The 1943 bomb plot succeeds

I was wondering about what would happen if Von Tresckow's 1943 plot to kill Hitler succeeded, the one where he tried to kill Hitler by putting a bomb on his plane. Did the conspirators have a plan to seize power in Berlin similar to the Valkyrie plan in 1943? If they do and it gets pulled off successfully, what happens from there in terms of the war, potential peace, etc?
 

hammo1j

Donor
The key to the '44 plot was that D-Day had succeeded and now the game was up for certain.

In '43 there would not have been the support and we would have the conspirators put down and a squabble for succession. Heydrich was out the way by then so it would be Himmler vs the Generals.

In either case there would be a possibility for negotiation but the Nazis would expect it on their terms. Possibly cessation in the West in exchange for a free rein in the East.

Western Allies would say no and a better commanded Wehrmacht would last until Berlin got nuked in August 45.
 
Western Allies would say no and a better commanded Wehrmacht would last until Berlin got nuked in August 45.

I'd think that by then, Germany had nowhere to go. It would need a major POD before 1943 for Germany to win (No ASB Diversion, but quite major).
 
Would Germany really be better led? ISTM that with a civil war within the REich would make things worse, surely?
 

General Zod

Banned
I was wondering about what would happen if Von Tresckow's 1943 plot to kill Hitler succeeded, the one where he tried to kill Hitler by putting a bomb on his plane. Did the conspirators have a plan to seize power in Berlin similar to the Valkyrie plan in 1943? If they do and it gets pulled off successfully, what happens from there in terms of the war, potential peace, etc?

They had a plan to seize power in Berlin, yes. Now, it is certainly not sure it would have succeeded, but IMO it is totally unreasonable to assume that if Hitler had died, the rest of the Nazi top echelons would have been surely able to suppress the coup or set up enough armed resistance to unleash a civil war (beyond some hours or days of patchwork skirmishes, that is). That might happen if Himmler escapes death or capture, and retains control of the SS network, but otherwise, we must be mindful of two factors: the Wehrmacht oath of loyalty was to Hitler himself, not to the National-Socialist regime. Also, the Nazi regime was critically reliant on Hitler to maintain cohesion. Him dead, the Heer in early 1943 has very little motivation to give allegiance to any other Nazi top dog, instead of setting up their own junta. And besides the SS network, the Nazi regime has very little ability to successfully stage any armed resistance against a military takeover.

So, the Heer takes over, and stabilizes its power after a few brief skirmishes with the most Nazi diehards among the Gestapo and the SS. They quickly attempt to set up separate peace negotiations with the Western Allies and with Stalin. The former quickly stall because the junta has unrealistic demands, given the political situation in Britain and America (they ask for a free hand in Central-Eastern Europe, in exchange for the liberation of Western Europe). The latter seem more promising, but ultimately stall as well, because of mutual distrust and disagreement about the placement of the border (Stalin asks for the 1941 borders, the junta wants the Dnieper border).

The junta retools and streamlines the German military machine and armament industry, focusing efforts on a few key weapon models and projects, and adopts elastic defense as a strategy. As a result, Summer-Fall 1943 battles on the Eastern Front result in a decisive German victory (they adopt Manstein's Backhand Blow strategy and it is successful, leading to the destruction of the whole southern wing of the Red Army). On the Western Front, the landings in Sicily succeed, but the ones in Salerno and Taranto are a bloody failure. They manage to seize a bridgehead in the tip of Calabria, but a combination of German entrenchment, bad logistics, and worse mountain terrain make any land gains in that area to happen at such a slow pace to make them useless. End of 1943 sees the Germans still entrenched in eastern Ukraine and masters of mainland Europe. The bloody failure of the landings in mainland Italy cause the Western Allies to rethink their strategic options: Roosevelt still pushes for a big amphibious offensive in northern France, but Churchill gets the greenlight for his dearly wished peripheral landings in Norwegia and the Balkans.

1944 sees a long string of massive Russian offensives on the Eastern Front, which the Germans counter by extensive use of elastic defense. The Wehrmacht is gradually forced to cede ground against the onslaught of superior Soviet numbers, but they manage to keep their own resources essentially intact, and make the Soviet bleed massively for every inch of terrain they reconquer and every German soldier they kill. By mid 1944, the Red Army has reached the Dnieper, and by late 1944 the Dvina-Pripet-Bug line, but they are totally exausted, with the USSR scraping the bottom of its manpower reserves. Stalin reluctantly accepts an armistice on the 1939 borders.

On the Western Front, the Allies have stepped up their bombing of Germany but the first German jet fighters are coming into line and making such efforts more and more costly and of questionable effectiveness. The landings in Norwegia and Greece have succeeded, allowing the Western Allies to liberate large tracts of both countries and to put Romanian oilfields and Swedish iron mines in their bombing range, which hampers the German war effort to a significant but not crippling degree. This however causes the German junta to scale down their demands for a peace settlement, to the platform of Germany and its allies keeping their own "ethnic" territories and their national independence and freeing other occupied nations throughout Europe. They go public with their peace offer. Roosevelt remains totally hostile, but Churchill is more pliable. Overlord is either a complete failure (since jet fighters allow the German to make extensive air recognition and seriously contest air superiority and thanks to a timely German counterattack on the beaches) or it manages to make a foothold, but the Allies face terribly high losses for every inch of land they conquer, while German elastic defense is keeping the bulk of the Wehrmacht essentially intact.

