Allies help republican spain in spanish civil war

[frieza]

what if britain along with other allied countries had helped republican spain to win the spanish civil war in fear of the facist movements sweeping europe and also to gain republican spain as a ally.

what affect would this have on the up and coming second world war.

on nearby facist countries like portugal and italy

and how would other democratic countries see britain in their involvment

 

[Mister Abbadon]

well this would have to mean the USSR not helping and thus not alienating the western powers, if this did happen, it could be an easier attack point in the event of the fall of France, it could just mean spain gets conquered along with France, or it could mean a counter attack and a place to retreat to for the French

 

[Cook]

well this would have to mean the USSR not helping and thus not alienating the western powers, if this did happen, it could be an easier attack point in the event of the fall of France, it could just mean spain gets conquered along with France, or it could mean a counter attack and a place to retreat to for the French

It means far more then that.

British and French Intervention is only conceivable if Appeasement is totally abandoned as foreign policy, with massive changes to events.

 

[Larrikin]

The Allies, and most other governments, saw the Republicans as a bunch of communists. Not necessarily bolsheviks, but remember, they had just seen what happens when a communist government comes in with bolsheviks around.

Given that no matter who won the election there was going to be an armed reaction by the losers, the smartest thing all round was to keep the hell out. The worst wars by far used to be civil wars. Probably the only civil war in history that can actually be fairly called "civil" was the American, and even parts of that were pretty damned grim.

 

[Goldstein]

The Allies, and most other governments, saw the Republicans as a bunch of communists. Not necessarily bolsheviks, but remember, they had just seen what happens when a communist government comes in with bolsheviks around.

Given that no matter who won the election there was going to be an armed reaction by the losers, the smartest thing all round was to keep the hell out. The worst wars by far used to be civil wars. Probably the only civil war in history that can actually be fairly called "civil" was the American, and even parts of that were pretty damned grim.

Excuse me, but the only thing that put the communists any close to gain power in Spain (and even in spite of that, they were unable to do so) was precisely the Western indecision. The Popular Front government's two main parties were Izquierda Republicana, from the progressive left, and the PSOE, that was big indeed, but divided in a radical and a moderate faction, the latter being the stronger politically. Azaña complained more about the inability to control the anarchists and the POUM (which had a filoanarchist tone), but that's normal given that they were... well, anarchists, and hence, a wild card. The hard left had already tried an insurrection in 1934 and failed miserabily, and the Communist Party of Spain was a very small force before the uprising.

It can be argued that the appeasement policies played a big role IOTL, but saying that the smartest thing was letting my country descend into 40 years of catholic fascism, is unfair at best.

 

[Larrikin]

Excuse me, but the only thing that put the communists any close to gain power in Spain (and even in spite of that, they were unable to do so) was precisely the Western indecision. The Popular Front government's two main parties were Izquierda Republicana, from the progressive left, and the PSOE, that was big indeed, but divided in a radical and a moderate faction, the latter being the stronger politically. Azaña complained more about the inability to control the anarchists and the POUM (which had a filoanarchist tone), but that's normal given that they were... well, anarchists, and hence, a wild card. The hard left had already tried an insurrection in 1934 and failed miserabily, and the Communist Party of Spain was a very small force before the uprising.

It can be argued that the appeasement policies played a big role IOTL, but saying that the smartest thing was letting my country descend into 40 years of catholic fascism, is unfair at best.

I didn't say that they were communist, that was the view of the other European govts.

And as for the 'smartest thing' comment, never, ever, get involved in family feuds.

 

[Niko Malaka]

It can be argued that the appeasement policies played a big role IOTL, but saying that the smartest thing was letting my country descend into 40 years of catholic fascism, is unfair at best.

I only can agree. In fact that's the key, in order to have a british intervention, or at least to made the british and certain french internal forces let Blum and Cot help the spanish democracy as they wanted, you need to change the whole british foreing policy and maybe even the interwars mentalities. Note, to have an idea of the international climate, that the lifting of the sanctions against Italy was only one month before the outbreak of the spanish civil war.

And as for the 'smartest thing' comment, never, ever, get involved in family feuds.

The problem is that, while everyone in the allied side was doing everything possible to avoid the arrival of french aircrafts and weapons to the republic, the italians and germans had sent their aircrafts and weapons to the rebels. Also they had helped the rebles to cross the strait of Gibraltar while the british authorities in Gibraltar were refusing to sell oil to the republican fleet wich was in the way to block the rebeles in Morocco. At this time, I think, it was clear that it was more than a familly feud, and we are speaking about the first days of the war. At least, it was not a familly issue for the fascists powers. But you are right, the americans should have follow the same logic regarding the european conflicts.

