Sir John Valentine Carden survives.

[Ramp-Rat]

Rommel IOTL, was able to run wild and free, doing virtually what he wanted, and as long as it appeared to Hitler and sections of the High Command, to be successful. They seeing the North African campaign as a sideshow, essentially left him alone to play games in the Desert. North Africa wasn’t the central focus of Germany’s efforts, that was the Soviet Union, until America entered the war, there was no way that the Germans thought the British could be a threat to them on the European Continent. And even after American entry into the war, the German military given their own biases, didn’t see the threat, that there entry brought. Very few Germans had any idea of the industrial power of America, and the few that did, were ignored. North Africa is a sideshow, and we have far more important things to consider right now, so stick the report about British capabilities in the pile, and pass me the intelligence dossier on the Soviet Army.

And what went on at the top, is very much repeated by those in North Africa, who failed to take full appreciation of intelligence that the Italians were able to provide. Intelligence from the own sources, about what they had discovered as a result of the recent French campaign. And failed to make a full appreciation of their own weaknesses in regards to the British strengths in the theatre. And so the British/Commonwealth forces have launched an attack, with clear and defined objectives, they want to push the Germans/Italians back towards Tripoli, and maybe if the Germans/Italians completely collapse in front of them, drive on to Tripoli. But that isn’t the primary objective of the attack, it’s simply to take another bit out of the German/Italians position. If the attack fails, the chances of the Germans /Italians being able to counter attack and drive the British back to Benghazi are slim to none. The British forces they face, are stronger and in some ways better lead, than those that they faced IOTL.

The truth is that the best that the German/Italian forces can hope for is a draw, with at the end of the battle both forces being in the same position that they were at the beginning. However such a draw is in the long term a loss of the Germans and Italians, as they will have major problems replacing their losses in equipment and personal. Where as the British will only get stronger over time, more and better equipment is already on the way, more troops are becoming available. And fuel the life blood of warfare in the desert, Britain has an endless supply, its only problem is getting it to the front. While the Germans and Italians not only have problems getting what fuel they have to the front, but of getting their hands on the fuel in the first place. And once the campaign against the Soviet Union starts, there will be even less fuel available.

If however the British manage to isolate and surround the German forces, ether by design or accident, it’s game over, in North Africa. The Germans hip deep in their Soviet Union campaign, are just going to write off North Africa as a big mistake, best forgotten about, and move on. The Italians have nothing more to give, other than to get as much as is possible of their remaining forces out of the area as they can. And once the Germans and Italians give up the game, the Vichy French in French North Africa, French Africa in general are going to be looking to declare for de Gaulle and the Free French, ASAP. While trying to negotiate so that he is not the man in charge, but just one of the leaders. After all who is he, a junior minister and self anointed general, in comparison to X fill in name of any signor, general/ administrator in the Vichy area. In the end the British can only win this battle, even if they appear to have lost, and the Germans unless they somehow pull off a miracle, have lost.

RR.

 

[Geordie]

I spent a summer working in Newcastle and had to resort to writing in order to communicate.

"Laarn how ta taalk propa, then, marra."

 

[Mog_X]

Gaelic (pronounced ‘Gallic’ in Scots) is used enough today to justify it’s own television channel.

In the late 1970s we recruited our signallers from Corby in Northamptonshire as only they could understand each other.

Corby was known as "Little Scotland" due to the migration south to work in the steelworks in the 1930s

 

[CaptainCalvert]

And once the Germans and Italians give up the game, the Vichy French in French North Africa, French Africa in general are going to be looking to declare for de Gaulle and the Free French, ASAP. While trying to negotiate so that he is not the man in charge, but just one of the leaders. After all who is he, a junior minister and self anointed general, in comparison to X fill in name of any signor, general/ administrator in the Vichy area. In the end the British can only win this battle, even if they appear to have lost, and the Germans unless they somehow pull off a miracle, have lost.

