hitler and the Nazis before the war is over, then the Soviet Union wouldn't actually have very many Nazis in the East whom it would actually be capable of sponsoring even if it wanted to. They'd all be dead, after all.

Outside of the SK doing a genocide on ethnic Germans, there's going to be plenty left to work with, it's just the SK would be removing senior leadership types and various "problem" actors.

 

[WolfBear]

Opposition from large elements of the Soviet bureaucracy, and I find most of those applicable here too just as they were in 1945 historically. Presumably there will be no Pacific War either, so FDR doesn't have the means of jumping the U.S. into the fray directly either.

You don't think that the Japanese expand anywhere in Asia other than China in this TL? And what ultimately happens in China? The Japanese retreat north back to Manchuria?

Also, does the USSR ever go to war against the Japanese in this TL?

Outside of the SK doing a genocide on ethnic Germans, there's going to be plenty left to work with, it's just the SK would be removing senior leadership types and various "problem" actors.

Well, Yeah, the more minor actors would still be there. Bureaucrats and the like.

 

[stevep]

What would the post-WWII peace settlement be if the German invasion of France fails in 1940 and the Schwarze Kapelle (SK) later overthrow Hitler and the Nazis? Let's say that the SK does this as early as it reasonably can, so either in late 1940 or in early 1941.

AFAIK, the SK were German nationalists, as evidenced by their 1944 peace platform/agenda:

Claus von Stauffenberg - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Some of these demands (such as South Tyrol) would not have worked at all given the geopolitical realities of late 1940-early 1941 in this TL, but would there have been any room for compromise in regards to this? Because if not, then the war between the Anglo-French and the SK will continue. I certainly don't see the Anglo-French actually be willing to allow Germany to keep its 1914 borders in the East, for instance. And having the surviving Nazi war criminals be tried in German courts could be risky given the experience with the extremely light punishment that Adolf Hitler previously got from the Weimar German judiciary for his role in the 1923 Munich Beer Hall Putsch.

I wouldn't see the allies being willing to accept the German continuing to rule non-German lands or have no restraints on their forces as that's just likely to push a new conflict back a few years as the SK were committed to expansion as you say.

Similarly with allowing Germany to try its own war criminals that's definitely a no go. Not just what happened with Hitler in 23 but that's what was allowed in 1919 and the Germans ran mock trials and let everybody off.

If the Soviets enter the war at a latter stage a lot would depend on the details. I doubt that the western allies would want to go to war with them because of the additional costs that would require but you could see a new coup against the SK who would be willing to a conditional surrender to the west allowing them to occupy most of the German empire before the Soviets could get there. This is likely to be bad for much of Poland however and possibly Romania if the Soviets attack that.

Its probably not going to be a walk over for the SK inside Germany as the Nazi party had put down deep roots and especially if Hitler isn't killed/captured immediately then a lot of the army as well as the party establishment and probably the LW will continue to fight for them so the situation could be complicated by an at least low level civil war in Germany.

In terms of the Far East it could go either way. Does Japan seek to pressurize an undefeated France over access to FIC? If it doesn't then it might not get sanctioned as badly but its going to see a lot more aid reaching the KMT from the US and probably the Soviets as well. The western allies probably won't send much because their busy with the war in Europe but Japan's designs on an empire in China is likely to see a slow and very costly death.

If they do drive south as a desperate measure a lot would depend on events in Europe but without FIC their a lot further away from Malaya and the western DEI, which are the crucial areas they need to seize and with Italy still presumably neutral the allies are going to have more assets to defend those areas. In the event of a war the Philippines will almost certainly fall and probably elements of the DEI and assorted Pacific islands but I suspect that the vital areas will stay in allied hands.

Steve

 

[History Learner]

You don't think that the Japanese expand anywhere in Asia other than China in this TL? And what ultimately happens in China? The Japanese retreat north back to Manchuria?

Also, does the USSR ever go to war against the Japanese in this TL?

I could see China becoming a frozen conflict or, most likely, one the Japanese are able to finish by the mid-1940s with tactic support from the Anglo-French as Japan joins the Anti-Soviet containment alliance. If there is a Soviet Japanese War, it will be one fought to a draw, with the Anglo-French backing the Japanese and the United States having to make some hard choices in all aspects.

 

[WolfBear]

I could see China becoming a frozen conflict or, most likely, one the Japanese are able to finish by the mid-1940s with tactic support from the Anglo-French as Japan joins the Anti-Soviet containment alliance. If there is a Soviet Japanese War, it will be one fought to a draw, with the Anglo-French backing the Japanese and the United States having to make some hard choices in all aspects.

By frozen conflict, do you mean having the current front lines becomes permanent borders? If so, will the Japanese-occupied part of China eventually have its own government led by someone like Wang Jingwei? :

Wang Jingwei - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Having a pro-Japanese nominally independent Eastern China (with Manchuria being a separate Japanese puppet state) would make things easier for Japan since it won't have to garrison as many troops in China in the long(er)-run. The crucial question is, though, would Eastern China permanently be able to hold out against KMT attacks, especially if the KMT will actually get Soviet support to reconquer Eastern China? Would Anglo-French support for Japan actually be enough to compensate for Soviet support for the KMT?

