Military dictatorship in FRG

I of course was referring to the 'clean Wehrmacht' myth. The Americans are perfectly aware that these German officers were happy to collude in mas murder until the war went against them.
I'm not actually so sure of this. Were the US Military aware of the population policies of the Heer they probably would have been sponsoring "staff" PhDs on the topic in the 1960s-1970s. (These would have been "problematic" to say the least given the obvious functionalist comparisons which would be made. But the absence of their existence is evidence that the US military did not use its own system of comprehension of the world, the staff PhD thesis, to have a formed opinion as an organisation on Heer responsibility for successful operations against the existence of civilian populations.) The US Military seems to have not been functionally aware of the German officer caste's role. US civil institutions are even less well formed in terms of continuity of conception due to the politicised civil service. This means their reliance on "the vibe" or importing scholars and academics ("Team B" import, Kissinger, "Boys from Chicago," Progressivism, etc.) indicates that we ought to look to the general reception of a changed impression on German leaders rather than institutionally specific views. You could try arguing the CIA formed an intelligentsia for the state; but, at least in my area of speciality they got Hungary 1956 so bloody wrong that I doubt their capacity to present the state with awareness.

Instead in holocaust and Eastern historiography we have Hilberg operating outside of the liberal arts system ( https://web.archive.org/web/2014060...enthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=gvKVLcMVIuG&b=395051 ) and then someone as level headed as a diplomatic historian in the form of Chris Browning causing great waves by publishing a tight little book on bureaucratic organisation in a single 500 man unit.

When the liberal arts college system beats you to unit level studies on how to kill millions of Europeans; and it emerges as a massive historiographical scandal even after Hilberg; then it seems to indicate that that government had no structured idea of what the composition of the BRD military was when the BRD military was still a dangerous subject.

So I'm not exactly sure that the institutions had that awareness. Individual officers may have from personal experience; but, I doubt the institutions did. For example if we (20 year rule) went back to 2001 and interrogated US staff officers regarding concepts around "responsibility to protect" and law of war we'd see a conception of the civil population deeply integrated. 60 years ago to 1961 we'd see a less well developed conception of the military/civil interaction.

I'm sorry if this seems off-topic but I'm just having the mind blowing realisation that the US military documents its own conceptions of the world through staff doctorates, and we can actually plumb its institutional self-awareness thereby through topic selection.

yours,
Sam R.
 
Europe would not accept this and it would drive a wedge between it and the US and the US would know this.

Any notion of a militaristic germany would be a complete nonstarter.
 
Europe would not accept this and it would drive a wedge between it and the US and the US would know this.

Any notion of a militaristic germany would be a complete nonstarter.
if DDR was the best non soviet military of Warsaw Pact , why can’t FRG have the best non US military of NATO ?
Surely the people of Eastern Europe suffered a lot more under the nazis and would be understandably more paranoid
 
The Soviet Union demonstrated the independence of the DDR and the NVA in 1953 to every Soviet friendly state in the gutters of Berlin when the working class proved undesirable and the Soviet Union elected another one.

So there’s a reason why people were relaxed about the DDR as a Soviet puppet state.
 
if DDR was the best non soviet military of Warsaw Pact , why can’t FRG have the best non US military of NATO ?
Surely the people of Eastern Europe suffered a lot more under the nazis and would be understandably more paranoid
Western Europe would not accept it and western europe was not eastern europe. Plain and simple. Keeping the germans demilitarized down and in check was a major reason for dividing the country in the first place. The populace would also not accept it as any hint of militarism was widely despised in west germany at the time with the bundeswehr being considered suspect.

To get this you would need a us approach to w-germany post wwii that the rest of europe would not allow,
 
Well if something like this actually takes place the European Community/European integration is dead in the water. The Elysée Treaty had only been signed a few years before, any French Government is going to be terrified of this resurgent Germany. Ditto the Benelux countries. The UK will be outraged as well. Even if the EEC somehow remains in place they certainly wouldn't go into it now.