I wonder if some might take an intermediate step of disassociating themselves from France but remaining neutral. Not everyone liked De Gaulle, and some would have worried about repercussions on the mainland (some FF officers used false names to reduce risk to family in occupied France and in Vichy.).
Political considerations leave the British empire forces on French borders. Weygand's attitude suggests he'd try to work within the armistice "We need to increase our forces to fend off (y)our enemies the Brits", thereby building up forces for later use for liberation. This could trigger an early Tunisia and full takeover of Vichy if the Germans are suspicious. But by this time, Barbarossa will by underway, so who do they have available for Tunisia? There are no spare motorised and Panzer divisions (busy heading east), Rommel's armour and the Italian armour and transport are destroyed or captured Do a whole load of unmotorised troops try to occupy Tunisia and try to hold the British off at Mareth? I can see the French being far more decisive in seizing and defending Tunisia this time round, with the less rebellious also angry at Vichy being taken over and more willing to stand up as there are no Italian and German troops next door in Libya.
So we have allied or true neutral Africa and middle east shortly after Barbarossa starts. Is that enough to sway Turkey to pro-allied neutrality, just when transit for non-military lend lease supplies would be most useful?
All sorts of fun.

 

[X Oristos]

Very few Germans had any idea of the industrial power of America, and the few that did, were ignored.

I am pretty sure that is not the case. The opposite rather is one of the over-arching themes in the "Wages of Destruction". German policy makers, Hitler included, had a pretty good idea of America's industrial power. I think Tooze did a terrific job in that book.

 

[Lascaris]

I wonder if some might take an intermediate step of disassociating themselves from France but remaining neutral. Not everyone liked De Gaulle, and some would have worried about repercussions on the mainland (some FF officers used false names to reduce risk to family in occupied France and in Vichy.).
Political considerations leave the British empire forces on French borders. Weygand's attitude suggests he'd try to work within the armistice "We need to increase our forces to fend off (y)our enemies the Brits", thereby building up forces for later use for liberation. This could trigger an early Tunisia and full takeover of Vichy if the Germans are suspicious. But by this time, Barbarossa will by underway, so who do they have available for Tunisia?

I'll note that during OTL Crusader, the Vichy leadership was brought to Berlin in December 20 to negotiate German and Italian forces from Libya retreating into Tunisia and getting supplied through Tunisian ports. Which Brinnon and Juin did promise while De Lattre was removed from his position in Tunisia in February as suspect to the Germans.

 

[marathag]

And even after American entry into the war, the German military given their own biases, didn’t see the threat, that there entry brought. Very few Germans had any idea of the industrial power of America, and the few that did, were ignored

I am pretty sure that is not the case. The opposite rather is one of the over-arching themes in the "Wages of Destruction". German policy makers, Hitler included, had a pretty good idea of America's industrial power. I think Tooze did a terrific job in that book.

"During the conference I(Rommel) realized that the atmosphere in the Fuehrer's H.Q. was extremely optimistic. Goering in particular was inclined to minimize our difficulties. When I said that fighter-bombers [which Rommel thought were American made] had shot up my tanks with 40-mm shells, the Reichsmarschall, who felt himself touched by this, said: "That's completely impossible. The Americans only know how to make razor blades." I replied: "We could do with some of those razor blades, Herr Reichsmarschall."

1950 memoir on Erwin Rommel by DAK staff officer Fritz Bayerlein, War without Hatred

 

[GrahamB]

"We could do with some of those razor blades, Herr Reichsmarschall."

I'm struck by how many times in this war (and the one previous), all sides made some pretty significant strategic decisions based on presumptive stereotypes before hard facts made themselves unavoidable.
As in so many things (shoutout to the Revolutions podcast for some stellar examples), the winners are usually those who are most receptive to hearing those hard facts while they still have control over the situation.

 

[Obfuscated]

Yeah, but that's Goering trying to make light of the fact the the Luftwaffe couldn't do the same nor could prevent it happening, which translates to denying somebody else air force could do it.

I wouldn't take any quote of Goering regarding the capabilities of the Luftwaffe or somebody else airforce as being true, particularly if made by Goering in front of an non-Luftwaffe audience, the man had a bad tendency to boast and bluster without being high as a kite (which was also frequently the case).

 

[CaptainCalvert]

I'll note that during OTL Crusader, the Vichy leadership was brought to Berlin in December 20 to negotiate German and Italian forces from Libya retreating into Tunisia and getting supplied through Tunisian ports. Which Brinnon and Juin did promise while De Lattre was removed from his position in Tunisia in February as suspect to the Germans.

