The Third Reich without Barbarossa?

The POD: In between the end of the Polish campaign and the spring of 1941, Hitler dies. Tragic car/plane/boat/zeppelin accident, heart attack, slips in the shower, whatever. After the initial shock wears off, there's a nasty, but short, struggle for power between the various factions (Party bureaucrats, Himmler and his mega-lunatics, the Wehrmacht) that ends up with a military junta in power. They collectively realize that invading the USSR might not be a good idea, and by the time they consolidate power it's too late in the year to even think about it anyway. Gradually, as 1941 wears on, and the war with Britain continues, the idea becomes ever more preposterous - as does declaring war on the United States when Japan attacks Pearl Harbor.

The war with Britain sputters on a few more years, but the Germans manage to avoid giving America a casus belli. Eventually, despite Churchill's resistance, public opinion in Britain turns against the war. In 1944, Churchill is defeated in a snap election. The new Prime Minister signs a peace treaty with the Reich that fall. The treaty is much more moderate than the Nazi ideologues hoped for - at least in the West. The pre-war borders are reinstated, despite the outrage of many German nationalists (especially concerning Alsace and Lorraine). In the East, Poland is sold out and the fourth partition of Poland is recognize by the Western governments. German troops withdraw from France, the Low Countries, Denmark and Norway even as Allied forces begin the bloody assault on the Japanese home islands.

Not long thereafter, to appease Himmler and his still-powerful allies, the junta annexes the General Government and the Protectorate of Bohemia-Moravia. Greater Germany takes on its final form:

194145fc.gif


And... then what? What do you, the viewers at home, think?
 
Red Alert with with FDR and a vengeful France on board,britain and Mussolini as well when they see that the Nazis are dead meat.Would make a good TL.
 
Wait, it doesn't even take Alsace Lorraine???

No, just no.

Too much? You're probably right. :eek: I see it as a "Okay, we'll give it back to France if you sell Poland and the Czechs down the river" compromise that pisses everyone off but just barely works.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
No, wouldn't work. If Germany beat France they'll get Alsace- Lorraine, period. And I can't really see Britain exiting the war just like that. And then to the Soviets, if that cowardly opportunist Stalin smells any weakness, he'll act. USSR was not ready for war when Barbarossa began IRL, but the point was to start the war before they were ready. So without Barbarossa, the Soviet military get time to prepare, and the war will start anyway with a much stronger Soviet.
 
Is France given over to de Gaule or Petain? I could see the Germans ceding Alsace-Lorraine if Petain's regime is recognized but not with de Gaule on their border. That could be seen a compromise of sorts.

And I'm assuming Fascist governments are implimented in Norway, Belgium and Holland. Germany still did hold the whip hand at this point.

Another huge factor is what borders are settled upon for the Balkans and Northeast Africa? Italy was heavily involved in all those regions and Mussolini is stubborn enough to insist upon getting his due.

For that matter I could see Japan giving in to US demands to withdraw from China if Germany achieves a peace settlement.
 

Susano

Banned
Way I see it, if the USSR is not attacked, Germany will take land from elsewhere - that being France and the Low Countries in this case. So might be even much more than A-L is taken...
 
Maby take luxenburgh, all of A-L, establesing a new border with belgium based on the meuse. Unnsure abouth holland thought. And what would happen with bohemia-moravia and the genneral goverment, they are not parts of germany but are controlled by it.
 
And how does Germany not get into a war with the USA? FDR was going to DOW one way or another, even if the junta does not DOW after Pearl Harbour.
And Britain giving up? Even without the US, I don't really see it. Maybe if it's Spitfire V vs. Bf 109F, but somehow I doubt it.
Also, what happens in the Meditterranian?
Besides that, Stalin is massing equipment on the Eastern border... with a year or two after '41, he will jump on the Allied side, and with en masse T-34s, that jump will be painful (for Germany). And if Germany is going to defeat the British, it's going to bleed away the defenses on the Eastern Front... Yeah.
 
