Nazi Germany and Possible Control of Africa Minus North Africa

In what scenarios might Nazi Germany have gained control of any part of Africa, ignoring North Africa, controlled by the Belgians, British, French, or maybe Italians?
As some examples, could they have gained control by any means of any/all of:
1. Belgian Congo
2. Italian East Africa (Not including war)
3. British East Africa
4. British West Africa
 
In what scenarios might Nazi Germany have gained control of any part of Africa, ignoring North Africa, controlled by the Belgians, British, French, or maybe Italians?
As some examples, could they have gained control by any means of any/all of:
1. Belgian Congo
2. Italian East Africa (Not including war)
3. British East Africa
4. British West Africa

Outside complete victory in Europe (Conquest of Britain and USSR) it is ASB. And even then i'm pretty sure the Americans will stop them.
 
Do you mean this as a scenario where Germany hangs on to some colonies after World War One or do you mean to ask what would happen if these territories were controlled in a Nazi victory scenario?
 

sharlin

Banned
If its the latter. Then a huge number of people are going to be taken to camps and never seen again or worked to death.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
In what scenarios might Nazi Germany have gained control of any part of Africa, ignoring North Africa, controlled by the Belgians, British, French, or maybe Italians?
As some examples, could they have gained control by any means of any/all of:
1. Belgian Congo
2. Italian East Africa (Not including war)
3. British East Africa
4. British West Africa

Intervention by The Mighty Thor on the side of the German Volk.


Or, you know, the Royal Navy self destructing en masse mid-1940.
 
I mean for instance could Nazi Germany ask for any of these things in a hypothetical peace deal and get them, whether with France or Belgium, maybe even the UK. If they could enforce these demands
 

Saphroneth

Banned
I mean for instance could Nazi Germany ask for any of these things in a hypothetical peace deal and get them, whether with France or Belgium, maybe even the UK. If they could enforce these demands

That last sentence is the key here. Of course, it's nigh impossible to get such a peace - even if the UK is stampeded into a peace deal in 1940, if the terms are too harsh they'll just look at the tiny little German destroyer flotilla that's their navy at that point and say "Okay, come take it."
 
That last sentence is the key here. Of course, it's nigh impossible to get such a peace - even if the UK is stampeded into a peace deal in 1940, if the terms are too harsh they'll just look at the tiny little German destroyer flotilla that's their navy at that point and say "Okay, come take it."
What about the Belgians or French? Would they have had much of a choice?
 

Saphroneth

Banned
What about the Belgians or French? Would they have had much of a choice?

The Belgians and French can actually be reached by German armed forces and as such can be forced to surrender - BUT the Brits can and will stop the Germans from actually taking possession. Besides which, even OTL the colonies didn't surrender and kept fighting - there's this thing called "Governments in exile", which the Belgians did, while the French only asked for and got an armistice rather than surrendering. (The French could, if they fought on, have done reasonably well - the French colonies are buggers to get to for the Germans.)
 
It's possible that the Germans could force the Belgians to surrender their colonies in a peace deal, but the British would snap them up before the Germans could derive any meaningful advantage.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
It's possible that the Germans could force the Belgians to surrender their colonies in a peace deal, but the British would snap them up before the Germans could derive any meaningful advantage.

Exactly. The Brits are the important member of the Allies here simply for their unparalleled sea mobility - AND their well documented grim determination to deny that advantage to the enemy. (Like Mers-el-Kebir.)
 
Or, you know, the Royal Navy self destructing en masse mid-1940.

Given the differences in Naval capability and shipbuilding capacity the RN could be back up to being stronger than the Germans before a major advantage could be gained.

Anyway, even IF Britain is forced to surrender these colonies (which isn't going to happen) most of their colonies would look at the treaty, spit in the Germans' faces, then tell them to go f**k themselves.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Given the differences in Naval capability and shipbuilding capacity the RN could be back up to being stronger than the Germans before a major advantage could be gained.

