Appeasement avoids War

[zoomar]

Let's imagine a 1930's in which the western allies (the UK and France) adopt a position of TOTAL disinterest and appeasement regarding aggression. No guarantees are given to Czechoslovakia and Poland, Italian occupation of Ethopia is not objected to, Japanese aggression in China is ignored, Soviet attack on Finland is considered OK, no assistance is given the Spanish republicans, and German reooccupation of Rhineland and Austria is accepted completely without even a tiny complaint. GB and France announce that their ultimate foreign policy aim is to avoid war, period. As long as no one directly attacks the territory of either nation or their posessions, they will seek friendship with all. They offer no assistance, diplomatic, economic, or military, to countries attacked by Germany, Japan, Italy, the USSR, or any of their satellites. The USA remains staunchly isolationist.

What would the map of the world look like in 1950? Do the fascist states eventually stop their conquests when they reach self-imposed limits? Does a fascist/Communist war break out? A US-Japanese War? Is it possible this could lead to conflicts in which the USA and/or USSR are at war with Britain and/or France?

 

[Max Sinister]

Hitler was a man who knew no limits. Not sure whether he'll attack France too if he has Poland, or whether he'd arm Germany until its ready to invade Russia. TTL might not see a Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, too. The question is what the Soviets would do in that case once Hitler invades Poland - Stalin might do more than watch. And in 1939, Germany wasn't ready for an attack against him. (OK, even less than in 1941.)

 

[Chengar Qordath]

Hitler was a man who knew no limits. Not sure whether he'll attack France too if he has Poland, or whether he'd arm Germany until its ready to invade Russia. TTL might not see a Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, too. The question is what the Soviets would do in that case once Hitler invades Poland - Stalin might do more than watch. And in 1939, Germany wasn't ready for an attack against him. (OK, even less than in 1941.)

The Germans were certainly not in the best of shape for a war with Russia in 1939, but before the Winter War the Red Army is still suffering badly from the purges and needs some major reforms, which by 1941 were at least partially complete. Neither side is really ready for war in 1939, and if they are forced to fight it could be rather interesting (in a bad way).

Also, I would think that if Hitler were given free reign by British and French in everything else, he would probably eventually feel bold enough to demand Alsace-Lorraine back. Even if France is all for appeasement that might be more than they are willing to accept.

 

[zoomar]

So, if we imagine a Soviet-Nazi war breaking out in 1939 over Poland, who wins and how long does it take? What is the possibility of stalemate and a negotiated settlement? Does this spill over into the rest of central Europe or Balkans? Do Japan and Italy enter as Anti-Comintern members?

 

[zoomar]

Also, I would think that if Hitler were given free reign by British and French in everything else, he would probably eventually feel bold enough to demand Alsace-Lorraine back. Even if France is all for appeasement that might be more than they are willing to accept.

For the sake of argument, let's presume France IS willing to return A-L for the sake of peace. But let's also consider that Hitler is likely to forego such a demand to avoid needlessly antagonizing France to ensure a free hand everywhere else.

 

[Thande]

Best case scenario for the West is for Hitler to ignore France and go straight after the USSR, then for the Nazis and Soviets to wear each other out in a long grinding war until neither are a threat. Of course, this would not be very pleasant for the Poles and the other Eastern Europeans...

 

[zeitenschmiede]

the possibility of a german victory is higher than in OTL.

off-topic: whats this whole *blame thande* thing about?

 

[Beowulf2005]

Requires ASBs. Despite what foreign-policy doves would have you think, appeasement always makes things worse. "If you give a mouse a cookie..."

 

[Calgacus]

This approach would result in the Soviet Union controlling Europe, directly or indirectly, in the 1950s. Britain would be under increasing pressure from the Soviets and from Communists within the country. The USA would be waking up too late to the consequences of its isolationism. Russia would probably be ahead of the US or Britain in any development of nuclear weapons, but how long it would be before these were developed is anyone's guess. Effectively you have a Cold War about to begin on much less favourable terms for the US.

 

[Dean_the_Young]

I see three things in the future.

1. A bloodier, long Fascist v. Communist war. Who wins, I can't say. However, it'll be bloodier by far than it was OTL. Best case for the world would be that the two beat eachother so badly that neither has as much power as it needs to dominate. But don't count on it. The US, quite possibly, will supply arms to whoever's losing in order to help this come about while also making a quick buck.

2. US-Japan war still on. Isolationist US or not, FDR still cut oil to JP, and if JP went on a colony-shopping spree of European colonies, any US administration will intervene even sooner. The war would restore the US economy as in OTL, while focusing solely on the Japs. would bring a JP defeat even faster. The after-war is murky, depending on who wins in Europe and what the US feels like doing, but while the US will be stronger in the Far East, the Atomic Bomb project might not be going on so fast. It was pushed by the Nazi threat, but Japan isn't as intimidating. Perhaps democratize the Far East, instead of a Cold War struggle?

