Hitler dies of stroke Feb 2 1943: successors and strategy?

BW, the OP and Plan 3. Might be interesting to see who ends up in charge.

I don't have a clear vision on the OP... just a lot of oh no it can't be him's; that I am kind of leaning towards Ribbentrop taking over the government tells you what a confused and disorganized time that exact moment was in the nazi party and the army's history

the German government actually having a succession that doesn't degenerate into anarchy or people shooting each other might honestly be ASB at that exact moment and its very difficult to determine who would come out the winner in that; unless I took some liberty with the OP and had Hitler die; but not instantly...maybe a heart attack that he awakes from; heavily weakened, and dies ten days later; so he has a chance to say exactly who he wants in charge instead of everyone trying to figure it out for themselves
 
I don't have a clear vision on the OP... just a lot of oh no it can't be him's; that I am kind of leaning towards Ribbentrop taking over the government tells you what a confused and disorganized time that exact moment was in the nazi party and the army's history

the German government actually having a succession that doesn't degenerate into anarchy or people shooting each other might honestly be ASB at that exact moment and its very difficult to determine who would come out the winner in that; unless I took some liberty with the OP and had Hitler die; but not instantly...maybe a heart attack that he awakes from; heavily weakened, and dies ten days later; so he has a chance to say exactly who he wants in charge instead of everyone trying to figure it out for themselves

Interesting. Any possibility of Hausser and/or Steiner gaining control of the military?
 
Interesting. Any possibility of Hausser and/or Steiner gaining control of the military?

I don't really think so... the waffen ss was such a tiny little thing then

My mind circles to Rundstedt to play the senior patriarch Hindenberg type role... he or Bock are probably the only officers who could reliably command the respect of the army poster boys at that particular moment
 
I don't really think so... the waffen ss was such a tiny little thing then

My mind circles to Rundstedt to play the senior patriarch Hindenberg type role... he or Bock are probably the only officers who could reliably command the respect of the army poster boys at that particular moment

Do you think they would disband the Waffen-SS, or just consolidate the current divisions and halt further expansion?
 
I think some people are completely overestimating how much time people have to affect the succession. If Hitler dies, you only have enough time to act from the time you learn about it to the time the German people hear about it. That may be several hours at most.

It is not enough time for anyone to organize an alternative to Goering. A radio announcement is going to be made, and per known past orders, Goering becomes the successor.

If one group of German officers or Nazi faction attempts to remove him and place someone else in power, they have no guarantee that their actions and their choice will be accepted by anyone else. You risk open civil war. I don't see anyone risking that no matter how much they detest Goering. If you moved too quickly without enough support, you have signed your own death warrant for treason.

I really don't see a situation where on February 3, Goering is Fuhrer, then on February 4 Himmler is, then on February 5 the Army puts someone in charge, etc. Or worse, a situation where 3 or 4 different people have announced the are in charge. There will be no "Year of the Four Fuhrers."

Instead, there will be lots of intrigue and ultimatums behind the scenes. It will take days, maybe weeks, for consensus to form on the nature of the new government. By that time, if Goering wants to stay on top, he will - he'll have been Fuhrer for a lot of time now and the people will have accepted it. He will just need to accomodate most of the demands made on him. If, on the other hand, he doesn't feel he is up to it, he may choose to step down and hand it over to someone else. At which point, there is a more furious battle over who should take his place. Because of that, I see Goering staying on board to prevent that kind of infighting.

What we may see is a division of offices. Goering might remain Reichspresident, but someone else could be appointed Reichskanzler (Speer?). Someone else might become leader of the Nazi Party (Goebbels?). A general will be made Oberbefehlshaber des Heeres. A lot of the every day working functions will be given to other people.
 
Will Stalin make peace? What does he gain by making peace?

By 1943, Stalin knows that the Soviet Union cannot lose the war. The only question is what does he have to gain and what does he risk losing with each of the scenarios that could happen.

Without Hitler, the Germans will try to make peace with Stalin, and they will agree to give up a lot. Presumably they offer a return to the pre-1939 borders (no M-R Pact) and may even agree to a pre-1941 border (M-R Pact borders). The danger to the Germans of course, is that they have allowed the Red Army to be right at their door step, in a good position to attack. Stalin gets the status quo antebellum which looks good from a 1941 perspective, but seems paltry by 1943. Lend Lease aid would end immediately, leaving the Soviet Union to somehow recover from the destruction of most of its industry and farmland alone. Stalin risks that the Germans could do a similar deal with the Western Allies, and then potentially both "capitalist powers" attack him. This is a small win balanced by a lot of major concerns/risks/costs.

