Halifax.

[Fletch]

In OTL Sir William Beveridge was elected Liberal MP for Berwick-upon-Tweed in a by-election on 17 October 1944. Because of the wartime electoral truce he was opposed only by an independent.

The Liberals also won in 1935 when they were opposed by the Conservatives, and also ittl in 1940 under similar circumstances. The death of Hugh Seely and the by-election has been brought forward ittl, for no reason other than creative license on my part...

 

[Nugax]

Firstly, a dodgy sourse on my part. The native population of Madagascar was 2.2 million in 1900, not 1940....As has been pointed out though, this is indeed the Nazis we are talking about so population movement is by no means out of the question.

As to the map, if you think its feasible(given the billions being pumped in), then I'll go along with it.

Well the Nazis would be dumping Jews in the North as its a) shorter distance from the Suez, and b) where all the good French built ports are.

They would then have to evict the Malegasi from the Tsaratanana Massif in the north in order to obtain food and water, or rather brutalize them sufficiently that when an independent Jewish state emerges it will be unable to make amends with the Malegasi there and will have to evict them. The main area of jewish settlement will then be on the Massif and coastal towns (the very dark green area in the north).

When push comes to shove in the early 50s (the Malagasy Uprising occurred in OTL '47 after all) they Jewish forces, unlike in Israel, will not really be able to penetrate the central highlands or the eastern coast. It took considerable French force in the OTL, and they were prepositioned, and the natives were exceedingly divided. However I think it likely the Jewish forces will be able to secure the lightly populated north-western coast (which is also very suitable for cash crop plantation agriculture) that can be easily reached from the sea and not from the central highlands, the southern boundary of this region is where the more serious deserts start. I expect at that point the Western powers will tell the Malagasy to 'shut up and make do' with the 60% of the island remaining to them, and some pleasant ethnic cleansing and decades long feud will develop, if vastly better than OTL Palestine Israel.

The verdant Tsaratanana Massif is roughly the 1.5 times size of OTL Israel and has some of the worlds most productive sugarcane and vanilla regions (as well as a lot of the islands grain production), and the rest of the Jewish state has another 7 Israels worth of arid scrub and tropical coast. They've also managed to pick up all the oil and gas.

The Malagasy state has the pepper production, the rice growing areas and all the deserts (lucky them) and some problems with subsistence poverty, Merina discrimination to displaced coastal ethnic groups, and adequate ports.

As to feasibility, the Malagesi aren't going to become a minority due to simple population dynamics, which would be needed if the Jews still desire a definitively Jewish homeland, and with it being an island and most of the natives really hard to get at they just aren't going to be displaced like with palestine. Plus they do already have a number of strong ethnic identities that would resist the taking of 'their' land. Thus I think an angry two state solution is really the only way it can turn out unless the Jews leave. The billions will be expended on making sure the refugees from europe don't starve or die of thirst.

OTH in a slightly nicer outcome the Jews might make good with some of the Ethnic groups of the coast (perhaps the rather east african Tankarana in the north), and incorporate them into the state (as long as a Jewish majority is maintained), but thats just not going to work re the central higlanders which make up most of the population.

 

[El Pip]

As you said, they took it in the 1945 election of otl until which time it was a Liberal seat. You are assuming, I suspect that a similar Liberal collapse is going to occur ittl, which is a big assumption indeed.

As to why he was booed, I've expanded on the issue.

It was more the fact that in the '45 election the Tory suffered a 10% swing against them but still took that seat. As has been said the correct comparison is to the last pre-war election not the inter-war electoral truce elections.

And I still really don't see that the will of the Indian people is going to excite the British public. It just seems wrong that a majority, or even a significant minority, would care. The OTL Government of India Acts attracted almost no popular comment, sure opposition parties and left leaning papers used them as a stick to beat the government with, but that's politics.

