Dunkirk Peace in WWII: What happens with India?

[Octosteel]

The Indian independence movement was getting increasingly about to explode in this period. When WWII started, the deal the British made with the Indian independence figures was they would have freedom once the war was over. This worked very effectively to cut out the legs of figures who wanted to "quit India" and men like Bose who wanted to directly fight against the British Empire. Gandhi himself however said he didn't want India freed on the grave of the British Empire.

However, what if Halifax made a peace with the Germans after Dunkirk. Even if he was only prepping to return to the war once the Germans started fighting the Soviets, the deal made with the Indians was that they'd be free once the war was over. Well, the war is over. It seems hard to imagine the Indians would accept the Brits saying the war is not "really" over since they're going to jump back in. So what happens with India? Does Britain just let them go? Do they try to make sure independent India isn't really independent? And how do the Indians react to this?

 

[Garrison]

However, what if Halifax made a peace with the Germans after Dunkirk.

And you are making some major unjustified assumptions straight out of the gate. First that the British would have sought terms when they were planning to fight on based on the assumption that Dynamo would fail. Second that Hitler ever had coherent/credible terms to offer and thirdly that Halifax would get the PM job only on the understanding he would continue the war. Basically your starting point doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

[Ukrainian Victory]

Even if he was only prepping to return to the war once the Germans started fighting the Soviets,

That might not be the easiest thing to do since AFAIK it's not exactly easy to restart the war machine after it's been deactivated.

 

[RedSword12]

And you are making some major unjustified assumptions straight out of the gate. First that the British would have sought terms when they were planning to fight on based on the assumption that Dynamo would fail. Second that Hitler ever had coherent/credible terms to offer and thirdly that Halifax would get the PM job only on the understanding he would continue the war. Basically your starting point doesn't make a lot of sense.

I think for the sake of discussion we can afford to accept the POD, and then move on from there. Otherwise we'll just end up retreading the same old ground.

 

[Octosteel]

I think for the sake of discussion we can afford to accept the POD, and then move on from there. Otherwise we'll just end up retreading the same old ground.

Yeah main question here is about an early peace that Britain makes but one where the question of Europe clearly isn't settled, and what they proceed to do with India as well as what the Indian leadership does. Curious to know what some experts here on the political situation think.

 

[thaddeus]

First that the British would have sought terms when they were planning to fight on based on the assumption that Dynamo would fail. Second that Hitler ever had coherent/credible terms to offer and thirdly that Halifax would get the PM job only on the understanding he would continue the war.

main question here is about an early peace that Britain makes but one where the question of Europe clearly isn't settled, and what they proceed to do with India as well as what the Indian leadership does. Curious to know what some experts here on the political situation think.

maybe we tend to underestimate the blow a failed evacuation would deliver? there could be a Phoney Peace, an armistice with intermittent hostilities, as a bookend to the Phoney War?

think that would make the situation with regards to India more interesting as the war is technically not over, but awaiting a final peace treaty.

 

[Octosteel]

maybe we tend to underestimate the blow a failed evacuation would deliver? there could be a Phoney Peace, an armistice with intermittent hostilities, as a bookend to the Phoney War?

think that would make the situation with regards to India more interesting as the war is technically not over, but awaiting a final peace treaty.

Very possible that the war does still technically continue, although I wonder how much patience the Indians have for this.

I also realized that there could very well be a general election if Labour withdraws support (depends on if they also consider the war over) and that could mean either Halifax stays in power of Attlee is in charge. I wonder if Attlee would be more open to letting India go, if it remains as a Dominion and agrees to be in an alliance with Britain. But maybe that ends shortly after the handoff like OTL. I think general consensus on this forum is that Halifax would narrowly win.

 

[thaddeus]

maybe we tend to underestimate the blow a failed evacuation would deliver? there could be a Phoney Peace, an armistice with intermittent hostilities, as a bookend to the Phoney War?

think that would make the situation with regards to India more interesting as the war is technically not over, but awaiting a final peace treaty.

Very possible that the war does still technically continue, although I wonder how much patience the Indians have for this.

technically there would be peace under an armistice, with the British looking for an opportunity to continue the war and/or stalling a final treaty, of course we can argue if they'd even agree to an armistice. (and we don't know how fast events happen, France may drop out of the war before Italy has entered? so Italy could be brokering something?)

every action, no matter how legitimate, by the British would be seen in India as attempting to continue the war?

wonder how the Soviets would act under this scenario, they were unwilling to meet with Bose historically or offer any support, here it appears the war in the West is winding dow and all that implies for them?

 

[CaptainCalvert]

I think for the sake of discussion we can afford to accept the POD, and then move on from there. Otherwise we'll just end up retreading the same old ground.

The problem is that earlier Indian independence is inluenced by British politics and politicians, so who's in charge, how they got there and what they'd promised and when makes a big difference.
Unless we're talking major political upheaval in Britain or personality transplants for the major players, it's easier to see India's attitude in the early and mid 30s undermining British will to fight and creating a Conservative/other political split which then leads to token or no European intervention.