Mussolini Flies & Dies With Hitler. What Would Göring and Italy Do ?

[Rattenfänger von Memphis]

In the August 30, 1941 issue of the New York Times the following announcement from the Associated Press appeared, datelined from Rome on August 29, 1941:

Rome, Aug. 29 (AP) --“Premier Mussolini piloted Adolf Hitler’s heavy airplane back from one section of the German-Russian front during their visit, Italian correspondents reported tonight in lengthy dispatches on the meeting.”

Also on board this airplane flight with Mussolini and Hitler were Heinrich Himmler, Chief of the German Police (including the Gestapo and the Waffen-SS) and Joachim von Ribbentrop, German Minister of Foreign Affairs.

What would have happened if this airplane had crashed killing all these high-ranking Axis men ? At one blow, Hitler, Mussolini, Himmler and Ribbentrop would all be dead. Before you decide if this event is extremely unlikely or how such a happening would affect the history of World War II, please take a closer look at the circumstances of this flight over Ukraine from 3 different sources:

(1) First the ever-present Wikipedia...

“During a flight from Uman to Lvov[Lviv] carrying Hitler, Mussolini, Himmler, Ribbentrop and others, Mussolini asked to pilot the aircraft himself. Hitler was so surprised that he said nothing and managed only an awkward smile. Since no one was willing to voice an objection, Mussolini took the controls and flew the plane himself for over an hour while everyone else on board was made extremely nervous.

(2)From the Time-Life Books’s series on World War II in the volume entitled “Italy At War”, page 102:

“Hitler and Mussolini flew to the Ukraine. There was no fighting going on at Uman when the two dictators arrived…[O]n the return flight..[Mussolini] persuaded the pilot to let him fly the plane. Hitler assented, and then had to endure a stomach-wrenching series of swoops and steep banks as the Duce played childishly with the controls. Later, Mussolini would insist that an account of his joy ride be included in the official communiqué of the meeting.”

(3)The Smithsonian Air & Space Magazine, in an article entitled “Despots Aloft” gives a more detailed background of this Mussolini-piloted flight: (Google "Despots Aloft Smithsonian")

“BY THE SUMMER OF 1941, OPERATON BARBAROSSA, Hitler’s bold plan for the invasion of Soviet Russia, was in full swing. With the Soviet armies in retreat, Hitler invited his Italian ally, Benito Mussolini, to fly with him to the war zone in his Fw 200 Condor, the Immelmann III. The journey would allow Hitler to savor his triumphs in the east and to view the conquered Ukraine, where his Army Group South had destroyed 20 enemy divisions and taken over 200,000 prisoners. Hitler firmly believed that Joseph Stalin and his Bolshevik regime now faced extinction.

The trip to the Ukraine called for a flight of over 600 miles to an airstrip at Uman, in an active sector of the front 150 miles south of Kiev. The weather proved ideal—little turbulence and a nearly cloudless sky. Joining Hitler and Mussolini for the flight were Nazi Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop, SS head Heinrich Himmler, and the Italian ambassador to Germany, Filippo Anfuso. Santi Corvaja in his Hitler and Mussolini, The Secret Meetings, records Anfuso’s vivid account of the unspoken anxiety aboard: “They were all thinking of the front pages of the newspapers had we all crashed together.” The Soviet air force had been nearly destroyed, so it posed no real threat; still, the Luftwaffe deployed an escort of Messerschmitt Bf 109 fighters to ensure the Führer’s safety.

But Hitler and his personal pilot, Hans Baur, encountered another danger: On the return leg, Mussolini asked his German host if he could fly the airplane. Mussolini had earned his pilot’s license in the pre-war years and fancied himself a talented aviator. Hitler acquiesced but prudently instructed Baur to remain at the controls.

Once Mussolini entered the cockpit, Hitler nervously returned to his Führersessel (special leader’s seat). Under the watchful eye of Baur, Mussolini put the Condor through several shallow banks and other maneuvers and expressed great admiration for the airplane’s responsive controls. After an hour, Mussolini finally returned to the cabin, to the relief of all. Anfuso wrote of the incident, “I’m sure the joke was not at all to Hitler’s liking. The SS must have thought of it as an attempt to murder the Führer. Not knowing what to do, they stared blankly at Himmler, who kept silent. When the time came to land, Hitler’s pilot…told the Duce landing was not such a good idea. Mussolini turned and saw the convulsed faces of the passengers, who having so far avoided death at the hands of the Soviets did not want to die because of an Italian, however famous he may have been.”

Much to Hitler’s annoyance, Mussolini then instructed an aide to mention in a joint communiqué from the two Axis leaders that the Duce had flown the Führer home from the front. Mussolini’s posturing as an intrepid aviator could have been a scene in a classic movie: Charlie Chaplin’s 1940 parody, The Great Dictator.

Most probably, at least I think so anyway, Hans Baur could have stopped a crash due to any Mussolini mishap, but what if the plane had crashed and killed all aboard ? What would have happened? Let’s look at the situation at the time.

Barely 10 weeks before this hypothetical airplane crash, Germany had invaded the Soviet Union and had driven deep into Russia as this map from Wikipedia shows.