Maybe I'm wrong but I think it's a case of modern views being projected backwards onto a public that just didn't think that way. :shrug:

In any event I wonder about your Liberal hint, sure they're the annoying post-Asquith type but one can still hope they rediscover their 'proper' Liberal roots and thrive. A man can dream...

 

[simonbp]

Attlee was in full swing, denouncing the move as 'introducing a 19th century solution to a 20th century problem.'

Good Lord, from my hand to Attlee's mouth!

I'm interested that Halifax still thinks that the India Act was his greatest achievement; when in TTL was the memoir published?

 

[Fletch]

It was more the fact that in the '45 election the Tory suffered a 10% swing against them but still took that seat. As has been said the correct comparison is to the last pre-war election not the inter-war electoral truce elections.

And I still really don't see that the will of the Indian people is going to excite the British public. It just seems wrong that a majority, or even a significant minority, would care. The OTL Government of India Acts attracted almost no popular comment, sure opposition parties and left leaning papers used them as a stick to beat the government with, but that's politics.

Maybe I'm wrong but I think it's a case of modern views being projected backwards onto a public that just didn't think that way. :shrug:

In any event I wonder about your Liberal hint, sure they're the annoying post-Asquith type but one can still hope they rediscover their 'proper' Liberal roots and thrive. A man can dream...

It was a Liberal seat in the 1935 election. The Liberals gained slightly on the 1935 result.

As to the public discontent, India is merely a symptom, not the root issue. At present, the government are viewed as the only opponents of radical changes in social welfare, housing etc.of the three main parties. If you include on top of that the denial of a sub-continent what should be seen as fair rights and also terrorism in Germany which is meaning tens of thousands of conscripted soldiers, who in normal circumstances would be home by now nearly a year after the end of the war, then you have all the makings of an unpopular administration.

As to your hope, well it is a pipedream on your part. William Beveridge has just been elected. He was one of the men behind the otl NHS.

Good Lord, from my hand to Attlee's mouth!

I'm interested that Halifax still thinks that the India Act was his greatest achievement; when in TTL was the memoir published?

What can I say? I was taken by the turn of phrase. As to the date of publication. Seven years after he leaves office. That is all I am saying on the matter.

 

[Fletch]

July 1944 saw another upsurge in insurgent attacks on British forces in Germany. That these were supplied by foreign sources was almost without question, but to pin the blame would be difficult as there was no direct evidence pointing to this conclusion. As a result of these attrocities, over 350 British servicemen and 25 servicewomen died protecting the peace within Germany over this month in a series of planned bombings. A group calling themselves the Marxist Alliance claimed responsibility for the attacks.

I was invited to a conference in Washington on July 25th, during which time President Roosevelt confirmed with me that the Americans had a plan to invade Japan with or without British and Commonwealth assistance. This was a serious deviation from the strategy of the blockade which had contained them without loss of any lives over the past few months. As such I communicated my displeasure at such a move, but as an ally through this dark period, I would pass on the information to my cabinet and the matter would be discussed.

Roosevelt also passed on his displeasure at the India Act, stating that it would merely help aid the Communists, which in my humble opinion was a bit rich coming from a man who paid more attention to the Soviets than ourselves during the European war.

The Chinese Civil War, which had erupted was also brought to the table and was one issue on which we could reach agreement as to the supply and support of the nationalists.

Overall, I have to say this was the most difficult visit I had to make to President Roosevelt. The Japanese question was raising its head now in a big way.

 

[John Farson]

July 1944 saw another upsurge in insurgent attacks on British forces in Germany. That these were supplied by foreign sources was almost without question, but to pin the blame would be difficult as there was no direct evidence pointing to this conclusion. As a result of these attrocities, over 350 British servicemen and 25 servicewomen died protecting the peace within Germany over this month in a series of planned bombings. A group calling themselves the Marxist Alliance claimed responsibility for the attacks.

I was invited to a conference in Washington on July 25th, during which time President Roosevelt confirmed with me that the Americans had a plan to invade Japan with or without British and Commonwealth assistance. This was a serious deviation from the strategy of the blockade which had contained them without loss of any lives over the past few months. As such I communicated my displeasure at such a move, but as an ally through this dark period, I would pass on the information to my cabinet and the matter would be discussed.

