The Munich Coup - my latest TL

We have to frame French reactions in reference. The Popular Front was already very controversial at home, TTL international events are going to strenghten the influence and appeal of right-wing parties more and more, with the unquestionable success of appeasement towards Germany (it returned to democracy, scaled down the pace of rearmament, gave guarantees on A-L, gave a sensible peace to Poland after victory, and made moves at reconciliation with Czechoslovakia and the West) and increasing signs of Soviet aggressive expansionism. In this framework, a political right-wing shift in France is quite likely (of course, as soon as France declares war to Soviet Russia, the PCF shall be outlawed and its sympathizers interned and despised as fifth-columnists). And it is also very likely that they would apply the appeasement strategy to Italy about Yugoslavia, too: both to "tame" Italy by allowing it to satisfy reasonable irredentistic claims and a "safe" sphere of influence, and to secure it as a very valuable (TTL Italy was no OTL pushover, thanks to two extra years of preparation and the lessons of the Third Balkan War) ally against Soviet expansionism. Given Mussolini's mentality, the gamble proves wholly correct.

In that context it could make sense fearing a Soviet menace. OTOH a right wing gov't might take the opportunity to push back against Italian aggression and open claims over French territory (OTL). Of course ITTL the USSR has invaded Romania, so there's a supportable reason to look the other way. Note also I never said France would automatically oppose Italy by force, just that some justification for their non-involvement was needed. You make a plausible justification here. Cheers!

Well, it is impossible for a Balkan overlord to make all nationalities content at once. At least leaving Kosovo to Serbia may make Serbs sufficiently pliable to Italian hegemony, and quelling Albanian insugency is less of an headache than quelling a Serbian one, as numbers and spread in the region go.

Certainly in a good position to given proximity (unlike Ethiopia which has wicked supply lines). Pressure on the Serbs to restrain the Albs could go a long way unless some outside force (like the USSR during the war) is propping them up.

True, but the Libyans have never been that numerous. I think it is feasible for the Italians to "dump" all of most of them in Niger or Chad (messing somewhat with EEDA colonial turf, but Sahel is not exactly at the top of EEDA strategic priorities) or stake out a low-value part of desertic Libya as a Bantustan-like "reservation" for them. Exiled Libyans may stil stage some insurgency from there, but it is not going to be anywhere as successful as if they had been free to roam the coutnry. Fascist Italy already used the large-scale native-concentration strategy to quell nationalist insurgency in the 1920s. It is wholly plausible they go all the way to secure their assimilation of the "Fourth Shore".

Brutal counterinsurgency, as you mention, was a Fascist specialty, though such heavy-handed matters only lead to the temporary suspension of hostilities and don't help the underlying resentment, typically making it worse. You'd need some form of "carrot" with the "stick" for any long-term solution. Balbo as Gov was fairly good in this area and always pushed for citizenship and Mussie set himself up as "defender of Islam", so some "separate but equal" semi-integration is possible short-term. How much of the population buys into it depends on a lot. And SbE is, of course, bullshit so there's real lingering resentment potential here. And as OTL has shown it doesn't take large numbers to support terrorism, particularly with hostile Islamisist neighbors (still quite possible since OTL's post-colonial problems will still be present ATL) and a porous desert border. Eventually Italy will need to improve the lot and treatment of the Libyans substantially if there's to be any hope of avoiding some measure of protracted conflict, even if only a violent terrorist minority.
 

Eurofed

Banned
In that context it could make sense fearing a Soviet menace. OTOH a right wing gov't might take the opportunity to push back against Italian aggression and open claims over French territory (OTL). Of course ITTL the USSR has invaded Romania, so there's a supportable reason to look the other way. Note also I never said France would automatically oppose Italy by force, just that some justification for their non-involvement was needed. You make a plausible justification here. Cheers!

It seems we have settled this issue to mutual satisfaction. :D

Certainly in a good position to given proximity (unlike Ethiopia which has wicked supply lines). Pressure on the Serbs to restrain the Albs could go a long way unless some outside force (like the USSR during the war) is propping them up.

True. By the way, IIRC, OW has written that Albania got a strong Communist collaboarationst regime, whileas Serbia saw a strong resistance like most of the other occupied European and Middle Eastrern countries. If Albanians picked up a reputation as Communist collaborationists, I can see the other Allies looking the other way as Mussolini runs roughshod on them.