Most military experts in 1941 all over the world expected Russia to swiftly collapse before the Nazi onslaught. Hitler was at the height of his power. Almost all of Europe (aside from Britain, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland and Sweden) was conquered by, or allied with, Germany. The Germans were not yet facing horrible air raids nor onerous rationing and shortages (that would come later in OTL). Indeed the German people were almost delirious with their soldiers’s many extensive victories in Russia. The Time-Life Books’s series on World War II in the volume entitled “The Home Front: Germany”, pages 66 – 67, describes this sense of euphoria.

“On the morning of the invasion[June 22, 1941 Barbarossa], Harry Flannery, an American journalist on his way to a recording studio to broadcast the news to the United States, sensed a current of excitement flowing through the gathered crowds: ‘For the first time since the War had begun,’ he wrote later, ‘there was a momentary enthusiasm among the German populace. The war against Russia was the first popular campaign that had been launched. None of the Germans had ever been able to understand why a treaty should have been made with the Soviets, since they had been made the main object of denunciation since 1933. Now they had a sense of relief, a feeling of final understanding. ‘Now,’ they said, ‘we are fighting our real enemy.’ ”

That exuberance was destined to last for some time. For the first few weeks of Operation Barbarossa, as the Wehrmacht swept deep into the Soviet Union, the mood on the German home front was buoyant. Day after day, regular programming on the state radio was interrupted by special communiqués from the military high command. In restaurants and cafés and other public places, the radio would be turned up, as the law demanded, so that people on the sidewalks could hear. Waiters stopped serving and diners stopped eating and talking. Then a blast of trumpets and a roll of drums introduced an announcer who delivered the news of yet another triumph of German arms.

Once more the German people began to sense the nearness of victory, to be followed by peace. “The mood of the population has changed dramatically,” government pollsters wrote in a report that summer. “Today nobody takes Russia seriously as a military opponent. People are so confident that they are talking about a period of six weeks before the War is over.”

As Harry Flannery’s presence in Germany indicates, the United States was not in the war, nor was Japan. This time period was 5 months before Pearl Harbor. With Hitler out of the picture perhaps the onus of making peace with Hitler’s designated successor, Hermann Göring, would not be out of the question for the British. (After all, just 3 months before this, before Operation Barbarossa, high-ranking Nazi Rudolf Hess had flown to Scotland on a crazy mission to make peace between Britain and Germany.) But I cannot see Göring trying to stop the war against Russia at the height of German successes, nor making peace with Britain.

What I can see Göring doing is giving more leeway to the German generals by letting them immediately concentrate on taking Moscow which nearly all of them wanted to do. Hitler had nixed that idea, wanting to conquer Ukraine first. (In OTL, the Germans resumed their advance on Moscow too late and the winter set in stopping them at the outskirts of Moscow December 6, 1941). But, taking Moscow didn’t win the war for Napoleon in 1812; but could it have helped to win the war in the East for Germany in 1941 and 1942 ?

And possibly Göring would have, somehow, avoided declaring war on the United States as Hitler did in December 1941. Who knows, but the possibility would have certainly been there.

I think Himmler’s successor to head the Gestapo and the Waffen-SS would no doubt have been Reinhard Heydrich who, OTL, went on to orchestrate the Wannsee Conference that organized the Holocaust. I am not sure if Göring would have stopped the Holocaust.

Those are some of my views on a Germany suddenly without Hitler in August 1941. Then there’s Italy in the aftermath of Mussolini’s unexpected death, a much more murkier situation to unravel of what might have been. By August 1941, Italy had lost Italian East Africa and about half of Libya. But German general Erwin Rommel, who would become the famous “Desert Fox”(“Wüstenfuchs“), had landed in North Africa and was about to embark on his incredible career dealing many defeats to the British with his mostly Italian soldiers.

In OTL, as I understand it, both Hitler and most Italian officials felt that it was mainly Mussolini who wanted an alliance with Germany and to enter the war on Germany’s side. I cannot see Italy being able to extricate herself from Germany nor being able to easily exit the war. I do not see Mussolini’s son-in-law Count Ciano becoming the new leader.

There were a few possibilities but I’m thinking that someone like Dino Grandi, a high-ranking Fascist, would be acceptable to the King of Italy, the Fascist party and the Italian people. (In OTL he was against the Italian racial laws against the Jews, as well as Italy entering the war. And he masterminded the OTL ouster of Mussolini in July 1943.)

What are your thoughts ?

 

[Moss]

See this may be what I love most about this site. No matter how much I read, or how many documentaries I watch I'm always able to find new interesting tid bits.

As far as your scenario goes, this is the height of Barbarossa. Germany is drunk on victory, believing the fall of the USSR to be immenent. However while Goring was never the biggest fan of war with Russia, seeing as Berlin is balls deep he has no choice but to fight on. To this end I don't think he will immediately end the war. Moscow or Kiev is quite the debate. I think it was a gamble either way. Guderian may well have taken the city, but you've got 700,000 troops now that can crash your unprotected and over extended flank. I'm going to go with Goring playing it safe and taking Kiev. Now around this time the Wehrmact sat Hitler down and informed him that the war couldn't be won in the east this year. Also around this time there were alleged offers of Brest Litovsk 2. I'm of the opinion Goring would take the deal. We now have Germany with BL borders, plus their gains in northern and western europe. Goring would tell the Japanese to fuck off and I don't belive would make a move against the US. He probably would push hard for a deal with the UK and after witnessing such a devastating defeat of yet another ally I could see London making peace. The problem here is America. If FDR still orders his attacks on German shipping the prospect of war remains. Goring was never a fan of the Navy and often fought petty turf wars with them. So I don't see him allowing this to escalate into a war.