OTL Crusader was in late 41 with a much stronger axis showing in Africa, Weygand had been forced to retire, and there had been a year of concessions from Vichy. Here, the axis showing is less impressive, there have been fewer concessions and Weygand is (almost certainly) still in charge of French Africa. Now, I'm not a great fan of Weygand, but he does have track record OTL for resisting and obstructing at least some of the concessions that affected north Africa.
I think the conditions here are sufficiently different from OTL December 41 that there could well be a different outcome. Most likely an 'accidental' misunderstanding that results in axis troops stuck just inside Tunisia with minimal supplies, no transport or petrol (I'm sorry but the armistice, so difficult to get spares, fuel etc) and some confusion over how they should be sent back home. Perhaps, Herr General we could ask the US as a neutral to ship your men over as internees to avoid risk of our or your ships being attacked by the treacherous British? What, they won't take your weapons? How awful, maybe we could use them to arm our loyal French forces in case the British try to invade. Talking of which, maybe we should be allowed a few thousand more troops to protect our borders?
Though full on hostilities are unlikely at the Libyan/Tunisian border, some skirmishes are quite possible, even if only from genuine misunderstandings. This would not be good news for a poorly supplied axis force trying to cross a fortified border since even a short delay makes it more likely the British pursuers catch up.

 

[Ramp-Rat]

While I am in complete agreement that a major collapse of the German and Italian forces, as a result of the latest British attack, could be one of the results. It is up to our esteemed author, to enlighten us, in his own good time, what the result will be. However should there be such a collapse, and the British end up in Tripoli, I think we can all agree, that the North African campaign as we understand it is over. What was up until the British occupation of Tripoli, essentially a military campaign, would become primarily a political campaign. Britain wants to avoid taking any more casualties than it has to, or expending resources and capital, on a campaign in French North Africa. They also would prefer not to get into a hot war with Vichy France, in the Mediterranean area. Yes in theory Britain is at war with Vichy France, and the Vichy Airforce has carried out an ineffective bombing raid on Gibraltar. But they haven’t provided the Germans with airfields or bases to conduct raids, against Gibraltar, or the Italians to interdict British convoys transiting the Mediterranean. So given that the British are in Tripoli, what will be the reaction of the French in North Africa, short term, and in the longer term.


The French have three basic choices, jump ship and join the British, jump ship and declare neutrality, or plead with Vichy, the Germans and Italians, for reinforcements and fight the British. Politics mean that for now they are going to be very reluctant to jump ship and join the British right now. As has been said de Gaulle, wasn’t the most popular man, among the officers and officials, in French North Africa, nor are the British exactly flavour of the month. Especially after the in French eyes abandonment of France in 1940, and the subsequent attack on the French Fleet in North Africa. It will take some very tricky negotiations, for the French to cut their ties with Vichy, arrest those German military and civil personnel in FNA. And then join forces with the British, and agree to fight beside them against Vichy and the Germans. Other than sorting out who should be the leader of the this alliance, they will want guaranties, that the French forces in FNA, will be reequipped, with modern weapons as good as those of the British. No way will they accept being fobbed off with second hand Italian cast offs, as the Greeks are. The British for their own part, will have a few demands of their own, both to make their position in the Mediterranean secure, and to improve their position in the Atlantic.

At a minimum the British will want access to airfields in FNA, on both the Mediterranean and Atlantic coasts, in the Atlantic for long range anti submarine patrol aircraft. While in the Mediterranean, it will be for a mix of patrol aircraft, and fighters to defend convoys against air attack. Later on, the British will require airfields in Tunisia, to assist Malta based aircraft in carrying out attacks against Sicily, and the Italian mainland. Things will get sticky when the British want to organise raids against Vichy France, after all Britain is at war with Vichy France. So while the French in FNA, which isn’t one country, but a collection of different colonial states, each with its own agenda. Might decide to jump ship and join the with the British, it’s going to take time to sort out the details.