3. Unless Fascists and Communists exhaust eachother completely, Europe will be dominated. Either by the Reds or the Nazis, or even by a nuclear US, Europe's role in the world will decline sharply. With no political capital from winning a war, who would care what most of Europe thinks? Britain is still a power, but the lack of energy could break up the empire even faster.

 

[BlackMage]

off-topic: whats this whole *blame thande* thing about?

Long story.

In short: he's eminently blameable. So we do.

 

[Glen]

Let's imagine a 1930's in which the western allies (the UK and France) adopt a position of TOTAL disinterest and appeasement regarding aggression. No guarantees are given to Czechoslovakia and Poland, Italian occupation of Ethopia is not objected to, Japanese aggression in China is ignored, Soviet attack on Finland is considered OK, no assistance is given the Spanish republicans, and German reooccupation of Rhineland and Austria is accepted completely without even a tiny complaint. GB and France announce that their ultimate foreign policy aim is to avoid war, period. As long as no one directly attacks the territory of either nation or their posessions, they will seek friendship with all. They offer no assistance, diplomatic, economic, or military, to countries attacked by Germany, Japan, Italy, the USSR, or any of their satellites. The USA remains staunchly isolationist.

What would the map of the world look like in 1950? Do the fascist states eventually stop their conquests when they reach self-imposed limits? Does a fascist/Communist war break out? A US-Japanese War? Is it possible this could lead to conflicts in which the USA and/or USSR are at war with Britain and/or France?

How 'staunchly isolationist' is the USA? No lend-lease to the USSR? No oil and scrap metal embargo on Japan?

That's an important point to clarify.

I will say this much; if the Nazis manage to defeat the Soviets, then there will be war with France over A-L, probably before 1950.

 

[Glen]

For the sake of argument, let's presume France IS willing to return A-L for the sake of peace. But let's also consider that Hitler is likely to forego such a demand to avoid needlessly antagonizing France to ensure a free hand everywhere else.

Huh? That seems contradictory. Okay, put it this way....France and Germany agree to a pleblicite in Alsace and Lorraine on which country to join.

BTW, anyone know in this scenario which way that vote would go?

 

[ninebucks]

Let's say France and Britain (can we include Benelux aswell?) sign a pact that essentially draws a line along the Franco-Benelucian border and says 'right, anything east of that line is none of our concern!'

Hitler is happy with this, as he doesn't really have any intention to rob the land from anyone but untermenschen, and with the Western powers disposed, he is able to concentrate his Drive to the East.

1930s: Czechoslovakia is invaded. Poland is partitioned between the Nazis and Soviets. Hitler and Mussolini divide the Balkans between themselves, some puppet governments are set up, while most of the land is simply incorporated as lebensraum.

1940s: Nazi Germany invades the Soviet Union, and presses through quite considerably. The Soviet Union eventually managed to slow down the invasion. Japan invades the Soviet Union from the south-east. As the weather picks up, Germany begins pushing further into Russia, the Soviet government flees east of the Urals. The Soviet Union, drastically in need of allies, organises the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi and empowers the Indian Communist partisans. Meanwhile, the Nazi-backed Mufti of Jerusalem declares himself Sultan of an Independent Sultanate of Jordan, the militias of his short-lived regime massacre Jewish settlers and destroy their kibbutzim, before eventually being supressed by British Imperial troops, Anglo-German relations take a nosedive. The Soviet Union and the Third Reich are caught in a stalemate which eventually ends when Hitler dies and is replaced by a more moderate Nazi who seeks to consolidate an agreed border with the USSR, Stalin reluctantly accepts, and the Third Reich begins establishing eugenically-selected communities in the conquered territories. By the end of this decade, nearly ten million Jews are dead.

1950s: Japan consolidates its East Siberian territories and begins colonising Russia in earnest. Japan introduces a two-tiered forced breeding program, the upper tier to encourage pure Japanese maidens to mate with pure Japanese soldiers to produce a ethnically pure ruling class, and a lower tier encouraging Imperial Soldiers to rape the natives and produce a half-Japanese servantile class.

The Soviet Mutiny begins in India. Communist militias begin armed resistance against the British armed forces. Many army camps are ambushed and their occupants massacred. Britain declares a State of Emergency in the Raj, and the army begins a serious enrollment scheme back in Blighty to enlist a force to suppress the multi-million man strong rebellion. Meanwhile, Nazi activities in Arabia have reached an unprecedented level.

In 1953, the Soviet Union invades British Iran, and World War Two begins.

 

[DrakeRlugia]

The parts of Alsace-Lorraine which Germany owned prior to World War 1 where almost entirely German, ethnically. There was a sizable French group within the region, but the Germans were more dominate. If a vote was held, the territory would probably remain French. Prior to the WW1, some 'atrocities' occured between German troops and the Alsatians, not to mention the region had no rights in the empire.

