Defending the Realm

As for the specifics of the invasion: October and November are not great times of year to move around off road. Switzerland is not suited to armies with tanks and artillery to move around, but it is suited for light infantry with those long wooden shoe things. Your best point of comparison could be the Soviet/Finnish Winter War, only with added mountains to slow advances. The Winter War was over 3 months in duration, and the Soviets had limited objectives. I can't see a complete overrunning of Switzerland in less than that, and 6 months is probably not unrealistic.

Just a little comment on your depiction of the Winter War: the Soviets had "limited objectives" only inasmuch as Finland was a small country, given that the original plan was the occupation and puppetization/annexation of the whole nation.

Generally I agree with your comment about a German-Swiss war, though I think we might expect the German attack to be somewhat more professional than the initial Soviet assault on Finland was - at the very least, here the German leadership might expect to fight an actual war instead of just scaring the enemy into submission like the initial Soviet expectation seemed to be in 1939.

But then of course the Alpine terrain would be more difficult and the Swiss would be a tough nut to crack.
 
Last edited:
Just a little comment on your depiction of the Winter War: the Soviets had "limited objectives" only inasmuch as Finland was a small country, given that the original plan was the occupation and puppetization/annexation of the whole nation.

I'm open to correction, because it's not an area I'm particularly familiar with, but my understanding was that the initial Soviet demands were moving the border on the Karelian isthmus by a significant amount, the Finns removing the existing fortifications on the isthmus, transferal of islands in the Gulf of Finland, and Finland leasing the Hanko Peninsula for 30 years.

It's a major ask, and one that would have been difficult/impossible to accept, but I haven't come across anything that suggested that it was planned to annex the whole of Finland.
 
I'm open to correction, because it's not an area I'm particularly familiar with, but my understanding was that the initial Soviet demands were moving the border on the Karelian isthmus by a significant amount, the Finns removing the existing fortifications on the isthmus, transferal of islands in the Gulf of Finland, and Finland leasing the Hanko Peninsula for 30 years.

It's a major ask, and one that would have been difficult/impossible to accept, but I haven't come across anything that suggested that it was planned to annex the whole of Finland.

There is all indication to say that the Soviet game plan was similar for Finland as with the Baltic states: erode the national morale and will (and ability) to fight with a string of in themselves limited demands and then when the small neighbour is rendered unable to resist, invade it in a quick coup de main. So the demands of the fall of 1939 would have been only a beginning. In themselves, the areas demanded in 1939 or even the areas received in 1940 did nothing to defend Leningrad (as indeed 1941 proved). Only taking the whole of Finland into the Soviet defensive system would make a difference for the northwestern USSR.

I have commented about this issue at length in various threads, so if you want to see my argument in more detail, just search my posts with the appropriate terms...:)

(I'd provide you links myself but I am on a train right now and it is a bit vexing for me to do with just my phone...)
 
Last edited:
Another question, what aare the U Boat losses like compared to OTL?
Without the Kriegsmarine surface fleet to deal with, the Royal Navy (and the other Commonwealth Navies) are able to focus entirely on combating the U-Boat threat, and consequently U-Boat losses are significantly lower in this timeline.
 
Without the Kriegsmarine surface fleet to deal with, the Royal Navy (and the other Commonwealth Navies) are able to focus entirely on combating the U-Boat threat, and consequently U-Boat losses are significantly lower in this timeline.

If you mean, the UK looses fewer ships, I'm not so sure. Even in the "real world", after the Norway campaign, the Kriegsmarine surface fleet was a paper tiger; it was always reduced to hit-and-run tactics. Here, despite the massacre of Sealion, I assume the Bismarck and Tirpitz are still intact, (they were commissoned only in 1941), so those are potential headaches. With the loss of the surface ships, I'd bet the surge of U-boot construction would start sooner. Add the fact that the RN was very short on ASW escorts and Coastal Command was almost an afterthought, the UK was not prepared for an U-boot war As for using fleet units for ASW warfare... the loss of HMS Courageous showed what a bad idea this was...
 
Higher you mean?