Roosevelt also passed on his displeasure at the India Act, stating that it would merely help aid the Communists, which in my humble opinion was a bit rich coming from a man who paid more attention to the Soviets than ourselves during the European war.

The Chinese Civil War, which had erupted was also brought to the table and was one issue on which we could reach agreement as to the supply and support of the nationalists.

Overall, I have to say this was the most difficult visit I had to make to President Roosevelt. The Japanese question was raising its head now in a big way.

To say that the Japanese haven't been having a good time with the blockade would be the understatement of the year, I'd bet.

Do the Japanese control anymore areas besides the Home Islands, at this point?

 

[Fletch]

To say that the Japanese haven't been having a good time with the blockade would be the understatement of the year, I'd bet.

Do the Japanese control anymore areas besides the Home Islands, at this point?

Yes, they are restricted to the home islands. The blockade is going to be having a horrendous effect on the Japanese economy, but you have to ask over the alternatives. Total victory with the Americans and many dead taking the trouble or the blockade with the Europeans with Japan reduced to near starvation but no dead allied troops. Which is the better option?

 

[mikegold]

Finland has hardly been mentioned. I presume the Winter War and Continuation War (in some form) occurred. Is Finland in the Soviet or Allied sphere, or is it neutral?

 

[John Farson]

Yes, they are restricted to the home islands. The blockade is going to be having a horrendous effect on the Japanese economy, but you have to ask over the alternatives. Total victory with the Americans and many dead taking the trouble or the blockade with the Europeans with Japan reduced to near starvation but no dead allied troops. Which is the better option?

Personally, from the Allied POV, I'd say that a blockade would be more likely. Oh sure, Japan is prostrate, and the Americans have had plenty of time to build up forces in Okinawa (the Americans are occupying Okinawa at this point, yes?) and elsewhere, but I think the general thinking would go "Why send allied troops to needlessly die on the beaches of Kyushu (or wherever the landings would take place) when we can just wait for the Japanese to cry uncle?" Of course, this would mean enourmous suffering for the Japanese, but there wouldn't be much concern for Japanese collateral damage in the 1940s.

There is of course the atomic bomb, but I suspect that things will have been resolved by the time that project is ready.

 

[Fletch]

Finland has hardly been mentioned. I presume the Winter War and Continuation War (in some form) occurred. Is Finland in the Soviet or Allied sphere, or is it neutral?

Finland is neutral, much as in otl.

Personally, from the Allied POV, I'd say that a blockade would be more likely. Oh sure, Japan is prostrate, and the Americans have had plenty of time to build up forces in Okinawa (the Americans are occupying Okinawa at this point, yes?) and elsewhere, but I think the general thinking would go "Why send allied troops to needlessly die on the beaches of Kyushu (or wherever the landings would take place) when we can just wait for the Japanese to cry uncle?" Of course, this would mean enourmous suffering for the Japanese, but there wouldn't be much concern for Japanese collateral damage in the 1940s.

There is of course the atomic bomb, but I suspect that things will have been resolved by the time that project is ready.

With regards the bomb, remember the Americans and the British have not co-operated in ttl, although the British and the French have and the project is currently in Canada(although any tests will be in Australia or the French Algerian Sahara). Either way, although there is a race between the US, the Franco-British and the Soviets the bomb will be behind the otl time it was developed.

As to the invasion of Japan, the position is rather complicated. The powers had firstly agreed on unconditional surrender, then on the blockade. The Americans, by now looking at it from a Cold War pov are under the impression that the fact the Japanese are still holding out is making them look rather weak. Also, invasion would give them an important ally in the long-term in east asia.

The Europeans, who are more limited in terms of manpower and exhausted by the european war and occupation of Germany are of the view that an invasion would simply be too costly, and that however long it is in the future, the Japanese will eventually surrender with the blockade.

