Count Valerian
Banned
Also, the Germans have better logistics, fully motorized apparently as opposed to dependent on horses like IOTL. The Nazi bureaucracy is also apparently less obstructive, if past updates were any indication.
Wagner’s Germany: An Axis Victory TL
- Thread starter CrimsonKing
- Start date
Also, the Germans have better logistics, fully motorized apparently as opposed to dependent on horses like IOTL. The Nazi bureaucracy is also apparently less obstructive, if past updates were any indication.
Count Valerian
Banned
No, they got 1914 borders and Finlandized the rest.
EDIT: the Nazis are...well, less Nazi-like. Jews (and implicitly Slavs and blacks) appear to get the Jim Crow treatment plus one, 'natural slaves' as opposed to subhumans useful only for extermination. Not really morally...commendable, but still a huge step up from OTL. At least there's room for improvement - this TL might lead to a scenario like in In the Presence of Mine Enemies.
On the other hand, they finlandized Poland FOR NOW.
Which by the way is YET ANOTHER thing that will make them look reasonable in the US.
Plus, the warhawks, in Britain, can't even argue "Poland is treated horribly, we can't abandon them".
They can always annex Poland after Barbarossa and the victory, though.
Which by the way is YET ANOTHER thing that will make them look reasonable in the US.
Plus, the warhawks, in Britain, can't even argue "Poland is treated horribly, we can't abandon them".
They can always annex Poland after Barbarossa and the victory, though.
Do not worry. You respond these questions when you can.
Indeed, a great update (although a bit shorter for my liking) with the Belgian surrender, while the Allies fall back into another German trap because the Volkswehr that have not worked hard to invade the Netherlands.
Keep going soon your great AH.
PS: Will we soon see a map of the European situation after the Battle of France?
I just found your great AH, CrimsonKing, and I love it.
Especially, the pre-war situation (the changes about Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland, as well as German non-participation in the Spanish Civil War), your idea of changing the German plans for the Battle of France (very very original), and, especially for German manipulation were the Allies who violate the Scandinavian neutrality (even the Danish would see the German occupation of their country as something painful but justifiable).
I look forward to the next update.
PS:
The only serious but I observed in your AH are the few details described to tell the Spanish situation in the Chapter 3 of your AH.
The Spanish monarchists who supported the preparations for the Spanish military coup, managed to obtain Italian military equipment through personal dealings with Mussolini. Therefore, although Nazi Germany not militarily supported Spanish Nationalist forces, they receive the strong support of Italian fascism and can finally get their victory in a SCW -after all, in OTL the SCW began with the Republican forces had all the gold of the Bank of Spain (considered the fourth largest gold reserve in the world at that time), all Spanish resources valid abroad, all the Spanish industrial power, Spanish financial resources, most of the Spanish Army, Navy and Air Force (including the generals), the richest agriculture, the longest stretch of coast, the main arms depots, the border with Europe, international recognition, the most populous cities, etcetera; the unique advantages of the Nationalists forces were the quality of their troops, especially the Spanish Army of Morocco, and the granitic cohesion of their ranks..., but finally would those two tricks that inclined the balance during SCW, because the government side, on the contrary, was stirred in internal quarrels, political turmoil and military confusion. Even when began get foreign aid, which was broadly similar for each side (we must not underestimate the enormous Soviet help to the Republicans forces, who allowed the Republican defense of Madrid during the autumn of 1936), but the Nationalists will make it a much more effective than their enemies use-.
And without forgetting the possibility that Nazi Germany could express their pro-Nationalist support through financial support and morally sustain the support of the multinational oil company Texaco to the Nationalist cause -perhaps the true great ally of them during the SCW, because without refueling, Nationalists had lasted very little in their attempt to overthrow the Republican government-, thanks to its CEO: Torkild Rieber.
However, if you still want to establish a Republican victory in a shorter SCW and a subsequent communist revolution in Spain, I believe more plausible that this revolution take the final throes of SCW and that is led by the revolutionary wing of the PSOE, because the Communists were still a minority in the Spanish political spectrum against the enormous revolutionary wing of the PSOE led by Francisco Largo Caballero, who at that Second Spanish Republic's times was dubbed as the Spanish Lenin. After all, the Spanish Communists began a process of integration with the Spanish Socialists in Catalonia just before the civil war, so it would be quite normal that the Communists decided to return to the PSOE -the Communist Party of Spain was the result of two Leninists divisions of the PSOE in the 1920s-, to confront the leftist Republicans and the many Anarchists.