If the US stays out, and I think the desire to join would be lesser without the option of the Russians doing the heavy lifting. (I'm reminded of Stalins remark "We paid in blood, you paid in steel") A middle east and med strategy would probably be employed if the war continues into 1942. Goring had made his case to Hitler in the spring of 41 in a failed attempt to dissuade him from invading Russia. I think if they could focus on the mid east and north africa its certainly possible for germany to conquer it. He probably would make Spain join and then would have a safer route to supply his troops. Turkey will be pressured to join and very well might. Eventually if the germans try and go for India or something crazy they will become over extended and get cut off.

All in all I think the most likely scenario is Goring makes a deal with Stalin, and then turns around offering England a white peace. He would not be seen as as objectionable compared to Hitler, and an uneasy peace may settle upon the planet.

 

[CaptainCalvert]

See this may be what I love most about this site. No matter how much I read, or how many documentaries I watch I'm always able to find new interesting tid bits.

As far as your scenario goes, this is the height of Barbarossa. Germany is drunk on victory, believing the fall of the USSR to be immenent. However while Goring was never the biggest fan of war with Russia, seeing as Berlin is balls deep he has no choice but to fight on. To this end I don't think he will immediately end the war. Moscow or Kiev is quite the debate. I think it was a gamble either way. Guderian may well have taken the city, but you've got 700,000 troops now that can crash your unprotected and over extended flank. I'm going to go with Goring playing it safe and taking Kiev. Now around this time the Wehrmact sat Hitler down and informed him that the war couldn't be won in the east this year. Also around this time there were alleged offers of Brest Litovsk 2. I'm of the opinion Goring would take the deal. We now have Germany with BL borders, plus their gains in northern and western europe. Goring would tell the Japanese to fuck off and I don't belive would make a move against the US. He probably would push hard for a deal with the UK and after witnessing such a devastating defeat of yet another ally I could see London making peace. The problem here is America. If FDR still orders his attacks on German shipping the prospect of war remains. Goring was never a fan of the Navy and often fought petty turf wars with them. So I don't see him allowing this to escalate into a war.

If the US stays out, and I think the desire to join would be lesser without the option of the Russians doing the heavy lifting. (I'm reminded of Stalins remark "We paid in blood, you paid in steel") A middle east and med strategy would probably be employed if the war continues into 1942. Goring had made his case to Hitler in the spring of 41 in a failed attempt to dissuade him from invading Russia. I think if they could focus on the mid east and north africa its certainly possible for germany to conquer it. He probably would make Spain join and then would have a safer route to supply his troops. Turkey will be pressured to join and very well might. Eventually if the germans try and go for India or something crazy they will become over extended and get cut off.

All in all I think the most likely scenario is Goring makes a deal with Stalin, and then turns around offering England a white peace. He would not be seen as as objectionable compared to Hitler, and an uneasy peace may settle upon the planet.

I know Franco wasn't impressed with Hitler, so what could Goering do to persuade him to join?

There's also the matter of what terms could make the UK call a halt? They were prepared to fight when the soviets were in close cooperation with Germany and - if anything - the situation is better since Germany alone is less of a threat than Germany plus soviets.

Bear in mind that in May 1941, before Barbarossa had been launched, Hess had offered peace terms (of a sort) and was promptly imprisoned, so it doesn't look like the UK are going to accept anything trivial. I'd be thinking a minimum of France restored, prisoners returned and the armistice overturned, and even that might not be enough.

 

[Moss]

I know Franco wasn't impressed with Hitler, so what could Goering do to persuade him to join?

There's also the matter of what terms could make the UK call a halt? They were prepared to fight when the soviets were in close cooperation with Germany and - if anything - the situation is better since Germany alone is less of a threat than Germany plus soviets.

Bear in mind that in May 1941, before Barbarossa had been launched, Hess had offered peace terms (of a sort) and was promptly imprisoned, so it doesn't look like the UK are going to accept anything trivial. I'd be thinking a minimum of France restored, prisoners returned and the armistice overturned, and even that might not be enough.

Goring can make it abundantly clear to Franco that if you want a strong position in the post war axis european order, you have to carry your own weight and join the war. This would be much easier if the view is that the Reich in only a few months time has seemingly, absolutely annihilated the USSR and are now proud masters of central, eastern, western, northern, and balkan Europe. Franco was intending to join the war at some point otl, he just wanted to do what Mussolini unsucessfully attempted, which was to jump in at its triumphant conclusion, risk very little, and yet still get a seat at the victors table during the peace confernce.

As far as the UK is concerned, to lose such a major source of resources, industry, and manpower would be a devastating blow to morale. Don't forget after the fall of Singapore there was a no confidence vote. How much more concerning would it be that Germany has deafeated the Soviet Union? England cannot fight forever, and if the US is not in the war 1942 simply isn't feasable for the UK. The US Army even recommended in summer of 1942 that terms be sought with the European Axis if the Soviets folded.

One last point here. If England has lost Poland, France, Russia, Gibraltar, Malta, and is losing Egypt as well, eventually someone in Londond is going to put an end to the long chain of catastrophe's that have plauged her ever since day one. Especially if Goring doesn't put reparations or restrictions against England I think its rather probable a deal is reached.

