Operation Unthinkable-Would a provisional German government be installed to command German troops?

Who would command German troops during Operation Unthinkable?

  • A provisional German government

    Votes: 6 6.9%
  • German military officers under Allied supervision

    Votes: 63 72.4%
  • British/American officers

    Votes: 18 20.7%

  • Total voters
    87
In the event of a war between the SOviet Union and the Western Allies, the amount of American and British divisions were to be as high as 103 divisions, with 47 divisions launching a pre-emptive strike at Dresden to start the war.

The plan also called for the re-mobilization of Wehrmacht POWs, the number of which equalled to about 10 more divisions.

But here's my question: Who would command these troops? Could the Allies attempt to put together some kind of German government (ala the Flensburg government, though not that particular government) to command the troops and deal with things behind the lines, like taking care of displaced persons, etc? Could the Allies employ German officers (Doenitz, Kesselring, Wenck) to command the troops or were the Allies expecting the Germans to take orders from British and American officers?
 
Yeah, I doubt it. That would probably be way to soon to re-constitute Germany, which doing this basically would.

Edit: This was in regard to the first option. I actually agree with option 2.
 
Last edited:
This was one of the details of the plan that wasn't specified, presumably because it was only to be worked out later in the event such a war was ordered, but assuming the magic required for the "Unthinkable War" to go through and be sustained long enough for the German forces to reach readiness occurs*, it would probably be as Wiking noted.

*The planners specified that the first German units would likely not be formed and reach combat readiness until after the 3-month period of war which the planners were working within for their operational planning.
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
It seems to me that using Wehrmacht personnel outside of Germany itself would be more of a hindrance than a boon due to the resentment it would generate from the local population. Cynically speaking, the best way to exploit the resource of former Wehrmacht personnel is to use them up as expendable cannon fodder in liberating East Germany and leaving the lucky survivors behind to garrison Germany before moving on with an Allied-only force.
 
… who says that German POW's (200,000+) would be interested in signing up for another war? They have just managed to get out of one alive.

If something like that should have been attempted, I wonder if they would be armed with their 'known' armaments? Tiger/Panther, MG-42, ME-262, Arado-234, 88's, etc.

The one's that might sign up could be SS. and having SS to 'liberate' Poland from the horrors of communism might sound a bit … odd.

And that is why it was .. Unthinkable!
 
PS: it was supposed to kick off in JUNE 1945.

I cannot see that any German government - besides the current Nazi-structures - would be in place or could be created.
 
Beating Japan is still guaranteed, but got a little harder. The IJA will likely have to surrender its weapons to local communist groups in China and SE Asia (which in itself would be a big challenge to Allied reconquest of the region). In exchange, the VVS likely will help Japan to fight off the USAF, making the nuclear attack harder.

Also, OTL Japan almost refused to surrender even after the nukes. It took the Soviet DoW.
There, Japan might not surrender, forcing the USA to launch Downfall.
 
USA wouldn't be able to spare the manpower to invade and hold Japan if Unthinkable was agreed on. I guess there's nuking Japan to try scare the Soviets into surrendering, but the Soviet air defenses of cities were good, plus they were willing to relocate industries before, so I think Stalin would tell the WAllies to "bring it". Allies woul stir trouble in Ukraine and Poland, USSR would rile up worker unions everywhere, and it would be one bloody draw in Europe.
 
Dear ObsessedNuker,
3 months seems unrealistically long considering the Wehrmackt’s recent experience with re-building divisions shattered on the Eastern Front.
Raiding depots would quickly produce all the weapons they needed. If WALLIES supplied trucks and fuel and fuel, fresh Wehrmacht divisions could be stood up in short order with a variety of German-speaking WALLIED officers mixed in at all levels.
 
I believe it would be German officers under Allied command, since German reconstruction, desnazification and so on wasn't yet planned, and would probably be all thrown away with a new war.

It wouldn't really matter, because the Soviets would steamroll what remains of the German forces. Outside of ASB intervention and the US putting all their manpower behind it to an extent it would be intolerable to the civilian populace, I can't see it succeeding.

Stalin probably wouldn't care if it was German officers, soldiers, or a goverment. He would push all the way to the Pyrenees, and probably wouldn't stop there.

Even if the Allies surrender before, post-war relations are poisoned to an unspeakable degree.
 
USA wouldn't be able to spare the manpower to invade and hold Japan if Unthinkable was agreed on. I guess there's nuking Japan to try scare the Soviets into surrendering, but the Soviet air defenses of cities were good, plus they were willing to relocate industries before, so I think Stalin would tell the WAllies to "bring it". Allies woul stir trouble in Ukraine and Poland, USSR would rile up worker unions everywhere, and it would be one bloody draw in Europe.

