How quickly can Nazi Germany defeat The British Empire after the Fall of France?

What it says in the title.

IF Nazi Germany concentrates its military efforts on the UK and Empire, how quickly can it force the UK to seek a peace deal?

The following qualifications apply

1) The US supports the UK as OTL, with Lend-Lease and other aid.

2) There is no Operation Barbarossa but the Germans need to maintain a large army and air force to deter Soviet attacks.
(Say 100 Divisions and 1,500-2,000 aircraft initially, and that force may need to grow as the Red Army grows stronger)

3) Assume no Japanese attack on the Southern Resource Area OR that such intensifies US support for GB even without a DOW by it on Germany and Japan.
 
with your stated points. It cant. As simple as that. GB may CHOOSE to give up (doubtful it didn't i otl) but it cant be forced.
 
with your stated points. It cant. As simple as that. GB may CHOOSE to give up (doubtful it didn't i otl) but it cant be forced.
Thank you for such a prompt response.

I'll reserve my opinion until (hopefully) I get some more responses. Especially ones that disagree with you! In which case it will be interesting to see the reasons and evidence adduced.
 
Germany is a Continental power. The UK is a blue ocean power.

That's a pretty big gap to close. As long as the UK can keep the seal lanes open, it can draw on allies and the Empire and keep going indefinitely.
 
with your stated points. It cant. As simple as that. GB may CHOOSE to give up (doubtful it didn't i otl) but it cant be forced.

Also note that even if a British government would be willing to admit defeat (mind you, the attrition from a drawn-out Battle of Britain works in favor of the British, not the Nazis) and try to seek conditions for peace it is very likely that the demands of Nazi Germany along with their past behavior will make such a peace impossible.
 
With your preconditions, I don't think it can.

Without Lend Lease, if the Germans can keep the peace in the East for long enough they may make the struggle enough of a grind for a peace of exhaustion to take hold, but with it German victory is impossible long-term, and no British government can be expected to trust a deal with the Nazis to hold.

They can't win the air or naval struggles against Britain + Empire with Lend-lease aid, and the British will know that.
 
Never,

Once its GB supported by US LL v Germany supported by Soviet trade it can't be won as it's committed to a long mutual attritional war, GB can and will decide that it can accept becoming a US puppet/protectorate (far better than losing to Germany) and N Germany can't accept the same position with USSR......
 
What if the Colonies Rebel in Asia and Africa, could it tip scale in favor of Nazi ?
Nice thought - but why should they rebel?

India was on the way to independence in any case and the others are small enough to be controllable by minimal British forces. (See Iraq for example.)
 

nbcman

Donor
Never,

Once its GB supported by US LL v Germany supported by Soviet trade it can't be won as it's committed to a long mutual attritional war, GB can and will decide that it can accept becoming a US puppet/protectorate (far better than losing to Germany) and N Germany can't accept the same position with USSR......
And even before US LL is flowing, there are US Neutrality Patrols that will go progressively further east in the AO. If the Germans try to interdict the ships going to the UK, eventually there will be enough of an incident to get the US to declare war on the Nazis. The Nazi’s can’t force the UK out if the US is supporting them.
 
Nice thought - but why should they rebel?

India was on the way to independence in any case and the others are small enough to be controllable by minimal British forces. (See Iraq for example.)
India had decades of slow resentment build in, With Germany completely focused on Britain and conditions in India deteriorating, it could have a bad result especially when you consider there were smaller attempts at rebellion that were not quite successful like Azad Hind led by Hugely popular Bose, perhaps with Britain alone being in war, we could see Azad Hind become much more prominent leading to revolt in India that could lead to similiar effects across the rest of Empire
 
Thanks for the responses so far.

Does anyone think that Nazi Germany could force the British Empire to make peace under these conditions?

The reason I ask is that they are the OTL conditions that Hitler and the Nazis faced in mid-1940. And they sensed that was the case.