 

[CaptainCalvert]

Goring can make it abundantly clear to Franco that if you want a strong position in the post war axis european order, you have to carry your own weight and join the war. This would be much easier if the view is that the Reich in only a few months time has seemingly, absolutely annihilated the USSR and are now proud masters of central, eastern, western, northern, and balkan Europe. Franco was intending to join the war at some point otl, he just wanted to do what Mussolini unsucessfully attempted, which was to jump in at its triumphant conclusion, risk very little, and yet still get a seat at the victors table during the peace confernce.

As far as the UK is concerned, to lose such a major source of resources, industry, and manpower would be a devastating blow to morale. Don't forget after the fall of Singapore there was a no confidence vote. How much more concerning would it be that Germany has deafeated the Soviet Union? England cannot fight forever, and if the US is not in the war 1942 simply isn't feasable for the UK. The US Army even recommended in summer of 1942 that terms be sought with the European Axis if the Soviets folded.

One last point here. If England has lost Poland, France, Russia, Gibraltar, Malta, and is losing Egypt as well, eventually someone in Londond is going to put an end to the long chain of catastrophe's that have plauged her ever since day one. Especially if Goring doesn't put reparations or restrictions against England I think its rather probable a deal is reached.

Goring can make it abundantly clear to Franco that if you want a strong position in the post war axis european order, you have to carry your own weight and join the war. This would be much easier if the view is that the Reich in only a few months time has seemingly, absolutely annihilated the USSR and are now proud masters of central, eastern, western, northern, and balkan Europe. Franco was intending to join the war at some point otl, he just wanted to do what Mussolini unsucessfully attempted, which was to jump in at its triumphant conclusion, risk very little, and yet still get a seat at the victors table during the peace confernce.

As far as the UK is concerned, to lose such a major source of resources, industry, and manpower would be a devastating blow to morale. Don't forget after the fall of Singapore there was a no confidence vote. How much more concerning would it be that Germany has deafeated the Soviet Union? England cannot fight forever, and if the US is not in the war 1942 simply isn't feasable for the UK. The US Army even recommended in summer of 1942 that terms be sought with the European Axis if the Soviets folded.

One last point here. If England has lost Poland, France, Russia, Gibraltar, Malta, and is losing Egypt as well, eventually someone in Londond is going to put an end to the long chain of catastrophe's that have plauged her ever since day one. Especially if Goring doesn't put reparations or restrictions against England I think its rather probable a deal is reached.

But isn't that what Hitler had previously offered Franco?
I'll agree that Goering is in a position to make a different and quite possibly more reasonable offer, and may be easier to get on with, but from the OP, the only other differences are
1) that Hitler - still at this point seen as a military genius - is gone, and
2) that Mussolini, who was Hitler's closest ally, is also dead.
This, to me, makes German military victory look less likely and would surely make Franco less likely to accept a German offer.

No more Hitler would provide an opportunity for Goering to open peace negotiations, if so inclined, and honest broker Franco might wish to gain a reputation as a peacemaking middleman.
Italy is quite likely to want to pull out after their disastrous losses while they still have most of Libya (peoviding another opportunity for Franco the peace broker), although France might be looking at Libya as war reparations if they can't get some land east of the current French Italian borders.

I can't easily see Goering getting a peace deal, but he at least has a chance to say " It wasn't me. Let's do what we can to fix it"
However, given his OTL record of overestimating his and the Luftwaffe's capabilities - Dunkirk, Battle of Britain, Crete, Stalingrad (after this POD but it shows his thinking) it's quite possible he decides - 'now at last I get to do things properly'.

 

[Post]

Don't forget after the fall of Singapore there was a no confidence vote.

It's not as much as you make it seem. It's been discussed before, and then I took a further look into it.

There were two votes. A vote of confidence, asked for by Churchill (passed 464 against 1).
And a vote of no confidence on the course of the war. 475 against 25 in Churchill's favor.

My previous posts on this when it was discussed earlier (in 2021):

The results of those votes were 464 against 1 and 475 against 25 in Churchills favor. Which is an overwhelming majority.

The first one was a vote of confidence, which was asked by Churchill himself, so that's not the house of commons trying to remove him.

Winston Churchill wins vote of ‘Confidence’ – World War II Today

The second was John Wardlaw-Milne not trying to remove Churchill, but wanting

the operation of the war turned over to a dominating figure to run the war and also a generalissimo to command all the armed forces.

John Wardlaw-Milne - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

As the records show, it's a VONC of the general direction of the war:

I beg to move, with the leave of the House, That this House, while paying tribute to the heroism and endurance of the Armed Forces of the Crown in circumstances of exceptional difficulty, has no confidence in the central direction of the war.

CENTRAL DIRECTION OF THE WAR. (Hansard, 2 July 1942)

CENTRAL DIRECTION OF THE WAR. (Hansard, 2 July 1942)

hansard.millbanksystems.com

Churchill became PM in may 1940 exactly because parliament wanted someone who would fight on. Even if Churchill was removed, it would hardly mean that the UK just throws in the towel.