In the case of the Axis, one of the stipulations meant that if one nation went to war with another nation not currently at war (excluding the Soviet Union), all the members of the Axis had to declare war.

This means, regardless of a junta, Germany and Italy declare war on USA. Period.

Also, Alsace Lorraine was seen as one of the major losses post WWI. The entire reason various parts of Poland and France were annexed and other parts weren't was the dream of Gross-Deutschland. A military junta, having fought for this very cause prior to their coming to power, would not have allowed this sort of injustice in their eyes to occur.

A compromise could possibly be a withdrawal from the majority of Poland, a withdrawal of Bohemia-Moravia (sans the German-speaking bit) and a withdrawal from the various zones of occupied France.

A war with the USSR is inevitable, and the junta would know this and go ahead with Barbarossa, possibly at a later date. It's a lot like the American Revolution and ACW: if they didn't happen then, they would have happened eventually. There are just some things that can't be avoided in history unless the POD is far enough away that anything close to where these events are taking place is completely butterflied.

But, to answer a question about the Balkans, a peace with Germany would more than likely mean Italy was involved as well. Hungary keeps Transylvania, we probably never have the Velvet Divorce as Czechia and Slovakia wouldn't have reunited anyway, and Mussolini would probably keep Albania and Ethiopia in exchange for helping transfer Egypt and Sudan back to British control (or a pro-British independent Egypt and Sudan).

Either way, any peace compromise at this point has the Axis holding the reigns. They get what they want or Britain post-Churchill gets a bloody long war.

I think, for this to work, you have to get the Japanese to not bomb Pearl Harbor, delaying US involvement at least two or three years, if the war isn't over by then anyway.

Maybe have the Japanese and Germans jointly invade the USSR. The Japanese would have used it as an incentive to swarm over the Bolsheviks (whom the Americans hated anyway at this point) trying to reach those oil fields, and would more than likely pulled back to Manchukuo at the very least in compliance with America's wishes. Japan gets an empire and oil, and America gets to keep their interests in China intact.

The compromise has to be looked at from both theaters, realized and potential ITTL for something like this to even remotely work.
 
THIRD REICH VICTORIOUS

Goring was Hitlers successor, and in 1941, he was no slacker. He opposed Barbarossa then, but did not oppose it for 1943. The Reich would have went after the Soviets in 1943, and probably done far better than they actually did, since Goring would not have meddled in the plans, and would have let the Generals act.
The real question is when would Himmler and the SS strike to sieze control? Goring stated in his Nuremburg discussions that he never liked Himmler, and would have taken over the SS if he ever had the opportunity. So if Goring becomes Fuhrer, does Himmler strike then? Or does Goring already have a plan to decapitate the SS?
I personally beleive Goring would have grabbed power, eliminated Himmler, and been Fuhrer. He would have also eliminated many other top Nazis, such as Boorman, Ribbentrop, and Lammers.
The Luftwaffe would then turn all its might against the UK. It is hard to say how long the UK could survive, because by this point Gibraltar and Malta would have fallen, and the Germans would likely be on the road to Iraq. It would require Churchhills government to fall in order for an armistice. In 1940, Goring thought he could have taken England with 4 airborne divisions had he had them. But in 1941, that would have been impossible.
Now if Himmler isnt eliminated, he might go on to be loyal to Goring, but he might also attempt to stage a coup, or even a Civil War.
 
sl

Giving up France is unrealistic( to close to the Ruhr region the heart of German industry).
The best bet for Germany would be to fight a limited war against GB (North Sea mainly), try to stay away from the North Atlantic and improve relationships with US, make sure that Italy doesn’t invade Greece and Egypt instead help Italy conquer Yugoslavia.
Start Barbarosa early in June and follow the original plan (no movement of tanks from group center to group south). All this and the additional troops (troops that were stationed in Greece, Africa Corps, troops stationed in Yugoslavia, in Yugoslavia Italy will bear the brunt of the occupation) with give the Germans a victory in USSR.
US will not declare war on Germany if they don’t see Germany as threat in the North Atlantic, even if Roosevelt wants to he has to go through congress.
GB by itself can’t invade West Europe and by the time that they will be ready and have enough troops to even start planning for it Germany will be in control of most of European Russia.
 