If Stalin refuses to make peace, he has the chance of 1) utterly destroying Germany, 2) capturing Eastern Europe, 3) collaborating with the Allies to restore Soviet (Russian) power in NE China and northern Pacific, and 4) obtain American aide for rebuilding the Soviet Union. The only cost is that millions of Soviet citizens will die en route. Let's face it, Stalin doesn't care how many of his people die. So this is a big win alongside a very low cost in terms of what Stalin cares about.

Which option is really the safer option for Stalin? Which one represents the greater win?

And don't forget that if Stalin makes peace, Allied strategy will change greatly. The minute the Western Allies learn that anything like serious negotiations are going on, they will be making plans to prepare for it. In 1943, there are not many German divisions in France. Defensive preparations are weak. The Allies could land in force and retain a bridgehead if needed in 1943. Costs in manpower will be high and lots of mistakes will be made, but this is probably less than if they wait until 1944 and fight the Germans alone. The minute the Allies do land, Stalin's calculations will change even if he is seriously considering peace. Italy and the other minor Axis Powers could defect. German position could deteriorate suddenly.
 
Do you think they would disband the Waffen-SS, or just consolidate the current divisions and halt further expansion?

eh there is infrastructure there; plus the men and officers have been useful to that point... the group doesn't expand; maybe they get renamed as footguard division
 
The only cost is that millions of Soviet citizens will die en route. Let's face it, Stalin doesn't care how many of his people die. So this is a big win alongside a very low cost in terms of what Stalin cares about.

Is Stalin so secure in his position that he can afford to bleed the Soviet forces and citizenry for a lot longer than in OTL, potentially well into 1946, without fear of political repercussions on the Soviet home front?
 
Is Stalin so secure in his position that he can afford to bleed the Soviet forces and citizenry for a lot longer than in OTL, potentially well into 1946, without fear of political repercussions on the Soviet home front?

As long as the Soviets continue to make progress, no matter how slow or bloody it may be, Stalin will reject peace. The Germans would have to stop the Soviets cold, with the Soviets having no way to continue fighting offensively for the immediate future, before he would consider making peace. The other side to that, is if the Germans can stop the Soviets, and the Soviets can't go on the offensive for a while, what would Germany have to gain by agreeing to peace? As I've said before, both sides would know the peace would only last as long as Stalin finds it convenient., Not to mention the implications with the Western Allies when Germany makes the Soviets' overtures public. I can picture a stalemate similar to Korea taking place though.
 
I
How about the Germans get the Russian half of Poland from Sep 1, 1939? Finland gets back its pre Winter War borders and Rumania gets back the hunk of territory it ceded to the Russians? The Russians get to keep the Baltic states. All prisoners are exchanged and there are no reperations.

Not an ideal settlement by any means but Stalin might well accept that rather than continue this war. For the Germans this frees up millions of soldiers and thousands of tanks and planes that can now be used to defend Italy and the rest of Europe.

Not a chance in hell if anything the Soviets would get the German half of Poland as a buffer. They're the ones who are obviously on the winning side.

They'd also want the Germans to repay them for all material losses (livestock, industry etc) they caused to the U.S.S.R and send back the slave labourers who were vital to the German war economy by 1942 onwards.

For this to happen we have to assume Stalin is a Gereman agent working for their interests, not his own.:rolleyes:


I wonder, if this POD can actually cause the allies to fight both the axis and the soviets???
David Irving gaining divine powers?


Astrodragon

While Manstein's reputation is possibly inflated, not least by himself;) I think his plan for absorbing an initial Soviet attack then hitting their exposed flank and pinning the force against the coast could have been very effective. Not likely to make major territorial gains and would still be a bloody battle. However likely to limit Soviet gains [and hence their ability to recruit new conscripts] and inflict heavy human and material losses.

It might be enough, with a new government in Germany, to persuade the two to make peace, although this would likely still fall over the question of what borders.
Again only if the Soviet high-command is actively working for the Germans and are nice enough not to use their 2 to 1 superiority in infantry, 4 to 1 superiorty in artillery, 5/6 to 1 superiorty in tanks and control of the air to launch attacks along the enitre front smashing through German defensive lines in one or more places along the entire front and throwing Manstein's ''back-hand blow'' into the dustbin.
 