In the transcripts of the debate, there seems to be wide support for Churchill, and the outcome confirms it. One MP even said

I ask the House what would happen if this Vote of Confidence in the Government were to be defeated. It would mean, of course, the immediate resignation of the Prime Minister and the Government. What would happen then? There is no lack of confidence in the Prime Minister as Prime Minister. That has been made clear a hundred times in the course of this Debate, and I do not think there would be any very great competition to succeed the present Prime Minister. Therefore, what would obviously happen would be that the present Prime Minister would be sent for by the King and asked to form another Administration, and no doubt he would do so with a certain number of changes. In this Debate there has been much criticism from all sides, and I think there is a strong feeling both in this House and in the country that there should be some changes in the personnel of this Government, and I hope that when he has got his Vote of Confidence, as of course he will, the Prime Minister will not ignore that obvious expression of opinion.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1942/jan/29/motion-of-confidence-in-his-majestys

 

[Moss]

But isn't that what Hitler had previously offered Franco?
I'll agree that Goering is in a position to make a different and quite possibly more reasonable offer, and may be easier to get on with, but from the OP, the only other differences are
1) that Hitler - still at this point seen as a military genius - is gone, and
2) that Mussolini, who was Hitler's closest ally, is also dead.
This, to me, makes German military victory look less likely and would surely make Franco less likely to accept a German offer.

No more Hitler would provide an opportunity for Goering to open peace negotiations, if so inclined, and honest broker Franco might wish to gain a reputation as a peacemaking middleman.
Italy is quite likely to want to pull out after their disastrous losses while they still have most of Libya (peoviding another opportunity for Franco the peace broker), although France might be looking at Libya as war reparations if they can't get some land east of the current French Italian borders.

I can't easily see Goering getting a peace deal, but he at least has a chance to say " It wasn't me. Let's do what we can to fix it"
However, given his OTL record of overestimating his and the Luftwaffe's capabilities - Dunkirk, Battle of Britain, Crete, Stalingrad (after this POD but it shows his thinking) it's quite possible he decides - 'now at last I get to do things properly'.

Franco as the peace maker is an interesting take. However in such a role he recieves no territory. He had designs on morocco and gibraltar, neither of which he will ever see in his empire without joining. Goring could make that point abundantly clear to him.

Italy losing the Moose might be seen as a great blow to be sure, yet I don't think Italy has suffered some of its worst defeats yet. In North Africa around this time the situation was far more favorable to the axis than it would be in 42 or 43.

The last and perhaps most important point though, is that the Soviets have surrendered and England now has zero allies on the continent. This is the greatest morale crusher since the outbreak of the war, far worse than any dispare the loss of Singapore summoned. The belief in eventual victory was championed by Churchill precisely because England had stronger allies that could show up and do the heavy lifting for her, now these hopes are dashed on the rocks of the blitzkreig. The other nations sitting on the fence will need to strongly fashion that into their considerations.

 

[Moss]

It's not as much as you make it seem. It's been discussed before, and then I took a further look into it.

There were two votes. A vote of confidence, asked for by Churchill (passed 464 against 1).
And a vote of no confidence on the course of the war. 475 against 25 in Churchill's favor.

My previous posts on this when it was discussed earlier (in 2021):

I'm well aware of the results. I was only speculating how a much stronger a reaction might be generated by this ATL wherein the Soviets have surrendered by October/November. Such developments would radically alter the deliberation on these issues.

 

[CaptainCalvert]

Franco as the peace maker is an interesting take. However in such a role he recieves no territory. He had designs on morocco and gibraltar, neither of which he will ever see in his empire without joining. Goring could make that point abundantly clear to him.

Italy losing the Moose might be seen as a great blow to be sure, yet I don't think Italy has suffered some of its worst defeats yet. In North Africa around this time the situation was far more favorable to the axis than it would be in 42 or 43.

The last and perhaps most important point though, is that the Soviets have surrendered and England now has zero allies on the continent. This is the greatest morale crusher since the outbreak of the war, far worse than any dispare the loss of Singapore summoned. The belief in eventual victory was championed by Churchill precisely because England had stronger allies that could show up and do the heavy lifting for her, now these hopes are dashed on the rocks of the blitzkreig. The other nations sitting on the fence will need to strongly fashion that into their considerations.

April 1941, Operation Compass had happened, salvaged by the Afrika Korps. The invasion of Greece had failed, salvaged by Germany, East Africa had been more or less lost. And Taranto had given them a nasty shock in 1940 and damaged the fleet.
So militarily, major losses averted by someone else and most of their African territory outside Libya lost and a fleet damaged in its home base.

It's way better than half of Libya lost, Albania under threat or lost and no German intervention, but doesn't paint a rosy picture. If Italy was reluctant to join the war, a new leader may well be unenthusiastic and start looking at how to extract themselves once things start to bog down in 1942.

 

[ravenscroft]

I think one possibility from the unexpected death of Hitler and Mussolini at that point would be chaos, as there would be no designated successor (Hess had flown to Britain months ago, and in any case he had lost power within the party) and even if Goring is now the leader of Nazi Germany he is not going to have the sheer clout of Adolf Hitler. Faith in Hitler was very strong at the time, as the first great defeats had yet to occur, and while Goring might be the nominal leader he will be challenged by a bunch of others. The Nazi regime was a snake pit, to a level that makes it hard to understand how they got as far as they did.

On the other hand, Germany is locked in a death match with the Soviet Union and there would be a certain “we must all hang together, or we will all hang separately” attitude - if there is a civil war, or even a prolonged power struggle, Stalin will have all the time he needs to rebalance his army and take the offensive. I would expect the Germans to patch over the cracks in the edifice as quickly as possible, while various factions jockey for power and prepare to launch corps when it can be done without committing national suicide.

