1940. Romania decides to defend Bessarabia and resist the Soviets.

[Alan]

In June, 1940, in accordance with the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, the Soviet Union demanded Bessarabia from Romania. Turkey promised to support Romania against Soviet aggression. Historically, Romania caved in, but what if it had not? King Carol, confident in the fortifications and the mountainous terrain defending the eastern border, and remembering the dismal performance of the Red Army in the Winter War, decides to fight. Turkey mobilises in support. Hitler, though bound by treaty obligation to comply with Russian demands, and with his army still deployed in the West, becomes anxious for the Romanian oil fields and the Turkish straits. What would happen subsequently?

[Snake Featherston]

Given that at this phase the Nazis did not yet want a Soviet invasion on top of all their other wars, the Romanians declaring war on the Soviets all by themselves is not likely, and Romania and Turkey against the USSR are going to be in for one Hell of a beating.

[Slowpoke]

There have already been a couple topics regarding the issue and/or connected ones.

The general consensus was:"reply hazy, try again". Basically, there were an enormous number of variables that would've caused considerable swings in outcome.

The only constant is the vital importance of oil transports (94% in 1940 and 75% in 1941 of all German oil imports, according to Axworthy).

Edit: Actual quote:

From 1940 to 1943 Germany had only two regular, major sources of oil; its own synthetic production and Romanian natural production. Other sources were finite (prewar reserves and captured stocks), small (Austrian and Hungarian natural production) or irregular (Soviet deliveries in early 1941). At the outbreak of war Germany's sythetic production was insufficient to meet even the minimum domestic needs of its peacetime economy. In 1940 and 1941 Romania supplied 94 per cent and 75 per cent of German oil imports respectively, and it is thus no exaggeration to state that the classic blitzkrieg campaigns of 1941-42 were fundamentally dependent on Romanian oil.

(Axworthy, Mark, Third Axis, Fourth Ally, p.19)

[Xachiavelli]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

Given that at this phase the Nazis did not yet want a Soviet invasion on top of all their other wars, the Romanians declaring war on the Soviets all by themselves is not likely, and Romania and Turkey against the USSR are going to be in for one Hell of a beating.

Wouldn't be surprised if they both got fully annexed into the USSR

[The Red]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

Given that at this phase the Nazis did not yet want a Soviet invasion on top of all their other wars, the Romanians declaring war on the Soviets all by themselves is not likely, and Romania and Turkey against the USSR are going to be in for one Hell of a beating.

Neither nation is very well equipped, but the Red Army is up against lots of natural boundaries, potentially we could have a springtime version of the Winter War. Germany will probably also step in and try and mediate, although the idea of the Soviets gaining Ploesti would drive them to war if it came to it.

[b12ox]

Hitler couldn't have done much since Werhmacht was tied in the west. The Soviets, following the pact, could invade in the best suitable time. They picked the right time to do it. I wouldn't compare it to the war with Finlad since the finnish war was a winter war. Ttemperatures fell well below 0.That makes it hard to fight an offensive war. The finns dug themselfs in their holes in the snow or climbed trees, good camo and all, and waited with their sniper rifles and Panzerfausts. in Romania, in June the Soviets don't have these problems. Hitler couldn't used it as a pretext for war against the Soviets after the attack on France. Nobody even really noticed what happaned in Romania since the attention was elswhere. The Soviets made the mistake of attacking Finland in a wrong time; one thing is they attacked in winter, another is they were in result of it branded as agressor while Germans sat quiet through the winter of 1940. They learned their lesson and striked when they should have. No winter, no Germans, no witnesses.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by Xachiavelli

Wouldn't be surprised if they both got fully annexed into the USSR

I would, primarily because the Soviets preferred to annex countries that had been Tsarist territory and didn't do much of this outside the USSR's boundaries. The consequences of a Soviet invasion of Romania would probably lead to an earlier Soviet-German war on terms more inclined to the former to some degree.

Originally Posted by The Red

Neither nation is very well equipped, but the Red Army is up against lots of natural boundaries, potentially we could have a springtime version of the Winter War. Germany will probably also step in and try and mediate, although the idea of the Soviets gaining Ploesti would drive them to war if it came to it.

Potentially, yes. OTOH, they are very badly equipped and the prospects of them making big mistakes from a defensive concept are somewhat greater than in Finland. The Germans are probably going to be drawn into war with the Soviets earlier, with the mindset of a bull charging a matador, which actually benefits the Soviets and ultimately the Allied cause, however.

[Magnum]

do you guys think it's feasible for Stalin to attack Romania while France is still alive and kicking ?

Because if yes, it gives me a good idea for a TL I've been thinking about.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by Magnum

do you guys think it's feasible for Stalin to attack Romania while France is still alive and kicking ?

Because if yes, it gives me a good idea for a TL I've been thinking about.