If you mean, the UK looses fewer ships, I'm not so sure. Even in the "real world", after the Norway campaign, the Kriegsmarine surface fleet was a paper tiger; it was always reduced to hit-and-run tactics. Here, despite the massacre of Sealion, I assume the Bismarck and Tirpitz are still intact, (they were commissoned only in 1941), so those are potential headaches. With the loss of the surface ships, I'd bet the surge of U-boot construction would start sooner. Add the fact that the RN was very short on ASW escorts and Coastal Command was almost an afterthought, the UK was not prepared for an U-boot war As for using fleet units for ASW warfare... the loss of HMS Courageous showed what a bad idea this was...
I'll probably have to re-think the Battle of the Atlantic in future updates then. My thinking was that, with the Kriegsmarine's surface fleet neutralised for the time being, the British Government would focus less on dealing with surface engagements (as there would be fewer) and instead greater energy would be put into confronting the U-Boats (i.e. the creation of more effective Bombes to decipher the Enigma code used by U-Boats).
But if my thinking on this is wrong, then I am more than willing to change the future updates.
 
With regard to Algeria, it seems to me that de Gaulle and company might like [the thought of 'liberating' (or at least bringing it over from Vichy's sphere)] it very much, since at least part of Algeria at this time is considered part of France itself. With Algeria, de Gaulle can run propaganda claiming that the Free French are Frenchmen (and women) now fighting out of and operating from France itself.

Situation in the Far East needs clarifying. With more decisive victories by the British, the Imperial Japanese might be looking twice at simply attacking anyone and everyone. One of the most important things, as far as I understand it, from their [Imperial Japanese] point of view is their nasty war in China, and that they continue to have the resources to fight it. If the US starts putting embargos on materials over Japanese actions in French Indochina, rather than thinking they might be able to defeat anyone and everyone it seems to me at least an outside possibility might exist that the Japanese feel the need to offer: 'Look, if we wind down our stuff in French Indochina, which was why you put the embargos on, will you take the embargos off?'
 
I'll probably have to re-think the Battle of the Atlantic in future updates then. My thinking was that, with the Kriegsmarine's surface fleet neutralised for the time being, the British Government would focus less on dealing with surface engagements (as there would be fewer) and instead greater energy would be put into confronting the U-Boats (i.e. the creation of more effective Bombes to decipher the Enigma code used by U-Boats).
But if my thinking on this is wrong, then I am more than willing to change the future updates.

Note that, afaik, the first british Bombe was up and running in March 1940. Vital as the "Enigma war" was, it was often crippled by the RN/RAF's lack of means to actually use the information aquired: ships, crews, weapons, long range aircraft and their weapons...
 
Note that, afaik, the first british Bombe was up and running in March 1940. Vital as the "Enigma war" was, it was often crippled by the RN/RAF's lack of means to actually use the information aquired: ships, crews, weapons, long range aircraft and their weapons...
Oh, I am aware that the first Bombe was developed before the POD, yet I was thinking that the British would be able to establish more effective bombes quicker in this timeline.
 
Chapter Seven: The End of 1941
As 1941 drew to a close, several events of significance occurred which shall be discussed in a single chapter dedicated to the final months of the year.

The first of these came as a direct result of Tannenbaum, and the Nazi conquest of Switzerland. The fact that Switzerland had declared neutrality upon the outbreak of the war in 1939 and had done little to provoke Germany sent shudders down the spines of the other neutral nations of Europe – it was clear that neutrality would not protect them from the Wehrmacht, and that waiting for the war to come to a close was simply no longer an option. And so, the remaining neutral European nations – Portugal, Sweden, Ireland, and Spain – began mobilising their armed forces in preparation for a possible incursion by the German military (although, in the case of Ireland, many Irish soldiers had already mobilised themselves and left to volunteer in the British Army - consequently, when de Valera ordered the mobilisation of Irish forces to take place, he found the Irish Army rather bare).
The second event came from beyond Europe in East Asia.