In addition, the proclamation of a Spanish People's Republic in early 1937 would yield enormous geopolitical changes in Europe and worldwide. A Marxist Spain could launch a broad anti-colonial power throughout Africa (Spain had several colonies in Africa, but probably due to the Moroccan support to the Nationalists, Republicans/Socialists could have decided the annexation of Spanish Morocco and calling for the immediate delivery of the international city of Tanger; ie could control the Strait of Gibraltar completely); strengthen the international position of the USSR because there were two sovereign countries under "workers' dictatorship", producing a fear evident both in Western democracies as in Axis members (especially in Italy), etcetera. And not forgetting two crucial data:
- the Spanish position with Portugal: if the Spanish Republican President Azaña supports arms trafficking to the Portuguese democratic opposition against the Estado Novo, and taking into account the Iberist inclination of Spanish revolutionary movements (Marxists or Anarchist), Salazar is shaking with fear, forced to approach the Axis members to avoid a Spanish revolutionary invasion or an internal workers' revolution supported from Madrid which ultimately lead to an Iberian People's Republic.
- that soon, they would have to establish a NEP-like economic policy if they are to avoid an early forced eviction of power due to hunger imposed by a forced agricultural collectivization -similar to that suffered hunger during the SCW, especially in the Republican zone-.
What do you think about it?
Having had the time to read this over, I can't dispute the basic soundness of the analysis here. The only question I have is is there any way Mussolini could have been persuaded to not support the Nationalists by the Germans if they had been of a mind to do so?
Glad you think so.
I will endeavor to have the next installment out within a week.The manner in which the Germans deal with the BEF and the French First Army will no doubt be a key sequence of the campaign. The next update will focus heavily on it.
Indeed, in OTL the Heer at the time of the Battle of France had over 4,000,000, not counting 100,000 in the Waffen-SS (which of course doesn't exist here). See Wikipedia's article, which uses Frieser's The Blitzkrieg Legend as its source. The difference, as The Congressman says, is that virtually all of them can be used in the west in the absence of the need to garrison Norway and the Soviet border.
German logistics are undoubtedly much better than they were in OTL, but I wouldn't say they're fully motorized. Horse transport can still be found in the infantry, which has the benefit of allowing fuel economization, which is still desirable even with the Matzen oilfield.
The Nazis' attitude towards Eastern Europeans in TTL is essentially similar to that which Japan held towards the rest of Asia. Their well-being has no inherent value, and any steps necessary to secure control over the territories which are deemed vital will be taken, but there's no point to killing them or devastating their lands just for the sake of it. Regarding the Jews, however, the view of them is darker, and will result in their eventually undergoing a different fate (although not that of OTL).
This is a not insignificant point. In the US in particular, the German-Polish war was a key impetus to steps taken to aid the Allies such as cash and carry. The lack of it is one thing that as you say makes the Germans look somewhat more reasonable than in OTL, in America, Britain, and elsewhere.
Do not worry. You respond these questions when you can.
Indeed, a great update (although a bit shorter for my liking) with the Belgian surrender, while the Allies fall back into another German trap because the Volkswehr that have not worked hard to invade the Netherlands.
Keep going soon your great AH.
PS: Will we soon see a map of the European situation after the Battle of France?
Unfortunately, I have no map-making skills. I will try to describe the situation in such a way that someone can follow it without a map.
I really doubt it. Besides, what reason could give the Nazis to try to convince Mussolini to not support the Nationalists?
Even without the fact that the Spanish Monarchists (Renovación Española/Spanish Renewal, represented the Alfonsist monarchists and led by Jose Calvo Sotelo, the former Finance minister during the dictatorship of General Primo de Rivera and was killed by Socialists policeman at 2 am on July 13, 1936 -a fact that encouraged many hesitant officers, including General Franco, to join the coup planned by General Mola-; and Comunión Tradicionalista/Traditionalist Communion, represented the Carlists and led by Manuel Fal Conde) and Fascists (Falange Española de las JONS/Spanish Falange of the JONS, led by the oldest son of General Primo de Rivera, Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera -who was arrested for illegal possession of weapons since March 1936, when began a failed process of outlawing the Spanish Falange-) asked economic and military aid before carrying out the coup of July 18, 1936, the mere possibility that Nationalists losed against Republicans troops -that were in a Marxist revolutionary maelstrom- would trigger an immediate help of Mussolini to the Nationalist forces in the face of the possibility that Communism (or something similar: the revolutionary wing of the PSOE defends a proletarian dictatorship more liberal and inclusive than established by the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union) was established in a country so close to Italy as it was Spain. And neither Salazar would allow it, who allowed the creation of Portuguese volunteers corps who was called Viriatos -he tried creating a Portuguese Legion in support of the Nationalists, but this produced pro-Republican protests in Portugal-, which, according to historians, they were between 8000 and 12000 volunteers.