A combination of factors (high casualties in Europe, the failure of landings in Italy and possibly in France, the fall of the Nazi regime and the new German goverment's public peace offer, the separate armistice of the Soviets) totally discredit Roosevelt's "unconditional surrender" political platform, and he loses the 1944 elections.

The new Adminstration is more willing to discuss a compromise peace, as it is the British government. In early 1945, a compromise peace is signed alongside the following terms: Germany keeps its 1939 borders, plus Danzig, the Corridor, and Upper Silesia (maybe even Posen, Luxemburg, and Elsass-Lotharingen if D-Day was a failure), Hungary keeps southern Slovakia, Backa, and northern Transylvania, the Baltic countries, Slovenia, and Croatia-Bosnia keep their independence, Italy and Finland keep their 1938 borders (quite possibly Italy keeps Dalmatia as well, since Croatia would be an independent ex-Axis country, too, and the Western Allies would not mind either way too much). The Axis countries liberate all other territories (Norway, Danemark, Netherlands, Belgium, France, 1939 Czechoslovakia, Poland with 1914 Western and 1939 Eastern borders, Greece, Albania, and Serbia), hand over war criminals for a trial in international tribunals, accept Western Allies supervision and inspection rights over their democratization process and gradual disarmement, the Western Allies recognize the separate peace between the Soviets and the Axis on the 1939 borders.
 
Last edited:
Did the 1943 plotters have a plan to seize power in Berlin after Hitler was killed?

I was under the impression it was Von Stauffenberg who came up with the plan and he wasn't on board until later.
 
The new Adminstration is more willing to discuss a compromise peace, as it is the British government. In early 1945, a compromise peace is signed alongside the following terms: Germany keeps its 1939 borders, plus the 1914 borders with Poland (maybe even Luxemburg and Elsass-Lotharingen if D-Day was a failure), Hungary keeps southern Slovakia, Backa, and northern Transylvania, the Baltic countries, Slovenia, and Croatia-Bosnia keep their independence, Italy and Finland keep their 1938 borders. The Axis countries liberate all other territories (Norway, Danemark, Netherlands, Belgium, France, 1939 Czechoslovakia, Poland with 1914 Western and 1939 Eastern borders, Greece, Albania, and Serbia), hand over war criminals for a trial in international tribunals, accept Western Allies supervision and inspection rights over their democratization process and gradual disarmement, the Western Allies recognize the separate peace between the Soviets and the Axis on the 1939 borders.
Posen might remain in Poland, even under an otherwise 1914 German-Polish border.
Hm. Well, your scenario certainly has things go very well for Germany, but not necessarily impossibly so.
 
Did the 1943 plotters have a plan to seize power in Berlin after Hitler was killed?

I was under the impression it was Von Stauffenberg who came up with the plan and he wasn't on board until later.

I know that Stauffenberg came up with the specific plan of turning Operation Valkyrie to the conspiracy's own ends, but the conspirators may have had another plan in place at that point.

You might need two POD's for the coup to work-

1. The bomb on the plane goes off. Obvious.

2. The conspirators have an effective coup plan in place( if their 43 plans weren't effective of course).

I wonder, what in your opinions would an effective coup plan be?
 

General Zod

Banned
Posen might remain in Poland, even under an otherwise 1914 German-Polish border.

Yes, you are right. Differently from Danzig, West Prussia, and Upper Silesia, German claim over Posen is much more shaky (not entirely farfetched, however, since there was a sizable German minority in Posen, too), just as or even more so for Luxemburg and Alsace-Lorraine. For all of these three lands, I think the issue is how skillful German negotiators are and above all which is the military situation on the ground. If D-Day succeeded, even if the Allies are bleeding heavily for every inch of land they get, I do not see Germany getting anything more than the 1939 borders plus West Prussia and Upper Silesia at the best. If D-Day failed, I can see them possibly making a successful claim on Posen and A-L-L, too. Posen more likely than the latter. In 1944, Hitler had expelled most Poles from Posen and the Corridor. The Western Allies' public opinion might well be unwilling to bleed through God knows so many failed landings (they don't know the nukes are coming) to restore Polish territorial integrity, esp. if the Poles get to keep eastern territories and the 1939 borders with the USSR. They liberated the country, that may suffice for their efforts.

Hm. Well, your scenario certainly has things go very well for Germany, but not necessarily impossibly so.

Yes, mine is a plausible best case scenario for Germany, flowing from the PoD. What do you expect from a Germanophile ? ;) Other AH.comers may fill in the details of the other most likely outcome, Germany getting a couple nukes in mid-1945. Anyway, in both cases, Stalin is still a loser, since a more competent German leadership since early 1943 makes WWII end with the Soviets still far from Central and Eastern Europe.
 
Last edited:

hammo1j

Donor
Good work, Zod.