Last edited:
Urban fox

What are you on?:confused:


Not a chance in hell if anything the Soviets would get the German half of Poland as a buffer. They're the ones who are obviously on the winning side.

They'd also want the Germans to repay them for all material losses (livestock, industry etc) they caused to the U.S.S.R and send back the slave labourers who were vital to the German war economy by 1942 onwards.

For this to happen we have to assume Stalin is a Gereman agent working for their interests, not his own.:rolleyes:

Stalin being a paranoid egomaniac would want something like that but no way he would get it at this point. Don't forget the Germans are on the Donest and the outskirts of Leningrad. I suspect that Stalin wouldn't be willing to make a separate peace yet but possible, before allies open the 3rd front if he suffers enough losses and make too little progress.


David Irving gaining divine powers?

That I agree on.;) No way the allies are going to switch sides.


Again only if the Soviet high-command is actively working for the Germans and are nice enough not to use their 2 to 1 superiority in infantry, 4 to 1 superiorty in artillery, 5/6 to 1 superiorty in tanks and control of the air to launch attacks along the enitre front smashing through German defensive lines in one or more places along the entire front and throwing Manstein's ''back-hand blow'' into the dustbin.

At that point the Red army wasn't strong enough to attack everywhere and would get slaughter again if it tried it as in the previous spring. It needed to concentrate the main attack and if it had done so in the south [the most likely area for several reasons] the Manstein counter-attack would have been the best bet. Not saying it would have worked but a damned sight better chance than dashing into the Kursk fortifications or just sitting totally on the defensive.

Steve
 
Is Stalin so secure in his position that he can afford to bleed the Soviet forces and citizenry for a lot longer than in OTL, potentially well into 1946, without fear of political repercussions on the Soviet home front?

By the time manpower losses for the Soviet Union becomes a significant factor affecting Soviet strategy, it will be 1945. All of Germany's European allies will have defected or been defeated. The Anglo-Americans will be in Western Europe. It will be obvious to everyone that Germany is doomed. Stalin is not going to abandon a winning hand at that point. If Soviet manpower losses are more steep, they may simply be less ambitious in some of their later offensives.

Hitler was the one who kept insisting Germany fight until it is destroyed. The revised German government is not going to keep fighting until 1946 (assuming they could even prolong the war that long, which is unlilkely) simply to kill more Russians, Siberians, and Central Asians (or British, Canadians and Americans).

What is likely instead is that the Germans concentrate on holding off the Soviets as much as possible. They don't launch the Battle of the Bulge, but keep any remaining offensive power to use against the Red Army. The Anglo-Americans may advance more rapidly relative to the Red Army in this scenario, and once advanced troops near Berlin, the Germans surrender to the Allies instead of fighting a Goetterdamerung climactic battle.
 
By the time manpower losses for the Soviet Union becomes a significant factor affecting Soviet strategy, it will be 1945.

The following is from memory from two of Dunn's books (1) (2). The Soviets stopped expanding the army in mid-1943 OTL. They also stopped conscripting everything possible by the end of '43, and equipped the army increasingly well, to increase fighting power without putting more men in the field.

They did this because the civilian economy needed manpower very very badly. The Soviets weren't getting bodies from some cost-free bottomless well. They were taking them from other productive enterprises, things that they gambled could be sacrificed to the extent the war economy could still produce victory. Through 1943, planning was all about this kind of manpower mining.

What changed? They stopped suffering ridiculously large permanent casualties, and they started retaking territory with usable manpower (booty troops) in the millions. The Soviet steamroller fed itself, excellent feedback loop.

Ridiculously large permanent casualties probably aren't coming back. What CAN happen in ATL, without too much effort, is they don't advance quickly enough to get 'booty troops' in large numbers (IE less total territory taken, and territory taken has manpower more thoroughly evacuated by the Axis). The feedback loop runs in the opposite direction, at least if you're comparing ATL to OTL. Fewer booty troops-> smaller Red Army + weaker Soviet production-> fewer casualties inflicted on Axis, more casualties suffered-> slower advance->fewer booty troops. (THIS is of course on average, unpredictable events on either side could send the eastern front off to entirely different end-states, like a fast Axis surrender or very generous peace terms for the Axis in '44.)

In ATL, this loop can't be observed so easily. The steam roller still looks like it's crushing the Axis, it's just slower. The Germans are probably still busy cursing the day they were born by fall 1944 (if the war is still on), but they don't know about OTL where AGC has already been erased.
 
Last edited:
Top