Only to say that this is the sensible bottom line to it all.
Only if the Western Allies are willing to make something akin to what eventually did for Japan, qualify the unconditional surrender request with sensible garantees (e.g. for Japan it was about the national unity of Japan, freedom from Communist occupation, and the survival of the Imperial institution).
Any German leader would be a fool and a traitor that in 1943-44, with the line of fighting well beyond the boundaries of Germany, if not outside Europe altogether, would think of accepting surrender without garantees about national unity, territorial integrity in the ethnic boundaries, safeguarding of German economy, and the lack of summary or collective punishments. That would not be about "miltarism", any sincere German patriot, be him a neo-Wilhemine, a fascist, a communist, or a democratic newly christened by fair and free elections, would do the same.
If Churchill and Roosevelt are willing to discard mad revenge plans about summary executions of German officers (Katyn, anyone ?), deindustrialization, slave labor for PoWs, ethnic cleansings, savage territorial losses, partition, Communist occupation, and publicly garantee Germany national unity, independence, its industry and the post-Anschluss borders (after D-Day; in 1943, at least the 1939 borders plus Danzig and the Corridor would be necessary) and occupation by the Anglo-Americans alone, then peace can be made sometime in 1943-44.
Luckily, I am quite unconvinced that the British and American people are willing to pay a huge butcher bill in order to let the New Dealers rape the German people with their Genghis Khan plans and fatten Stalin.
Germany may accept surrender if it is qualified with the garantees of a
just, humane, and honorable peace. Like the one Japan eventually got.