However, the most delicate moment for the Nationalist troops was when the Spanish army in Morocco was the crossing of the Strait of Gibraltar (by ships and specially by aircraft, being the first airlift of military history, thanks to the fighters and bombers sent by Hitler and Mussolini). However, the crossing was quite slow until the Republicans committed one of its biggest mistakes: transfer most of its military ships to the Cantabrian Sea (caused, among other reasons, by the British refusal to allow the Republican Navy leading to the total closure of Strait of Gibraltar), allowing a much faster transfer of troops by ships. There are other clamorous errors of the Republican government:
- They had licensed military troops (this measure was done so that the soldiers could disobey their putschist officers, but precisely only had effectively among soldiers who had already demonstrated their adherence to the Spanish Republic after the Nationalist coup occurred).
- They were forced to accept arming Marxists and Anarchists militiamen, but without control and discipline of the military loyal to the Republic (this destroyed the coherence of the military policy that Republicans should do to quell the Nationalists; especially because the militiamen considered any Republican military as a possible Nationalist and shot them before any doubt).
- The brief government of then president of the Spanish Parliament, centrist Republican Diego Martinez Barrio, is more successful in convincing several putschist officers that the coup has failed (he got several generals and colonels desist from supporting the coup, with his success more sounded in Malaga; for example, with General Miguel Cabanellas, a Mason Republican who commanded the 5th Division located at Zaragoza), thus disrupting the Nationalist coup in the peninsula and achieve the surrender of the Nationalists in the Balearic Islands, the Canary Islands and Spanish Morocco through a tense negotiation (I don't see possible then a Spanish division style-Taiwan in the Balearic Islands, the Canary Islands and Spanish Morocco).
- However, that negotiation would probably cause a furious reaction among Socialists, Communists and Anarchists, who taking advantage of the instability of the Republican government and ultimately launch their workers' revolution leading to the proclamation of a Spanish People's Republic during the month of September 1936 -but surely the Marxist purge of Rightists, Republicans and Anarchists would delay a united Marxist government until November or December 1936-.
- However, I don't see how it can be produced without Mussolini and Salazar try to support any area (no matter how small) that do not yet fall immediately into the hands of the revolutionaries; and not forgetting the possible British and German reactions, clearly opposed to a Marxist regime in any country of Western Europe. Do not forget that the Spanish Navy was the fourth largest in Europe (and the sixth largest in the world) at that time.
- And although it is firmly established a Marxist government in Spain, how they would avoid the continued hunger caused by agricultural collectivization and its publicisation, when Spain is in Western Europe, and can not prevent the denial of this unfortunate situation as if the Soviets could make by the vast expanse of their country? This would cause a great excuse for a international propaganda campaign to free Spain of Marxist yoke, encouraged by many Spanish exiles and Portuguese and Italian governments.
Last edited:
I think, upon reflection, it will be simpler to go with a Nationalist victory, given the factors which you have laid out. How long would it have taken with Italian but not German support?
Cool storyline. I caught on with it this week.
You originally went with Marxist victory in Spain, probably to make west more worried about reds than nazis, I am correct?
If so, I think that simply making civil war last longer, up until early 1940s, with communists and anarcho-syndicalists having more time to commit atrocities would have similar effect in worrying the western democracies about reds. While simultaneously distracting them from Wagner's shenanigans.
You originally went with Marxist victory in Spain, probably to make west more worried about reds than nazis, I am correct?
If so, I think that simply making civil war last longer, up until early 1940s, with communists and anarcho-syndicalists having more time to commit atrocities would have similar effect in worrying the western democracies about reds. While simultaneously distracting them from Wagner's shenanigans.