Given that Stalin didn't even begin the whole controversy until the fall IOTL, I don't think so. Of course depending on the circumstances it might be possible, albeit IMHO at the lower end of probability.

[b12ox]

Originally Posted by Magnum

do you guys think it's feasible for Stalin to attack Romania while France is still alive and kicking ?

Because if yes, it gives me a good idea for a TL I've been thinking about.

Hitler would say yes. it was his top concern in the war with France. He said if the Soviets had stabbed him in the back then and cut off the oil he would have been finished and could have done nothing to stop them.

[von Adler]

I actually did a study of this, and compared it to the Winter War.

Basically, if the Romanians decide to mobilise and defend Moldavia, they are going to give the Red Army quite a bit of a bloody nose, but the outcome is never really in doubt.

Moldavia is a hilly country, crossed by several major and minor rivers that need to be crossed.

Romania is in a bit of a bind, because Hungary wants Transylvania, and Bulgaria wants southern Dobrudja at the same time. However, I think the Germans, while agreeing with the Soviets' right to take Moldavia as part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact do not want to see Romania dismembered or counquered - it is their future ally and their main source of oil. So the Germans might very well keep from the Vienna Dictat and tell Hungary and Bulgaria to stand down until the Romanian-Soviet war is at an end.

After the fall of France, Germany is the mover and shaker on the Balkans, so they can do this.

Some advantages the Romanians have on the Finns;

1. Larger and better equipped army.
2. Stronger artillery, with more and heavier pieces in each division, and a large component of heavy howitzers and cannons for counter-battery fire.
3. A large air force.
4. An operationally mobile component (their cavalry brigades, equipped with light tanks and the embryo of what would become their armoured division).
5. A semi-decent internal arms industry.
6. Most likely, covert German support.

Here is how I think it will play out.

The Romanians mobilise and rush to the border. The Soviets try to sweep them aside, but their planned occupation forces are too weak for this.

The Soviets build up a crushing superiority in men, artillery and above all tanks. Intensive air battles.

The French are using Czech and French materiel mainly, and the Germans can covertly shuffle some of their huge pool of captured arms and ammunition from these countries to the Romanians to make sure they do not collapse.

The Soviets stage a massive offensive - and are thrown back. The huge command problems that became evident in the winter war are still not remedied, and the Romanians have the firepower, at least locally, to challenge the Soviet artillery with counter-battery fire (the Finns could not do this). The Soviets suffer horrendous casualties, as they try to supplement flexibility, operational and tactical manouvres, command and control and inteligence with brute force, zeal and discipline.

The Soviets switch commanders, reinforce, build infrastructure to improve supply, pre-calculate a HUGE barrage and go on the attack again. This time they break through. The Romanians, although worn, are not broken and retreat in good order to their next planned defensive line. The Soviets catch up, are blunted, re-build and then break through this line too. The Romanians throw in their reserve in a counter-attack, including most of their armour, but are thrown back after some initial casualties. The Red Army is strong on the defensive when it has not yet outrun its artillery support, and its superior firepower and support by KV-1 tanks makes it impossible to move for the Romanians.

The Romanians are by now desperate, as the Soviets prepare to advance across the Prut. The Germans, however, remind the Soviets that only Moldavia was part of the Molotov-Ribbentrob pact, not the rest of Romania. Stalin does not want to confront Hitler right now, so he backs down, and makes peace with the Romanians for the intial demands.

The whole affair takes 2-3 months.

Note the many rivers the Red Army would have to cross in these offensives.

[von Adler]

Romanian army, summer 1940:

24 Infantry divisions (including border and guards formatons).
8 Reserve divisions.
3 Cavalry divisions.
1 Reserve cavalry division.
4 Mountain brigades.
2 Fortress brigades
1 Cavalry brigade
1 Motorised brigade (including an armoured regiment)
1 Coastal brigade
5 Border regiments

Romanian airforce, summer 1940:

Fighters
50 Pzl P.24E (2 cannons, 2 MGs)
14 Pzl P.7A (2 MGs)
50 Pzl P.11B (2 MGs)
33 Pzl P.11C (2 MGs)
95 Pzl P.11F (4 MGs)
30 He 112 (2 cannons, 2 MGs)
69 Bf 109E (2 cannons, 2 MGs), not all migth have arrived by the time the Sovets attack)
12 Hurricane Mk I (8 MGs)

Recon and light bombers
200 Potez 25
50 IAR 37
50 IAR 38
95 IAR 39
23 R-XIII
19 P.23A

Bombers
37 Blenheim Mk I
23 Potez 633
22 Pzl P.37

[LOTLOF]

How in the hell does the Romanian air force have 12 Hurricanes?

[KACKO]

Originally Posted by LOTLOF

How in the hell does the Romanian air force have 12 Hurricanes?