It is at this point, at the end of 1941, that a general overview can be provided of the situation in East Asia, and the United States’ attitude towards it – for, while the Second World War was raging in Europe, the Second Sino-Japanese War was also taking place. The war began in July 1937, as Japan launched a full-scale invasion of China, hoping to conquer the nation and solidify Japanese dominance in East Asia. Although the war initially saw Japanese advances deep into Chinese territory, it eventually devolved into a brutal war of attrition, characterised by atrocities such as the Rape of Nanking.

Yet, by 1941, Japan faced a new problem – the international community’s reaction to their actions. After Japanese troops invaded French Indochina in September 1940, the United States, wary of Japanese actions, imposed an oil embargo on Japan in August 1941, so as to put pressure on the Japanese Government to withdraw from Indochina and cease its conflict with China. The US embargo soon had its intended effect, as Japanese oil supplies, which had already been running low, soon began to become scarcer, and many in the Japanese Military began to speculate on drastic action to secure oil – namely, attacking the US and the Allies to secure oil in the Dutch East Indies. Eventually, Japan began preparing for an attack on the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbour so as to force a war between them and the Allies. Yet, in October 1941, an event occurred in northern China which changed the dynamic of East Asian affairs entirely.

In October, civilians in the Liaoning province of Manchuria noticed a suspicious liquid bubbling above the surface in several areas – initially the people who discovered this liquid were reluctant to inform anyone else, yet eventually (how exactly has since been lost to history) authorities in Manchukuo learnt of the discovery, and, soon enough, geologists were deployed from Japan to investigate the ‘liquid’ discovered in Manchuria. Several tests were conducted, and it quickly became clear to Japan that oil had been discovered in Liaoning [1]. By November, equipment had arrived in Liaoning to start the drilling of the oil, and soon enough the long process of extracting oil began, with oil reaching Japan in earnest in 1945.

Historians have emphasised the discovery of oil in Liaoning for a variety of reasons – yet the most important was that it enabled Japan to successfully escape the US oil embargo, and therefore led to the abandonment of Japanese plans for an attack on the US. Although supplies of other resources Japan lacked as a result of other embargoes, such as scrap materials, remained scarce, the discovery of oil was seen by the Japanese Government as enough, for the time being, to turn its attention away from war with the US. Meanwhile, Japan was able to solve its shortage of rubber, another precious resource made sparse by the embargoes, by pressuring Thailand, a generally pro-Japanese nation, to declare war on China in February 1942, thereby allowing the Japanese to gain access to rubber from Thailand. And so, no conflict came between the US and Japan at the end of 1941, and for the time being the two remained hostile to one another, albeit at peace.

Yet for how long?

***​

[1] Our timeline’s Liaohe Oil Field.
 
Last edited:
With regard to Ireland "mobilising its forces for war", too late. Much of its potential to increase its armed forces is already mobilised, having left Ireland and joined the British forces.

De Valera's position in charge of Ireland is going to be interesting, and the status of the treaty ports will be reopened. Britain now has huge leverage to get use rights, and along with the Azores, the Battle of the Atlantic is swung significantly away from Germany.

On the other hand, given that Sealion was a German fiasco, I'm not sure what problem Ireland perceives from Germany. Germany can do stuff all about Britain, and the wreckage of barges and planes and German ships testifies. With Britain still in play, any German attempt at Ireland is a complete fantasy.

German industry has just taken a knock. Swedish iron ore shipments to Germany amounted to around 10 million tonnes per year of high grade. By way of comparison, Germany was able to produce from within the areas it held, around 10 million tonnes per year of low grade ore. The second Sweden stops supplying to Germany, Germany's industry is screwed big time.


With regard to your Japanese summary, you've got oil discovered in October 1941, and it being a productive field by mid 1942. Right. Minimum figures follow. Tough conditions, such as climate, terrain, or hostile population, will lengthen these. Pre-drilling usually takes 6 months. Drilling to access the oil, 1-2 months. Then you've got to refine the stuff, transport it, and so on. Typically, using modern techniques, it's 2-5 years to go from: "Oh, look at this nice black stuff" to "Now we've got stuff we can use." If the Japanese discover oil in Oct 1941, we can probably reckon that, given the circumstances of the situation, and assuming no interruptions, they'll be able to start using it by Oct 1945.

