Fascism's emphasis on nationalism, militarism and the cult of the leader seem to me aspects that could easily make the ideology popular among third-world dictators. Fascism's conception of a national rebirth or recapturing past glories could make the ideology popular among the nationalist intelligentsia in the colonized areas. Indeed, some national libration movements in OTL seem close to fascism. Consider Pol Pot's murderous racism or his exaltation of the glories of Angkor and the necessity of retaking the Mekong from Vietnam. Or consider the cult of the Kim family in Korea, and North Korean rhetoric about "racial purity" and the superiority of the Korean people over other races.

So, in a timeline in which America and Britain are locked in a Cold War with Nazi Germany (like the AANW, except without the St. Patrick's Raids), could the Germans find strongmen and "national liberation" movements to support? Seeing how Germany fought America and Britian to a standstill, and with communism dead, could fascism become popular among anti-colonial movements?

In real life the Nazis definitely dabbled in this to some extent. In the Middle East they presented themselves as liberating the region from Anglo-French colonial domination, and Hitler most famously made overtures to Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, in an attempt to foment an anti-British, anti-Jewish Palestinian uprising (which was interesting considering that in the 1930s the Nazis had actually briefly considered reaching out to the Jewish Irgun and Lehi paramilitary organizations for the same purpose of harassing the British in the event of war, and even Reinhard Heydrich was involved in funneling weapons to them.) In India they created a group called the Frei Indische Legion to fight against the British, and cooperated with the Hindu nationalist leader Subhas Chandra Bose. It was something of a retread of the "Hindu-German Conspiracy" between Indian nationalists and German intelligence to try and overthrow the British Raj before and during the First World War, as well as the attempts the Germans made during the reign of the Kaiser to strike alliances in the Islamic world to encourage rebellions against the British, French and Russians.
The question, of course, is whether or not the Nazis' other plans from OTL would undermine these activities, not to mention the entire nature of Nazi ideology itself. There was still a movement within Germany to either reclaim the German colonies that had been lost to the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 or to create a new colonial empire for Germany in Africa (the long-sought after "Deutsche Mittelafrika"), principally represented by the Reichskolonialbund headed by Franz Ritter Von Epp, a former Freikorps commander and one of Hitler's earliest supporters from his Munich beer hall days, and a distinguished veteran of the brutal war in German Southwest Africa against the Hereros in 1904-1908. General Lothar Von Trotha, the German commander in that war whose attempts to systematically wipe out the Herero and Nama tribes has since been classified as a genocide, was treated as a hero by the Nazis and even had a street named after him in Munich. They also celebrated the prominent Kaiserreich-era colonialist and pan-Germanist Carl Peters, who as governor of German East Africa was so infamously brutal that the German press dubbed him "Hangman Peters." Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' contains some vicious references to black people. Perhaps because he didn't envision the tactics that the Germans would resort to during the war, he had this to say about the idea of allying with colonial nationalists in the event of Germany going to war once more with the British Empire; "
pp.502-505

ABSURDITY OF HOPING FOR THE COLLAPSE OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE

I remember well the childish and incomprehensible hopes which arose suddenly in nationalist circles in the years 1920-21 to the effect that England was just nearing its downfall in India. A few Asiatic mountebanks, who put themselves forward as "the champions of Indian Freedom", then began to peregrinate throughout Europe and succeeded in inspiring otherwise quite reasonable people with the fixed notion that the British World Empire, which had its pivot in India, was just about to collapse there. They never realized that their own wish was the father of all these ideas. Nor did they stop to think how absurd their wishes were. For inasmuch as they expected the end of the British Empire and of England’s power to follow the collapse of its dominion over India, they themselves admitted that India was of the most outstanding importance for England.

Now in all likelihood the deep mysteries of this most important problem must have been known not only to the German-National prophets but also to those who had the direction of British history in their hands. It is right down puerile to suppose that in England itself the importance of India for the British Empire was not adequately appreciated. And it is a proof of having learned nothing from the world war and of thoroughly misunderstanding or knowing nothing about Anglo-Saxon determination, when they imagine that England could lose India without first having put forth the last ounce of her strength in the struggle to hold it. Moreover, it shows how complete is the ignorance prevailing in Germany as to the manner in which the spirit of England permeates and administers her Empire. England will never lose India unless she admits racial disruption in the machinery of her administration (which at present is entirely out of the question in India) or unless she is overcome by the sword of some powerful enemy. But Indian risings will never bring this about. We Germans have had sufficient experience to know how hard it is to coerce England. And, apart from all this, I as a German would far rather see India under British domination than under that of any other nation.

The hopes of an epic rising in Egypt were just as chimerical. The ‘Holy War’ may bring the pleasing illusion to our German nincompoops that others are now ready to shed their blood for them. Indeed, this cowardly speculation is almost always the father of such hopes. But in reality the illusion would soon be brought to an end under the fusillade from a few companies of British machine-guns and a hail of British bombs.

A coalition of cripples cannot attack a powerful State which is determined, if necessary, to shed the last drop of its blood to maintain its existence. To me, as a nationalist who appreciates the worth of the racial basis of humanity, I must recognize the racial inferiority of the so-called ‘Oppressed Nations’, and that is enough to prevent me from linking the destiny of my people with the destiny of those inferior races."

There was also the frequent incidents during the Fall of France in 1940 in which the Germans had gone out of their way to systematically massacre Senegalese and other African colonial troops that France had used to try and makeup for a shortage of manpower. The Germans released an abundance of propaganda for the home front sneering that France's multi-racial army was proof of the decadence and overall inferiority of French society. There was also all the explicitly racist propaganda that had produced attacking not only blacks in general, but specifically the mixed-race children of French African troops who had occupied the Ruhr after the First World War, many of whom wound up being sterilized forcibly once the Nazis took power. I bring up all of this because I'm wondering how the Nazis would downplay all of it in order to present themselves as the friends of people throughout the colonized world whom Germans on the home front were told repeatedly were inferior subhumans. I assume it would have to be something like the situation on the Eastern front during the Second World War. The multi-ethnic divisions of Waffen-SS volunteers were given propaganda instruction by SS officers in their own native languages, but each one was slightly different depending on which unit it was. The recruits the Nazis picked up in Eastern Europe to fight the Soviets obviously weren't getting the same instruction as German-speaking SS men, considering that Himmler lectured them constantly on the sub-humanity and overall inferiority of the Slavs, whom he frequently compared to Huns, Mongols and "Redskins" and drove home the fact that the eventual Germanization of the land would necessitate their extermination/enslavement. I'm guessing that in this case the Nazis would have to prepare propaganda for the countries where they wanted to spark uprisings that was entirely separate, and count on the lack of German-speakers there to prevent what they were telling their own people to get out. There was also the fact that in Asia, their Japanese allies, while similarly presenting themselves as crusaders against European colonialism which would be supplanted by the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere", weren't exactly doing a good job of keeping their own violently brutal subjugation and pillaging of those same countries a secret.
 
the obvious problem is that Nazi regime is allied or aligned with Fascist Italy, Spain, and to certain extent (more if they were winning) Portugal who all had colonial empires?

do think they could have gained quite an advantage among Arab Nationalists, assuming Italy remained neutral, and would have had no qualms supporting them.
"There are no libyan arabs, they're just Muslim Italians who are loyal subjects to the duce and the king, just like catholic italians from mainland europe" - Some hypothetical Italian fascist ideologue. I'm sure Gaddafi could make a great ATL successor to Mussolini or Balbo.
 
Top