Assuming Manstain takes command in the East, the Germans will probably lunge at Moscow earlier than OTL. That probably gives them the only real chance of victory in the East, although it does leave their flanks open to attack from Russian units they bypassed during the offensive. The Russians fought hard, if ineptly, in 1941, and - like most armies of the era - they did better over the months as the shock and awe of Blitzkrieg wore off. (The French actually fought better in the latter half of the battle of France, but by then it was too late.) This raises three possibilities:

-The Germans take Moscow, and get a victory of sorts.

-The Germans take Moscow, but the Soviets fight on and the Germans realise they have re-enacted Napoleon’s defeat, and later retreat.

-The Germans fail to take Moscow, and in the confusion the Soviets pull off enough of a strategic victory to give them a real chance of winning the war in 42/43.

Italy is an interesting question. The Italians have taken a beating, which means they will either be on the winning side and completely dominated by Nazi Germany or be beaten by the British and lose most of their colonies. By this point, most reasonable Italians should doubt their ability to pose as a great power, but getting out from under Germany’s thumb would be incredibly difficult; the Germans would certainly have contingency plans to seize Italy, and from their point of view beating Italy as an occupied country would make a certain degree of sense. The Italians could not switch sides, or even declare neutrality, without risking being attacked by both Britain and Germany. It is possible Churchill would agree to a peace between Britain and Italy in hopes of winding down the North African war before Japan can strike, if she still does in this timeline, but the Germans would have something to say about it. Nein!

On the other hand, the Germans have to know they cannot afford another war. Perhaps they will see sense.

I don’t know if the British would agree to peace terms with the Germans, even after Hitler’s death. At the very least, the British would want the restoration of France (as a counterbalance to Germany) and a number of other concessions the Germans would probably be unwilling to make. The British would also not trust the Germans to keep their word one second after they no longer needed the peace deal. Even without Hitler, Nazi Germany was not seen as a trustworthy state; no one in the Reich, as far as we know, convinced Hitler not to snatch up the rest of Czechoslovakia in early 1939, or to start menacing Poland.

That said, with Hitler’s death, a little urgency would probably go out of the British war effort.

John

 

[Garrison]

Goring can make it abundantly clear to Franco that if you want a strong position in the post war axis european order, you have to carry your own weight and join the war.

And Franco would continue to tell him where to stick it. Franco was convinced that the USA would enter the war and once they did Allied victory was inevitable. Given that Spain was completely dependent on foreign food imports and and was still struggling to recover from the Civil War joining would be disastrous. Franco was determined to stay out of the war, he died peacefully in bed in 1975, these two things are connected.

 

[jseidorf]

And Franco would continue to tell him where to stick it. Franco was convinced that the USA would enter the war and once they did Allied victory was inevitable. Given that Spain was completely dependent on foreign food imports and and was still struggling to recover from the Civil War joining would be disastrous. Franco was determined to stay out of the war, he died peacefully in bed in 1975, these two things are connected.

If anything, Mussolini would've been very well served to have exercised a similar skepticism of German victory chances.

 

[Rommel1941]

I would guess
1 goring was the designated successor so will take over. Everyone hated himmler and he was in the early part of his power ascent.
2 goring let's the generals have more control. No lunge to Kiev.
3 Moscow taken. The Soviets around Kiev do not have the logistics or mobility or communications to drive north to attack the flank of army group center esp with army group south pinning them. And the luftwaffe controlling the air.
4 stalin shot. Baria in charge signs a peace with Germany giving up Poland and the Baltic states.
5 England peace with France freed besides al. Versailles treaty disabled. Patents returned. Germany restricted to 25 % of English fleet. Tunisia and corsica to Italy. Lux annexed to Germany. Rest of Europe freed.

 

[Rattenfänger von Memphis]

In this ATL, while I believe that Göring would definitely continue the war against Russia, he could still keep a “Peace With Stalin” option open by taking 3 immediate actions from a position of strength. These 3 actions would benefit the German war effort and, at the same time, be a silent signal to Stalin that, just perhaps, a deal could be made with Göring.

(1) Immediately revoke the Commissar Order that Hitler had issued June 6, 1941, which called for the immediate execution of captured, or even suspected, Soviet political commissars assigned to Russian Army units. Hitler himself, in OTL, cancelled the Commissar Order on May 6, 1942:

“According to the order, all those prisoners who could be identified as "thoroughly bolshevised or as active representatives of the Bolshevist ideology" should also be killed….

…When the Commissar Order became known among the Red Army, it provoked stronger resistance to German forces. This unwanted effect was cited in German appeals to Hitler (e.g. by Claus von Stauffenberg), who finally cancelled the Commissar Order after one year, on 6 May 1942.

(2) Stop starving captured Russian soldiers which angered the Russian people and also increased their will to fight the Germans. Göring could have done this many months before 1942.

“By the end of 1941, millions of Soviet soldiers had been captured, mostly in large-scale encirclement operations during the German Army's rapid advance. Two-thirds of them died from starvation, exposure, and disease by early 1942—ranking as one of the highest death rates from mass atrocity in history…

The first 200,000 Soviet prisoners of war were deported to Germany in July and August 1941 to fill the labor demands of agriculture and industry. The deportees faced conditions similar to those in the occupied Soviet Union. Hitler halted the transports in mid-August, but changed his mind on 31 October..