Neutrality, the first question is how, these are not independent states in a position to make their own decisions, they are as far as international law regards them, Vichy French colonial possessions. No one is obligated to take any notice of such a declaration, it has no standing in Law, as to make it is to declare independence from France. Yes the British will be happy to accept this declaration and go along with the fiction, while negotiating with the local authorities, their switching sides. But at the end of the day, it’s just a fiction, and no one else has to abide by it. There is also the problem of what to do about Germans in FNA, both military and civilian, do you round them all up and place them in interment, or do you expel them. If the Germans or Italians attack them by sea or air, have they declared war on them, thus making them a part of the British war. Declaring Neutrality will only work, for a very short time, and the underlying truth is, such a declaration will be seen to joining the British side.

Acting on orders from Vichy, and their masters in Berlin, the decision is made to welcome the fleeing Germans and Italians, and join them in fighting the dam roast beefs. Who deserted France in its hour of need, and then cowardly attacked the French Fleet when it was in harbour. And is now providing sanctuary to the traitor de Gaulle, and those sycophants around him. Problem one, is what do you and the Germans/Italians have to fight with. Under the terms of the Armistice between France and Germany, the local French forces, have been stripped of most of their heavy weapons, all of the armoured vehicles, other than a few World War One holdovers. Your Airforce is equipped with a few obsolete flying death traps, and your Navy is a joke. You do not have enough ammunition to fight more than a few days, and your new allies are even worse off than you. Politically you given your attitude towards the Italians, letting them in to your territory, is going to be a very hard pill to swallow. However can you guarantee the loyalty of all your citizens and forces, and what happens when you lose the fight, as any sane man knows is inevitable. Remember that the Army in FNA, is not the French Army, it is the French Colonial Army, a very different kettle of fish. It’s ranks are predominately local indigenous people, and all volunteers, while it’s officers are all professional, older and more experienced than those in France were during the German invasion. They have more in common with the per war regular officers of the British Army, and most of all with the British officers of the Indian Army. And they and the colonial authorities, along with the large ‘French’ settler community, will be considering just how much damage there will be both physically and politically, from a major campaign in FNA. For both the commanders and signor officials, there is another problem, if they jump ship and go with the British now, or declare neutrality negotiate with the British before jumping ship. They will have some say in what the final settlement is. If however they obey instructions from Vichy, join with the Germans and Italians, when as it will, it all collapses, the British and their friends the Free French will impose, what ever settlement suits them, on everyone.

RR.

 

[CB13]

Re: French North Africa - When in doubt, history has proven that "large bribes" are very effective in creating policy change.

In this case, it would make a lot of sense for British Intelligence to begin communication with each of the independent French colonies and working to see "how much would it cost?"

Although Algeria and Tunisia might be fantastic longer-term targets to gain control of the Mediterranean, as they are more vulnerable to retribution, the initial "best" targets might instead be Lebanon, Syria, Morocco, Senegal, etc., as flipping those colonies (at least to "neutral") would immediately free British assets for deployment elsewhere....

 

[Spencersj345.346]

I wonder if the French fleet sails to North Africa in this timeline and doesn't scuttle?

 

[Derek Pullem]

The French have three basic choices, jump ship and join the British, jump ship and declare neutrality, or plead with Vichy, the Germans and Italians, for reinforcements and fight the British.

Technically Vichy do not jump ship and declare neutrality - they are already neutral. A very friendly pro-German neutral but still neutral. They have the ability to become a slightly less friendly neutral but anything up to and including the evacuation of Italian and German troops from North Africa is just about stretchable under the Swedish (TM) pattern of neutrality.

My take on it is that we are unlikely to have to force the decision until after the "Day of Infamy" on December 7 which brings the US into the war (can't see German losses in a sideshow theatre impacting the Japanese decision that much). My guess is that we will be seeing a "reverse Tobruk" between Tripoli and the Vichy border and that the Germans at least will be content to evacuate via Tunisia (or Vichy will be occupied). After that then its American funded large brown envelopes to various Vichy governors along with promises of post war (and even this war) advancement.

If the Italians and Germans are losing badly it makes no sense for the Vichy French to take up arms for the reasons you have listed

 

[CaptainCalvert]

Technically Vichy do not jump ship and declare neutrality - they are already neutral. A very friendly pro-German neutral but still neutral. They have the ability to become a slightly less friendly neutral but anything up to and including the evacuation of Italian and German troops from North Africa is just about stretchable under the Swedish (TM) pattern of neutrality.

