WI: Germany Doesn't Aid Italy in the Balkans

Deflare · Dec 16, 2005

In our timeline, Germany invaded the Sovie Union in June of 1941. However, the original plan for Operation Barbarrosa was for it to be launched in May of that year; the Wehrmacht was delayed by an invasion of Yugoslavia and Greece, to support the Italian invasion of Greece. However, what if...?

April 1941: Hitler refuses to follow Mussolini and get involved in the Balkans.

May 1941: Operation Barbarrosa is launched on schedule. The Wehrmacht makes somewhat better progress than it did historically, due to the weaker state of the Soviet army (which had been becoming more modern and disciplined daily, in response to its poor show in the Winter War).

November 1941: After a long, hard push over Eastern Europe, the German army reaches Moscow. The Wehrmacht surrounds and besieges the city; three weeks later, the swastika is raised over the one remaining spire of the Kremlin.

December 7, 1941: The Japanese, sensing a weakness in the Soviet Union, launches a surprise torpedo bomber attack on Vladivostok, sinking much of the Soviet Pacific fleet. This action is followed up by a land-based attack on the city; local naval superiority causes the city to quickly capitulate.

May 1942: As the spring muds harden, Germany sets out again. This second offensive causes Leningrad to fall, followed by Stalingrad as the city is cut off and crushed. German troops march ever closer to the Urals, as Japanese invaders lance into the distracted USSR's rear.

September 1942: A coup is launched that kills Stalin, placing Molotov in charge. Molotov arranges a peace deal with the Axis; Germany and Finland gain all territory west of the Urals, the Central Asian SSRs are liberated, and the Japanese recieve eastern Sibers; the USSR survives as a rump state between these three bordering powers.

October 1942: Over one hundred German front-line divisions, freed up by the USSR's surrender, invade Turkey, supporting Italy's struggling efforts in the Balkans a year late; Bulgaria, by force, accepts the creation of Pan-Slavia under hefty Italian influence. The swift conquest of Turkey is followed by an invasion of Iraq and Syria. At this point, Germany moves in to occupy Vichy France- essentially destroying the rump French government.

December 1942: After a swift campaign through the Middle East, German troops cross the Suez Canal from the east; this vital artery of the British Empire is cut, causing supply lines to stretch around Africa and into U-Boat territory.

April 1943: The British, trapped in a pincer movement between Afrika Korps and various Italian forces in the west and the bulk of the Wehrmacht in the east, surrender at Tobruk. Italian forces continue south to reclaim Ethiopia; some German forces accompany them, while some others strike into West Africa; however the majority of German forces diffuse to aid with anti-partisan efforts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East.

June 1943 - May 1944: A second 'phony war' emerges as Germany spends over a year rebuilding the Kriegsmarine and forming a huge transport fleet in the Black Sea, out of range of Allied bombers. Germany also undertakes the construction of a much-expanded and modernized air force. At various points in this time period, German airborne troops seize Cyprus, Malta, and Gibraltar.

June 6, 1944: Germany launches a major invasion of Britain, using its new air and sea forces to open a corridor in the English Channel; a beachhead is secured in southern England.

October 1944: After a swift campaign through England, Britain is forced to surrender. Determined members of the government, including the King and Winston Churchill, retreat to India to carry on the fight. Ireland seizes Ulster in the chaos.

January 1945: German forces invade Persia, while amphibious and airborne forces attack various 'free' governments in the colonies.

April 1945: German forces invade India. Weakened British lines in Burma break, allowing Japan to advance westward. The two forces meet near Calcutta and head south- the only time in the war that the Japanese and the Germans fought together.

May 1945: The Free British government surrenders; Canada and New Zealand secure a seperate peace with the Axis, while Australia, South Africa, and the colonial governments in exile swear to contine the fight.

August 1945: The Nationalist Chinese government surrenders. Japan establishes Mongolia, Tibet, and Sinkiang as puppet states and turns its eyes southward.

December 1945: Japanese forces invade northern Australia. A war-weary populace riots until the government is forced to sign peace, ceding Papua New Guinea and some land in Northern Australia.

February 1946: Free Belgium surrenders to Germany.

April 1946: Japan carries out an invasion of , southern Arabia, Madagascar and South Africa. Despite stretched supply lines, modern equipment from Germany allows the Japanese to make significant gains. Italy takes the opportunity to invade Saudi Arabia. The Arabian peninsula is conquered quickly.

