Feasibility of German success in early Kursk

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

What if the Germans had kept to their original schedule and attacked at Kursk on May 4th? Zhukov did not mention the desire to stand on the defensive until April 8th, though defensive positions were being prepared already. The greatest part of the defensive lines were constructed in later May, June, and were ready by early July. The German offensive power did not increase enough proportionally to justify the delay, as they were relatively more powerful on May 4th than July 4th. So would it even matter if the Germans launched their attack early? Could they achieve their objective of slicing off the salient before the Soviets were allowed to expand their defenses and have two extra months of stockpiling tanks and other equipment that allowed them to launch their own powerful counter offensives immediately after the battle?

Provisionally, I will say that they will have much more success, though I am not sure about a total victory on the level they expected. At most, it will severely damage the Soviet armies, preventing an immediate series of counter offensives. Additionally, there will be fewer German losses, which should allow them to better withstand the Soviets attacks later in the year. Plus, it gives them extra time before the Allies invade Sicily. There probably would be some ugly follow up to the offensive, but I am not sure that the Lower Don Offensive would be nearly as successful. This could push the Soviet advance back several months, allowing the Germans to pull back to the Wotan line in good order, and not allow the Soviets to breech the river defense line nearly as quickly. Plus, without the German forces being smashed up in the frantic retreat, there won't be the massacre of forces caught on the wrong side of the river during the Soviet attacks. All in all a longer Eastern Front campaign with lower German losses by 1944, leaving them a viable defense for longer. Thoughts?
 
Weird, I posted a similar thread. My guess is that Germany gets quite a victory out of this with heavy Soviet losses. The result is that Germany's offensive power isn't broken and that they still have some offensive potential/initiative left in them. The immediate result will be a much slower progress for the Soviets and an instant can of sunshine for Berlin in, say, August 1945. My guess is that things like Operation Bagration are butterflied away so Romania will stay in the war so the Wehrmacht will have oil for longer (perhaps enough fuel to keep going into 1945).

As for post-war, the division of Germany had been decided on at Tehran in 1943 so we'll still see a GDR even if it's less Soviet influenced and possibly socialist instead of truly communist/Stalinist. The USSR itself will get 1939 borders. Countries like Romania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia (if the Allies decide to restore it under Tito) will likely not go communist although I'm still in doubt about Romania since it borders the Soviet Union, it'll depend on whether the Red Army will go for the fuel or for Berlin (which they won't reach ITTL). Poland and East Germany will and Stalin might grab Finland in anger and to compensate. I could see Czechoslovakia being cut up between a capitalist Czechia and a communist Slovakia. I'm still in doubt about Hungary.
 
The immediate result will be a much slower progress for the Soviets and an instant can of sunshine for Berlin in, say, August 1945.

I agree with your thoughts on the offensive, but perhaps a bit more watered down. I think the offensive delays the soviets drive into the Reich by a matter of months and allows them enough armor to harass the Soviets more along the constricting front. Because it's only a delay and far from a game (theatre) changer I still believe atomic weapons will be reserved for Japan. The strategic positions of Japan are much more difficult than Germany and even with a successful Citadel, the writing is on the wall for Germany at this point.

As for post-war, the division of Germany had been decided on at Tehran in 1943 so we'll still see a GDR even if it's less Soviet influenced and possibly socialist instead of truly communist/Stalinist. The USSR itself will get 1939 borders. Countries like Romania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia (if the Allies decide to restore it under Tito) will likely not go communist although I'm still in doubt about Romania since it borders the Soviet Union, it'll depend on whether the Red Army will go for the fuel or for Berlin (which they won't reach ITTL). Poland and East Germany will and Stalin might grab Finland in anger and to compensate. I could see Czechoslovakia being cut up between a capitalist Czechia and a communist Slovakia. I'm still in doubt about Hungary.

I tend to think that besides maybe the Czech's, the OTL bloc will be setup by Moscow. I don't see any chance that Bulgaria and Romania escape the Red s. Maybe Austria is settled into the Western camp. A lot depends on just where the two fronts are during the negotiations. If Germany looks to still have some capable way of keeping the Soviets from simply walking into 1939 Poland then the West might be more capable of securing Poland and thus parts of Germany from outright Soviet annexations and control. Stalin might still be inclined and have a newfound reason to demand a second front. Possibly making him curb ambitions in these areas. I'm not sure the Soviets are going to except 1939 borders unless they are in dire straights. At the least they might agree to 1940 borders with the Poles taking it on the chin, or being bribed with Germany territory ala OTL. So that paints a Western version of the Czech's and Austrians with a Germany that probably has occupations forces although a much great Western influx of control. Also, perhaps a real Polish voice attempts to break through although I'm not sure how much Moscow will except. It's that variable of just where the Allied armies end up.
 

Deleted member 1487

What about the Soviet's increased losses and delayed liberation of territories? Does that mean more complete scorched earth? Perhaps manpower concerns start to become critical, especially if the Dniester lines is held for a while? If Romania and Hungary can be kept in the game longer, their manpower stays at the front on the Axis side, instead of switching over to Soviets, meaning the Soviets will have to deal with fighting them for longer instead of gaining an ally. Plus, without a Bagration, the Germans stay somewhat viable longer, as after AGC was gone, it was just a matter of time.
 

Markus

Banned
The Germans will win, but the Russians will not loose a lot. As early as 1942 they prefered to withdraw rather than stand fast and get destroyed a´la 1941. They did loose a lot of equipment when their soldiers literally walked back but the soldiers usually made it home without much difficulty because the Wehrmacht lacked infantry to seal off a pocket.

And if they Red Army does not have many troops in the area the Germans attack they can not loose many anyway.
 

Deleted member 1487

In 1942, yes. But if they are standing on the defensive, confident they can stop the attack, they won't run away. For course if the defenses are not completely ready, it is going to hurt quite a bit when they discover that fact the hard way.
 
One interesting consequence of German win in Kursk (and by "win" I mean almost any development more favourable than OTL) could be that Soviets would adopt "we can only fight Germans in winter" line of thought. You see, there's a certain trend: Red Army got chewed up in Summer 1941 and gave Germans bloody nose in December 41 (Moscow), then again had been bloodied in summer 1942 and won Stralingrad next winter. So now what, Germans are humiliating Red Army in summer again? Well, let's postpone next major battle until next winter and have a relatively quiet summer getting ourselves ready.

What could come out of it? Bagration is butterflied away, for starters. However, Soviets are still advancing, using most inopportune weather conditions (remember, that Kursk alternated perception of Soviet leadership, not the fact that Red Army was slowly but surely turning into formidable force as in OTL). So, instead of liberating Soviet territory by Autumn 1944, Red Army is back at the border by sometime early Spring 1945.

Now, assuming that situation on Western Front is as per OTL, that most likely means Soviets not getting farther than Eastern Poland by the time Germany is nuked and forced to capitulate (sometimes between late autumn 1945 and spring 1946, I guess). However, it is far from certain that Allied offensive would be as successful (if landing would happen at all) as in OTL. Although Overlord started before Bagration OTL, it was very obvious that Red Army wouldn't be quiet and Germans continued to re-shuffle her forces turning France into rest area for mauled and shellshocked units, too weak or demoralized to fight on Eastern Front. Would Allies attempt to land, facing good German units (who were in Belarus and Ukraine IOTL, preparing for what was undoubtedly coming).
 
Top