IMHO IF the replies above are unchallenged, then the conclusions explain the decision to launch Barbarossa.

And render moot any attempts to make the Atlantic/Mediterranean strategy work.
 
And even before US LL is flowing, there are US Neutrality Patrols that will go progressively further east in the AO. If the Germans try to interdict the ships going to the UK, eventually there will be enough of an incident to get the US to declare war on the Nazis. The Nazi’s can’t force the UK out if the US is supporting them.
Yes agree, the issue is it almost certain to end up the "Anglo speaking world" (and colonies and trade protectorates) under US leadership v Axis+ USSR, the second block will hold together far worse than the first as it actually really hates each other and is mainly just held together by necessity and mutual fear/hatred of the Anglo world rather than real shared bonds that can be agreed by the first group.

The Anglo world group is also richer than the rest of the world once depression era under capacity is back in use anyway......
 
What if the Colonies Rebel in Asia and Africa, could it tip scale in favor of Nazi ?
The main issue is that once GB accepts becoming airbase one of the USA it doesn't really matter if they hold India or Africa they can still fight so long as USA supplies them (and once they get weaker US will be more motivated to keep them fighting as allowing them to fall is more and more a threat to US long term).
 
India had decades of slow resentment build in, With Germany completely focused on Britain and conditions in India deteriorating, it could have a bad result especially when you consider there were smaller attempts at rebellion that were not quite successful like Azad Hind led by Hugely popular Bose, perhaps with Britain alone being in war, we could see Azad Hind become much more prominent leading to revolt in India that could lead to similiar effects across the rest of Empire
Valid points and it's certainly feasible that Churchill and Westminster could mishandle things. But, why are conditions worsening in India? War spending will help the Indian economy, volunteers for the Indian Army will be well paid and send money home to their families. OTL the British defeated the "Quit India" movement even with the Japanese on the frontiers after conquering Burma. IF there's no Japanese attack on SE Asia conditions should be better, not worse.

I also doubt that the Indian example would lead to the rest of the Empire revolting, let alone those being successful. And the scenario posits US support, which OTL made up for the loss of Malaysia and Burma in any case.

So, I'm sceptical but it is a possible way that the UK has to quit.
 
Thanks for the responses so far.

Does anyone think that Nazi Germany could force the British Empire to make peace under these conditions?

The reason I ask is that they are the OTL conditions that Hitler and the Nazis faced in mid-1940. And they sensed that was the case.

IMHO IF the replies above are unchallenged, then the conclusions explain the decision to launch Barbarossa.

And render moot any attempts to make the Atlantic/Mediterranean strategy work.
No ,, to beat Britain needs a certain Sea Mammal that cannot be named. As there are no circumstances where that can work, the best Germany can do is a Cold War, However Germany will collapse in on itself just like the USSR did as its economy is only functioning by robbing Peter to pay Paul and so eventually the plates come crashing down.
 
In my view, there are a few factors that especially made war with Britain unwinnable for Germany:
1. Kristallnacht had a galvanizing effect on international relations. While many already believed war was inevitable, the disgust at Kristallnacht turned the view of Germany from a belligerent nation that could still potentially be negotiated with to a barbaric mob that could not coexist with the civilized world. It antagonized most of the remaining sympathizers to Nazism in the UK.
2. Churchill's rise to PM gave Britain a proper wartime leader. It's been debated whether Halifax would have sought peace or not, but with Churchill there's no question - peace without victory is not an option.
3. Germany's military buildup was entirely land-based. Plan Z was basically dead by 1939, and for the rest of the war there were insufficient resources for the Kriegsmarine.
4. German submarines used defective torpedoes, a problem that wasn't discovered until it was far too late.
5. German radar research was miles behind the UK.
6. The breaking of the Enigma code.
7. Perhaps most importantly in my view, Hitler was never particularly interested in war with the UK. His strategic aim from the very beginning was Russia. For the entirety of the war, the UK was a sideshow in German planning and production. Germany did not want to fight the UK and was making no serious efforts to tip the scales in their favor.
8. Finally, time was never on Germany's side. The UK could always fall back on US arms and equipment, and the Battle of the Atlantic was unwinnable for the Kriegsmarine. US intervention becomes more and more likely as the war drags on, and as soon as the US is in the fight, the chances for an attack on Britain are gone.
 