June 1946: Germany invades French Guyana, despite concerns of American involvement in the war. President Dewey decides that involving the US in the war would be political suicide, and decides not to involve the US in Germany's war- especially on the losing side. Free France, forced out of Africa, surrenders.

September 1946: South Africa, the last of the Allies, surrenders. The war is over, and Germany, Japan, and Italy start to divide the spoils.

Europe in 1955:

Condottiero · Dec 16, 2005

Why would the US remain outside the war?

JimmyJimJam · Dec 16, 2005

Condottiero said:
Why would the US remain outside the war?

Because the author feels like it.

schrammy · Dec 16, 2005

Deflare said:
In our timeline, Germany invaded the Sovie Union in June of 1941. However, the original plan for Operation Barbarrosa was for it to be launched in May of that year; the Wehrmacht was delayed by an invasion of Yugoslavia and Greece, to support the Italian invasion of Greece. However, what if...?

April 1941: Hitler refuses to follow Mussolini and get involved in the Balkans.

so far so good possible sure enough.

Deflare said:
May 1941: Operation Barbarrosa is launched on schedule. The Wehrmacht makes somewhat better progress than it did historically, due to the weaker state of the Soviet army (which had been becoming more modern and disciplined daily, in response to its poor show in the Winter War).

the progress the wehrmacht will make, will not be that much greater but it will probarly succeed in capturing even more soviet prisoners and matirials inflict some more casualties.

Deflare said:
November 1941: After a long, hard push over Eastern Europe, the German army reaches Moscow. The Wehrmacht surrounds and besieges the city; three weeks later, the swastika is raised over the one remaining spire of the Kremlin.

reaching the city is quite possible even starting to besiege it is not unthinkable but captureing it after 3 weeks of siege is just not possible
remember OTL leningrad....moscow would hold out atleast that long if not longer.

Deflare said:
December 7, 1941: The Japanese, sensing a weakness in the Soviet Union, launches a surprise torpedo bomber attack on Vladivostok, sinking much of the Soviet Pacific fleet. This action is followed up by a land-based attack on the city; local naval superiority causes the city to quickly capitulate.

if the japaneese had choosen to not go to war with the US this might have become atleast possible in theory

Deflare said:
May 1942: As the spring muds harden, Germany sets out again. This second offensive causes Leningrad to fall, followed by Stalingrad as the city is cut off and crushed. German troops march ever closer to the Urals, as Japanese invaders lance into the distracted USSR's rear.

acutaly stalingrad was far more likely to have fallen in 1941 than in 1942 i remeber i read some where that if the germans had at kiev lay siege to it instead of takeing the city trough storm that they would have cut of the forces that later defended stalingrad from there retreat to that city.
as for leningrad if its defenders had not been reliefed i think its quite likely that the city would have fallen.

Deflare said:
September 1942: A coup is launched that kills Stalin, placing Molotov in charge. Molotov arranges a peace deal with the Axis; Germany and Finland gain all territory west of the Urals, the Central Asian SSRs are liberated, and the Japanese recieve eastern Sibers; the USSR survives as a rump state between these three bordering powers.

altough i doudt that any military leader would have been placed as head of the sovietunion, hey its your story so i'll go allong with the personal changes
but i don't think that the Central Asian SSRs would be liberated simply because none of the axis nation would care enough about any of those people to make it a point on there agenda.

Deflare said:
October 1942: Over one hundred German front-line divisions, freed up by the USSR's surrender, invade Turkey, supporting Italy's struggling efforts in the Balkans a year late; Bulgaria, by force, accepts the creation of Pan-Slavia under hefty Italian influence. The swift conquest of Turkey is followed by an invasion of Iraq and Syria. At this point, Germany moves in to occupy Vichy France- essentially destroying the rump French government.

after a german victory against the soviets turkey would surely join the axis no need to invade, remember they where rather close to joining the axis in OTL a german victory over the soviets would made them joining the axis a near certainty, also bulgaria is already a member of the axis and its troops fought together with the germans against the soviets it was a member of the CP in WW1 and generaly a verry pro german nation so this is just not gona happen sorry.
vchy france destroyed,well i could see a pod for things like that happen so if you want to sure why not

Deflare said:
December 1942: After a swift campaign through the Middle East, German troops cross the Suez Canal from the east; this vital artery of the British Empire is cut, causing supply lines to stretch around Africa and into U-Boat territory.

they would not have to cross the canal to close it and there is little reason to do so after all egypte has littel to offer in therms of oil and other recourses needed for the allies to contineu the war.

