alternatehistory.com

So having reread Max Sinister's Hitler's Mediterranean Strategy, and seen some related scenarios involving better Axis success in that theater, I was wondering.

Would we have seen Stalin try and take advantage of the thinly-stretched Axis borders?

In Sinister's tl, Barbarossa is postponed until 1942. However, there are somethings I find implausible about this timeline. Namely, that Britain stays in the war after losing the Suez Canal AND simultaneously being attacked by Japan. I believe these two disasters would have pushed Britain over the edge; Parliament would have forced Churchill to negotiate with Hitler.

Even with America's entrance into the war, I find it difficult to believe that the British public could have ever been persuaded that victory was possible after losing Egypt, Singapore, and the great pressure on Australia and India.

With all that said, assuming the Brits agree to peace with Germany in December '41/early '42, is it not likely Stalin would have decided to attack Germany, knowing they were in a weak position and with the bulk of their forces scattered across Africa and the Middle East, an early spring strike across Eastern Europe could have allowed him to take Prussia, Romania and its oil, and Hungary quite quickly? Could the Axis have had any hope? After all, the main success behind Barbarossa was the fact that so many Soviet troops were at the border and this allowed the Germans to encircle huge numbers of them. Could we see the same happening to Germany, with an infuriated Hitler ordering commanders to hold position when retreat was preferable?

Depending on the scale of Axis success in the ME, would the USSR try and invade Turkey and/or Iran?

My scenario precludes the declaration of war on the U.S, btw, because Hitler would have seen it as bolstering British confidence, although obviously the U.S will certainly funnel ludicrous amounts of aid to the Soviets, even if they decide to strike first.

Thoughts?
Top