Axis-Soviet Invasion of Turkey, 1941

[Locke]

Suppose Hitler decides to postpone Barbarossa for all the blatantly obvious reasons he should have in OTL, in favor of continued cooperation with the USSR (for now...).

Under what circumstances would Turkey have been given the Poland treatment by Stalin and Hitler? Would Stalin have gone for it? One POD is Turkey not signing a friendship treaty with Germany (signed June 18), and gets closer with the Allies.

Turkey had a weak military and lots of resources. Hitler would have wanted it to secure control of the Levant, possibly to link up with Rommel and the Vichy forces in Syria, and anti-British Arabs. Stalin would have wanted to secure the Black Sea, gain more territory around the Caucuses, and might very well have followed it up or concurrently launches an invasion of Iran (without British help in this case; he might very well have taken all of Iran instead of the northern half.

How would the campaign influence British resolve? How would the Turks, as well as the Kurds and Armenians, respond to the possibility of liberation, or trading one master for another?

 

[jmc247]

Honestly, if Stalin and Hitler signs on then Britain likely ends up at war with the Soviet Union and Germany and will likely feel they have to make peace with one or the other after a few months or risk losing their Empire.

 

[The Byronic Hero]

How does Hitler cross the Bosphorus? Seems the Soviets would need to conduct the majority of the invasion and Stalin doesn't strike me as someone who would jump at that chance.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

How does Hitler cross the Bosphorus? Seems the Soviets would need to conduct the majority of the invasion and Stalin doesn't strike me as someone who would jump at that chance.

Actually Stalin was proposing action on Turkey, because he wanted control of the Bosphorus and naval access to the Mediterranean. Basically the traditional Russian policy of a warm water port. The problem is Hitler and Stalin have too many strategic frictions on that to really happen, so I think both would prefer to let Turkey remain neutral rather than invade and then get into serious disagreements over the Straits.

 

[King Augeas]

Yeah, the main attraction of Turkey is access to the Med, and I can't see a policy of sharing it being very stable - each side would be aware that the other could cut off access at any point...

 

[Gudestein]

Actually Stalin was proposing action on Turkey, because he wanted control of the Bosphorus and naval access to the Mediterranean. Basically the traditional Russian policy of a warm water port. The problem is Hitler and Stalin have too many strategic frictions on that to really happen, so I think both would prefer to let Turkey remain neutral rather than invade and then get into serious disagreements over the Straits.

This is interesting for AH. How was he proposing action?
Lets just assume that Hitler accepts expansion of Soviet influence (in exchange for a lot of something) with the intention to strike east when the Soviets are occupied in turkey?

 

[luis3007]

Just sign on a small republic in Thrace, neutral to all and with free access for both sides. So Hitler gets a puppet Turkey with its resources, Stalin gets his eastern claims and both sides have access to the straits.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

This is interesting for AH. How was he proposing action?
Lets just assume that Hitler accepts expansion of Soviet influence (in exchange for a lot of something) with the intention to strike east when the Soviets are occupied in turkey?

TBH I don't recall the specifics, it was something that came up on this forum when discussing Soviet entry into the Axis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German–Soviet_Axis_talks#Soviet_counterproposal_agreement

The problem is that Soviet interests in the Straits also came with demands for bases in Bulgaria. It would be too much of a mess to even try and encourage the Soviets to invade Turkey.

 

[thaddeus]

TBH I don't recall the specifics, it was something that came up on this forum when discussing Soviet entry into the Axis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German–Soviet_Axis_talks#Soviet_counterproposal_agreement

The problem is that Soviet interests in the Straits also came with demands for bases in Bulgaria. It would be too much of a mess to even try and encourage the Soviets to invade Turkey.

a (speculative?) offer was made to Bulgaria to "conquer European Turkey" for them, of course they were well aligned with Germany and the "offer" came with the presence of Soviet army!

 

[Dementor]

How does Hitler cross the Bosphorus? Seems the Soviets would need to conduct the majority of the invasion and Stalin doesn't strike me as someone who would jump at that chance.