Yes. Wagner deliberately refuses to intervene to allow the West to be fearful of a Marxist takeover
A Nationalist Spain has the further advantage (for Germany) or forcing the French to guard their south border (at least more than with a Communist / socialist / republican Spain).
Plus, once France is beaten, a Nationalist Spain MAY accept to join Germany and Italy in war, to take back Gibraltar. In return, the Spaniards may want French Morocco or at least Tangiers, an economic aid package (to rebuild after the civil war) and of course Gibraltar herself.
OTL, the Spanish took Tangiers in 1940, bloodlessly, on their own initiative (after France was beaten). Neither the British nor the Germans nor the French themselves (who had more important problems on their plate) objected.
That didn't stop Vichy to constantly try to further Collaboration with the Germans (it was mostly them who were reluctant, and only used Vichy when they needed it.
So, if ATL the Spanish enter the war in exchange for Tangiers (or French Morocco), that will displease Vichy French (and make this government look weaker). But if anything, that will also push Vichy to MORE collaboration. In the hopes of getting British territories to compensate for their losses (plus Belgian Congo). In the hope of getting military victories (hence, pride) on the British (the former ally who sank the Mers-el-Kébir fleet, and alongside the Free French, tried to invade West and Equatorial Africa, and more importantly, repeatedly bombed factories in France proper)
And in the hopes of getting real German concessions (return of prisoners, reduction of occupation zone, reduction of reparations). Better to look like "the government which lost Morocco BUT got back the prisoners, the occupation zone, gained new colonies elsewhere" than just "the governement that lost Morocco". People can forgive the loss of a colony (especially a colony not vital to the country) if things get better at home.
If Wagner is crafty, he can get BOTH Franco and Petain to enter the war together, at the same time. With a treaty that gives France the Belgian Congo (and future colonial conquests) and Spain Morocco.
Then, you can have the Italian, French and Spanish navies, the German, French and Spanish armies, and the Luftwaffe and French air force, attacking Gibraltar together. While French (and then Spanish) troops join the Italians and Germans in Egypt. And French troops open new fronts in Gambia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Togo, Cameroun, Sudan.
Next step : take Cyprus and Malta. There, too, Spanish and French navies would be a useful addition.
Moreover, with Spain on board, you can push Portugal to allow the Axis basing rights in the Azores, Cape Verde... Or AT LEAST, be sure that Portugal will NEVER open these bases to British and Americans (like OTL).
-----------------
Whether the Nationalists finally won or not, the communist atrocities in Spain (and obvious Soviet support to Spain) will help Wagner cause in the US and British opinion.
-----------------
If Spain is socialist/communist, it can be interesting too. For starters, not EVERYTHING would go the German way. Well, almost everything (for 1936-40 at least), but Spain. And I'm sure there can be interesting developments.
=> It would be a near-communist government NOT put in place by the Red Army (even if the Soviets helped), but purely home-grown. And relatively independent from the Soviets because of the distance.
=> Left-wing Spain would likely be more welcoming to refugees from France.
=> ATL, Spanish refugees in France might be Nationalists (that crossed the border illegally), who would happily help the Nazis. Which would be a reversal.
And also some anarchists and trotskyists, who were crushed in Spain by the PSOE / Communist alliance (and would be tracked by Vichy and Nazis too).
=> Wagner will not tolerate (long-term speaking) a Communist country in West Europe, and left-wing Spain will KNOW it. So they will prepare for the inevitable invasion. Which might happen after Barbarossa and British defeat.
=> Left-wing Spain will not dare to enter the conflict except if the Axis looks like it's losing.
=> I'm not sure if Allied Spain would be more a help, a liability or both or neither to the British (don't know enough about Spain military and economy at the time).
=> If Spain goes Allied, there will be a vicious war in the Pyrenees, and it's likely that NEITHER side manages to cross the mountain range for good.
=> ATL Spain might send a legion of volunteers on the Eastern front, on Soviet side. Maybe send there the far-left hotheads (like anarchists) to get them killed while being useful.
------------------
Oh and, when Barbarossa starts, since Germany already has Norway and Denmark as allies, and will likely have Finland too, maybe try to have Sweden as one further ally ? Swedish help did a lot for Finland during the Winter War, and it was volunteers (even if coming from the regular army), and Danes and Norwegians helped too. If Sweden actually enters the Continuation War, it would put the Soviets under even more pressure.