In the process of installing a "compliant" government in Germany, the US will have alienated the rest of Western Europe and strangled European integration in its cradle.
 
Well if something like this actually takes place the European Community/European integration is dead in the water. The Elysée Treaty had only been signed a few years before, any French Government is going to be terrified of this resurgent Germany. Ditto the Benelux countries. The UK will be outraged as well. Even if the EEC somehow remains in place they certainly wouldn't go into it now.

In the process of installing a "compliant" government in Germany, the US will have alienated the rest of Western Europe and strangled European integration in its cradle.
Gamble is that Cold War may be won sooner if USSR bankrupts by late 70s or early 80s
Then US can cut the Germans to size
 
Would this be before or after France left NATO in 1966? If after, France can have a field day declaring its moral superiority to a NATO that has no qualms accepting a military dictatorship as a member, but demanding France place its own nuclear weapons under their control. If shortly before, it would sour the relationship between France and Washington even more and possibly be the cause for France withdrawing even sooner.

Said nuclear weapons are now fixed on the Eastern border of the Rhine, even more than OTL while at the same time France will welcome every German 17-year old who does not want to be drafted and every journalist, songwriter and teacher who suddenly finds himself under constant surveillance..... Let's just say that May of 1968 will become a lot more interesting.
 
Last edited:
And one more thought: OTL the sixties also saw a massive cooperation between the aircraft industries of France and Germany. In this case, I think it's fair to say that France would quickly cut all ties with Germany and look elsewhere for cooperation. The UK being the most likely partner. Even if he German dictatorship would collapse in a couple of years, today Eurocopter and Airbus would be dominated by Paris and Toulouse instead of Hamburg and Munich.
 
This is ASB.
There is not the tiniest kernel of anything hinting in that direction IOTL, and many people on the thread have already argued how utterly hopeless such an endeavour would be - let alone that there weren't any forces who would have pushed this in the first place. And the US would not have requested or wanted it in the first place. I can't even imagine a different US leadership who would want this without having a completely different post-war situation overall.
 
Would this be before or after France left NATO in 1966? If after, France can have a field day declaring its moral superiority to a NATO that has no qualms accepting a military dictatorship as a member, but demanding France place its own nuclear weapons under their control. If shortly before, it would sour the relationship between France and Washington even more and possibly be the cause for France withdrawing even sooner.

Said nuclear weapons are now fixed on the Eastern border of the Rhine, even more than OTL while at the same time France will welcome every German 17-year old who does not want to be drafted and every journalist, songwriter and teacher who suddenly finds himself under constant surveillance..... Let's just say that May of 1968 will become a lot more interesting.
There were military dictatorships in NATO.
 
If in the 1960s height of the Cold War pro US BW military officers stage a coup and install a military dictatorship in FRG
...
IMHO completly ASB.
Why, how and by/with what 'forces' should such a coup be executed and esp. military dictatorship enforced throughout the country ?

By the german 'hairforce' the Bundeswehr of rather reluctant conscripts was at around that time?
Hairforce 1.jpg

bw-default.jpg

Hairforce 2.jpg


🤣🤣🤣

Sry but ... not the most 'effective' supportive forces for any kind of authoritarian regime.

Be assured these/most/almost every every soldiers would have - at least - left their barracks the minute any coupist announcement was out.
The RAF and its predecessors wouldn't have had the logistical means (vans, cars, truck, drivers) to empty all the depots immediatly open to them.

Sry ... but ... such coupists would have been laught at to death.
First by the younger, then - after some initial 'shock' moments ofc - also by the elderly political 'leadership alike Willy Brandt also.
 
IMHO completly ASB.
Why, how and by/with what 'forces' should such a coup be executed and esp. military dictatorship enforced throughout the country ?

By the german 'hairforce' the Bundeswehr of rather reluctant conscripts was at around that time?
View attachment 773679
View attachment 773678
View attachment 773680

🤣🤣🤣

Sry but ... not the most 'effective' supportive forces for any kind of authoritarian regime.