The Bosphorus is less than a kilometer wide at some points. It would not pose any serious difficulty to the German forces.

 

[Father Maryland]

Yeah the Turk's had a weak military. But there were a hell of a lot of them, they've proven themselves to be damned fierce fighters, and they have a lot of really rough terrain that the Nazis/Soviets will have to crawl through.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Yeah the Turk's had a weak military. But there were a hell of a lot of them, they've proven themselves to be damned fierce fighters, and they have a lot of really rough terrain that the Nazis/Soviets will have to crawl through.

Tell me, how did that work out for them in WW1? Or the Balkan Wars?

 

[pattersonautobody]

The Pesky Persians did not hold out against the Soviets and Brits either, and Iran is more than twice as big as Turkey.

http://mapfight.appspot.com/tr-vs-ir/turkey-iran-size-comparison

 

[Father Maryland]

Tell me, how did that work out for them in WW1? Or the Balkan Wars?

Err pretty well at Gallipoli. And pretty damn well after the war against the Greeks, Italians, French, and pretty much everyone else. They're not fighting for some far off colonial province this time. They're fighting on home ground. Damned rough home ground at that.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Err pretty well at Gallipoli. And pretty damn well after the war against the Greeks, Italians, French, and pretty much everyone else. They're not fighting for some far off colonial province this time. They're fighting on home ground. Damned rough home ground at that.

So Palestine was a far off province? Or Anatolia? In Europe in the Balkans wars, which was where they were the strongest they got their clock cleaned. And most of that was against militaries that weren't particularly great. At Gallipoli they had German help and supply, plus it was the one area they were the strongest. Not really a big help in defending Istanbul from land attack or against air attack. They might have been able to fight a successful war from the interior against the Greeks in the 1920s, but what about the Germans and Soviets in 1941?

 

[ben0628]

So Palestine was a far off province? Or Anatolia? In Europe in the Balkans wars, which was where they were the strongest they got their clock cleaned. And most of that was against militaries that weren't particularly great. At Gallipoli they had German help and supply, plus it was the one area they were the strongest. Not really a big help in defending Istanbul from land attack or against air attack. They might have been able to fight a successful war from the interior against the Greeks in the 1920s, but what about the Germans and Soviets in 1941?

With all due respect, I think you are under estimating the Turks. First off, let's start with the Balkan Wars. They were at war by themselves against Bulgaria, Serbia, and Greece. One of the main reasons why they did poorly in the first Balkan war was because at the outbreak, the vast majority of its troops were in the Asian part of the empire and the troops they had in Europe were surrounded by three different countries and outnumbered, which is why they did poorly. I would also like to point out that Turkey got their shit together and did pretty well in the Second Balkan War.

Now, let's move on to World War One. The main reasons why the Turks lost was because of the Arab revolt and they were fighting a war on multiple fronts. However it wasn't until the Arab revolt was in full spring late in the war when the Turks started losing. Before then, they held off the Entente in Gallipoli, they were regaining lost ground in the Caucasuses, they were holding up pretty well in Southern Palestine, and oh yeah that's right, they destroyed an entire British army in Iraq! It's wasn't until the Arab population went bat shit crazy and revolted that the Turks started to lose ground. But even then, I'd still argue that the Turks were not defeated and we're still capable of defending the Turkish homeland. After the war, the Turks were able to drive the Greeks and French out of their occupied country (without German support), further showing their tenacity.

Finally, let us move on to World War Two and the proposed German Soviet invasion of Turkey. First off, if this were to happen, the Turks would no doubt get support from Great Britain (hell maybe even some lend lease from America), so supplies for the Turkish army won't be a problem. Secondly, the Soviets in 1941 wouldn't be able to invade Turkey unless Germany did most of the work. The Russians got their asses kicked by the Finns for Christ sake! A large incompetent, i'll-equipped Russian army trying to advance through the mountains of Eastern Anatolia wouldn't get too far.

