No Nazi Germany

... The irony was that Eupen-Malmedy never became part of Third Reich, they remain in occupy Belgium ! ...[/quote)

The cantons were reincorporated into the Reich. There were even postage stamps issued comemorating the action. Well over 5,000 men from the E-M cantons were directly conscripted into the Wehrmacht, as German citizens & not as expatriate 'Deutchvolk'.
 

Deleted member 1487

Britain might eventually come around. France is a different matter. They had a window to negotiate something all along, and each sucessive government failed to change policy. The Germanphobes dominated French policy towards Germany. Instead of updating policy France choose to maintain the largest military affordable, building the largest fortress system & the second largest field army and air force in Europe from 1921 through 1938. While internal policies prevented France from taking direct action when it really needed to 1936-1938 the core policies towards Germany remained for lack of any other action.
French finances were the bigger part of that. They were effectively insolvent during the Rheinland crisis, so were forced to leave the gold standard to be able to use their gold stocks to start to rearm. Then they weren't rearmed and needed British help, which was not forthcoming, to fight in 1938, so it wasn't simply internal policies, but practical constraints.

The rearmament of the nazi regime was accomplished without regard to any sane fiscal policy. It effectively bankrupted the government, and was starting to degrade the general economy. Most other likely governments are going to remain inside the limits of fiscal sanity. So, the Wehrmacht of OTL is very unlikely. Including reservists or auxillaries it is going to be half the size of what we are familiar with, and armed differently. It would be as well trained, but the nazi favorites would be missing from the senior leadership, so a improvement there as well.
A Weimar Germany IIRC had set their rearmament plans to a 300k men standing army which was pretty much what von Seeckt had initially wanted; it was really just getting up to the 1920 initial conception of the German military after WW1 and would mirror what the Bundeswehr did after the 1950s. It effectively be a defensive force for the most part, but one very highly mobile and trained, capable of taking down their neighbors in a quick fight if violence broke out, not an army of conquest.

The Luftwaffe would actually be quite interesting; ITTL it would be led by Helmuth Wilberg and Walter Wever might come over as his CoS or might well stay with the army. Its actually not out of the realm of possibility that Erhard Milch could take over a post dealing with civilian aviation at some point on the government level. They would likely form a small strategic component in addition to a flexible operational bomber force, air space protection fighter force, and CAS units. Basically a much more limited air force for short, sharp conflicts of aggressive defense.

From what I can tell the conception for armed force under Weimar would be a small, highly competent defense force that would be a relatively limited burden on the budget compared to the WW1 mass army. If you get someone in charge that wants violent revision of the Polish border then that might change, but in 1932 when they laid down Weimar's defense needs after Versailles it seems that it was a 1970s Bundeswehr-type force with a stronger Luftwaffe with strategic capabilities.
 

Deimos

Banned
What if, for whatever reason, the Nazis do not come to power in Germany and Germany continues to be a republic, Weimar or otherwise. How does this effect Mussolini's strategic thinking as well as Japan's? Does Stalin still go after Finland? Does he get aggressive in Eastern Europe with the Baltic States, Romania, or Poland? What are the priorities of France and Great Britain without a threat from Germany? Could we see a combination of Great Britain, France, Germany and Italy combine against the threat of Stalin and the USSR?
In that period Germany will always be a threat to France - it is too popolous, too industrialized and most important of all far too close. You seem to take it for granted that a republican Germany is never bellicose. Due to the distances invoved the Soviet Union will rank low on the actual threat scale except for its neighbours.

Mussolini will be more cautious of this Germany because he has not managed to "export" his ideology as IOTL. Austria is blocking this Germany from Mussolini's Balkan sphere of influence. Losing Austria means not only losing prestige but also economic disadvantages.
However, an Anschluss analogue might still be possible but Italy will not be be happy.

France will still try to maintain the Little Entente to be able to exert pressure or they become too weak in the face of Germany. If Germany becomes a constitutional monarchy I can see the French going to war if their continental allies are up for it (ATL-Sudeten crisis at the latest, perhaps tentatively allied to a post-Anschluss Italy).

Stalin's only chance to absorb European territory is a quick landgrab during a war where the other continental powers are distracted. Japan seems like a safer enemy. Easy to beat, too far away for many to interfere and due to racism towardas Asians in general and past Japanese behaviour specifically not very much liked.
 
I think Stalin launching a war of revenge against Japan for 1905 is more doable, considering they're isolated diplomatically and a weaker opponent than any European coalition that would come to the defense of Poland (don't know about the Baltics). Plus the USSR was already making inroads into China, which Japan would threaten.

There's at least one TL on this site where Khalkhin Gol becomes a full-blown Soviet-Japanese War that the Japanese lose...badly.

(At least on land.)

Considering how the crazy-militarist faction was strongest in the Army, if the Army is beaten like a drum on land but the Navy protects Japan itself from invasion (bonus points if the Navy is able to secure Korea--it'd be more defensible than Manchuria at any rate), Japan might undergo militarist-detox.
 
... The irony was that Eupen-Malmedy never became part of Third Reich, they remain in occupy Belgium ! ...[/quote)

The cantons were reincorporated into the Reich. There were even postage stamps issued comemorating the action. Well over 5,000 men from the E-M cantons were directly conscripted into the Wehrmacht, as German citizens & not as expatriate 'Deutchvolk'.

not quite
the Border remain and the People from Eupen or Malmedy had use passport to cross border into Third Reich and back.
i had the chance to talk with People from Eupen, who life in that time and belief me they were Piss Off, that Border was Closed and that were used as cannon fodder for East front.
the survivors who came back from Stalingrad, face the rage of Belgium authority...
even today the People from Eupen or Malmedy are ignored by Belgium politicians and Walloon authority.

seems that East Belgian community is triple Looser in History.
 