Not to mention that moving German troops from Norway to Finland (and then the Karelia/Leningrad front) is MUCH easier and faster through Sweden.
------------------
Wagner should secretly contact Rashid Ali. And maybe Palestinian leaders (there was a rebellion that ended just in 1939, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936–39_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine ), and tell them to TIME their rebellion.
So that they can start rebelling when the Germans (and Italians and French) are actually in position to help.
Of course, Mussolini was in contact with hardline Zionists (Lehi / Stern group, and Irgoun) since 1937. Those Zionists had a fascist-like ideology and would have possibly listened to a proposal like "put the European Jews in Palestine and create the nation of Israel, ruled by Irgoun / Lehi of course".
If the Axis time things well, they can have a large-scale Arab revolt in Iraq and Palestine (plus a small-scale Irgoun / Lehi rebellion), just when they managed to take Egypt, and just when German (and Italian and French) forces arrived in Syria and Lebanon.
Then, let Egypt, Iraq and Palestine have their independence. The only conditions will be :
=> Opening the Suez Canal to Axis navies
=> Remaining in the war (and maybe provide volunteers brigades, those countries can't provide full armies anyway)
=> Oepning ports, land and airbases to Axis for the duration of the war
=> Providing oil to Axis at a low price for the duration of the war.
Also, let the Arabs deal themselves with the Zionists and do the dirty work there. (Of course, once the war is finished, the Axis can always backstab the Arabs and turn them into full protectorates. After all, Mussolini DID want his New Roman Empire. Basically, have Wagner, Petain and Mussolini pull a new Picot-Sykes on the Arabs).
-------------------
Once the Axis has taken Egypt, Transjordania and Iraq, they don't even need to physically conquer the British protectorates on Arabian peninsula (except Aden, to close the Red Sea). U-boats, and Luftwaffe bombings (on Qatar, Trucial States... oil extraction plants and oil rings) would stop the Arabian oil to reach the British. Plus, local population might rebel against the British on its own (and can be supported).
Saudi Arabia was neutral, and will likely remain so (and not provide any oil to British).
-------------------
Through Iraq, you also reach Persia, of course. Like OTL, the British will fear that Persia joins the Axis, or that the Abadan refineries (Abadan is VERY close from Iraq) stop producing oil for them. Abadan oil was vital to them.
Then you can have three scenarios :
1 ) British do nothing. Germans pressure Persia to stop producing oil for Britain. Persia doesn't comply, and Abadan refinery continue to work for the British. Then, Germans could invade Persia but it's not in their interest. Too much cost, too long logistical lines.
Then, the U-boats can target the tankers off the Abadan coast, while the Luftwaffe can target the refineries themselves. It's unlikely Persia will declare war over that, with the risk of a full invasion. So, basically, a war limited to Abadan.
British will lack oil.
2 ) British do nothing. Persia stops producing oil for them (on German pressure). Then, either the British still do nothing, or they invade Persia (which is forced into a German alliance). Which leads to next scenario.
3 ) After the Fall of Iraq, the British preemptively invade Persia and try to remove Reza Shah. Then, Persia enters the German alliance. OTL, Persia didn't resist the invasion (which was both Soviet and British). Here, if the British are alone, the Persians resist, and the Germans are next door, the British might be booted out from Central Iran, and then, Khuzestan.
Meaning that the British have lost all Persia and Near East oil, the Germans have lots of ports to carry submarine war in the Indian Ocean, and the Luftwaffe can start bombing strategical targets in India. Not to mention the British can't use Suez and have to take the long way around.
--------------------
In this scenario, Wagner could mass armies in Persia, tunder the guise of booting the British from Khuzestan and invading India. While, at the same time, having the Luftwaffe bombing strategical targets in India, and dropping leaflets. And weapons to rebels (like Subas Chandra Bose).
ATL, Britain will look weak at this point. Having lost the BEF in France, then lost Egypt, Near East, Persia. Maybe South-East Asia, if Japan takes advantage. The British will also be forced to deploy even more Indian soldiers everywhere, to raise even more taxes in India...
So, a rebellion could be started. With German agents and Luftwaffe bringing weapons on one hand. And with agent provocateurs riling up the Indian population (for example, shooting a policeman/soldier during a peaceful demonstration, turning it into a bloodbath). Even if there is only a limited and botched rebellion, it helps the German.
