Decapitation Strike on Nazis in March 1943

It hasn't been long since Goebbels had given his 'Total War' speech, increasingly he was becoming the 'face' of the regime. Guderian has just moved into his newly powerful posiiton as Inspector of Armoured Troops. Some sort of triumvirate between those two and Speer would probably result. They might do what Hitler did in IOTL and declare the rank of Fuhrer 'special', whilst allocating the role of President to Goebbels, Chancellor to Speer, and merging OKH and OKW under Guderian's control.
 

Deleted member 1487

It hasn't been long since Goebbels had given his 'Total War' speech, increasingly he was becoming the 'face' of the regime. Guderian has just moved into his newly powerful posiiton as Inspector of Armoured Troops. Some sort of triumvirate between those two and Speer would probably result. They might do what Hitler did in IOTL and declare the rank of Fuhrer 'special', whilst allocating the role of President to Goebbels, Chancellor to Speer, and merging OKH and OKW under Guderian's control.
Goebbels had no power. Without Hitler he's nothing and was already largely just an orbiter; doing some rallies and having some media control won't last beyond being arrested. Really none of the three had much power or public support without Hitler supporting them. Hitler really was the lynchpin of the regime and only Goering and Himmler had actually power ("power comes from the barrel of a gun") outside of Hitler.
 
Still unconditional surrender. There was a strong point of view at the time that the Nazi government was merely a symptom of the inherent Prussian militarism which had been allowed to survive post-Great War, after getting dragged into things for a second time they were going to make damn sure there wasn't a third. Combine it was the German Resistance's quite frankly insane demands and they're going to get turned down flat.

What's interesting is that even some political elements in Germany believed that too. Adenauer apparently in 1919 thought Prussia needed to be dissolved and the Rheinland made into a separate German federal state (within the Germany) and post-WW2 thought Germany should never again have a capital in Berlin; it has come out even that Adenauer wanted to trade West Berlin for parts of Thuringia and Saxony, which JFK rejected.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_Adenauer#After_World_War_II_and_the_founding_of_the_CDU

Which is all a little odd since the NSDAP's Heartland was Catholic Bavaria!?
 
Over all it was applied with some minor face saving terms, like the Emperor of Japan remaining as a figurehead.
This is untrue. While Japan was allowed to keep the Emperor this was NOT a term of surrender. It was a choice made by the Allies following Japan's surrender.
 

Deleted member 1487

Which is all a little odd since the NSDAP's Heartland was Catholic Bavaria!?
Bavaria is not the Rheinland, the Nazis weren't the Prussians, but allied to them. Also IIRC the Nazis did better in the North than South in the last free election.
 
So, at the end of September the Red Armies offensives have damaged the German position in the east, Italy has lost territory-removed Mussolini-is in Armisitce talks or surrendered, the Allies have a port and growing lodgement in France, and German offers of a cease fire have been rejected in favor of capitulation. What are the good options for the new German government at this point?

I'm assuming this is with the regular army in control and the SS neutered. If so, well, the Wehrmacht senior generals strip the western and southern fronts of everything they can, essentially opening them to the advance of the western allies while throwing it all at the Soviets. "We must hold back the Russian beasts" etc etc

So, soviet and western ally forces meet at the vistula rather than the elbe.
 
So, at the end of September the Red Armies offensives have damaged the German position in the east, Italy has lost territory-removed Mussolini-is in Armisitce talks or surrendered, the Allies have a port and growing lodgement in France, and German offers of a cease fire have been rejected in favor of capitulation. What are the good options for the new German government at this point?

Let's pick up from this point, and, add in a small item. Suddenly, possibly from interviews with former captives and/or as a result of Russian advances revealing previously unknown locations, the world gets wind of just how inappropriately Hitler's boys had been in their dealings with Jews, Gypsies, and the like. That's going to change the surrender dynamic just a wee bit, don't you think?
 
Let's pick up from this point, and, add in a small item. Suddenly, possibly from interviews with former captives and/or as a result of Russian advances revealing previously unknown locations, the world gets wind of just how inappropriately Hitler's boys had been in their dealings with Jews, Gypsies, and the like. That's going to change the surrender dynamic just a wee bit, don't you think?

Not really.
 
Goebbels had no power. Without Hitler he's nothing and was already largely just an orbiter; doing some rallies and having some media control won't last beyond being arrested. Really none of the three had much power or public support without Hitler supporting them. Hitler really was the lynchpin of the regime and only Goering and Himmler had actually power ("power comes from the barrel of a gun") outside of Hitler.

He lacked a power base but his media control did grant him a great deal of "soft power". I wouldn't be surprised if he became the 'face' of the regime, whilst Speer ran the home front and Guderian managed the war.
 

Deleted member 1487

He lacked a power base but his media control did grant him a great deal of "soft power". I wouldn't be surprised if he became the 'face' of the regime, whilst Speer ran the home front and Guderian managed the war.
No. He was not well liked in the party and the public really didn't care for him. Again Mao was right, power does come from the barrel of a gun and he had no guns under his command. A squad with MP40s showing up to his office to arrest him removes ALL of his power immediately. The new regime could put anyone in that role without issue.
 