My take on it is that we are unlikely to have to force the decision until after the "Day of Infamy" on December 7 which brings the US into the war (can't see German losses in a sideshow theatre impacting the Japanese decision that much). My guess is that we will be seeing a "reverse Tobruk" between Tripoli and the Vichy border and that the Germans at least will be content to evacuate via Tunisia (or Vichy will be occupied). After that then its American funded large brown envelopes to various Vichy governors along with promises of post war (and even this war) advancement.

If the Italians and Germans are losing badly it makes no sense for the Vichy French to take up arms for the reasons you have listed

Franco was kept out of the axis in part by favourable trade deals.
Vichy was neutral and was not at war with Britain, despite Mers El Kebir. As neutrals, the US was able to provide them with some supplies, but this would not have been the case if they had been at war.

 

[Look More Closely Later]

…My take on it is that we are unlikely to have to force the decision until after the "Day of Infamy" on December 7 which brings the US into the war (can't see German losses in a sideshow theatre impacting the Japanese decision that much)…

The British noticeably reinforcing Malaya (if that does take place in this timeline) above and beyond the original timeline may however affect what the Imperial Japanese do. Whatever the Imperial Japanese judged adequate in the original timeline for attacking Malaya with is unlikely to seem as adequate if the British more troops/tanks, etc, there.
If in the original timeline the Imperial Japanese considered (to drop into algebraic expression for a moment) 3y troops sufficient to attack 3x British troops, then if in this timeline the British have 4x troops, then the Imperial Japanese (under the same arithmetic which they use as in the original timeline) will clearly, to Imperial Japanese minds, require 4y troops. And they will need transport (and the extra unit y of troops too, in the first place) above and beyond what they had in the original timeline, to make war on the British.

Now maybe they will be able to borrow troops from China and to somehow Alien Space Bat magic up the transport from somewhere to move those original timeline plus this timeline extra troops against Malaya on their original schedule, or maybe they will have to delay a week or two beyond the original timeline date to get more things ready and in position; or maybe they will have to cancel original timeline opening operations to be able to concentrate on Malaya (and Singapore), or maybe they will think '**** it', and reduce their presence in French Indochina to see if that will result in the USA removing some of the sanctions which the USA claims is related to French Indochina.
(And if the Imperial Japanese do reduce their presence in French Indochina, in this timeline, that may give the USA a stronger hand in dealing with Vichy, albeit this is a USA which may not be directly involved in the war as of December 7th/8th 1941 (depending on time zones.)

 

[Derek Pullem]

The British noticeably reinforcing Malaya (if that does take place in this timeline) above and beyond the original timeline may however affect what the Imperial Japanese do. Whatever the Imperial Japanese judged adequate in the original timeline for attacking Malaya with is unlikely to seem as adequate if the British more troops/tanks, etc, there.
If in the original timeline the Imperial Japanese considered (to drop into algebraic expression for a moment) 3y troops sufficient to attack 3x British troops, then if in this timeline the British have 4x troops, then the Imperial Japanese (under the same arithmetic which they use as in the original timeline) will clearly, to Imperial Japanese minds, require 4y troops. And they will need transport (and the extra unit y of troops too, in the first place) above and beyond what they had in the original timeline, to make war on the British.

Now maybe they will be able to borrow troops from China and to somehow Alien Space Bat magic up the transport from somewhere to move those original timeline plus this timeline extra troops against Malaya on their original schedule, or maybe they will have to delay a week or two beyond the original timeline date to get more things ready and in position; or maybe they will have to cancel original timeline opening operations to be able to concentrate on Malaya (and Singapore), or maybe they will think '**** it', and reduce their presence in French Indochina to see if that will result in the USA removing some of the sanctions which the USA claims is related to French Indochina.
(And if the Imperial Japanese do reduce their presence in French Indochina, in this timeline, that may give the USA a stronger hand in dealing with Vichy, albeit this is a USA which may not be directly involved in the war as of December 7th/8th 1941 (depending on time zones.)

All depends on how long the Italians and Germans keep the British out of Tripoli - without an end to the Desert campaign I can't see a lot of reinforcements heading East. At least not enough to worry the Japanese initially.