Last edited:
What it says in the title.

IF Nazi Germany concentrates its military efforts on the UK and Empire, how quickly can it force the UK to seek a peace deal?

The following qualifications apply

1) The US supports the UK as OTL, with Lend-Lease and other aid.

2) There is no Operation Barbarossa but the Germans need to maintain a large army and air force to deter Soviet attacks.
(Say 100 Divisions and 1,500-2,000 aircraft initially, and that force may need to grow as the Red Army grows stronger)

3) Assume no Japanese attack on the Southern Resource Area OR that such intensifies US support for GB even without a DOW by it on Germany and Japan.
Frankly, the main problem for Germany is, that it really can't effectively threaten that much of the British empire. Most of Africa outside the North of it, and most of Asia aside from Middle East (and even that one is highly difficult), are completely unreachable, for Germany, and without Japanese invasion, they can continue fully supporting GB.

So, the 2 main places that are in reach of Germny are the UK itself and North Africa. The implausibility of the Seelöve invasion actually taking Britain out of the war has been dealt with numerous times here, so the German forces are either going to sit in French cafees untill mid-1942, or be lost in a suicidal invasion. With the leand-lease still going on, the British are certainly not going to loose the air-war, which will probably continue on.

Then there is the North Africa campaign, in which the Wehrmacht might well use much more resources then in OTL. However, would it really matter? At their greatest reach at El Alamein, the Axis forces had their logistics extremely overstretched, and further advance, especially with more millitary units present, would be highly difficult. Then they would actually have to cross the Nile river, and later on Suez itself, both of which would be well defendable. So perhaps we might see a further advance by Axis in Egypt, though one hampered by supply and harsh British-Commonwealth deffense. And even if the Germans and Italians by some lucky roll manage to get beyond the Suez, what then? The British can still put up further deffensives in Palestine and Egypt. While the loss of Suez would be a blow for the British, loosing the Eastern Medditarean will not loose them the war.

So, no I don't think its possible to force a peace deal, even with these changes. The Axis can cause more damage, that is certainly possible, but not ones that would force the British to give up the fighting. Oh, and in this scenario, I would expect the USSR to join the war by July 42. Their army would have finished its modernizations, and with so much of the Axis forces concentrated in France and North Africa, I would expect Stalin to fell secure enough to launch a full invasion of Europe, sometime after the 1942 Rasputica rains are finished.
 
No ,, to beat Britain needs a certain Sea Mammal that cannot be named. As there are no circumstances where that can work, the best Germany can do is a Cold War, However Germany will collapse in on itself just like the USSR did as its economy is only functioning by robbing Peter to pay Paul and so eventually the plates come crashing down.
The Mediterranean strategy may "work", as far-fetched as it is (even though it's easier to pull off than the Sea Mammal). If Britain is defeated in Egypt (and loses Malta) I really can't see them not seeking peace in some form.
If there's no Barbarossa there may be even a way to pressure Spain into invading Gibraltar to deal a finishing blow, I guess ...
 
but it is a possible way that the UK has to quit.
I dont see why losing India forces GB to quite, the western war is mostly about aircraft and ships not men and India did not have that much industry relative to the US/European powers.

All losing India does is make GB look weaker and therefore force the hand of US to come more to its aid and with US industry (if not actual US troops once India falls) GB can effectively fight forever against a European enemy who is gradually getting weaker and at some point must look at its declining strength v the Soviets and stop first?
 
Last edited:
Top