Anyway, even IF Britain is forced to surrender these colonies (which isn't going to happen) most of their colonies would look at the treaty, spit in the Germans' faces, then tell them to go f**k themselves.

True, I just meant that with absolutely nothing with a RN ensign on it left in the water, then an USM is merely insanely hard.
 
Interesting. This makes sense that the most the Germans could hope for with a peace deal with the British is a white peace. And that France could keep fighting on from its colonies if it it wanted to
 
Last edited:
It's possible that the Germans could force the Belgians to surrender their colonies in a peace deal, but the British would snap them up before the Germans could derive any meaningful advantage.
The only way to do that would be for the Germans to actualy leave Belgium, since that would be the only way Belgium would make a peace deal with Nazi-Germany. Although, if Germany would be willing to leave Belgium (and thus probably the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and France), a peacedeal with Britain would be made a lot easier and peace with britain would be necessary for German colonies in....well anywhere overseas.

That said, I see no reason why Nazi-Germany would want any colonies in Africa.
 
The only way to do that would be for the Germans to actualy leave Belgium, since that would be the only way Belgium would make a peace deal with Nazi-Germany. Although, if Germany would be willing to leave Belgium (and thus probably the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and France), a peacedeal with Britain would be made a lot easier and peace with britain would be necessary for German colonies in....well anywhere overseas.

That said, I see no reason why Nazi-Germany would want any colonies in Africa.

Nazis want their coffee and chocolate. But seriously, for it all to happen, Nazis had to beat RN first.
 
But seriously, for it all to happen, Nazis had to beat RN first.
Not entirely true. The Royal Navy must not be a threat to Nazi-Germany. This could be accomplished by destroying it (which Nazi-German can't do) or by making peace with Britain. The last can be accomplished by beating Britain (which Nazi-Germany can't do) or by offering a peace which Britain would be willing to accept (which is very unlikely Nazi-Germany will do, as it means leaving France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and probably Poland and later in the war various other countries including Greece, Yugoslavia, etc.).
 
Connections North Africa to Sub-saharan

Just as a guide to access to Sub-saharan Africa. Let's say that the Axis gains complete control of all of the countries/colonies that border on the Med(Both Spain and Turkey join the Axis and Gibraltar falls...(Not quite ASB, but close)

How many Railroads and Maintained (Gravel or better) Roads are there connecting North Africa to Sub-Saharan Africa? (Assume for these purposes that the Italians have lost Ethiopia and it is counted as Sub-saharan)

My guess is that there aren't many and that the ones that are there are parallel to the Nile and can be easily destroyed by retreating British.
 
Not entirely true. The Royal Navy must not be a threat to Nazi-Germany. This could be accomplished by destroying it (which Nazi-German can't do) or by making peace with Britain. The last can be accomplished by beating Britain (which Nazi-Germany can't do) or by offering a peace which Britain would be willing to accept (which is very unlikely Nazi-Germany will do, as it means leaving France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and probably Poland and later in the war various other countries including Greece, Yugoslavia, etc.).
Not unless Hitler gets assassinated, but that has to happen before the invasion of Poland, so the Brits would wanna keep them around to halt the red russians.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Just as a guide to access to Sub-saharan Africa. Let's say that the Axis gains complete control of all of the countries/colonies that border on the Med(Both Spain and Turkey join the Axis and Gibraltar falls...(Not quite ASB, but close)

How many Railroads and Maintained (Gravel or better) Roads are there connecting North Africa to Sub-Saharan Africa? (Assume for these purposes that the Italians have lost Ethiopia and it is counted as Sub-saharan)

My guess is that there aren't many and that the ones that are there are parallel to the Nile and can be easily destroyed by retreating British.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...A#v=onepage&q=1940 africa map railway&f=false
If that link works... well, if the map's accurate (it may actually be from the 1980s! It's certainly post-1945) then the answer to your question may well be "absolutely fuck-all."
It's just so much easier to go by ship around Africa and build rail lines in from the coast.
 
Top