Plus, the public opinion in the USA and Britain would be very divided at the very least, and likely massively opposed to the war. Either because sympathy for the Soviets, opposition to the principle of backstabbing an ally, or simply the human and financial cost of a continued war against the Soviets.
 
Dear ObsessedNuker,
3 months seems unrealistically long considering the Wehrmackt’s recent experience with re-building divisions shattered on the Eastern Front.

Technically, the planners didn’t specify precisely how long it would take to stand up these units, just that they wouldn’t be ready for frontline duty within the first three months of operations they were working within for their offensive to the Danzig-Wroclaw line (as an aside, something I notice that is never mentioned is that such a line, even if reached, would still leave the vast bulk of pre-war Poland in Soviet hands). I’m unsure of how the Wehrmacht’s experience in anyway contradicted this: the reformation of forces that had been totally destroyed, whether by overrun or encirclement, was generally a multi-month process to get something out capable of more then the most localized of defensive actions. Given that all units in the Wehrmacht by the time the plan was submitted at the start of June had been fully disbanded and the personnel in Anglo-American hands scattered to PoW camps across Western Europe and North America, not to mention that the WAllies who would be forming these units had much higher standards for what constituted "ready for combat" then the 1944/45 Wehrmacht, 3+ months doesn't seem very unrealistic to me.

Of course, that’s the first variant. The second, defensive variant didn’t discuss the Germans at all. Probably because, in the specific scenario it envisioned (that is, the war occurring after western demobilization and a total American withdrawal from Europe a lot like 1918-1919), Germany would be overrun within the first few weeks, with the rest of Western Europe following soon after, and hence that variant was only concerned with how to defend the British Isles.

Plus, the public opinion in the USA and Britain would be very divided at the very least, and likely massively opposed to the war. Either because sympathy for the Soviets, opposition to the principle of backstabbing an ally, or simply the human and financial cost of a continued war against the Soviets.

I recall reading one historian in a interview noted that the wording of the document, keeping in mind this was the British General Staff, used could be interpreted as them obliquely threatening to resign (and warning that most of Churchill's government would probably do so too, which would have led to the collapse of his administration) if they were ordered to carry this through. The reaction of the British and American public likely wouldn't be too far removed. If anything it would be even worse given that, in 1945, the pro-Soviet sentiment only grew stronger the further down the government totem pole in Britain you went. And it all becomes even worse if the Soviets smash the initial attack and push the WAllies out of Western Germany or beyond, which was a very probable outcome.
 
Last edited:
Whatever plans for a limited deployment of Germans go out the window if the war bogs down and the Ango-Americans go into full wartime propaganda mode while being less then interested in taking millions of casualties for the venture.

For the Germans you would have a severe morale problem as once you shatter the morale of an army it’s not so easy to rebuild it into fighting shape and the main question for the German officers would be why didn’t you guys make up your minds a year or two ago you wanted Stalin to stay out of Central Europe?

Armies at zero morale tend to dissolve rather then fight.

In a short decisive war yes the Germans fight led by WAllied officers. In a longer one the WAllies would have to make concessions to keep the German divisions from falling apart.
 
Last edited:

nbcman

Donor
It seems to me that using Wehrmacht personnel outside of Germany itself would be more of a hindrance than a boon due to the resentment it would generate from the local population. Cynically speaking, the best way to exploit the resource of former Wehrmacht personnel is to use them up as expendable cannon fodder in liberating East Germany and leaving the lucky survivors behind to garrison Germany before moving on with an Allied-only force.
A great deal of German POWs are sitting in camps in Canada (34k) and the US (425k) in 1945. That's a lot of potential soldiers outside of Germany who could be used to create a pro-Western German army - plus these soldiers are well fed as compared to the rations that the German Army and German nation were receiving in mid-1945.
 
I think we forget one thing: Why would German POW's fight another war? They just got through one alive. And what is left in Germany? Volksturm, etc. Not something a new Germany army can use.

Combing through POW camps for volunteers? Maybe. But if nobody is going to volunteer? Will it then be a call up of Germans to invade Poland again?

Lest we forget something: German generals tended to be rather good at commanding big units. That was not something UK generals had learned yet and only beginning to realise in US army.