Deflare said:
April 1943: The British, trapped in a pincer movement between Afrika Korps and various Italian forces in the west and the bulk of the Wehrmacht in the east, surrender at Tobruk. Italian forces continue south to reclaim Ethiopia; some German forces accompany them, while some others strike into West Africa; however the majority of German forces diffuse to aid with anti-partisan efforts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East.

the first part is quite possible but the bulk of the wehrmacht would never be able to cross the chanel baybe if they realy tryed a division or 10 max but not more. tough the rest is quite possible.

Deflare said:
June 1943 - May 1944: A second 'phony war' emerges as Germany spends over a year rebuilding the Kriegsmarine and forming a huge transport fleet in the Black Sea, out of range of Allied bombers. Germany also undertakes the construction of a much-expanded and modernized air force. At various points in this time period, German airborne troops seize Cyprus, Malta, and Gibraltar.

this is impossible even whit all shipyards own and captured working around the clock it would take atleast 3 years not 1 and that is if you can get the captured once to work at full capacety right away,also to do all that in the blacck see would require al those shipyards need to be moved there.
the expension of the airforce how ever is quite likely and will prpbarly happen if above TL is indeed reached.

Deflare said:
June 6, 1944: Germany launches a major invasion of Britain, using its new air and sea forces to open a corridor in the English Channel; a beachhead is secured in southern England.

as sayed above the date here has to be placed atleast 2 years further ahead most likely by than the british islands are an invincable fortres.
more likely is that the germans contineu there Strategy to starve the british cut of any supply line they have sinkig there convoys.

Deflare said:
October 1944: After a swift campaign through England, Britain is forced to surrender. Determined members of the government, including the King and Winston Churchill, retreat to India to carry on the fight. Ireland seizes Ulster in the chaos.

altough i as above mentioned doudt that an actual invasion would take place the many defeats ever worsening supply situation and thread of invasion would sooner or later bring the british to the negotiating table.

Deflare said:
January 1945: German forces invade Persia, while amphibious and airborne forces attack various 'free' governments in the colonies.

again probarly not needed i think that the persians would be quite willing to join the axis of the soviets where defeated, they surely would be so ather mesopotamia falls to the germans.

Deflare said:
April 1945: German forces invade India. Weakened British lines in Burma break, allowing Japan to advance westward. The two forces meet near Calcutta and head south- the only time in the war that the Japanese and the Germans fought together.

more likely by this time india would have become independant nutral either trough revolt (with a little friendly arms supplie from germany and jappan) or even an axis member trough peace agreement with the british.

Deflare said:
May 1945: The Free British government surrenders; Canada and New Zealand secure a seperate peace with the Axis, while Australia, South Africa, and the colonial governments in exile swear to contine the fight.

see above posts

Deflare said:
August 1945: The Nationalist Chinese government surrenders. Japan establishes Mongolia, Tibet, and Sinkiang as puppet states and turns its eyes southward.

altough i dout this could happen before say 1950 the end result is quite possible in this TL.

from there on the TL is to much fiction and to impossible for me to coment upon.

Deflare · Dec 16, 2005

Thanks for the detailed commentary; this is my first TL, so all improvements are appreciated.

schrammy said:
the progress the wehrmacht will make, will not be that much greater but it will probarly succeed in capturing even more soviet prisoners and matirials inflict some more casualties.

Aye; another element I forgot to mention is that, with another month of marching, Germany could have moved much further ahead than it did historically. In OTL, Germany made it to just outside Moscow by December; had they started a month earlier, they may have surrounded the city by November

reaching the city is quite possible even starting to besiege it is not unthinkable but captureing it after 3 weeks of siege is just not possible.

remember OTL leningrad....moscow would hold out atleast that long if not longer.