Be assured these/most/almost every every soldiers would have - at least - left their barracks the minute any coupist announcement was out.
The RAF and its predecessors wouldn't have had the logistical means (vans, cars, truck, drivers) to empty all the depots immediatly open to them.

Sry ... but ... such coupists would have been laught at to death.
First by the younger, then - after some initial 'shock' moments ofc - also by the elderly political 'leadership alike Willy Brandt also.
Having long hair affects your fighting ability ? I know a LOT of Sikhs who would disagree with that
 
Would this be before or after France left NATO in 1966? If after, France can have a field day declaring its moral superiority to a NATO that has no qualms accepting a military dictatorship as a member, but demanding France place its own nuclear weapons under their control. If shortly before, it would sour the relationship between France and Washington even more and possibly be the cause for France withdrawing even sooner.

Said nuclear weapons are now fixed on the Eastern border of the Rhine, even more than OTL while at the same time France will welcome every German 17-year old who does not want to be drafted and every journalist, songwriter and teacher who suddenly finds himself under constant surveillance..... Let's just say that May of 1968 will become a lot more interesting.
On a the flip a lot of 25 yr olds in 1945 would be in mid 40s now , how would they react ?
 
IMHO completly ASB.
Why, how and by/with what 'forces' should such a coup be executed and esp. military dictatorship enforced throughout the country ?

By the german 'hairforce' the Bundeswehr of rather reluctant conscripts was at around that time?
View attachment 773679
View attachment 773678
View attachment 773680

🤣🤣🤣

Sry but ... not the most 'effective' supportive forces for any kind of authoritarian regime.

Be assured these/most/almost every every soldiers would have - at least - left their barracks the minute any coupist announcement was out.
The RAF and its predecessors wouldn't have had the logistical means (vans, cars, truck, drivers) to empty all the depots immediatly open to them.

Sry ... but ... such coupists would have been laught at to death.
First by the younger, then - after some initial 'shock' moments ofc - also by the elderly political 'leadership alike Willy Brandt also.
Very few things are ASB. This is not one of them. Anything can happen, given the right circumstances. A Bundeswehr Dictatorship is highly unlikely, but it's possible, even if it would require a lot of things going differently in the timeline before it could happen.
 
This is ASB.
There is not the tiniest kernel of anything hinting in that direction IOTL, and many people on the thread have already argued how utterly hopeless such an endeavour would be - let alone that there weren't any forces who would have pushed this in the first place. And the US would not have requested or wanted it in the first place. I can't even imagine a different US leadership who would want this without having a completely different post-war situation overall.
I have a feeling to US leadership of 60s a German military dictatorship on a tight US leash is still far more acceptable than losing most of Europe to soviet influence.
 
Western Europe would not accept it and western europe was not eastern europe. Plain and simple. Keeping the germans demilitarized down and in check was a major reason for dividing the country in the first place. The populace would also not accept it as any hint of militarism was widely despised in west germany at the time with the bundeswehr being considered suspect.

To get this you would need a us approach to w-germany post wwii that the rest of europe would not allow,
OTL Germany in NATO had one of the biggest military in all of Europe( so it was far from demilitarized post 1955), in this scenario a military German leadership is expected to be a lot more compliant with US interests and much harder on local leftists.
Maybe rise of left wing terrorism in Europe could be a trigger ? Like a German 9/11
 
OTL Germany in NATO had one of the biggest military in all of Europe( so it was far from demilitarized post 1955), in this scenario a military German leadership is expected to be a lot more compliant with US interests and much harder on local leftists.
Maybe rise of left wing terrorism in Europe could be a trigger ? Like a German 9/11
It was smaller than French and British military. The Brits even freaked out over German reunification in 1990 - ITTL they would have fully supported De Gaulle's actions.

Also, expect pro-democratic elements in Germany to throw their lot with France.

As for the US, propping up a West German dictatorship is not worth losing every single one of any other European country, especially when France + Britain still > West Germany in the 1960s.
 
Last edited:
Top