Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck president

I think President L-V would restore the monarchy.

The Kaiser would be forced to accept the limited role of constitutional monarch

Once power has been consolidated crackdown on the SA thugs.

Next send military advisors and/or troops to Finland and the Baltic states.

Form a White Russian Gov't in Exile

Wait for WWII to start

If Germany wins they have hegemony over Eastern Europe, if they lose an Iron curtain drops across Europe

Also, having lost one's colonies Germany has nothing to lose if they start supporting liberation movements. This is especially useful when negotiating with country's that still have colonies. L-V also looks good from the freedom fighter's perspective.
 
I think President L-V would restore the monarchy.

The Kaiser would be forced to accept the limited role of constitutional monarch

Once power has been consolidated crackdown on the SA thugs.

Next send military advisors and/or troops to Finland and the Baltic states.

Form a White Russian Gov't in Exile

Wait for WWII to start

If Germany wins they have hegemony over Eastern Europe, if they lose an Iron curtain drops across Europe

Also, having lost one's colonies Germany has nothing to lose if they start supporting liberation movements. This is especially useful when negotiating with country's that still have colonies. L-V also looks good from the freedom fighter's perspective.

I am not sure if France allows return of der Kaiser even as formal head.
 
Not sure if he would bring back the Kaiser but I could see him stomping down on Hitler and the Nazis. Possibly literally chopping off their heads when they tried to power grab power.

I could see him standing up against the Soviets and maybe trying to work on better relations with Poland and other states to stop any Red movements.
 
von Lettow-Vorbeck gaining power in Germany is not a good thing. Check out some background on him and German East Africa.

Given his status as the last German commander to surrender, if he'd not been part of the Kapp pustch he may have been a good candidate to lead a later putsch. However, he detested politics, so getting him democratically elected requires a large change in his character.

I get the sense that if he was dictator of Germany, like Hitler, he would violently overthrow Versailles. So he may be a good candidate for leader in a "militarist Germany starts WW2" timeline.

fasquardon
 

Mrstrategy

Banned
von Lettow-Vorbeck gaining power in Germany is not a good thing. Check out some background on him and German East Africa.

Given his status as the last German commander to surrender, if he'd not been part of the Kapp pustch he may have been a good candidate to lead a later putsch. However, he detested politics, so getting him democratically elected requires a large change in his character.

I get the sense that if he was dictator of Germany, like Hitler, he would violently overthrow Versailles. So he may be a good candidate for leader in a "militarist Germany starts WW2" timeline.

fasquardon
Agree or disagree
 
If he went ala Hitler and became the Fuhrer, would he militarize Germany but not go on an expansion fit? Could he contain on trying to make Germany strong but still stay civil with his neighbors?
 
If he went ala Hitler and became the Fuhrer, would he militarize Germany but not go on an expansion fit? Could he contain on trying to make Germany strong but still stay civil with his neighbors?

There'd most definitely be expansion, but it might be more restrained and/or not as openly confrontational with the Entente ... not to the point of open warfare, at least. Conflict with Poland was a thing long before the Nazis rose ... even democratic governments resorted to all sorts of moves that were blatantly confrontational. One only needs to look at the trade wars.

So, even a more reasonable Germany would certainly go for Austria and Poland. The re-militarization of the Rhineland would go ahead, if only to prevent France from simply walking in and crippling Germany's industrial capabilities. Czechoslovakia would be off the table (either turned into a client or an ally, but not outright conquered - the local Germans demanded autonomy, rather than union with Germany OTL until the Nazis started pushing). Alsace-Lorraine would be taken only as a target of opportunity, if already at war with France, but, much like the Wehrmacht (Reichwehr TTL, I suppose) did so OTL, there'd be an undercurrent of fundamental terror at the concept of picking a fight with the Entente again.

You'd probably see a move south, attempting to rip the Little Entente apart and turn it into a German sphere (with the inevitable conflict with Italy looming over such a move, I suppose), rather than an attempt to defeat France and Britain ... much less an attempt to take down the Soviets.
 
If he went ala Hitler and became the Fuhrer, would he militarize Germany but not go on an expansion fit? Could he contain on trying to make Germany strong but still stay civil with his neighbors?

No. Lettow-Vorbeck wanted a fight with Poland (most German military and political bigwigs in the Weimar period did). Also, there were a fair number of people in politics and in the military itself who thought France would need to be defeated in war in order to overthrow Versailles - I can't remember Lettow-Vorbeck's own view on a new war with France, but I feel he'd be at least as open to the idea as Hitler was.

I'd say that a militarist Germany would be very likely to follow most of the early moves of the Nazis. The big exception being that I don't think an outright annexation of the Sudetenland and Bohemia would be too likely. And of course, the order the moves happen in could be different. That could significantly change how things go and whether Germany's wars trigger a WW1 of some kind. But certainly I think Austria, France and Poland would be on the German "hit list" and Germany would try to extend its influence and economic control over Eastern Europe whatever regime was in power.

fasquardon
 
Top