My understanding is that Leningrad was aided by its position as a seaport, both for providing food and for bringing in supplies. Perhaps a 3-week siege is too brief, but Moscow is cut off- that's enough to serve our purposes.

if the japaneese had choosen to not go to war with the US this might have become atleast possible in theory

Aye, I figure that a much less intimidating USSR may prove a more attractive target than the Sleeping Dragon of the US.

acutaly stalingrad was far more likely to have fallen in 1941 than in 1942 i remeber i read some where that if the germans had at kiev lay siege to it instead of takeing the city trough storm that they would have cut of the forces that later defended stalingrad from there retreat to that city.

as for leningrad if its defenders had not been reliefed i think its quite likely that the city would have fallen.

You mean Stalingrad's defenders largely consisted of retreated units from Kiev? Hmm... Well, maybe. I'm not as familiar with the pre-Stalingrad Eastern Front as I am with the first few years of the war. The gist of this is that the second German advance seizes several important cities and industrial areas in the European portion of the USSR.

altough i doudt that any military leader would have been placed as head of the sovietunion, hey its your story so i'll go allong with the personal changes

Molotov was the Foreign Minister under Stalin- he lent his name to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. I wasn't quite clear on this point- the coup was planned and led by Soviet generals disgusted at Stalin's mishandling of the war.

but i don't think that the Central Asian SSRs would be liberated simply because none of the axis nation would care enough about any of those people to make it a point on there agenda.

Those areas of the USSR were a hotbed of rebellion; I could easily see a defeated Soviet Union being forced to give them up, whether the Germans were demanding it or not.

after a german victory against the soviets turkey would surely join the axis no need to invade, remember they where rather close to joining the axis in OTL a german victory over the soviets would made them joining the axis a near certainty, also bulgaria is already a member of the axis and its troops fought together with the germans against the soviets it was a member of the CP in WW1 and generaly a verry pro german nation so this is just not gona happen sorry.

vchy france destroyed,well i could see a pod for things like that happen so if you want to sure why not

My understanding is that Turkey oscillated between the Axis and the Allies before the war, and could very easily have joined the Allies had Turkey felt such an alliance to be in its interests. Plus, Turkey was becoming a Western republic and didn't want to endanger that course by joining the Axis. A German invasion is hardly out of the question.

As for Bulgaria: Germany had a tendency to play its allies off of each other; just look at the Hungarian annexation of Transylvania from Romania. Further, that Yugoslav territory was being annexed to Bulgaria; it therefore seems possible that Bulgaria would have accepted great Italian influence in the government, which they may be able to eschew eventually. Probably should change the name, though.

they would not have to cross the canal to close it and there is little reason to do so after all egypte has littel to offer in therms of oil and other recourses needed for the allies to contineu the war.

The crossing of the Suez was symbolic more than anything else, and an indication that the Germans are going to keep fighting in North Africa. As for why the Germans would carry the fight there: Why did the Germans fight in Africa historically? They wanted to support their Italian allies, they wanted to crush the British army in the area (just in case), and they wanted to secure Middle Eastern oil. The latter has been accomplished, and with a planned invasion of Britain, the second becomes much more important.

the first part is quite possible but the bulk of the wehrmacht would never be able to cross the chanel baybe if they realy tryed a division or 10 max but not more. tough the rest is quite possible.

The Suez Canal? The canal isn't very wide, and wouldn't require a tremendous amount of naval power to cross. Why couldn't several German units cross over, especially with several months to do so? Perhaps I miswrote with the "Bulk of the Wehrmacht" comment, but enough would have made the trip to make asignificant impact.

this is impossible even whit all shipyards own and captured working around the clock it would take atleast 3 years not 1 and that is if you can get the captured once to work at full capacety right away,also to do all that in the blacck see would require al those shipyards need to be moved there.

the expension of the airforce how ever is quite likely and will prpbarly happen if above TL is indeed reached.

Not a fleet to outmatch the British fleet, merely one able to, as indicated, keep a corridor open long enough to establish a beachhead. The new Luftwaffe would be the main factor in this corridor, the idea being that several air squadrons would engage the Royal Navy long enough for hasty airbases to be established in Britain, allowing supplies to cross by air. It's also possible that an expansion of U-Boat construction could aid in destroying elements of the British fleet. Not to mention the fact that part of the British fleet is already engaged against Japan, which isn't having its navy be destroyed by the Americans.

as sayed above the date here has to be placed atleast 2 years further ahead most likely by than the british islands are an invincable fortres.

more likely is that the germans contineu there Strategy to starve the british cut of any supply line they have sinkig there convoys.