Bought them? Deliveries of Hurricans to Romania started in August 1939. Originaly 50 ordered but only 12 delivered.

[Carinthium]

Originally Posted by von Adler

I actually did a study of this, and compared it to the Winter War.

Basically, if the Romanians decide to mobilise and defend Moldavia, they are going to give the Red Army quite a bit of a bloody nose, but the outcome is never really in doubt.

Moldavia is a hilly country, crossed by several major and minor rivers that need to be crossed.

Romania is in a bit of a bind, because Hungary wants Transylvania, and Bulgaria wants southern Dobrudja at the same time. However, I think the Germans, while agreeing with the Soviets' right to take Moldavia as part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact do not want to see Romania dismembered or counquered - it is their future ally and their main source of oil. So the Germans might very well keep from the Vienna Dictat and tell Hungary and Bulgaria to stand down until the Romanian-Soviet war is at an end.

After the fall of France, Germany is the mover and shaker on the Balkans, so they can do this.

Some advantages the Romanians have on the Finns;

1. Larger and better equipped army.
2. Stronger artillery, with more and heavier pieces in each division, and a large component of heavy howitzers and cannons for counter-battery fire.
3. A large air force.
4. An operationally mobile component (their cavalry brigades, equipped with light tanks and the embryo of what would become their armoured division).
5. A semi-decent internal arms industry.
6. Most likely, covert German support.

Here is how I think it will play out.

The Romanians mobilise and rush to the border. The Soviets try to sweep them aside, but their planned occupation forces are too weak for this.

The Soviets build up a crushing superiority in men, artillery and above all tanks. Intensive air battles.

The French are using Czech and French materiel mainly, and the Germans can covertly shuffle some of their huge pool of captured arms and ammunition from these countries to the Romanians to make sure they do not collapse.

The Soviets stage a massive offensive - and are thrown back. The huge command problems that became evident in the winter war are still not remedied, and the Romanians have the firepower, at least locally, to challenge the Soviet artillery with counter-battery fire (the Finns could not do this). The Soviets suffer horrendous casualties, as they try to supplement flexibility, operational and tactical manouvres, command and control and inteligence with brute force, zeal and discipline.

The Soviets switch commanders, reinforce, build infrastructure to improve supply, pre-calculate a HUGE barrage and go on the attack again. This time they break through. The Romanians, although worn, are not broken and retreat in good order to their next planned defensive line. The Soviets catch up, are blunted, re-build and then break through this line too. The Romanians throw in their reserve in a counter-attack, including most of their armour, but are thrown back after some initial casualties. The Red Army is strong on the defensive when it has not yet outrun its artillery support, and its superior firepower and support by KV-1 tanks makes it impossible to move for the Romanians.

The Romanians are by now desperate, as the Soviets prepare to advance across the Prut. The Germans, however, remind the Soviets that only Moldavia was part of the Molotov-Ribbentrob pact, not the rest of Romania. Stalin does not want to confront Hitler right now, so he backs down, and makes peace with the Romanians for the intial demands.

The whole affair takes 2-3 months.

Note the many rivers the Red Army would have to cross in these offensives.

In this scenario, what would become of the Turkish support for Romania? There would surely be at least an attempt- what would happen in it, and what would the result be?

[stevep]

Guys

The most complex prospect here is if Romania holds as long as von Adler suggests and then the Germans forget about Britain and swing everything east as soon as France goes Vichy. Given Hitler's paranoia about oil, his desire to invade Russia anyway and his famous [lack of] patience that seems very likely. He could warn Stalin off going any further than Moldavia but since he wants to attack anyway I think he would be more likely to pretend to mediate, slowly feed supplies to the Romanians and then strike.

A swinging drive to the Black Sea could threaten all the Soviet forces engaged in attacking Romania. Probably no other major deep attacks, this year anyway, but could cause a lot of Soviet losses in an already strained force. Stalin might well order other forces to attack into Poland and Prussia but they would be fighting much nearer the German bases. I think the most likely result would be a series of limited offensive's during the winter, mainly by the Soviets, possibly a pause during the spring then a powerful series of German offensives that would probably have significantly less success than OTL 1941.

The big winner out of this could be Britain as no BoB and fear of invasion. Also, with Germany deeply involved on the eastern front probably less effort on U boats. Similarly the German engagement in Russia means that serious intervention in Greece if Italy still attacks and gets into problems is more difficult. Although with his concerns about oil and probable British intervention in support of Greece that could still occur.

I suspect Churchill would still accept Stalin as an ally but the level of aid and support from Britain and the US could be lower as rather than be the victim of a Nazi attack Stalin has yet again attacked a neighbour.

The other complicating factor would be the status of Turkey. Neither it or Britain would want to be at war and logistics makes an attack by either side difficult. However Turkey would be technically at war with the Soviets and at least kind of allied to the Nazis.