I don't buy this scenario. If anything, a military junta would have more interest in A/L, since they won't buy into Lebensraum, just old-fashioned Grossdeutschland. And of course Germany actually annexed it in the armistice with France in 1940. Luxembourg is no way going to stay indepedant.

Then of course there's the issue that Roosevelt will be doing his level best to get America into the war, and this will mean liberty ships. Lots of liberty ships, or their equivelant ITTL. More and more of Britain's supplies will come over in American shipping. What can Germany do? They could play nice... and leave Britain capable of holding out forever, basically. Or they could torpedo an ever greater quantity of American shipping.

Then there's Germany's treaty obligations to Japan, and most importantly, does anyone really believe that Stalin meant to keep his promise? I don't. He got stabbed first, but if Germany doesn't attack in '41, then Stalin will attack in '43 at the very latest. When he's ready, he'll just turn off the oil flow.
 
It's as if my sketchy, unlikely idea is fodder for educated disagreement! :D

Okay, let me go back to the drawing board a bit. Pretend A-L (and Eupen-Malmedy and Luxembourg) is inside the Reich on that map up there. I'm less interested in the particulars of how the Third Reich survives into the 1950s than what it looks like if it does. So, somehow (I think it can be done without ASBs, even if the POD should admittedly pushed back earlier than 1941), America and Germany don't go to war with each other, Germany doesn't invade the USSR and Britain eventually accepts the dominance of the Reich over continental Europe. It's now, say, 1955. What is the world like? My ideas...

The USSR and the Reich - obviously the elephant in the room. By this time, though, both sides are likely to have developed atomic bombs. With marginally less insane leaders in Berlin, this enforces a very unsteady peace. The Cold War might be an inspiration, but where will Communism and Nazism butt heads? What ideological appeal does National Socialism (instead of garden variety fascism) have outside of those countries with large European-descended populations? Not much, I think, although there are certainly enough crazy people anywhere to give it a go. More likely is Berlin playing realpolitick, exporting advisors and armaments around the Third World (decolonization seems very likely to me in TTL, if not as swift or as widespread, perhaps, as in OTL) instead of ideology. Wehrmacht volunteers help train the armies of various regimes while the Communists support radical movements and Berlin and Moscow tiptoe around the edge of all-out war.

But what about the US & the British (and the Commonwealth countries)? Good question. A stance much like OTL is likely, although the lack of any continental European powers makes their position a lot weaker. Maybe the NATO equivalent has a more Asian focus, with Japan, India, Australia and the Republic of China as lynchpins against Soviet expansion. The Mediterranean is divided and interesting - Spain and Portugal and Turkey probably fall into the German orbit fairly quickly, but what about North Africa? Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt - this could be the main battleground between Nazi and Western influence.

And inside the Reich? How does the junta keep the Nazi fanatics happy? Does it go along with gradually expelling or "Germanizing" the Slavs in Czech and Polish lands? Who ends up as the new Fuhrer?

What do you all think?
 
I think if the pacific war goes on OTL then so will the manhattan project and FDR even without a dow will egg churchill on until a bomb is ready.

Hell give the british one bomb who will drop on Berlin or somewhere leading to either a nazi unconditional surrender or at least a negotiated peace (germany returns to 1938 borders)
 
But what about the US & the British (and the Commonwealth countries)?
IOTL there wasn't a regime, no matter how repulsive and bloodthirsty, which wasn't supported by USA on sole merit of being Anti-Soviet (heck, I still remember Americans fighting tooth and nail to keep Khmer Rouge in UN as "lawful government of the country", and it is not easy to imagine worse abomination than KR). So, this Germany of yours would probably be Numero Uno ally of the USA. Three-side rivalries don't work, "enemy of my enemy is my friend".
 
Top