And as I said, it's possible that at least a foothold could have been established. The army has never been Britain's pride; had a significant army managed to land in England, it's quite possible that they could have forced back the British and started moving toward Northumbria. As for the supply line strategy: Hitler never struck me as a patient man. It seems like an invasion route is much more in his character, especially since much of the German economy was being fueled by loot from conquered lands.

[quotealtough i as above mentioned doudt that an actual invasion would take place the many defeats ever worsening supply situation and thread of invasion would sooner or later bring the british to the negotiating table.[/quote]

Aye, I think I may have overestimated the willingness of the various Western Allies to fight without American or Soviet backing and with the British isles under attack.

again probarly not needed i think that the persians would be quite willing to join the axis of the soviets where defeated, they surely would be so ather mesopotamia falls to the germans.

True. Of course, with Hitler in charge and his instability growing worse, it's generally a safe bet to say that he'll go with the most aggressive course possible.

more likely by this time india would have become independant nutral either trough revolt (with a little friendly arms supplie from germany and jappan) or even an axis member trough peace agreement with the british.

Perhaps or perhaps not; I think it depends on how much control the British chose to exert on their empire as Germany grew stronger and stronger. I guess it's possible that India could have become independent, though.

altough i dout this could happen before say 1950 the end result is quite possible in this TL.

Well, Japan is starting to get material aid directly from Germany from across Asia by 1944 in TTL. That, combined with a much stronger economy from not having to pay for losses against the Americans, could cause Japan to finally defeat the Chinese. I could see the war dragging on a few more years, though- certainly, the occupation would have been nasty.

from there on the TL is to much fiction and to impossible for me to coment upon.

Such is the fate of all TLs long enough after the PoD, especially with WWII. However, now that I look at it again with the understanding that the colonial governments weren't especially gung-ho about the war, I think I can see the war ending a little earlier in Africa and Asia.

As for American participation: The populace of the US was very isolationist at this time. A combination of a lack of Pearl Harbor to unite the country and the prospect of facing a significantly stronger Germany worked together to keep the sentiments of the population against the war; declaring war would have been political suicide for everyone involved. By the time the Monroe Doctrine would be violated in my TL, the Axis was ready to partition the Old World between member nations; there would be simply no way for the US to fight an entire hemisphere.

MarkA · Dec 16, 2005

No German assistance in the Balkans means that Italy is defeated. The Greeks were more than holding their own against the Italians and were even counter attacking. With British and Commonwealth assistance, perhaps delayed until the Axis forces were completely driven out of North Africa, the Greek armed forces would have likely forced an Italian withdrawl from the Balkans.

With the Rumanian oil fields under threat and Hitlers allies facing an invasion from the Allies, coupled with the prospect of the German divisions in Russia being cut off from the homeland, how could Hitler ignore the plight of Italy? This is why he went to their aid in the first place - for German interests not Italian.

Grimm Reaper · Dec 16, 2005

Hitler decides not to support Italy? Hmmm...

May 1941: The German invasion of Russia gets off to a slow start, more due to the massive spring muds turning the Soviet 'roads' into extremely long mud holes, the Soviets are not quite so hard pressed and are able to start learning a bit sooner.

September 1941: Hitler's plans hit a minor snag when British intervention causes the collapse of Italian rule in Albania, while the RN snarfs up all remaining Italian colonies. Yugoslavia's new anti-German government has now had several months to start rebuilding the army and the first British weapons have arrived.

October 1941: Stalin pulls Zhukov's forces to save Moscow two weeks sooner. The RAF obliterates the Ploesti oil fields, might be a small difficulty for the Axis.

November 1941: With the temperature collapsing the German Army reaches Moscow. An incredibly bloody street fight commences.

December 1941: With Zhukov's forces arriving the Wehrmacht has a minor problem. Supply is collapsing, hundreds are dying of the cold daily and Hitler won't let them retreat. Japan declares war on the USSR instead of the US.

January 1942: German forces around Moscow collapse due to frigid weather, for three months now, lack of preparation for said weather, and fierce battles with Zhukov's forces. Effective crippling of Army Group Center. German High Command frantically tries to find a viable defense line.

Japanese invasion met by remaining Soviet units in Far East, including 3000 tanks. Oops. Japanese Army, with little in the way of proper armor or anti-tank weapons, suffers terrible losses immediately.