I think Stalin launching a war of revenge against Japan for 1905 is more doable, considering they're isolated diplomatically and a weaker opponent than any European coalition that would come to the defense of Poland (don't know about the Baltics). Plus the USSR was already making inroads into China, which Japan would threaten.

East Asia without the Nazis a really fascinating scenario, because Japan would be stuck in an unending money sink, while unlike OTL, the Brits and French would invest more in their defenses, and Russia would pour more resources into China.
 

Deleted member 1487

East Asia without the Nazis a really fascinating scenario, because Japan would be stuck in an unending money sink, while unlike OTL, the Brits and French would invest more in their defenses, and Russia would pour more resources into China.
I think it would be a lot less interesting in the Chinese sense of the word. Without the Nazis the Japanese would pay dearly for messing with China. The US and West would embargo the hell out of them much earlier and the Germans would be on board due to their trade deals with China. The Japanese economy would collapse hard by 1940 and the army would be badly discredited for its actions. It might well cause a purge of the aggressive young officers acting out of turn and bring the civilians back into power. Then the post-war KMT led China fighting its civil war with a lot less damage and no pro-Mao Stalin (he was still supporting Chiang before ~1944) would be a highly interesting place, especially with Germany heavily invested in it. China was willing to barter with Germany, so regardless of Schacht defaulting on German debt with the US and the resulting problems raising capital (which had to happen Hitler or not) Germany could well survive without US capital markets and prosper. Given Schacht's deals with Latin America, no loss of USSR trade due to the Nazi initially, and China remaining a major market Germany without the Nazis and damage they did to German domestic life/international standing could do extremely well by the late 1930s and into the 1940s. Without the huge drain rearmament and a large standing army did, even without Austria, Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia or any territorial gains (other than Saarland in 1935) Germany with reforms of their agriculture and historic trade cultivated would have become quite wealthy.
 
Even the weimar republic would have eventually rearmed and rearmament and rearmament had already started during the end phase of the republic. Additionally it is probably a safe bet that the leaders of a surviving weimar republic would attempt to revise the treaty of Versailles.

This had also begun before the Nazi rise to power.
 
Without the Nazis we also have to ask what this means for the Jewish people? Is it possible that there is no state of Israel? Now we are talking about butterflies the size of eagles!
 

Tyr Anazasi

Banned
One can say, that Hitler was one of the main reasons for creating Israel. Without him it is very possible Israel would never exist.
 
I think it would be a lot less interesting in the Chinese sense of the word. Without the Nazis the Japanese would pay dearly for messing with China. The US and West would embargo the hell out of them much earlier and the Germans would be on board due to their trade deals with China. The Japanese economy would collapse hard by 1940 and the army would be badly discredited for its actions. It might well cause a purge of the aggressive young officers acting out of turn and bring the civilians back into power. Then the post-war KMT led China fighting its civil war with a lot less damage and no pro-Mao Stalin (he was still supporting Chiang before ~1944) would be a highly interesting place, especially with Germany heavily invested in it.
There would perhaps have been a bidding war between Germany and the USSR for the role of principal sponsor of KMT China - a united, modernising anti-Communist China would be a nightmare for Stalin and conversely a dream for Germany, so both would be willing to invest heavily in the KMT regime. This gives Chiang a lot of leverage - if he feels he's not getting enough support from Moscow, he could plausibly threaten to turn to Berlin. This might force Stalin to escalate against Japan to the point of entering the war directly, say in 1938 or 1939. Japan probably couldn't hold Manchuria if the Red Army moved against it in force (though the logistics might favour them). Alternatively German aid might seem more attractive, if it can get to China - which would probably require British or French logistical assistance.
 
There would perhaps have been a bidding war between Germany and the USSR for the role of principal sponsor of KMT China - a united, modernising anti-Communist China would be a nightmare for Stalin and conversely a dream for Germany, so both would be willing to invest heavily in the KMT regime. This gives Chiang a lot of leverage - if he feels he's not getting enough support from Moscow, he could plausibly threaten to turn to Berlin. This might force Stalin to escalate against Japan to the point of entering the war directly, say in 1938 or 1939. Japan probably couldn't hold Manchuria if the Red Army moved against it in force (though the logistics might favour them). Alternatively German aid might seem more attractive, if it can get to China - which would probably require British or French logistical assistance.

The Japanese Army against the heavily mechanized Russian Army would be no contest. However the mountain terrain of Korea would help the Japanese as well as the overwhelming superiority of the Japanese Navy against anything the Russians had on water. Also Japanese air power would help them stay in the fight, at least for a while. It will be a bloody, long fight, but one that the Soviets with their industrial and manpower superiority will win in the end. There will be a big vacuum in China with the inevitable pullout of Japanese troops to fight the Russians.
 

Deleted member 1487

There would perhaps have been a bidding war between Germany and the USSR for the role of principal sponsor of KMT China - a united, modernising anti-Communist China would be a nightmare for Stalin and conversely a dream for Germany, so both would be willing to invest heavily in the KMT regime. This gives Chiang a lot of leverage - if he feels he's not getting enough support from Moscow, he could plausibly threaten to turn to Berlin. This might force Stalin to escalate against Japan to the point of entering the war directly, say in 1938 or 1939. Japan probably couldn't hold Manchuria if the Red Army moved against it in force (though the logistics might favour them). Alternatively German aid might seem more attractive, if it can get to China - which would probably require British or French logistical assistance.

The KMT threw in their lot with the Germans, they didn't trust Stalin or Russia given their history of interference in China; Germany was too far away and had no colonial holdings left in Asia so were deemed the least threat and the most complimentary economy/military to the Chinese, so were the best advisors, better than the US even.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-German_cooperation_until_1941
 
Top