Brutal counterinsurgency, as you mention, was a Fascist specialty, though such heavy-handed matters only lead to the temporary suspension of hostilities and don't help the underlying resentment, typically making it worse. You'd need some form of "carrot" with the "stick" for any long-term solution. Balbo as Gov was fairly good in this area and always pushed for citizenship and Mussie set himself up as "defender of Islam", so some "separate but equal" semi-integration is possible short-term. How much of the population buys into it depends on a lot. And SbE is, of course, bullshit so there's real lingering resentment potential here. And as OTL has shown it doesn't take large numbers to support terrorism, particularly with hostile Islamisist neighbors (still quite possible since OTL's post-colonial problems will still be present ATL) and a porous desert border. Eventually Italy will need to improve the lot and treatment of the Libyans substantially if there's to be any hope of avoiding some measure of protracted conflict, even if only a violent terrorist minority.

All true. There would still be significant terrorism. My point was that with harsh counterinsurgency, the SL would suppress widespread insurgency, however. I agree that a definitive solution would not be found until the fascist block collapses, Italy returns to democracy, and restores equal rights to the Arab minority. However, by 1989, it would not go beyond that. With strong immigration from Italy, Iberia, and Greece in previous decades, the large majority of the Libyan population would have become European already.
 
Japan, on the other end of the world, was fighting a war of conquest in China. With an American oil embargo in place, Japan was running out of fuel fast
OTL the US didn't impose the Oil Embargo till after the Japanese occupation of IndoChina.
The British and Dutch went along with the Embargo, due to Lend Lease Comcerns.
ITTL neither of those conditions apply, So Japan should be alble to buy Oil from the DEI.
 

Eurofed

Banned
OTL the US didn't impose the Oil Embargo till after the Japanese occupation of IndoChina.
The British and Dutch went along with the Embargo, due to Lend Lease Comcerns.
ITTL neither of those conditions apply, So Japan should be alble to buy Oil from the DEI.

This is a plausible objection. As a possible explanation, in the lack of an aggressive Nazi Germany, Japanese expansionism in China may look even more untolerable to the Roosevelt Administration, so they enforce the oil embargo just as a response to the ongoing Sino-Japanese War.
 

JJohnson

Banned
I think you folks are exaggerating the grip FDR had on America and the leeway he would have to dictate US policy if the public and Congress turn fiercely anti-Communist. Yes, he was very popular with center-of-left Americans because of his New Deal policies, but he was also loathed by center-of-right Americans because of them. And because the New Deal was "pushing the envelope" of period mainstream politics, FDR and Wallace would be terribly vulnerable to accusations of being sympathetic to the Soviets. Besides, both he and Wallace had plenty of skeletons in the closet, from poor health (FDR) to bizarre religious beliefs (Wallace).

I propose the following scenario: when Stalin attacks Europe, American public opnion starts to be really scared of Communism, fueled by propaganda from pro-European lobbies. Japan attacks South East Asia, including the Philippines, America is roused from isolationism into a war frenzy, further fueled from news of Japanese atrocities on Philippine civilians and American PoWs. FDR asks and obtains a DoW on Japan, but drags feet about the USSR. Evidence of Soviet-Japanese military cooperation grows, increasing the anti-Soviet stance of the US public. The Congress pressures FDR to give Land-Lease to Europe, he reluctantly accepts, but refuses to give naval protection to US merchant shipping. Soviet submarines sink several US ships, increasing the anti-Soviet stance of the public and Congress, voices are raised for a DoW on the Soviets. FDR drags his feet, his popularity sinks as allegations are made of his treasonous "softness" to Stalin while US sailors are butchered. European intelligence services, eager to remove the main obstacle to American co-belligerance, gather their evidence about Soviet espionage and Communist sympathizer infiltration of FDR Administration, half exaggerated, half depressingly true. They coverly release it to the Republican Party and right-wing lobbies and newspapers. A massive press campaign starts about the FDR Administration being a nest of Communist spies and traitors who want to sell Europe first, America second to the Bolshevik hordes. The allegations appear credible because of FDR reluctance to stand up to Stalin. The popularity of FDR plummets and the Republican Party wins a large majority in the mid-term Congressional elections of 1942. Together with conservative southern Ddemocratics, who also made gains, while severa lkey New Dealers lost their seats, they have an ample veto-proof supermajority. Conservative Democratics take control of the party. Land-Lease to Europe is massively boosted, investigative powers of the FBI are expanded and laws are passed that restrict the activities of "subversive" far-left groups. FBI and Congressional investigations soon unroot credible evidence that Soviet spies and Communist sympathizers infiltrated the Administration to some serious degree. FDR's popularity sinks to 20%, many of his top aides and Cabinet members are forced to resign in disgrace amid allegations of philo-Commie disloyalty or outright Soviet espionage. The American public is in an outright Red Scare. Allegations of pro-Soviet sympathies and bizarre religious beliefs involve Vice-President Wallace, the leaders of the Democratic party force him to resign rather than face impeachment (or alternatively, some right-wing "lone gunman" kills him, with the Secret Service and the FBI conspicously lax in protecting him and to unroot any evidence of a wider conspiracy). Widely unpopular FDR is forced to make an about-face on his policies by veiled threats of impeachement for culpably condoning Communist disloyalty in the goverment and nominate suitably hard-core anti-Communist conservative Democrats as Secretary of State (and next in line for Presidential succession, the 25th Amendment does not exist yet), Secretary of the Treasure, and other influential members of the cabinet. An obvious choice is Joseph Kennedy as Secretary of State. FDR is forced to step up naval protection of Land-Lease shipping in the Atlantic to an undeclared war with the Soviets, which further inflame the anti-Soviet feelings of the public. FDR's health declines from the stresses of the scandals and loss of popularity, either he suffers a fatal stroke or the real severity of his poor health is leaked to the public and he is forced to resign. Kennedy Sr. becomes Acting President and asks Congress a declaration of war against the USSR, which he easily obtains.