April 1942: German/Axis finally establish successful defense line, Baltic States, Byelarus, Crimea, Ukraine west of Dneiper River still held. Hitler bitterly disappointed by such major retreats.

Japan, now entering the 8th month of the US oil embargo is facing economic collapse. Alas, the Japanese Army which invaded the USSR has been all but destroyed and now a Soviet counterattack enters Manchuria and nears Korea. Japanese forces in China ordered onto defensive but the Chinese, Nationalist and Communist alike, are starting to attack...

Great Britain invades Sicily successfully. Two corps of the British Army offered to Stalin in support, first elements begin arriving in May...

MerryPrankster · Dec 17, 2005

Grimm,

I think if Moscow itself is under threat, those 3000 Soviet tanks will be heading towards the Urals as fast as the trains could carry them. I think the Japanese would do better.

And if there's fighting in the city itself, Stalin might be hurt or killed. He did refuse to leave when the Germans were in the suburbs, so he might stay even when things get ugly (as a morale-booster). All you need is a lucky bomb, artillery shot, or a soldier whose father was killed in the Purge and bye-bye Uncle Joe.

Grimm Reaper · Dec 17, 2005

MerryPrankster, second point first.

If something happens to Stalin, that is not necessarily bad for the Soviets if a more pragmatic and militarily professional leader emerges.

The 3000 never left the Far East in our TL, despite the threat to Moscow.

Ward · Dec 17, 2005

You forgot one thing is that the Germans out ran ther supply units .
How are the Germans resupplying there troops .Not by Rail for it is the wrong gage for the German trains to use.

Also what about the Italians in Greece they would be distoied and you would have the British on the contiant again .

Faeelin · Dec 17, 2005

Grimm, I like it.

But why would Japan attack the USSR?

MerryPrankster · Dec 17, 2005

Faeelin said:
Grimm, I like it.

But why would Japan attack the USSR?

If those 3000 tanks leave, they might want to take Vladivostok and the surrounding environs back.

Furthermore, it might improve their position in China if they can attack out of Siberia into the Nationalist rear. Plus there is oil in Siberia, though it is harder to get than in the Dutch East Indies.

MerryPrankster · Dec 17, 2005

Grimm Reaper said:
MerryPrankster, second point first.

If something happens to Stalin, that is not necessarily bad for the Soviets if a more pragmatic and militarily professional leader emerges.

The 3000 never left the Far East in our TL, despite the threat to Moscow.

Why wouldn't they leave the Far East? Moscow is the hub of the Soviet rail network as well as the chief command/control center of the regime. If Moscow fell, they'd be in big trouble.

On the matter of Stalin, I know he liked to meddle and that caused a lot of problems, but if he dies, there might be political chaos at the top and that might cause problems too.

Grimm Reaper · Dec 17, 2005

Let's not rule out the flip side of the coin.

If Japan is fighting Russia and China, Russia is probably sending weapons and advisors to help China out. Historically Stalin was not nearly as enthusiastic about Mao as he might have been. So now Japan is suffering hideous losses against TWO enemies with superior numbers and, in the USSR's case, superior weaponry also. Plus the unfortunate cutoff of US oil and several more months for the US and the European colonies to build up their forces.

Deflare · Dec 17, 2005

I completely forgot to mention: The USSR was part of the Allies at this time. Therefore, the Japanese attack also involved it in a war with the European Allies. I figured that the South Pacific campaign would continue historically, minus the involvement of the US and the Phillipines- without the invasion of Guam and the Phillipines to deal with, it may have gone a little faster.

I'd be amazed if Stalin stayed in the city if the Germans had arrived there earlier- he strikes me as the kind of guy who would abandon the planet to destruction if he could save himself.

I'm aware that Belarus and the Ukraine become giant mud puddles in the spring. My understanding, however, was that these are largely dried up by late April and early May. An invasion in mid- or late May would, again, have the same effect as the historical invasion, with marginally greater speed and a 1-month head start. Encircling Moscow seems entirely possible with another month to get there before winter.

I'll admit, I know little of the Balkan campaign. Had Italy been forced out of Greece, were the British guaranteed to land there? Is it possible that the armies of the Axis minor powers could have come into play there, rather than as anit-partisan units in Germany's conquered lands? If Bulgaria is hit hard by the Balkan campaign, it may be weakened enough to form the Pan-Slavic nation I mentioned...