Not to mention, France, appeasement or not, would not be likely to hand over a region they fought so hard for to regain.

 

[TheMann]

Appeasement might just result in Germany's attacking the USSR without bothering in with France and Britain. Hitler surely would know that if he hit Britain the rest of Britain's empire would come after him, and the French would not give back Alsace-Lorraine without one helluva brawl. Germany would overrun the Poles in 1939 and keep on going, and as soon as one Panzer division crosses the border into the USSR Stalin gets pissed and the Red Army responds full force with the Germans. Stalin would extend the front lines form the Baltic all the way to the Mediterranean.

There is a good question that opens here - if Japan is dumb enough to attack either the USSR or Pearl Harbor right now, the West would have much choice but to hit back. Hitting the USSR which is preoccupied with Hitler would be easier but nonetheless a huge challenge to do. Japan here would be advised to act as the frontman against the Reds - by that Japan is backed by the US and the colonial powers to beat up on the Russians. This would be rather requiring Japan not attack any imperial territories - meaning the Phillipines, French Indochina and the Dutch East Indies are off-limits. That might keep Western Europe and their empire out of the war, at least for a while.

The West might play both sides - do some covert backing of the Reds while openly backing Japan, letting Germany and the USSR beat the shit out of each other to the point where neither is much of a threat. Japan would gain from this, though with their racism they might cause problems towards the treatment of the Russians. The moment anybody hits a European or US colony (Phillipines was a US colony until 1946, don't forget) then WWII gets kicked off in earnest.

 

[KieronAntony]

Basically, the Germans would win the war alot easier, they don't have troops committed elsewhere fighting the British or French. The USSR would collapse once the Germans took what they wanted as Lebensraum, and eventually the Italians would declare war on Britain and France because of African territories, Germany would follow suit, french are again fairly easily beaten, British are isolated, eventually sign an armistice, that is an actual armistice, both sides jus stop the fighting and declare white peace for one another. Japanese attack British territory in far east and attack US at Hawaii, Pearl Harbour, both sides declare war on Japan, Germany remains neutral as it did not need to ally itself with Japan, or declare war on US, Japan is eventually defeated, Atomic bombs are not used. Britains empire remains in tact because it did not need to compromise with India to fight in the war in exchange for independance. Britain eventually declares was on Italy, again, over african territories, Germany, having got what it wanted throughout the war, remains neutral, Italy loses the war after being severely beaten back in North Africa, Britain assumes control over former Italian colonies and gives back Italian occupied territories of France back to France, although Indo-china has become three indepenant countries by this time because they were proclaimed so because France had to give them up because of German occupation during the war, which has now ceased and democracy again flourishes in France, although as a result of the French loss in the war they had to give up Alscae-lorraine to Germany.

 

[TheMann]

The French did put up the Maginot line, which even if it didn't stop the Germans it would slow them down or force them to go through the Netherlands and Belgium. Either way the French have some time to mobilize, and if Hitler does go after the USSR first his army will probably be worn down form that, and it would take time to replenish it and re-outfit it. If the Germans start massing anywhere near the Western Borders, its game on and the Brits and French would have cause to hit first.

Hitler wouldn't go after the Western Europeans because he had more to gain going east instead of West. Smashing the USSR and potentially toppling Stalin wouldn't hurt the opinion of the West towards him either.

 

[Smaug]

Basically, the Germans would win the war alot easier, they don't have troops committed elsewhere fighting the British or French. The USSR would collapse once the Germans took what they wanted as Lebensraum, and eventually the Italians would declare war on Britain and France because of African territories, Germany would follow suit, french are again fairly easily beaten, British are isolated, eventually sign an armistice, that is an actual armistice, both sides jus stop the fighting and declare white peace for one another. Japanese attack British territory in far east and attack US at Hawaii, Pearl Harbour, both sides declare war on Japan, Germany remains neutral as it did not need to ally itself with Japan, or declare war on US, Japan is eventually defeated, Atomic bombs are not used. Britains empire remains in tact because it did not need to compromise with India to fight in the war in exchange for independance. Britain eventually declares was on Italy, again, over african territories, Germany, having got what it wanted throughout the war, remains neutral, Italy loses the war after being severely beaten back in North Africa, Britain assumes control over former Italian colonies and gives back Italian occupied territories of France back to France, although Indo-china has become three indepenant countries by this time because they were proclaimed so because France had to give them up because of German occupation during the war, which has now ceased and democracy again flourishes in France, although as a result of the French loss in the war they had to give up Alscae-lorraine to Germany.

both sides jus stop the fighting and declare white peace for one another.

Hmmm:/

 

[Wendell]

Maybe Hitler makes a deal with France over A-L along the lines of that he made with Italy over South Tyrol. IIRC, Hitler began removing Germans from Italian-held territory.