 

[History Learner]

By frozen conflict, do you mean having the current front lines becomes permanent borders? If so, will the Japanese-occupied part of China eventually have its own government led by someone like Wang Jingwei? :

Wang Jingwei - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Having a pro-Japanese nominally independent Eastern China (with Manchuria being a separate Japanese puppet state) would make things easier for Japan since it won't have to garrison as many troops in China in the long(er)-run. The crucial question is, though, would Eastern China permanently be able to hold out against KMT attacks, especially if the KMT will actually get Soviet support to reconquer Eastern China? Would Anglo-French support for Japan actually be enough to compensate for Soviet support for the KMT?

The loss of Eastern China removed most of the the KMT's industrial, financial and manpower base to the extent that they were running drugs just to attempt to stay afloat and dependent upon British loans. If Anglo-France switch their support to Japan, the KMT is going to be in no shape to continue fighting on a scale that would endanger Japanese interests; as it was historically, they were only able to mount two strategic offensives, one which failed and the last came in 1945 as Japan was already in collapse.

As for the Soviets-Japanese competition, by the 1950s or 1960s at the latest, Japan will have an economy comparable to the United States. It's not a struggle the Soviets can win, although they can ensure the Japanese can't win against them either.

 

[WolfBear]

The loss of Eastern China removed most of the the KMT's industrial, financial and manpower base to the extent that they were running drugs just to attempt to stay afloat and dependent upon British loans. If Anglo-France switch their support to Japan, the KMT is going to be in no shape to continue fighting on a scale that would endanger Japanese interests; as it was historically, they were only able to mount two strategic offensives, one which failed and the last came in 1945 as Japan was already in collapse.

As for the Soviets-Japanese competition, by the 1950s or 1960s at the latest, Japan will have an economy comparable to the United States. It's not a struggle the Soviets can win, although they can ensure the Japanese can't win against them either.

I'm skeptical about Japan having an economy comparable to the US because Japan has less people and also the US's GDP per capita is exceptionally high relative to most of the rest of the developed world, even in comparison to some countries (such as Canada) with higher PISA exam scores in comparison to the US. I suspect that the size of the Japanese economy might be around two times less than that of the US in this scenario. But of course that's not counting Korea, Taiwan, Manchuria, et cetera, which could give Japan a boost.

 

[stevep]

I'm skeptical about Japan having an economy comparable to the US because Japan has less people and also the US's GDP per capita is exceptionally high relative to most of the rest of the developed world, even in comparison to some countries (such as Canada) with higher PISA exam scores in comparison to the US. I suspect that the size of the Japanese economy might be around two times less than that of the US in this scenario. But of course that's not counting Korea, Taiwan, Manchuria, et cetera, which could give Japan a boost.

Would agree. OTL post-war Japan was able to live largely disarmed rather than be committed to massive military spending and autocracy under the governments of the 1930's. If their still having such a burden here they won't be anything like the industrial giant they became OTL.

Plus I'm doubtful of the allies switching to supporting Japan rather than China. Apart from anything else they have far more investment and economic interests in China and that trade has been massively disrupted by Japan's actions. I could see them supporting a Japan that has made a deal with China where Japan keeps its Manchuria puppet - possibly even annexing it directly which was clashing with Russia. But not if their still trying to hold down most of China. Frankly Japan can't really win a war against China as long as the latter gets aid and that will come from Russia and the US even if the western allies don't do anything further.

 

[History Learner]

I'm skeptical about Japan having an economy comparable to the US because Japan has less people and also the US's GDP per capita is exceptionally high relative to most of the rest of the developed world, even in comparison to some countries (such as Canada) with higher PISA exam scores in comparison to the US. I suspect that the size of the Japanese economy might be around two times less than that of the US in this scenario. But of course that's not counting Korea, Taiwan, Manchuria, et cetera, which could give Japan a boost.

OTL 1960s, Japan had already matched the U.S. in steel, automobile and shipbuilding output. GDP growth rates also placed it on the path to surpassing the U.S. in GDP, although that failed to pan out because of the 1990s Crash. Here though, without the horrific damage of WWII and with a retained Empire? A core Empire of Japan itself, Korea, Manchuria and Formosa alone would match the United States in population size too right now, not even factoring in the improved demographic effects of no WWII, Korean War, PRC, etc.

 

[ATP]

The Anglo-French meet the Red Army on the Elbe. In the West, a Germany very similar to OTL BDR is formed, while in the East you get a hybrid Nazi-Communist entity, perhaps under Goebbels or Otto Strasser.

For a time - Sralin wonted entire Europe,so he would attack.And without USA help,France and England could fall.Europe and Africa - gulags,gulags ewrywhere.

 

[WolfBear]

For a time - Sralin wonted entire Europe,so he would attack.And without USA help,France and England could fall.Europe and Africa - gulags,gulags ewrywhere.

You're probably severely overestimating Soviet military abilities here. The USSR won't have Lend-Lease trucks here, after all.

 

[ATP]

You're probably severely overestimating Soviet military abilities here. The USSR won't have Lend-Lease trucks here, after all.

Of course - that is why Sralin had genial plan to wait till germans finally storm Paris after bleeding themselves,and backstab them then.And it would worked,if not for french cowardice.
Only example when cowardice saved half pf continent from genocide.