Surviving Reich, no WW2 - long term consequences?

Supposin' Hitler dies after the Munich conference but before invading Poland and starting WW2. Assume also that some kind of Nazi government continues after the inevitable power struggle AND that somehow the economy limps along just long enough to recover from the effects of Hitler's policies. Whoever takes over realizes France and Britain will move if Poland is attacked, so he holds off. Germany has Austria and Czechia to digest, anyway. Poland gets a reprieve. In short, Nazi Germany survives. Perhaps not the most plausible outcome of Hitler's early death, but let's roll with it, shall we?

So... Then what? There's no war in Poland, no Barbarossa, no Holocaust. Where does the world go in such a scenario? What's the likely long term position of the Czechs in the Protectorate? Does it get fully annexed, giving the Reich a new, large and restive minority? Nominal autonomy? Nominal independence? How long can the tense peace last before someone invades someone else?

What do you, the readers at home, think?
 
When this new leader dies, his successor attacks Poland due to the brainwashing that the Nazis have done to the population, if the Soviets haven't tried to overrun Eastern Europe yet. If they have, Germany becomes an impromptu Ally against the Soviets. So ironically, a cautious Nazi government is just as likely to find themselves at war as an aggressive one.
 
So... Then what? There's no war in Poland, no Barbarossa, no Holocaust. Where does the world go in such a scenario? What's the likely long term position of the Czechs in the Protectorate? Does it get fully annexed, giving the Reich a new, large and restive minority? Nominal autonomy? Nominal independence? How long can the tense peace last before someone invades someone else?

What do you, the readers at home, think?

It's hard to say because this wouldn't be a true Nazi government. The whole ideology is based on taking over Eastern Europe for its living space and exterminating the Jews and the Slavs. Stopping at Czechoslovakia would mean unfinished business, even for Hitler's successor.

The regime - if it can survive for long post-Hitler, and assuming not another fanatic takes over - might reform into some form of "moderate" Nazism (if that's possible, but then again look what the Chinese have done with "Communism" in OTL).

Or it could collapse from within as there might be conflict between the "true" Nazis who want to continue Hitler's plan, and "moderates" who want to stop with the current gains. In addition to the military and other segments of Germany who are not completely sold on the regime, and now having hostile Czechs and other minorities within its borders.

Also, Stalin will have more time to build up the Red Army and Soviet war industries, and will invade and destroy Nazi Germany at a time when its economy is in a weak state trying to recover from Hitler's economic policies. Time was not on the Nazi's side - Hitler knew this, which is why he wanted to invade the USSR ASAP. Every year of waiting means a stronger USSR that will be harder to defeat. Same applies to the British, French and Americans, should they get involved - they all gained an advantage over the Nazis with each year that passed.

Either way, it is difficult to see Nazism surviving for long, whether it's from domestic or external factors.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

Supposin' Hitler dies after the Munich conference but before invading Poland and starting WW2. Assume also that some kind of Nazi government continues after the inevitable power struggle AND that somehow the economy limps along just long enough to recover from the effects of Hitler's policies. Whoever takes over realizes France and Britain will move if Poland is attacked, so he holds off. Germany has Austria and Czechia to digest, anyway. Poland gets a reprieve. In short, Nazi Germany survives. Perhaps not the most plausible outcome of Hitler's early death, but let's roll with it, shall we?

So... Then what? There's no war in Poland, no Barbarossa, no Holocaust. Where does the world go in such a scenario? What's the likely long term position of the Czechs in the Protectorate? Does it get fully annexed, giving the Reich a new, large and restive minority? Nominal autonomy? Nominal independence? How long can the tense peace last before someone invades someone else?

What do you, the readers at home, think?
Let's say for the sake of argument that Hitler's death by natural causes comes between the Munich Conference and the violation of the Munich Agreement in March 1939. Goering likely takes power due to his stature relative to all the other Nazis and the inability of the anti-Nazi conspirators to regroup quickly enough to stop him from reaching power, especially as he would have a lot of public support and support within the party and military establishment as well as internationally (he was seen as the 'reasonable Nazi). Goering doesn't do the aggressive Hitler moves of OTL because he doesn't feel he has the power yet that Hitler did after Munich. Munich was Hitler's coup, not Goering's, so Goering would have to take time to build up his national and institutional support to make any other moves internationally. First though the issue of rearmament would have to be addressed, because it was unaffordable and there were other options that he would have to take to address this financial issue that Schacht was proposing. Assuming he was doing what he did IOTL to stay in Hitler's good graces and amass power relative to his rivals by appealing to Hitler's desires, Goering in power would have been somewhat of a different animal. According to a biography I've read on him, he was seriously opposed to going to war in 1939 and hated Ribbentrop for pushing that option and convincing Hitler that was the best way to go. So being smart and informed enough about the state of the economy, as he ran most of it, he'd likely recognize that continued rearmament would push the nation into war if he didn't wean the economy off of it, as Schacht was urging, as they'd have to smash and grab to keep the economy moving if they just continued to rearm. Given that Goering still have a lot of good will in Britain after Munich but before the violation of the agreement, getting bridge loans to transition off of rearmament would certainly be possible, as Chamberlain, already riding high after the Munich Agreement, would be able to say his diplomacy was such that he managed to get the Germans to stop rearming and avoid the path to future conflict, as well as solidifying the perception that Munich was a viable agreement.