Would the Heer have stopped the Holocaust and SS excesses? I can't see a return to Democracy, but a military dictatorship that cut out the excesses of the Nazis might be a palatable negotiating partner.
 

General Zod

Banned
Good work, Zod.

Thanks. :D

Would the Heer have stopped the Holocaust and SS excesses?

Surely. Apart from sheer moral issues, that would still be highly relevant to many Heer officers, the Wehrmacht knows that the antisemite genocidal antics of the Nazis were a complete loss for the Fatherland, racking a terrible PR burden if known, and a significant waste of resources from the war effort for no discernible gain. They would also be fully mindful that by 1943, Hitler's dream of making European Russia a German colony would be a megalomanic pipedream, and even if they would manage to win a total victory in Russia by some ASB factor, they would still do it the Kaiserreich/Brest-Litovsk way, good old puppet states instead of mass killings.

At the very most, they might complete the expulsion of Poles from the territories they mean to claim in the peace settlement (ie. the 1914 borders), if there are anyone left.

Also, be mindful that by early 1943, the Final Solution would still be in its infant stages, so it is most easy to cut the operation, quietely send the personnel involved to prison or a firing squad, and bury the evidence. And of course, from an humanitarian POV, the very good thing about this PoD is that the overwhelming majority of the Holocaust's victims would be saved.

There would still be the victims of the SS massacres in Eastern Europe during 1939-42, of anti-partisan repression in Western Europe during 1940-42, and they would be the issue of the international tribunals ITTL but I think they would amount to a rather tiny minority of OTL Nazi victims.

Also take into account that the junta would have every political interest to pile the blame for Hitler's atrocities squarely on the shoulders of the Nazi party, the Gestapo, and the SS, so they would happily throw everyone the Allies would ask from those groups to the wolves, and make exemplary punishment of the others, to wash the taint off the German people at large. They would just try to bury prosecutions against Heer officers involved in war crimes, and maybe for members of the Waffen-SS that they would regard as respectable if misguided soldiers, as opposed to murderous thugs (the SS proper).

I can't see a return to Democracy, but a military dictatorship that cut out the excesses of the Nazis might be a palatable negotiating partner.

The junta would surely stay in charge for the duration fo the war, but I really can't see them resisting the pressure for a return to democracy afterwards, despite any illusion the more reactionary-authoritarian fringe of the Heer might have in that sense. Also take into account that the Western Allies would almost surely make a supervised democratization and disarming process a condition of the peace treaty, even if I can totally see the Western public opinion giving up the claim for Allied occupation of Germany ITTL if the body count and military reversals pile up.
 
Last edited:

General Zod

Banned
Why did the landings in Southern Italy fail again?

Salerno was a very close near miss IOTL. It is totally feasible that with a more competent German leadership and more efficient allocation of resources, they would have been repelled. The British also made subsidiary landings in Calabria and Taranto, but the main force was at Salerno, the other landings were made with very limited forces (a corps in Calabria and an airborne division at Taranto). It is very difficult to assume that they would have manage to establish a stable foothold in Puglia if Salerno fails. They might have in Calabria, the terrain and infrastructure is horrid and would delay a German counteroffensive, but for the same reason, I can see the Allies getting totally bottled in southern Calabria or making a verrryyy sllooowww and costly advance throughout Calabria during 1943 and 1944.
 
Now, I imagine any coup would, in order to be successful, have to assasinate Himmler as well. I imagine that the coup members immediately arrest all SS and Gestapo leaders, disarm and disband the Waffen-SS and shut down the camps. That is all well and good.

However, even with the most obvious danger of a counter-coup by Himmler and the SS removed, is there a danger of a counter-coup by Hitler loyalists in the Wermacht itself, such as Keitel and his ilk?
 

General Zod

Banned
Now, I imagine any coup would, in order to be successful, have to assasinate Himmler as well. I imagine that the coup members immediately arrest all SS and Gestapo leaders, disarm and disband the Waffen-SS and shut down the camps. That is all well and good.

Yes, this is all necessary, even if I think they would try to put the figthing potential Waffen-SS to good use anyway. Say they redistribute their equipment, enlisted men and the most reliable-looking officers among Heer units.

However, even with the most obvious danger of a counter-coup by Himmler and the SS removed, is there a danger of a counter-coup by Hitler loyalists in the Wermacht itself, such as Keitel and his ilk?

Which "Hitler loyalists in the Wehrmacht" ? To my knowledge they were either guys that took their oath of loyalty to the Fuhrer more seriously than it was healthy for the Fatherland, or career-minded opportunists. They were loyal until Hitler was alive and in charge. Very very few were ideologically committed to Nazism seriously enough to try and lead a counter-coup to save the Nazi regime with Hitler dead (and their oaths of loyalty gone) against their own fellow officers. As it concerns Keitel and stuff, they were bootlicking opportunists, they would try and align with the new junta, if they can. Only if the junta seems seriously minded to punish them for their inks with the Nazis, they might attempt to do something, but all in all they would be just interested to negotiate immunity from prosecution (at the least) or a position in the new regime (at the best) for themselves. If Himmler and the SS can't pull the counter-coup, the Nazi regime is dead and buried.
 
Last edited:
Top