Now as for the Germans. Yes their army is competent as well as large and well equipped. However, to get to Turkey's capital of Ankara, the Germans would have to plow their way through Turkish defenses on the Turk's European peninsula, get into Street fighting in Istanbul, cross a mile wide Bosporus, and March through the mountains of Western and Central Anatolia all the while having to deal with and angry Turkish population that won't like being occupied, British soldiers reinforcing the Turks, and to top it all off, logistics would be a nightmare for the Germans. Now I'm not saying the Germans wouldn't succeed, however the obstacles the Germans face make blitzkrieg impossible, meaning a Turkish invasion would become a war of attrition.

 

[Shinsu]

Allow me to requote myself from an earlier thread. I don't see Stalin being willing (or Hitler for that matter) to allow this sort of thing to happen. So here is my thoughts on it.

Trying to go through Turkey would really only cause more problems for the Axis, one of Turkey's main exports to Germany was Chromite which was needed to produce Stainless Steel, while the lack of this export could be taken under control and mined directly, that "transition" tends to produce problems.

Turkey couldn't have lasted long against an invasion. They had a peace time army of 174,000 men which didn't start seeing increase until the start of 1940, at that time they mustered ~230,000 men, one armoured brigade, and three cavalry brigades. But almost all of the equipment was pre-WW1 with rifles like the Lee Enfield, Lebel, Masuiers etc. being used. They had fortifications along the Dardanelles and along the outer regions of the country to the East. The airforce was 370 planes of all type with only about half of them being modern even though they had over 8,000 men in their airforce.

The infrastructural would be pretty horrible for the Germans though. Where exactly would they try to re-supply them from? The ports along the Southern end of Turkey would (likely) not be usable due to the British naval and aerial presence from Cyprus and Egypt. The Soviets would NOT allow German ships into the Black Sea and I think the small Turkish navy could even prevent a good portion of supply ships to be sunk if the Soviets did allow German ships through. Do you think they could/would send as much offensive ships to the Black Sea as they did in OTL? Romania used their navy primary during the Black Sea offensives and it was "on par" with the Turkish navy. (The Turkish navy consisted of the outdated battle cruiser Yavuz (ex-Goeben), 4 destroyers, 5-6 submarines, 2 light cruisers, 3 mine-sweepers, 2 gunboats, 3 motor torpedo boats, 4 minelayers and a surveying vessel.)
Other then that then all supplies would need to be brought in from land and you can just imagine the troubles that it would cause...

 

[MerryPrankster]

Tell me, how did that work out for them in WW1? Or the Balkan Wars?

Defeated British at Gallipoli and Kut.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Defeated British at Gallipoli and Kut.

Lost the war though. They only won at their strongest fortified position in the Empire at Gallipoli and then when the Brits got really dumb and overextended themselves. When the Brits came back heavy later in the war they destroyed the Turks.

 

[Veiovis]

Secondly, the Soviets in 1941 wouldn't be able to invade Turkey unless Germany did most of the work. The Russians got their asses kicked by the Finns for Christ sake! A large incompetent, i'll-equipped Russian army trying to advance through the mountains of Eastern Anatolia wouldn't get too far.

those finns had a army equal in size to the turkish one,with better equipment,tactics and a terrain/weather advantage that made anatolia look like a playground. also,the soviet army of 1941,while deeply flawed,was hardly the one of the winter war.

However, to get to Turkey's capital of Ankara, the Germans would have to plow their way through Turkish defenses on the Turk's European peninsula, get into Street fighting in Istanbul, cross a mile wide Bosporus, and March through the mountains of Western and Central Anatolia all the while having to deal with and angry Turkish population that won't like being occupied, British soldiers reinforcing the Turks, and to top it all off, logistics would be a nightmare for the Germans. Now I'm not saying the Germans wouldn't succeed, however the obstacles the Germans face make blitzkrieg impossible, meaning a Turkish invasion would become a war of attrition.

1. The Germans occupied significantly larger populations that weren't exactly thrilled living under nazi "care"
2. turkish defenses on the european side will collapse extremly quickly. street fighting and crossing narrow straits with air support is hardly something the germans can't pull of.
3. similar mountains hardly saved jugoslawia or greece

i think your are quite overestimating the combat power of a small,backward country against two superpowers at once