 

[Faralis]

Well, the help of the Soviets really helped the republicans, the Tanks were quite better than the German ones ( better not talk about Italian ones ) and the planes were probably better than anything in the other side.

If the help comes along the Russian help, yes can change the SCW very much if came INSTEAD the Soviet one probably Franco still wins ...

And calling Franco a Fascist is quite a misnomer, it was a far right ultracatholic military dictator, he was no near a Fascist he just used them, as he used the Carlist, the Monarchist and the more moderate right ...

Paraphrasing Paradox´s Hearts of Iron he is a soldier that rules "his" country as he directed his regiment ...

 

[Goldstein]

And calling Franco a Fascist is quite a misnomer, it was a far right ultracatholic military dictator, he was no near a Fascist he just used them, as he used the Carlist, the Monarchist and the more moderate right ...

Paraphrasing Paradox´s Hearts of Iron he is a soldier that rules "his" country as he directed his regiment ...

True, but as much as there were different factions and the regime's ethos was more clerical-reactionary than fascist, it was still quite fascistic until the very end, both in rethorics and organization. The idea of the integration of the family, the syndicate and the municipality as the organic cells of society was very present, for example. The economy ran on technocratic-corporatist lines, the party employed the usual fascist jargon... even being an oversimplification, and recognizing that Franco was not a fascist in the standard sense, Francoist Spain could be very well described as a fascist country, if with strong theocratic elements. That's why, regarding the mess that the regime was, the term "clerical fascism" is the most commonly used.

 

[Markus]

And as for the 'smartest thing' comment, never, ever, get involved in family feuds.

But they did get involved by actively obstructing the efforts of the legitimate government the defend itself. Adopting a "Cash&Carry" policy would have been best for both sides. The UK and France get some hard currency -God knows their economies could have needed it-, their defence industries get an incentive to "gear up" -also not the worst thing to do-, Spain get´s decent weapons for a decent price and without communist control attached and the Fascists get one shoved up the ...

In WW2 the Germans would have to make a sweep through Spain after they are done with France, the UK would have lost Gibraltar -convoys to Malta would have to sail from Egypt- but the UK might very well have secured French North Africa with Spanish help.

 

[Astrodragon]

But they did get involved by actively obstructing the efforts of the legitimate government the defend itself. Adopting a "Cash&Carry" policy would have been best for both sides. The UK and France get some hard currency -God knows their economies could have needed it-, their defence industries get an incentive to "gear up" -also not the worst thing to do-, Spain get´s decent weapons for a decent price and without communist control attached and the Fascists get one shoved up the ...

In WW2 the Germans would have to make a sweep through Spain after they are done with France, the UK would have lost Gibraltar -convoys to Malta would have to sail from Egypt- but the UK might very well have secured French North Africa with Spanish help.

Not quite sure why the Germans would go into Spain. After the civil war, its very likely that whoever won would stay neutral at this point, Spain is still going to be a wreck. Germany heading in in 1940 would stop any likely attack on the UK taking place that year, so giving Britain a chance to recover, so not a good idea.
In 1941, it takes effort away from Barbarossa, in order to bog troops down in a country with probably a quite effective partisan force.
However I could see Spain decalrig for the allies at a later point, if only to stop Germany occupying them to stop an allied attack into France from there. Or Germany invading to stop that very thing - not sure when would be the most likely time for that to happen, though...

 

[Markus]

By the way, Neutrals are allowed to sell arms to belligerants:

A neutral Power is not called upon to prevent the export or transport, on behalf of one or other of the belligerents, of arms, munitions of war, or, in general, of anything which can be of use to an army or a fleet.

And in order to get arms of all kinds one does not need the USA. Belgium´s FN made all sorts of small arms and Fokker in the Netherlands could have provided modern warplanes, actually more modern ones than the US made at the time.

@Astrodragon:

Right, depending on the level of support Spain get´s and the time of the republican victory they might or might not declare war on Germany. I was assuming they did but that´s not a certainty.

 

[Markus]

But would they have been able to supply what the Republic really needed/demanded? The Soviet Union after all supplied 1000 out of the 1300 planes in Republican use. According to Beevor, the 'republicans greatest needs were for aircraft, tanks and automatic weapons. French equipment was generally of poor quality and the British aircraft available at that date were obsolete. Probably the only country capable of satisfying their needs, apart from the Soviet Union, was the United States'. Despite Fokker dominating the civil aviation market, and despite some of its aircraft winning respectable victories against the Luftwaffe in 1940, I doubt that the company could have really fulfilled Republican demands. If you dont have the USSR, you have to have the USA.

Oh you little faith!

Dutch light bomber:
Fokker C.X, 2*385lb bombs that´s not ideal but if I were a destroyer I´d try not to get hit.