 

[Ramp-Rat]

Apologies to one and all, my understanding was that Vichy was at war with Britain, I should have checked before I wrote anything, my bad.
RR.

 

[dave_r_gilbert]

The British noticeably reinforcing Malaya (if that does take place in this timeline) above and beyond the original timeline may however affect what the Imperial Japanese do. Whatever the Imperial Japanese judged adequate in the original timeline for attacking Malaya with is unlikely to seem as adequate if the British more troops/tanks, etc, there.
If in the original timeline the Imperial Japanese considered (to drop into algebraic expression for a moment) 3y troops sufficient to attack 3x British troops, then if in this timeline the British have 4x troops, then the Imperial Japanese (under the same arithmetic which they use as in the original timeline) will clearly, to Imperial Japanese minds, require 4y troops. And they will need transport (and the extra unit y of troops too, in the first place) above and beyond what they had in the original timeline, to make war on the British.

Now maybe they will be able to borrow troops from China and to somehow Alien Space Bat magic up the transport from somewhere to move those original timeline plus this timeline extra troops against Malaya on their original schedule, or maybe they will have to delay a week or two beyond the original timeline date to get more things ready and in position; or maybe they will have to cancel original timeline opening operations to be able to concentrate on Malaya (and Singapore), or maybe they will think '**** it', and reduce their presence in French Indochina to see if that will result in the USA removing some of the sanctions which the USA claims is related to French Indochina.
(And if the Imperial Japanese do reduce their presence in French Indochina, in this timeline, that may give the USA a stronger hand in dealing with Vichy, albeit this is a USA which may not be directly involved in the war as of December 7th/8th 1941 (depending on time zones.)

The Japanese "decision" to go to war with the USA, British Empire, and Dutch Empire while simultaneously embroiled in China was not a rational one in OTL.
Another small entry, like a few thousand extra troops in the "this is nuts" column wouldn't make any difference.
Given the stark choice of withdrawing from china, or going all in against 90% of the worlds industrial capacity, they chose the latter in OTL.

With regards to Malaya the "thinking" seems to have a certain element of circular logic to it.
Our forces will be sufficient to take Malaya, because we need to take Malaya, so the forces we allocate will be sufficient.
Despite considerable intelligence Japanese estimates of the strength of the garrison were out by a wide margin, both before and all the way through the campaign.

Allocating more forces to the invasion wasn't really possible, due to shortage of transport, supply, and trained troops that weren't in China.
The formations allocated were the best the Japanese had, partly because they had to be, and partly because the sea transport wasn't available for any more.
As it was, the whole thing relied on being able to reuse forces engaged in phase 1 of the campaign for phase 2, and then again in phase 3.
Assuming success in each phase, and making no allowance for losses.

Going to war, in OTL, was plainly bonkers, in the medium to long term if not in the short.
An increase in the Malaya garrison wont make a difference to the decision to go to war.
It may make a difference to the course of the campaign, which was a close call despite appalling british empire leadership, poor preparation, generally lower quality and undertrained troops, downright bad luck, and generally excellent Japanese leadership combined with high quality troops.
And a strong focus that only a mad charge down the length of the peninsula stood any chance of success before reinforcements overturned the initial advantage of surprise.

 

[Look More Closely Later]

..With regards to Malaya the "thinking" seems to have a certain element of circular logic to it.
Our forces will be sufficient to take Malaya, because we need to take Malaya, so the forces we allocate will be sufficient...

Except it seems to me that if the original timeline Imperial Japanese had actually thought like that, they wouldn't have bothered to send an actual army with divisions, aircraft, amphibious landing support, etc, etc, but would have sent a child with a toy popgun to conquer Malaya.

(edited)
Regarding the accuracy, or otherwise, of Imperial Japanese counting, even if the accuracy of counting is only 80% of troops actually present in Malaya, 80% of 4x (to go algebraic again) is still more than 80% of 3x, unless we're using some kind of magical counting system. Even if the Imperial Japanese are only spotting 'four out of every five' British troops, their count is still going to be higher in this timeline (if Malaya is reinforced as compared to the original timeline) than in the original timeline.
(And let's not forget that they had actual spies and saboteurs such as Patrick Heenan (liaison with RAF in Malaya) able to feed them some information directly.)