I believe that withe the right butterflies, this scenario can easily and quickly unfold and America be brought into the anti-Soviet war within early-late 1943 under a staunchly anti-Communist leadership. You just have to anticipate a political swing that happened half a decade later in the same circumstances (easily since ITTL the USSR is even more of an obvious menace to the Western world and an ally to hated Japan), unroot the evidence that FDR Administration was infiltrated with Soviet spies and philo-Commie sympathizers (or far-left radical willful dupes like Wallace), and let the Red Scare storm brew out. FDR shall have to make an 180 turn or be wiped out (or be brought down by his poor health), he was not an invincible political god.

I like the scenario here, minus the 'lone gunman' bit. I would only add to it that I would also like to see Joe Kennedy get caught in the crossfire and get thoroughly discredited as well, leaving the Kennedy legacy/mystique in tatters, if for any reason that it would make for interesting reading, and would be believable in this timeline. Any future Kennedys would then be limited to local politics at best.
 

Eurofed

Banned
I like the scenario here, minus the 'lone gunman' bit. I would only add to it that I would also like to see Joe Kennedy get caught in the crossfire and get thoroughly discredited as well, leaving the Kennedy legacy/mystique in tatters, if for any reason that it would make for interesting reading, and would be believable in this timeline. Any future Kennedys would then be limited to local politics at best.

Well, this is quite easy to do. Joe Kennedy had plenty of skeletons in its own closets as well, such as links with the mob, IIRC. You need to make them surface as a last-ditch flailing counterattack from sinking New Dealers. You may easily substitute another staunchily anti-communist, pro-European conservative Democrat to become Acting President after Roosevelt. I'm not sure about alternative names, but surely not Truman. For all his hindsight merits, he was a nobody in 1942-43. Not that it would matter that much, the American public would still realign into a Red Scare anti-Soviet war mode, and the Republican Party would almost surely ride the wave into seizing the Preisdency in 1944 with Dewey (moderate Republican, anti-Communist, and internationalist).
 
Good post .BTW what happened to the notorious Julius Streicher, Hess, and other Nazis?No Kristalnacht or for that matter would the murder of a German diplomat in Paris be butterflied awaY?Thanks for thread!;)
 
Wonderful thread and timeline it looks like an alt Wolfenstein 3D will be featuring BJ Blaskowicz storming the USSR I see.;)

By the by, Onkel Willie, what countries in this alternate world are monarchies? You mentioned Nasser being thrown out, does Fuad II get restored?
 

Eurofed

Banned
Good post .BTW what happened to the notorious Julius Streicher, Hess, and other Nazis?No Kristalnacht or for that matter would the murder of a German diplomat in Paris be butterflied awaY?Thanks for thread!;)

No author here, but here's my reasoned guess: the Kristallnacht shall surely never happen because TTL fall of the Nazi regime happens on September 29th and the former was scheduled for November 9. Hess was arrested and executed by firing squad for treason, like the other Nazi leaders (Hitler, Himmler, Heydrich, Bormann, Nebe), barring Goering who fled to Sweden. Says so in the first page. I assume that murder of a German diplomat shall be butterflied out with the fall of the Nazi regime. There would be widespread expectation of a peaceful change for the better in Germany among anti-Nazi activists after the coup, so why use violence ? Julius Streicher was a disgusting hatemonger but in terms of the Nazi pecking order he was small fry and he would probably slip back into well-deserved obscurity after being stripped of any influence by the new government.
 
Top