The problem is that the international economy was still pretty messed up. The German economy was effectively running on debt it had been racking up in trade deals that screwed Germany's suppliers of raw materials. Likely a Goering led Germany would be forced to look for increased barter deals with China to get access to raw materials at a discount, which means screwing Japan by trying to find ways to blunt their military adventure in China to maintain that trade. It will probably also mean working with Poland and Russia to get trade deals, as well as increasing market leverage in the Balkans. Just because war is avoided over Poland doesn't mean the economic situation is going to be great, especially as the Nazi vampire economy was not really set up to generate peacetime wealth. They'd probably have to let Schacht run his program to find foreign suppliers of raw materials to enable the German economy to work, while ruthlessly hunting down arms contracts to make money.
This book details the scheme that Schacht was developing pre-war, but was derailed by Hitler in his bid for rearmament before jumping into war: https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Shadow-Empire-Economics-Spanish/dp/0674728858?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc
That would be the one path really open to the Nazi government without war.

I think that there is a path that could be charted that wouldn't result in war, but I don't think it would be particularly prosperous until free trade in Europe became more of the orthodoxy. At very least though the Germans would have to sign some sort of trade with with the USSR like they did in 1939-41 and pay up to keep their economy running without war. Stalin wasn't looking for war to expand his empire, he was just interested in building up the USSR to ensure 'Socialism in One Country' worked.
 
As Wiking says the Nazi economy was in an incredibly vulnerable state in the immediate run up to World War 2 thanks to Hitlers immense and unaffordable military build up. Unlike him though I doubt Schacht's scheme would have worked, it trod on way too many toes and required too many people overseas to play along. To use the example of British loans that is a complete non-starter. The reason Chamberlain got a boost post Munich was the idea that by sacrificing Czechoslovakia he had saved Britain the cost in blood and money of another war. Goering come along a few months post Munich demanding loans will go down as badly as annexing rump Czechia did. On the subject of Czechia there wouldn't be any large restive minorities inside Germany's borders until post March 1939 when Hitler violated the Munich Agreement and established the Protectorate.
In the short term Germany either undermines the regime by making massive cuts in military spending (Schacht option), goes bankrupt without loot to keep the economy going, invades somewhere to get some loot and probably kicks off WW2.
 
The public struggle is between Hess and Goring. Hess was the heir-apparent, Deputy Fuhrer. Goring had the keys to real power but the Army still had the means to derail anyone it wished to. I think the issue becomes one in which Goring can maneuver around Hess without getting the Army to quash him or if everyone settles on Hess but struggles behind the scenes and the fiefdoms ultimately blow apart into open anarchy. Without Hitler and without his military victories the Nazi-dictatorship had a finite life and legitimacy, more importantly little to check the Generals if they get too fed-up. Hess was as much a Nazi as Hitler but I doubt he had the same cunning or appeal if he pushed towards a war. Goring might have pursued war but he is so quixotic it is hard to predict him between hedonism or bullying, either would likely end him. Oddly I can see the Army supporting some civilian government, a coup or even another stab at democracy, so long as it lets Germany rebuild to a sound defensive position. The Generals deferred to civilian authority, ultimately to Hitler and he only beat their power by winning against the odds after this moment.

Stalin is stymied by Poland so I see a crisis there to get Soviet troops on the German border without provoking the UK and France. Especially if a trade treaty with Germany continues on. If that occurs then its war. Finland, Baltic states, Poland, Germany, and the Cold War settles at the French border until Stalin can maneuver again. Stalin liked to see his enemies fight to weakness then step in, thus Hitler swept the board as well as Stalin could ever hope, but Stalin only got half of Europe.
 
Top