Its a difficult one.

 

[Fletch]

I returned from Washington to find a major announcement was made by the Labour and Liberal parties. In it, they announced their intention to establish a new cradle to grave welfare state. Such a move showed the extent that the Liberals had been taken over by the idea of socialism. In response, I ordered a royal commision into the nations social and welfare needs in order to provide a strong opposition to such costly measures.

One other area which was mentioned within the party was that if such agreements had taken place between the Liberals and the Socialists, then what odds on secret electoral agreements? Several cabinet members, in private voiced their concerns over the chances of electoral disaster should we not start showing more drive and initiative from now on in.

I made the point that for the majority of the time I had been Prime Minister, the nation had been in a state of war, that crisis after crisis had emerged and yet somehow we had sailed through these events in a strong manner. I also argued that we had made several major important historical actions, such as the India act and the Versaille armistice in 1940, following the ten month war.

However, the nation did require its leaders to build a land fit for heroes, and it was our job to deliver. We had to act tough and get the job done.

On August 8th, the largest single attrocity that was to happen in the post-war period occured in the British sector of Germany in Hamburg. At the opening of a large Marks & Spencers store seven minutes after one o'clock in the afternoon a large bomb went off, killing 217 civilians, 12 British, 6 US and 2 French servicemen. The move made headlines across Germany. Within 48 hours, on advice from the local populace, the culprits were caught. In due course all five were to be tried and hanged in accordance with the military command.

On 23rd August, the French Premier, Auriol visited Britain. I met him in Chequers, and the discussion was of varied subjects ranging from the European Confederation to the situation in Germany. The subject which dominated the discussion however was the Japanese question. We were of a united mind on the subject, and as such at his suggestion, the question of offering the Japanese terms on a take it or leave it basis was raised. I seriously took this under consideration.

 

[Fletch]

Events were now coming in at an uncomfortable pace. Dorothy urged me to slow down but events were conspiring against that course of action. The Americans were putting some serious pressure onto us to enter the war against Japan, whilst at the same time the French were advocating peace.

In India, Churchill had his first meeting with Ghandi, during which time he was urged to allow for Indian independence, something he would not contemplate. Events on the sub-continent were moving though as our India bill had split the Congress Party into those who accepted it and those who rejected it. Tempers were often frayed and Winston reported back that he feared a second Indian rising if things carried on as they were.

Domestically, we did not have our problems to seek. John Simon announced in the that it was his intention to put up taxes to pay for our commitments overseas. This was very unpopular and chimed against the opposition parties, who it seemed had made some form of unholy alliance against us.

As we were attempting to deal with the reaction to that, John Reith resigned from the cabinet on the grounds he no longer felt I was the man to lead the party into the post-war age. The loss of such a distinguished member of the cabinet led to disquiet once more over the direction of the party, but I was convinced that we would enter a bright future should we get past the current problems.

On November 21st in Washington DC, our US Ambassador David Lloyd George died of a heart attack. His body was taken back to England where the old man was given a state funeral. His replacement was Sir Roger Makins.

Two days later, a decision was made over Japan.

 

[DAv]

Ah, cliffhanger! Should be interesting to see what happens with this and what impact it'll have on Halifax's waning popularity.

 

[Blackadder mk 2]

If he chooses USA over France he should tell America they owe UK a favour

 

[Sealion]

If he chooses US over France then he'll need to have a damn good reason to present the UK public (and the Cabinet) or he'll find himself out on his ear!

Don't forget that the UK isn't like the USA - the PM isn't a President and doesn't carry the same "do it because I say so" authority in all things. He can be removed if he loses the confidence of Parliament, and the way things are now a mass resignation (2-4 or more) from the Cabinet would bring the Government down.