Dutch fighter:
Fokker D.XXI, an (almost) 300mph monoplane fighter with a closed cockpit. A very modern design for 1935 and still competitive in 1940.

French tanks:
R35 and H35

The Belgians made Mauser bolt action rifles that were exported to half the world and a certain light machine gun known as the BAR.

The US had the M2 light tank and fantastic 75mm/155mm artillery designed in WW1 by … France.


And most important Franco´s forces were better armed than the Republican´s but they were still far behind almost anybody else.

 

[NothingNow]

There's another option: the United States. In that country, there lay sizeable public sympathy for the plight of the Republic: it was a set of elites, from Texas Oil to certain Senators on Capitol Hill, that rigorously enforced American neutrality and covertly aided the Nationalists (oil credits from Oil magnates etc). Get American public opinion on your side, and you're really set. The potential for arms shipments would be massive (although with isolationism still waning, i really doubt the American Army would ever be shipped over: lets not get carried away). The only real obstacle in OTL was the N-IC; Roosevelt was convinced by the existence of that organisation that neutrality was the best option.

Don't Expect the Army, Maybe some "Volunteers" but nothing more than that, The Marines have more Combat experience at this point and we might see a stunt like the Occupation of Veracruz. But US aid would mostlikely be Stocks of excess heavy equipment from WW1 and the Spanish-American war era (oh the Irony), with M1903, Krags and M1895 rifles, Thompson SMGs and BARs making up the vast majority of the Kit. Boeing might sell some B-17s, martin will certainly sell some of their light bombers and Curtis and/or Grumman selling Fighters by the literal boat load, while Republic might sell some P-35s, but don't expect them to be delivered. If it drags on long enough Bell and Lockheed could possibly sell a few as well. The US might take the Christie M1928 and Tweak the design after seeing how tanks perform in Spain.

At the same time though, you dont have a Non-Intervention Committee. Now I don't imagine that the Baldwin/Chamberlain governments in the UK would really condone arms shipments from British manufacturers, but where does that leave the rest of the world? Because with overt French assistance, there isn't as much a stigma as OTL: Mexico, the USSR, France, perhaps the USA are now shipping arms over, in quantity and at a profit. As time goes on, I think that the Soviet contribution and influence would lessen- American aircraft were superior to Soviet models at the time, certainly in comparison to Fascist models- but at the same time Spanish finances become more stretched. With superior equipment, the onus will be on Italy and Germany to keep up. Perhaps we see an acceleration of the Bf109 development? That's dangerous. Quicker evolution of tactics before WWII? Certainly. Pressure will be on the Condor Legion and the CTV to perform better: more lives will be lost.

Actually the 109 might be a casualty of this if Heinkel can get their act together with the He112, which was a superior (and Safer) aircraft than the 109.

 

[Niko Malaka]

Well, I think that we are assuming that in the propossed scenario the war will be long enough to require similar number of weapons that in OTL. But I think that a Republic backed by other western powers since the begining could achieve a relatively quick victory, so maybe the production limitations of certain potential suppliers won't be a problem.

In first place, if the republican manage to block the moroccan ports during the first days, the bulk and the better of the rebel army is stuck in northern Africa. That probably would mean a hard time for the nationalists in Andalusia.

If anyway the nationalist can cross the strait, we will see probably a race between the two sides to build up their armies as it was not seen in OTL, and that also probably means a different strategy by the nationalists. They probably can't go with the "hold, exterminate, advance a bit, and repeat the process." without risking a serious republican counteroffensive. That could mean also a more troubled rearguard. i mean, if in OTL the republic could have won in the Battle of the Ebro with better air support, I think in this TTL we could see a major republican offensive early and with better means. Furthermore in this context, Miss Islas Canarias 1936 (as other nationalist generals called Franco because of his lack of definition to join the coup until the last moment, being a sort of attention whore) could be more doubtful, in a situation requiring more determination than in OTL although that could be meaningless and even we could butterfly Franco as head of the rebels. And las but not least, the lesser soviet influence could butterfly the (often) violent division between communist and anyone else in the republican side. In fact I'm wondering what is happening here with the militia "movement" and wether a western support would mean an early centralized republican army similar to OTL Ejército Popular.

OTOH, in OTL, one of the advantages of nationalists was the control the fertile agricultural areas in north-east Castile. On the republican side the advantage was in the control of the industrial centers and the bigger manpower (although less preapred for military tasks) In our case, the republic can get food and industrial supplies from other countries (a war is not only weapons) and it could help a lot.

Cheers.