.
(3) Remember that Ribbentrop, the German Foreign Minister, also would have died in the plane crash along with Hitler, Mussolini and Himmler. Hitler and Ribbentrop had been responsible for the Non-Aggression Pact with Stalin. These betrayers, as Stalin would have regarded them, were now out of the picture.

Göring was the new leader, maybe someone Stalin could consider dealing with. Perhaps, especially if Göring appoints someone who might be very acceptable to Stalin as the new German Foreign Minister. This someone could be Count von der Schlenburg.

Count von der Schulenburg had been the German ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1934 until 1941 when the Germans invaded Russia. He was totally against a war with Russia and had been proud of the improved German-Russian relations from 1939 to 1941 which happened on his watch. Indeed, he had been “kept in the dark about Germany’s planned invasion of the Soviet Union” as Wikipedia states :

“Schulenburg was kept in the dark about Germany's planned invasion of the Soviet Union. He knew for certain that the invasion would take place only a few hours before it was launched, when Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop cabled him a message to read to Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov justifying the invasion.

He, however, got suspicions of what his government was planning to do in the spring of 1941. To the last, he tried to thwart any talk of invasion by such means as hinting at the Soviet Union's military strength and the unassailability of its industrial reserves. He is quoted as having said to Molotov on the morning of the attack:

"For the last six years I've personally tried to do everything I could to encourage friendship between the Soviet Union and Germany. But you can't stand in the way of destiny." A few weeks before the invasion, Schulenburg tried to warn the Soviet Ambassador to Germany Vladimir Dekanozov of his suspicions, but Dekanozov dismissed the evidence of military preparations as false British propaganda.”

The reason I think a “Schulenburg Gambit” might work as a signal to Stalin is because Stalin used a similar method of signaling to Hitler when he replaced his own Foreign Minister Maxim Litvinov with Molotov in May 1939, shortly before Hitler and Stalin concluded the German-Russian Non-Aggression Pact in August 1939.

Stalin would recognize the signal. Whether he would act upon it or not, is a different question.

“After the 1938 Munich Agreement, German state media derided Litvinov for his Jewish ancestry, referring to him as "Finkelstein-Litvinov"….

….On 3 May 1939, Stalin replaced Litvinov, who was closely identified with the anti-German position, with Vyacheslav Molotov. At a prearranged meeting, Stalin said: "The Soviet Government intended to improve its relations with Hitler and if possible sign a pact with Nazi Germany. As a Jew and an avowed opponent of such a policy, Litvinov stood in the way." Litvinov argued and banged on the table. Stalin then demanded Litvinov to sign a letter of resignation…

… Hitler took Litvinov's removal more seriously than Chamberlain. The German ambassador to the Soviet Union, Schulenburg, was in Iran. Hilger, the First Secretary, was summoned to see Hitler, who asked why Stalin might have dismissed Litvinov. Hilger said: "According to my firm belief he [Stalin] had done so because Litvinov had pressed for an understanding with France and Britain while Stalin thought the Western powers were aiming to have the Soviet Union pull the chestnuts out of the fire in the event of war”

 

[ProdigAHl Son]

Goring would probably accept something like this deal.

In actual history, Stalin made a series of peace offers from 1941–1944. The first in July 1941 offered to cede the Baltics, Ukraine (presumably including the Crimean peninsula which was not then part of Ukraine) to Germany.

 

[the Imperium of Canada]

@ObssesedNuker

I think Himmler’s successor to head the Gestapo and the Waffen-SS would no doubt have been Reinhard Heydrich who, OTL, went on to orchestrate the Wannsee Conference that organized the Holocaust. I am not sure if Göring would have stopped the Holocaust.

The Nazi is going to Nazi

 

[CaptainCalvert]

On post 14, I'm struggling to see Stalin being all that keen on an easy deal with Germany after so much death and destruction in the first 2 and a bit months of Barbarossa.
Indeed, a new boss (who doesn't have the image of military genius that Hitler had) might not have the baggage as a betrayer, but if they are seen to be ordinary rather than a successful war leader then Stalin should see his chances of military success as much improved.

 

[Alex1guy]

I also don't know why people in this thread is acting like Goering is some kind of Notzi who would try sue for peace or was someone the Soviets or British trusted. The guy was also an arrogant bastard and the Germans were (as far as they were concerned) winning the war. Why would he make peace? He is now the heir to Hitler's legacy and that is his main source of legitimacy. He cant release France back into the arms of the British (and I have serious doubts that anyone in London would be listening after two years of being bombed the Luftwaffe) and he was (what he appeared to be) merely months away from a total Soviet collapse. Why take some B-L style deal (also the idea that Stalin offered this... I'll get to that...) when you can take the whole thing?

Also the Soviet-German portion of the war had already taken on its own nightmarish dimensions as a death struggle between two extreme ideologies with a bunch of bitter racial elements thrown in for good measure. That doesn't just go back in the bottle. Both sides have presented the fight as a war of annihilation, and that isn't just at the leadership level, as far as the people involved on the ground are concerned, its victory or death.

I'm not super well versed, but I'm fairly certain the idea of "ignore Kiev, go for Moscow and the war is over", it probably results in Army Group Centre getting cut off an annihilated. Leaving hundreds of thousands of Soviet troops on the flanks and just marching to a giant urban centre that wont fall in just days, would end in catastrophe for the Germans. Moscow is huge and the Germans are going to get bogged down for weeks if not months trying to surround and take it.