The Cabinet aren't going to agree to an invasion without hearing from the Chiefs of Staff first, and they are bound to point out the likely (high) casualties. The spectre of the Somme is still lurking at the back of most peoples minds, and there is bound to be opposition to the plan - expect the Cabinet to point out:

• The need to avoid another Somme, or another Gallapoli
• The diplomatic damage this will do to the blossoming Anglo-French entente
• The Electoral effect of taking heavy casualties - opposition accusations of "The Government leading us into another Somme", backed by heavy casualties will lead to a huge loss of support.

Halifax may be able to carry the Cabinet along on this, but only if he's got a convincing arguement (including a solid advantage for the UK) that justifies the casualties. Doing it "because the US is going in anyway" won't wash. If he tries to force this one through without a convincing case, he'll find himself with a cabinet revolt on his hands, and facing a vote of no confidence in the House of Commons.

 

[xt828]

Best solution from the British POV would probably be to wash their hands of the whole thing - they've already liberated the colonial empires the Japanese threatened, and who can tell them to leave? If the Americans want to expend millions of lives attacking Japan, let them - the Commonwealth and Europe can spend that time rebuilding and getting trade going.

 

[Fletch]

The atmosphere of the cabinet room reminded me strongly of 1940 when the armistice was called for. Following the longest cabinet meeting in my time in office, we came down against British participation in the US invasion of Japan, but agreed that we would send out of peace feelers to them without the Japanese, based upon them accepting terms of surrender to be established by ourselves and, should they agree, the other allied powers. I suspected though that the French and the Dutch would be the only other signatories to such an idea.

I made this clear in the Commons. Within hours, we were being attacked by the American government as being against the idea of victory in the east. Despite the pressure, I opted to stand firm.

Since 1939, many sons and daughters of our nation have lost their lives in the defence of their families, liberty, their towns, their nation and indeed the Empire itself. It cannot be said that our nation has not done its fair share of fighting in the defence of democracy against tyranny and evil.

This blood price, this price in flesh has made us harden. It has made us tough but yet weary. We should remain proud of this, that it has not robbed us of our very humanity.

At this moment, over 250,000 British servicemen and women are serving in Germany, in Europe, in the Empire, in Asia. They are serving in the four corners of the globe defending our national interest. This is a heavy burden to bear, but one which is required to defend our nation.

This brings me to the main object of my statement here today. At this moment, the warships of the Royal Navy are working with steadfast courage in the military blockade of Japan. This has neutralised the threat of the Japanese.

They no longer are a threat to India.
They are no longer a threat to Australia.
They are not even a threat to Hong Kong.

Any invasion of the Japanese Home Islands would lead undoubtedly, say our own sources, to the deaths of hundreds of thousands more British troops. Thousands more lives lost in the pursuit of the invasion of an evil regime, but one posing no external threat.

This leads us to the question. What do we do?

Should we invade Japan I would have full confidence in our final victory. However, as a people we would have lost more of our sons. I don't think that this would be acceptable. One of the first priorities of a government must be the lives of our people. The government is elected to represent the people, after all.

This, I want to tell you now is not the position of the government of the United States. They are of the opinion that the blockade is allowing an evil regime to prosper whilst we stand at a brick wall as if it were a door, awaiting it to open. This is to underestimate the effects of the blockade.

Millions of Japanese people are suffering. I have this message to them. It is simple. Protest. Force your government to accept the terms which we will offer. A lasting peace, without more loss of life will then occur.

If the Americans decide to invade, we will support them. No British troops will be there however. Behind this lies a simple truth. I am not willing to sacrifice one British life in the completion of a task which I do not fully believe is needed.

 

[DAv]

Now this should liven things up between the Allies. A definite souring of relations and if the US does go through with the invasion, it's going to be most unpleasant.

 

[Sealion]

Now this should liven things up between the Allies. A definite souring of relations and if the US does go through with the invasion, it's going to be most unpleasant.

And if the US invasion fails, things get really bad - expect acqusations of being left in the lurch etc (a bit like British reactions to the US after Suez, only 100 times worse).


Hmmm ... I think its goodbye Special Relationship, Hello Europe