Could Germany had defeated soviet union without western front

[Logisticsofwar]

Could germany had defeated the Soviet Union if it was at peace with the UK and it's allies in 1940/1941 before pearl harbor meaning no USA military involvement or would Germany and it's allies still lose leaving all of Europe at the mercy of the red army and comunism?

 

[JackLumber]

I'm of the opinion that without land lease the Soviets couldn't hold out

 

[Cuirassier]

Yes.
Commitments outside the Eastern front demanded disproportionately large material resources.

 

[Deleted member 96212]

Outright defeated is doubtful, but I think they could force a stalemate. I read somewhere that close to 80% of all German military casualties were sustained on the Eastern Front. Even assuming that many soldiers who would've gone to fight the West would be available to fight the USSR that still tells me the Germans are facing a tremendous uphill battle.

 

[TDM]

The thing is what does peace with UK and its allies mean. are we talking about a Germany that has beaten Poland, France, Norway, lowlands etc but for some reason isn't fighting the UK. Or a Germany that avoid all that and is only fighting Russia?

The problem with the first is I can't see how GB and it allies stay out, and I can't see how Germany can beat them on this schedule (or in fact at all)

The second is better for Germany obviously but there's still the question of Poland between them. I think the single best scenario for Germany is for some reason the USSR in say 1940 invades Poland, the Red army is not ready for this and struggles* and Germany seizes it opportunity to invade through Poland and on into Russia. downside to this is Russia is mobilising already, but an upside is Germany might actually find itself with international favour** and Russia with none. The big problem here is after the Finnish debacle, the soviets are going to need a really good reason to initiate an invasion of Poland (as opposed to just taking the opportunity presented by the German invasion of Poland). So Maybe a diversion point is the soviets don't invade Finland but instead Poland? But if there's no prior Finnish invasion the weakness of the red army is less known.



Either way Germany vs. USSR only. It's going to come down to Germany timing it just right so that it's amassed enough logistics and resources (none of the 3 months worth only bollocks) before the Soviets sort their army out. Problem is doing that without invading somewhere earlier first is going to put a massive strain on German industry and in the scenario above they would be doing this just on the off chance the Soviets just happen to invade Poland***. No invasion of France/west means less men and material losses but also less combat experience with a tactic they're going to need to be perfect at for Russia. Ultimately I think it's possible for Germany to get to Moscow and either take it out of commission or to actually take it. Especially if we add some change in the weather maybe the Sep/Oct rain holds off a bit that year. They're are going to need oil from somewhere though. Ultimately though I don't think this beats Russia, entirely, but if Russia is alone in the world they might struggle to fight back past that in a mass military organised way as per OTL and instead it turns into Germany trying to hold a massive amount of land while the Soviets do their best to make it as hard as possible from east of the Urals. Maybe Japan seeing the soviets humbled now decide they can risk taking an opportunity north and not south at this point? (although fighting wars in two massive countries, not a great idea), this has the knock on effect of not riling the US and colonial powers up.

One thing though Nazis are gonna Nazi, they will start containing and then liquidating the local population etc. Maybe they can keep that quiet from the international community, maybe the international community will be more tolerant of it since there's no western European invasion and it will be happening in Russia, more willing to accept German mitigation "those rehousing facilitates outside Kiev really are nicely painted after all". Either way it will effect international impression at least somewhat and it will certainly increase local resistance.



*OTL they didn't exactly impress anyone even when Germany had gone first from the other direction,

**if the soviets did do this it actually feeds into Hitlers "Bolshevik threat", and even if the the rest of the world don't suddenly jump on side with him, they might be happy to see him and Stalin fight (especially after the international surprise of the M-R pact)

***maybe the M-R pact is a bit more friendly and Russia lest slip to Germany that it's going to invade Poland, or maybe the pact gives an opportunity for a better then OTL German intelligence (and worse Russian counter intelligence) and the Germans find out through espionage?

 

[History Learner]

Yes. To quote from Denis Havlat's articles on Lend Lease, part 2, from the Journal of Slavic Military Studies:

Overall, the Western Allies were responsible only for a small fraction of the losses sustained by German infantry and armor between 1941 and 1943 (around 10 percent); however, their contribution in the destruction and occupation of the Luftwaffe was overwhelming. The same applies to their contribution in forcing the Germans to leave most heavy artillery in the Reich as anti-aircraft weapons, preventing them from being used as anti-tank weapons in the East. Without Allied military intervention, the Germans could have sent at least 2,000 additional tanks, some 5,000 additional 88 mm anti-aircraft guns, around 15,000 additional aircraft, tens of thousands of additional motor vehicles, and up to half a million additional soldiers to the Eastern Front in the years 1941–1943, which would have shifted the balance in their favor.​

Further on:

Without the need to fight in the Atlantic; to transport large amounts of troops, equipment, and supplies across the entire continent; and the necessity to defend against Allied bombing, Germany could have massively reduced its U-boat, locomotive, and anti-aircraft gun and ammunition production and converted at least part of these capacities into the production of more aircraft and equipment for land warfare. Additionally, without bombing, and the need to maintain a large enough army to fight on several fronts, there would have been less need to use forced labor in the factories, thus boosting production. Historically, Germany already outproduced the USSR in certain areas like locomotives, trucks, and even bombers, with 12,664 produced by Germany in the years 1941–1943 as compared to 11,359 built by the USSR.170 Without Allied intervention and Lend-Lease, Soviet margins in these areas would most likely have widened, while margins in areas such as tanks would have shrunk significantly. If Germany and its industry could have concentrated on one single front from 1941 onwards, it most likely would have vastly changed the outcome of the war in the East.​

 

[Sam R.]

still lose leaving all of Europe at the mercy of the red army and comunism?

You know, the editorial doesn't belong amongst history. There's a reason so many Central European informed historical speculations become quite arch, or deploy soviet propaganda phraseology. And it is largely because of the volume of this kind of editorial slipped into otherwise worthy speculation. "No eastern war: French proletariat enslaved forever?" See the point?

Currently we believe the Soviet Union would have collapsed without lend-lease, but, simultaneously conflicting nationalisms and imperialisms meant that the British state would not have accepted France under German hegemony. Never mind the political constitution of that state: cf Spain as an independent state of broadly corresponding acts and politics.

So it is bloody difficult to get the original speculative position. A hegemon on the continent was unthinkable for the UK until the 1990s.

yours,
Sam R.

 

[TDM]

Couple of extra things on my post above. If the Germans are going to invade Poland after the Soviets do, they're going to have to really double down on the "protecting the world from judeo-Bolshevism" rhetoric and do their best to sell the narrative that they are just passing through Poland to chase the Bolsheviks back and then on into Russia. Now obviously no their not ever going to leave Poland and they'll only be able to rein in their natural proclivities for so long but they will need to try and keep that shit further east to begin with.

Also Italy. Assuming Italy does what it does OTL, Germany can use them as a distraction and not directly help them in the Balkans, Greece and N.Africa. If Germany isn't fighting GB & Co. but GB & Co. end up fighting a much smaller and quicker war against Italy's cut price new roman empire, that's a distraction from everyone thinking too much about Germany.