No. He was not well liked in the party and the public really didn't care for him. Again Mao was right, power does come from the barrel of a gun and he had no guns under his command. A squad with MP40s showing up to his office to arrest him removes ALL of his power immediately. The new regime could put anyone in that role without issue.

I'm working on the basis that those who killed Hitler are even more likely to fail than the Valkyrie plot a year later, when the plot was far better organised and the war situation was even worse.

By all accounts, Speer had a decent relationship with Goebbels until the last months of the war. I'm fairly sure that Guderian would have gone along with such an arrangement had it meant that he would have been able to increase his military and political capital.

As an aside, your Mao quote is rather selective. Whilst he did state that political power comes from the barrel of a gun, his broader point was that it was necessary for the CCP to be wedded to the PLA. Even then, he pointed out that the party must control the gun, and never the other way around.
 

Deleted member 1487

I'm working on the basis that those who killed Hitler are even more likely to fail than the Valkyrie plot a year later, when the plot was far better organised and the war situation was even worse.
In general I agree, but the problem is with Hitler, Goering, and Himmler dead, the only Nazis with control over guns in a HIGHLY centralized state are dead; the opposition to the coup is headless, while the army, now severed of any loyalty to the Nazis, even if caught flat footed, isn't going to want to be led by any of the remaining Nazis.

By all accounts, Speer had a decent relationship with Goebbels until the last months of the war. I'm fairly sure that Guderian would have gone along with such an arrangement had it meant that he would have been able to increase his military and political capital.
Speer being friendly with Goebbels means nothing in terms of a post-Hitler government. Goebbels is useful or he's not. Also Speer had no guns under his control. Guderian also had no guns under his control, was being bribed by Hitler to accept whatever he said, and was more pro-army than Nazi.

As an aside, your Mao quote is rather selective. Whilst he did state that political power comes from the barrel of a gun, his broader point was that it was necessary for the CCP to be wedded to the PLA. Even then, he pointed out that the party must control the gun, and never the other way around.
Right, because the core point was that without control over guns you have no power; that means Goebbels, without any guns under his authority, had not actual power.
 
I think Goebbels would survive, he's both too powerless and useful to kill. If the army takes over, he would be a perfect representant to keep from the old regime; harmless but useful. Ifanother Nazi take over; why get rid of him either?

As for me I expect the army would take over, it will send out feelers for peace. The Allies will likely keep demanding unconditional surrender. Which will make the Germans fight on. But I expect with the Germans pushing peace feeler, it will be hard for USA to explain its population why unconditional surrender are so important, while in UK it will raise question on why they fight to give USSR half of Europe.
 
But I expect with the Germans pushing peace feeler, it will be hard for USA to explain its population why unconditional surrender are so important

Nope, I disagree with that. Given that the stab in the back myth came out of German generals surrendering last time, the last thing anyone wants to do is have a 3rd round of this nonsense.

Consider the fact that part of the Morgenthau plan got implemented until it was clear the Soviet Union was the next threat and Germany had to be armed. But notice it was two Germanies armed against each other. Unified Neutral Germany would have been quite disarmed.


The only Axis powers that could potentially get away with less than unconditional surrender are the minors and maybe Italy.
 

ben0628

Banned
Although the Allies as a whole agreed to unconstitutional surrender, would it be possible for the Western allies to sell out the Russians and make a really good deal with the Germans (all German soldiers move east and withdraw from France, Africa, and Italy as well as promising to allow Western allied troops to occupy the Balkans and Poland under the condition that Germany can keep it's pre polish invasion Territory and gets protection from the USSR) ?
 
Which is all a little odd since the NSDAP's Heartland was Catholic Bavaria!?
Not really. The NS strongholds were in (the Protestant parts) of East Prussia, and rural North Germany generally, Thuringia, and Munich. Most of the rest of Bavaria (except the majority Protestant areas) were BVP strongholds. Zentrum's base was in the Rhineland and Saxony, as was the SPD's while the KPD was strong in northern German cities like Hamburg and Lübeck, as well as Saxony.

Much of the NS leadership was Bavarian, but most of its voters weren't.
 
I'm assuming this is with the regular army in control and the SS neutered. If so, well, the Wehrmacht senior generals strip the western and southern fronts of everything they can, essentially opening them to the advance of the western allies while throwing it all at the Soviets...

In 1943? There are no US/UK forces in Europe - the North African campaign has two months to run.

And the Germans came to fear the US/UK almost as much as the Soviets. It was RAF Bomber Command that rained destruction on German cities; it was US Treasury Secretary Morgenthau who proposed the postwar demolition of German industry.
 
But I expect with the Germans pushing peace feeler, it will be hard for USA to explain its population why unconditional surrender are so important,

Insted of going by your expectations, look up the polls. There was a specific question in the Gallup ones, about making a deal with a Germany led by generals instead of by Hitler. The answer was, nope.
 
The solution the Russians took, eliminating the Junkers, deGermanizing half of Prussia in favor of the Poles, and eliminating every other overt aspect of Prussian militarism.

I understand your point, but the funny thing is that the Russian solution was ineffective. Today, most German neo-Nazis live in eastern Germany, and in fact the right-wing populist AfD is very strong there. Meanwhile in the former WAllied occupation zone, the right is mich weaker.

The conclusion: The American way to deal with Fascism was more effective than the Soviet one.
 
Top