Steve

[von Adler]

Poland had several orders with France and Britain in September 1939 - some of them were already on their way through the Med.

The Polish plan was to fall back to a bridgehead in southeastern Poland next to the border to Romania if their border defences failed - they were unable to do this due to the Germans stopping the Bzura counterattack (that was to break through to it) and the Soviets invaded. From there, it was intended that they would be supplied and get arms deliveries from Britain and France through friendly Romania.

R-35 and Lt-VIB tanks as well as MS.406 fighters went to Turkey instead - the Romanians got Hurricanes and the entire Polish airforce, who retreated into their territory (thus the large amount of Pzl planes).

If the Soviets attack, the Germans will most likely abandon the plans for an invasion of Britain and rush their troops east to make sure Stalin knows that they can back up their claim that he gets what is specified in the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact - nothing more.

What is interesting is what this will mean for Barbarossa. The Soviets will have another lesson in their inferior command, control and ability to manouvre. Perhaps commisars are demoted early? The Romanians will also have learned about their inability to handle large masses of tanks and massed offensives and perhaps reform and retrain accordingly?

What of Greece and Yugoslavia? I can see Mussolini sending "volunteers" and aid to Romania, perhaps instead of invading Greece (it was a direct response to the Germans placing troops in Romania without informing him OTL, which will not be the case here). Perhaps there will be more resources for Libya, allowing the Italians to hold their own there?

[MikeTurcotte]

Originally Posted by von Adler

I actually did a study of this, and compared it to the Winter War.

Very solid analysis - great work.
Going with this analysis, we can posit the following:
1. Chance that some notable commander (Zhukov) is in charge of the initial Soviet attack and gets shot for his 'failure'.
2. Soviets gain some more operational experience prior to Barbarossa.
3. Romanian Army is still trashed in May/June 1941; while still a willing participant in Barbarossa, not as able to contribute as in OTL.
4. Other Balkan states (i.e. Yugoslavia) get paranoid about USSR; join Axis.
5. German/Soviet relations sour quicker; Stalin buys idea of German attack Barbarossa, lessens impact of surprise.
6. No Greece; Yugoslavia an Axis Ally; Balkans enough of a tinderbox that Hitler tells Il Duce to get stuffed. Brits run Ities out of Libya; no Africa Korps, no Desert Fox, etc.
7. USSR still stronger than Germany; USSR stills wins.

Mike Turcotte

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by von Adler

-snip-

Romania also has strong disadvantages. Weather in the summer will favor the Soviet Air Force much more than the winter of 1939 did. Romania will face troops with much greater reserves of manpower and armored forces, which even if they get smashed smashing them will take casualties and expenditure of ammunition to achieve. Unless they have very strong anti-armored forces they might well be stupid enough to use their armor for tank-on-tank clashes, while in 1941 the Nazis were smarter than to do this. Romania likewise is going to sustain quite a few losses in this fighting, enough to damage its effectiveness in any Soviet invasion, while Hitler is phenomenally likely to overreact and to put much more of Germany's strength right where the Soviets expect it to be, which means that where the Soviets are weaker, so will Army Groups North and Center be.

All this is assuming that this doesn't wind up causing the German war machine to start sputtering and grinding when, not if, increased German hostility to the USSR cuts it off from a lot of vital material it needed to prepare its invasion of the USSR in the first place.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by MikeTurcotte

Very solid analysis - great work.
Going with this analysis, we can posit the following:
1. Chance that some notable commander (Zhukov) is in charge of the initial Soviet attack and gets shot for his 'failure'.
2. Soviets gain some more operational experience prior to Barbarossa.
3. Romanian Army is still trashed in May/June 1941; while still a willing participant in Barbarossa, not as able to contribute as in OTL.
4. Other Balkan states (i.e. Yugoslavia) get paranoid about USSR; join Axis.
5. German/Soviet relations sour quicker; Stalin buys idea of German attack Barbarossa, lessens impact of surprise.
6. No Greece; Yugoslavia an Axis Ally; Balkans enough of a tinderbox that Hitler tells Il Duce to get stuffed. Brits run Ities out of Libya; no Africa Korps, no Desert Fox, etc.
7. USSR still stronger than Germany; USSR stills wins.

Mike Turcotte

Romania's strategic situation is not the same as Finland's, however. A strike in the summer of 1940 will see the Soviet Air Force play a much more prominent role than in the invasion of Finland, perhaps forcing the Red Air Force to make some sharp adjustments to its inappropriate system for WWII. Germany didn't have a sufficiently complete anti-armor system in 1941, with a much more powerful army relative to the Red Army than Romania's. The Soviets are also a Great Power, Romania is at best a Tin Pot dictatorship with a weak, inefficient army even by WWII standards. Its performance in 1941-2 as an augment to Army Group South is not an effective barometer of what it'd be capable of doing by itself.