The other thing you don't mention is what Japan's doing about SE Asia. It's leaving America alone. OK. What about Malaya, Singapore, Burma, Dutch East Indies, French Indochina, etc? Are these being left alone? If so, why? Japan still needs stuff like rubber, etc. If not, what are they doing about places like the Philippines? Relying on the USA not stirring itself while it attacks - which would be rash given how vulnerable its lines of supply are. Or doing something about the Philippines, which promptly brings the USA into the war.

And if nothing is being done in SE Asia, then the IJN are sitting around, twiddling their thumbs, while the IJA is busy winning glory (of a sort) in China. Cooperation between the IJA and the IJN was not great, and if the IJA is doing things, then the IJN has also got to play, and obviously, the two aren't going to work together or anything silly like that.
 
With regard to your Japanese summary, you've got oil discovered in October 1941, and it being a productive field by mid 1942. Right. Minimum figures follow. Tough conditions, such as climate, terrain, or hostile population, will lengthen these. Pre-drilling usually takes 6 months. Drilling to access the oil, 1-2 months. Then you've got to refine the stuff, transport it, and so on. Typically, using modern techniques, it's 2-5 years to go from: "Oh, look at this nice black stuff" to "Now we've got stuff we can use." If the Japanese discover oil in Oct 1941, we can probably reckon that, given the circumstances of the situation, and assuming no interruptions, they'll be able to start using it by Oct 1945.
I'll duly modify the post to increase the time taken by the Japanese to start drilling the oil - I must admit that one flaw I am finding in my timeline thus far is that I am rather optimistic on the timescale on which events take place. I'll try and fix that in the future.

The other thing you don't mention is what Japan's doing about SE Asia. It's leaving America alone. OK. What about Malaya, Singapore, Burma, Dutch East Indies, French Indochina, etc? Are these being left alone? If so, why? Japan still needs stuff like rubber, etc. If not, what are they doing about places like the Philippines? Relying on the USA not stirring itself while it attacks - which would be rash given how vulnerable its lines of supply are. Or doing something about the Philippines, which promptly brings the USA into the war.
I have amended so as to allow Japan to secure rubber from Thailand, thereby solving that issue. In regards to the European colonies in SE Asia, Japan is somewhat reluctant to attack them for the time being, due to the display of strength made by the Allies during 1941 against Germany, and, consequently, the Japanese are worried that attacking the Allies would leave them in a similar position to Germany - enduring costly and humiliating defeats.

And if nothing is being done in SE Asia, then the IJN are sitting around, twiddling their thumbs, while the IJA is busy winning glory (of a sort) in China. Cooperation between the IJA and the IJN was not great, and if the IJA is doing things, then the IJN has also got to play, and obviously, the two aren't going to work together or anything silly like that.
This won't be the last update on East Asia, and this question will be answered then.
 
The Portuguese and British held strong historical ties (the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance being the oldest in the world), and the two often found themselves as allies in conflicts against a common foe. However, Portugal had initially declared neutrality when war broke out, fearing that Fransisco Franco’s Spain, believed to be an Axis ally by many, would proceed to declare war on Portugal and open up a further front in the war – yet the Nazi invasion of Switzerland disturbed Franco just as much as the leaders of the other neutral nations of Europe, and so the prospect of Spain joining the Axis appeared distant at best. So, on November the 26th, Portugal declared war on Germany and Italy, and interned all German and Italian shipping in Portuguese ports.

Shortly after the Portuguese declaration of war, Churchill travelled to Lisbon

This... this is unlikely at best, tbh. We simply did not have any way to even begin to fight Germany, even in this timeline. Note that, even in the real world, Salazar stuck to near-complete neutrality rigth untill late 1943, when the agreement to use the Lajes airbase was signed. And we supplied Germany with vital raw materials untill 1944. Also never forget this simple, basic fact: Salazar was a fascist dictator. In terms of idiology and politics, he had far more in common with Hitler & Mussolini than with Churchill. Two days after Hitler died, Salazar order all Portuguese flags to be flown at half-mast; officially due to the "death of a foreign head of state". Yeah...