Of course it would be very interesting to see a SHAEF with Eisenhover as the 'chairman' and then Patton, Monty, Bradley, Steiner, Sepp, Mannstein, Guderian, Model (if he hadn't shot himself!) to implement it all.

of course language would not be a barrier.
 

nbcman

Donor
I think we forget one thing: Why would German POW's fight another war? They just got through one alive. And what is left in Germany? Volksturm, etc. Not something a new Germany army can use.

Combing through POW camps for volunteers? Maybe. But if nobody is going to volunteer? Will it then be a call up of Germans to invade Poland again?

Lest we forget something: German generals tended to be rather good at commanding big units. That was not something UK generals had learned yet and only beginning to realise in US army.

Of course it would be very interesting to see a SHAEF with Eisenhover as the 'chairman' and then Patton, Monty, Bradley, Steiner, Sepp, Mannstein, Guderian, Model (if he hadn't shot himself!) to implement it all.

of course language would not be a barrier.
Why would a country who lost a war build an army to fight a foreign country to liberate their country? If we only had an example that made up 1/4 of the fighting force of the 15th Army Group.
 
Technically, the planners didn’t specify precisely how long it would take to stand up these units, just that they wouldn’t be ready for frontline duty within the first three months of operations they were working within for their offensive to the Danzig-Wroclaw line (as an aside, something I notice that is never mentioned is that such a line, even if reached, would still leave the vast bulk of pre-war Poland in Soviet hands). I’m unsure of how the Wehrmacht’s experience in anyway contradicted this: the reformation of forces that had been totally destroyed, whether by overrun or encirclement, was generally a multi-month process to get something out capable of more then the most localized of defensive actions. Given that all units in the Wehrmacht by the time the plan was submitted at the start of June had been fully disbanded and the personnel in Anglo-American hands scattered to PoW camps across Western Europe and North America, not to mention that the WAllies who would be forming these units had much higher standards for what constituted "ready for combat" then the 1944/45 Wehrmacht, 3+ months doesn't seem very unrealistic to me.

Of course, that’s the first variant. The second, defensive variant didn’t discuss the Germans at all. Probably because, in the specific scenario it envisioned (that is, the war occurring after western demobilization and a total American withdrawal from Europe a lot like 1918-1919), Germany would be overrun within the first few weeks, with the rest of Western Europe following soon after, and hence that variant was only concerned with how to defend the British Isles.



I recall reading one historian in a interview noted that the wording of the document, keeping in mind this was the British General Staff, used could be interpreted as them obliquely threatening to resign (and warning that most of Churchill's government would probably do so too, which would have led to the collapse of his administration) if they were ordered to carry this through. The reaction of the British and American public likely wouldn't be too far removed. If anything it would be even worse given that, in 1945, the pro-Soviet sentiment only grew stronger the further down the government totem pole in Britain you went. And it all becomes even worse if the Soviets smash the initial attack and push the WAllies out of Western Germany or beyond, which was a very probable outcome.

This is actually a very interesting scenario, what would happen in this case? The Red Army takes Austria and Germany whole before the western allies sue for peace? I’m assuming Churchill’s government would quickly fall and Truman would be extremely unpopular. The Korean War likely never happens in this case and what would become of Japan? If the American and British governments blunder and have their armies pushed out of Germany and in the process become extremely unpopular, would Japan just be forgotten or would it be used in the aftermath of Unthinkable to drum up support by “finishing off the Axis”?
 
Plus, the public opinion in the USA and Britain would be very divided at the very least, and likely massively opposed to the war. Either because sympathy for the Soviets, opposition to the principle of backstabbing an ally, or simply the human and financial cost of a continued war against the Soviets.

It would depend on who attacks first. If Unthinkable happens because the Soviets backstab the Wallies that changes in a hurry.
 
Unthinkable was a sneak attack on USSR on 1 July 1945. COS had a look at it (all of 2 minutes if I could read Brooke) and sent it back to Churchill as … unthinkable.

Remember, Churchill also suggested (Potsdam I believe) that if Stalin would cause problems, they could always chuck a bomb at Kiev, Moscow, Stalingrad, Leningrad and so on.

So, end of war for Churchill became a bit of an adjustment.

Should it be taken serious? Stalin was not comfortable with all this planning of attacking USSR.

he Projected Balance in Western Europe, 1 July 1945[13]
Allied Soviet Ratio
Infantry Divisions[o]
80 228 1 : 2.85
Armored Divisions[p] 23 36 1 : 1.57
Tactical Aircraft 6,048[q] 11,802 1 : 1.95
Strategic Aircraft 2,750[r] 960 2.86 : 1

from Wiki

In essence: not a great proposition!
 
Top