 

[Markus]

Fine, they're good. But are you seriously telling me that Belgian and Dutch arms companies can supply even on a par with the US? Reading the quantities delivered to various airforces in those Wiki articles still leaves me in doubt.

Absolutely! In 1935 the US arms industry was not making much of anything as the depots were still full of WW1 vintage arms. FN exported rifles to almost all Central and South American nations and a few nations on other continents. They made BARs for Egypt, Argentine, Chile, Greece, the Netherlands, Sweden and even the USA. The number of planes made by Fokker –a giant of the aviation industry by the way- looks low but that was the result of few orders placed in the inter-war years. The USN for example ordered 30 SBA, 125 SBU and 250 SBC and 150 F3F. If Fokker had orders more planes were made. Like app. 500 of the C.X´s predecessor that were made by Fokker. And last but not least the overall number of warplanes seem to have been quite low in the Civil War. Legion condor had 100 operational planes of all kinds.

edit: I admit the US could have provided more, especially in the longer run but non-US sources could have provided more than enough as weapons were not needed in WW2 quantities.

 

[Faralis]

Not quite sure why the Germans would go into Spain. After the civil war, its very likely that whoever won would stay neutral at this point, Spain is still going to be a wreck. Germany heading in in 1940 would stop any likely attack on the UK taking place that year, so giving Britain a chance to recover, so not a good idea.
In 1941, it takes effort away from Barbarossa, in order to bog troops down in a country with probably a quite effective partisan force.
However I could see Spain decalrig for the allies at a later point, if only to stop Germany occupying them to stop an allied attack into France from there. Or Germany invading to stop that very thing - not sure when would be the most likely time for that to happen, though...

The problem with this is one : Gibraltar.

Even if stays neutral (I´m quite sure that it would try to ) the Germans may invade if only to close the Mediterranean.

Another question all together is if the intervention of the Allies will make the WWII start faster than OTL, I suppose that could be better for the allies but not sure ...

@Golstein: Yep, good point, definition is one thing, attitude is another completely different ...

 

[Markus]

This is the real issue, and what the Republic would have recognised: guaranteed quantity, over time, rather than quality. OTL, the USSR could and did supply this demand: they thus loomed large out of the available suppliers, ...

And why would big european companies not be able to deliver large numbers of weapons on time? Neither FN nor Fokker is a start-up like Brewster. Fokker even had an american subsidiary. GM was their partner, which does say something about Fokker´s "weight". With regard to the USSR, Wiki says they delivered app. 800 planes to the Republicans, the other side got app. 1,200 from Germany and Italy. That looks huge given the small inter-war orders other nations placed but considering the conflict lasted almost three years we talk about a monthly average of 25 to 35 planes. Even Brewster managed to make more than 40 planes per month and they sucked at volume production.

 

[Markus]

Thats not the point: in OTL the Republic did not go to the great lengths to buy these supposedly superior models, they grabbed Soviet equipment. First come, first serve. This was partly down to the Non-Intervention Committee, and party down to the perception that the Soviet Union could fulfil demand, just as in an alternate timeline, the more politically acceptable alternative, the United States, would have.

They could not IOTL as the western democracies did not allow any sales. And my point is, if they had one would not have needed the numbers the US industry was capable of making. I did not mean to say don´t buy from the US.

I don't use Wikipedia, but The Battle for Spain by Antony Beevor, Spain's Civil War by Harry Browne, A History of Spain by Harold Livermore and Anthony Eden by David Carlton, all left over from by dissertation on foreign intervention in the war.

I read Beevors "The Spanish Civil War". He made it clear the quantity of heavy weapons at the start of the war was very, very low by any standard. And at least the number for the size of Legion Condor is confirmed by other websites and a quick look in an a/c encyclopedia says Spain got 185 I-15/152 and 280 I-16 fighters from the USSR. That makes the 800 plane total look realistic.

 

[Blair152]

This is the real issue, and what the Republic would have recognised: guaranteed quantity, over time, rather than quality. OTL, the USSR could and did supply this demand: they thus loomed large out of the available suppliers, the situation the US would find themselves in in the ATL. Who is to say that US manufacturers wouldn't have evolved in what they produced, aped Continental designs? OTL, the Republic did receive European materiel (even from Germany via Goering oddly enough), albeit via third parties and extremely covertly given the Non-Intervention Committee, but opted for the USSR, they receiving predominance because of the potential fulfilment of demand.

If the arms embargo hadn't tied the Spanish Republic's hands, then it could have bought arms on the open market, and not have to depend on the Soviets, who ultimately ended up stealing their gold reserves. I read that in the 1980 novel The Spike, by Robert Moss, and Arnaud de Borgrave. The Soviets sold the Spanish Republic outdated Polikarpov I-15s
and I-16s, which were biplane fighters.