Also I understand it wasn't only Hitler who thought leaving the Kiev pocket on the flank was a bad idea, most of the German command staff were opposed to the idea of leaving their flanks open. Guderian was the one making these claims that he could have rushed Moscow, and he had the luxury of being able to be alive to spin the story to where he doesn't look like an idiot.

Goring would probably accept something like this deal.

Looking into this, it seems this claim has no historical basis beyond what the author who wrote it in the 70s said. He's literally the only one to mention the idea, and there are no names of those involved, no hard documented evidence this took place. There was some mid-ranking officers in 1940-41 dealing with their counterparts in Sweden or something, but that's not Hitler and Stalin. I've tried to get some better understanding of this quote, maybe its based on the claim of some German officer that the author spoke to, but I can't find much about this.

On post 14, I'm struggling to see Stalin being all that keen on an easy deal with Germany after so much death and destruction in the first 2 and a bit months of Barbarossa.
Indeed, a new boss (who doesn't have the image of military genius that Hitler had) might not have the baggage as a betrayer, but if they are seen to be ordinary rather than a successful war leader then Stalin should see his chances of military success as much improved.

I am in total agreement, seeing Hitler die would be a boost to Soviet and British morale. The idea that they could suddenly trust the nation that's they've been fighting tooth and nail seems like a complete fantasy. It really seems like a lot of people in this thread have fallen for the idea that Hitler was the one that lost Germany the war as posited by all those coping German generals post-war.

Italy is interesting to interpret, I feel like they were banking on an easy cut and run.

 

[Moss]

I think one possibility from the unexpected death of Hitler and Mussolini at that point would be chaos, as there would be no designated successor (Hess had flown to Britain months ago, and in any case he had lost power within the party) and even if Goring is now the leader of Nazi Germany he is not going to have the sheer clout of Adolf Hitler. Faith in Hitler was very strong at the time, as the first great defeats had yet to occur, and while Goring might be the nominal leader he will be challenged by a bunch of others. The Nazi regime was a snake pit, to a level that makes it hard to understand how they got as far as they did.

On the other hand, Germany is locked in a death match with the Soviet Union and there would be a certain “we must all hang together, or we will all hang separately” attitude - if there is a civil war, or even a prolonged power struggle, Stalin will have all the time he needs to rebalance his army and take the offensive. I would expect the Germans to patch over the cracks in the edifice as quickly as possible, while various factions jockey for power and prepare to launch corps when it can be done without committing national suicide.

Assuming Manstain takes command in the East, the Germans will probably lunge at Moscow earlier than OTL. That probably gives them the only real chance of victory in the East, although it does leave their flanks open to attack from Russian units they bypassed during the offensive. The Russians fought hard, if ineptly, in 1941, and - like most armies of the era - they did better over the months as the shock and awe of Blitzkrieg wore off. (The French actually fought better in the latter half of the battle of France, but by then it was too late.) This raises three possibilities:

-The Germans take Moscow, and get a victory of sorts.

-The Germans take Moscow, but the Soviets fight on and the Germans realise they have re-enacted Napoleon’s defeat, and later retreat.

-The Germans fail to take Moscow, and in the confusion the Soviets pull off enough of a strategic victory to give them a real chance of winning the war in 42/43.

Italy is an interesting question. The Italians have taken a beating, which means they will either be on the winning side and completely dominated by Nazi Germany or be beaten by the British and lose most of their colonies. By this point, most reasonable Italians should doubt their ability to pose as a great power, but getting out from under Germany’s thumb would be incredibly difficult; the Germans would certainly have contingency plans to seize Italy, and from their point of view beating Italy as an occupied country would make a certain degree of sense. The Italians could not switch sides, or even declare neutrality, without risking being attacked by both Britain and Germany. It is possible Churchill would agree to a peace between Britain and Italy in hopes of winding down the North African war before Japan can strike, if she still does in this timeline, but the Germans would have something to say about it. Nein!

On the other hand, the Germans have to know they cannot afford another war. Perhaps they will see sense.

I don’t know if the British would agree to peace terms with the Germans, even after Hitler’s death. At the very least, the British would want the restoration of France (as a counterbalance to Germany) and a number of other concessions the Germans would probably be unwilling to make. The British would also not trust the Germans to keep their word one second after they no longer needed the peace deal. Even without Hitler, Nazi Germany was not seen as a trustworthy state; no one in the Reich, as far as we know, convinced Hitler not to snatch up the rest of Czechoslovakia in early 1939, or to start menacing Poland.

That said, with Hitler’s death, a little urgency would probably go out of the British war effort.

John

The Germans would never relinquish control over France. That was their historical enemy and could not be allowed to threaten the Reich again. As much as the allies felt Germany needed to be permenantly de fanged, the Reich felt France needed to be defeated once and for all. It would entirely compromise their security, and let England back on the continent that was now mostly theirs. I'm sorry but this is not happening.

 

[Moss]

And Franco would continue to tell him where to stick it. Franco was convinced that the USA would enter the war and once they did Allied victory was inevitable. Given that Spain was completely dependent on foreign food imports and and was still struggling to recover from the Civil War joining would be disastrous. Franco was determined to stay out of the war, he died peacefully in bed in 1975, these two things are connected.

Franco was determined to do what he felt was in his personal best interest. If it becomes clear that the axis are winning then he will go whichever way the wind is blowing.