Faeelin · Dec 17, 2005

MerryPrankster said:
If those 3000 tanks leave, they might want to take Vladivostok and the surrounding environs back.

Furthermore, it might improve their position in China if they can attack out of Siberia into the Nationalist rear. Plus there is oil in Siberia, though it is harder to get than in the Dutch East Indies.

How does taking Vladistovok help them win the war in China or gain them oil?

MerryPrankster · Dec 17, 2005

Deflare said:
I'd be amazed if Stalin stayed in the city if the Germans had arrived there earlier- he strikes me as the kind of guy who would abandon the planet to destruction if he could save himself.

One of the few praiseworthy things Stalin ever did was refuse to leave Moscow when the Germans were in the suburbs. That took a lot of guts on his part.

MerryPrankster · Dec 17, 2005

Faeelin said:
How does taking Vladistovok help them win the war in China or gain them oil?

There's oil in Siberia, although it's harder to extract.

IIRC, the Nationalist Chinese retreated west quite a distance in order to find a spot to regroup. If the Japanese advance a good way into Siberia and establish good supply lines, they might be able to strike south into western and central China, possibly through Mongolia.

Cockroach · Dec 17, 2005

April 1941: Hitler refuses to follow Mussolini and get involved in the Balkans.

May 1941: Operation Barbarrosa is launched on schedule. The Wehrmacht makes somewhat better progress than it did historically, due to the weaker state of the Soviet army (which had been becoming more modern and disciplined daily, in response to its poor show in the Winter War).

April 1943: The British, trapped in a pincer movement between Afrika Korps and various Italian forces in the west and the bulk of the Wehrmacht in the east, surrender at Tobruk. Italian forces continue south to reclaim Ethiopia; some German forces accompany them, while some others strike into West Africa; however the majority of German forces diffuse to aid with anti-partisan efforts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East.

These two seem mutually exclusive.
With out German support the Italians run out of steam early in their Greek campaign and hence the poms don't need to redeploy as many troops to Greece... Hence the poms have sufficient extra troops to drive the Italians out of North Africa (which in OTL was only prevented by the need to redeploy several divisions to Greece)... Hence no Africa Corp hence the poms are only facing a German offensive throught Turkey.

December 1942: After a swift campaign through the Middle East, German troops cross the Suez Canal from the east; this vital artery of the British Empire is cut, causing supply lines to stretch around Africa and into U-Boat territory.

While still a significant blow the loss of Suez is not as major as you seem to think. In OTL only the ocasional fast convoy went throught the Med... most Far East or Middle East bound convoys went round Africa anyway.

June 1943 - May 1944: A second 'phony war' emerges as Germany spends over a year rebuilding the Kriegsmarine and forming a huge transport fleet in the Black Sea, out of range of Allied bombers. Germany also undertakes the construction of a much-expanded and modernized air force. At various points in this time period, German airborne troops seize Cyprus, Malta, and Gibraltar.

As pointed out this is too short a time to bring the Kriegsmarine up to a level to rival the RN... even assuming the poms have the decency to cease all of their naval construction. Also the Black sea is far from the most convinient place to prepear an invasion force bound for England.
On the point of the airforce it also seems likely that the poms will have modernised and expanded the RAF as well.

MarkA · Dec 17, 2005

Deflare, in answer to some of your questions - yes the Greek army had stopped the Italians in their tracks and were launching counter attacks. The British, Free French and Commonwealth forces were diverted from North Africa on Churchills express order to forestall a German rescue operation. Unfortunately it had the opposite affect.

If the Allies had not reinforced the Greeks directly and the Germans did not come to Mussolini's aid as the scenario suggests, then the extra troops in North Africa would almost certainly ahve driven the Italians out of Africa and would be ready to invade either Sicily or go to the Balkans. If the latter and with no German troops available to secure the southern flank, then the possibility of rolling up the Italians and at least tying down the German allies like Bulgaria and Rumania would be significant.

Germany did not invade the USSR on its own but used its Axis friends to hold the southern flank. The Italian Blue Divisions fought bravely and rather effectively against superior Red Army opposition, for example. Allied destruction of the Romanian oil fields, either through bombing or land attacks, would deprive Geramny of vital oil.