And there were a lot of people with conections to the regime making a lot of money supplying germany, specially with tungsten.

So, just because it looked as if Germany was gobling up neutrals, I don't see Portugal, a country cooperating and supplying Germany, going to the allies. Quite the contrary, I see Salazar doing it's best to improve relations with Germany, with increases in supplies and maybe even suggesting basing rights.

Also, I doubt Franco would declare war on us without first receiving massive amounts of supplies and equipment from Germany. Spain was a wreck after the civil war and depended too much on trade with neutrals (specially the US, for oil) to risk this.

The only way I see as joining the allies, here, is if Churchill promised a couple of UK divisions, some RAF squadrons and severall hundred aircraft and tanks to reequip us. And by promise, I mean all of this arriving in Lisboa the very next day of the declaration of war.
 
I'll duly modify the post to increase the time taken by the Japanese to start drilling the oil - I must admit that one flaw I am finding in my timeline thus far is that I am rather optimistic on the timescale on which events take place. I'll try and fix that in the future.

It's easily done. As a general rule of thumb, everything always takes longer than one first thinks it does.
 
This... this is unlikely at best, tbh. We simply did not have any way to even begin to fight Germany, even in this timeline. Note that, even in the real world, Salazar stuck to near-complete neutrality rigth untill late 1943, when the agreement to use the Lajes airbase was signed. And we supplied Germany with vital raw materials untill 1944. Also never forget this simple, basic fact: Salazar was a fascist dictator. In terms of idiology and politics, he had far more in common with Hitler & Mussolini than with Churchill. Two days after Hitler died, Salazar order all Portuguese flags to be flown at half-mast; officially due to the "death of a foreign head of state". Yeah...

And there were a lot of people with conections to the regime making a lot of money supplying germany, specially with tungsten.

So, just because it looked as if Germany was gobling up neutrals, I don't see Portugal, a country cooperating and supplying Germany, going to the allies. Quite the contrary, I see Salazar doing it's best to improve relations with Germany, with increases in supplies and maybe even suggesting basing rights.

Also, I doubt Franco would declare war on us without first receiving massive amounts of supplies and equipment from Germany. Spain was a wreck after the civil war and depended too much on trade with neutrals (specially the US, for oil) to risk this.

The only way I see as joining the allies, here, is if Churchill promised a couple of UK divisions, some RAF squadrons and severall hundred aircraft and tanks to reequip us. And by promise, I mean all of this arriving in Lisboa the very next day of the declaration of war.
Portugal actually did a lot to support the Allies in our timeline - when Britain requested that the Royal Navy be allowed to use the Azores' facilities in 1943, Portugal duly provided such facilities. Although I will update the post based on your final paragraph, so as to give Portugal a greater incentive to be committed to the Allied cause.
 
Portugal actually did a lot to support the Allies in our timeline - when Britain requested that the Royal Navy be allowed to use the Azores' facilities in 1943, Portugal duly provided such facilities. Although I will update the post based on your final paragraph, so as to give Portugal a greater incentive to be committed to the Allied cause.

We did not have much support, apart from some hidden diplomacy. When he tried to buy Spits or Hurricanes in 1939, all we got were a few Gladiators. And, again, the Azores deal was only done in 1943, pretty much a "shotgun wedding". And even then, for some weird reason, it was signed only with the UK; the US only came latter on, in 1944
 
We did not have much support, apart from some hidden diplomacy. When he tried to buy Spits or Hurricanes in 1939, all we got were a few Gladiators. And, again, the Azores deal was only done in 1943, pretty much a "shotgun wedding". And even then, for some weird reason, it was signed only with the UK; the US only came latter on, in 1944
Do you reckon I ought to remove Portugal joining the war, then?
 
If Portugal joins the war (edit: as an active participant) when it looks a long way from over, then what is in it for Portugal? It's not necessarily 'not going to happen' but what serious kickbacks or favours are they getting?
 
Top