Even if there is the FEAR of Indian rebellion (which finally never happens, despite German attempts), it will force the British to leave more garrison in the subcontinent, to less trust Indian soldiers and civilians, and so on.
Plus, the British might come to the table just to not risk India rebelling and joining the Axis (better to have an autonomous / independent India still allied with Britain). Not to mention their oil shortages and multiple defeats.
--------------------
Wagner will proclaim that his troops in Persia were here to invade India. But he can use them to start an invasion in Central Asia instead. At the same time as Barbarossa in Europe. Plus, the Luftwaffe will be able to take the war in Central Asia.
If the Germans are good enough, they can say that Stalin started to invade Persia (by faking battles at the border). After all, Russia / SU had always looked south (for Persian oil and ports), and everyone hates the Commies. So, the US opinion might believe Wagner, or at least be in doubt and not clearly see Germany as an aggressor.
And of course, Central Asian people might rebel (like the Ukrainians, Balts... did). Even if they don't at first, Stalin will FEAR their rebellion (he was paranoid). He might start mass deportations, or mass shooting of suspects, or silly things like that, actually driving people to rebel (even if they wouldn't have otherwise).
At the same time, since Axis will be in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq (and Persia), push Turkey to join the Axis. Use the Luftwaffe to bomb Baku. Send the French, Italian and Spanish navies in the Black Sea.
Start landings (through airlifts or sea, through Black Sea or Caspian Sea or both) in Caucasus. And/or Crimea. Encourage rebellion in Caucasus.
Promise Aegean islands, Cyprus, Mosul and bits of Soviet territory to Turkey. About Mosul, don't tell Iraq. The Axis will backstab Iraq later anyway, so it doesn't change anything actually.
About Aegean Islands, Italy can give the Dodecanese. And Greece can be carved now. With Turkey and Bulgaria taking their share, and Italy forcing Greece into a protectorate. It's likely Metaxas won't say "No" if the Germans support the Italians right from the start, and the British are out of the Med. So, Italy gets Greece without fighting.
If Metaxas still says "No", Greece carving can always wait for the end of the war.
In such a scenario, Stalin would be in deep trouble :
=> Attack from west AND south. And if Barbarossa only happens a few months after the Germans arrive in Persia, the Soviets won't have time to build up defences there.
=> Possibly, mass rebellions in Central Asia and Caucasus (on top of Ukraine, Byelorussia and Baltics)
=> Lutwaffe attacks on Baku and any key infrastructure in Caucasus or Central Asia
=> No lend-lease (British or US) through Persia. Nor through Murmansk (thanks Finland and Norway). Maybe not through Vladivostok if Japan joins later.
=> Turkish and Persian troops (even if it's not much) joining the fight.
=> Wagner not treating Soviet civilians as subhumans (maybe planning to backstab them, but later) and actually liberating them (and getting them to work willingly for the German war effort). Maybe THE most important point.
-----------------
To sum it up :
1 ) If Spain is nationalist, rope her in. Take Gibraltar. If not, use Spain as a commie scarecrow.
2 ) Rope in Vichy France, too, if possible.
3 ) Have Italians, Spanish and French work together to take Egypt. Send Afrikakorps if you have to (but maybe the three countries together will pull it).
4 ) Better coordination. So, when Vichy enters the war, the Axis troops (and Luftwaffe) are ready to be deployed in Syria and Lebanon. And have the Arab (and maybe Zionist hardliners) rebel at THIS time.
5 ) Give the Arabs actual independence (with Axis bases and access to oil for the duration of the war), and only backstab them (by forcing unequal treaties) later.
6 ) When Iraq falls, depending on Persian and British reaction, either use U-boats and Luftwaffe to interrupt the Abadan production, or help Persia to repel British invasion.
7 ) If a Persian-British war starts, deploy troops in Persia, and boot out the British.
8 ) Pretend to prepare an invasion of India through Persia, while cultivating rebellion (or fear of rebellion) in India. The British might come to the table (or not).
9 ) Attack the USSR in Central Asia and Caucasus, through Persia and Turkey. Whether the British come to the table or not. Having your troops in Persia (with a legitimate reason : invade India) is a GOLDEN opportunity for such a surprise attack. So, even if the British are still in the war, it's worth fighting both at once. The British won't be able to do much to threaten or harm Germany (or Italy or France or any important ally) at this time, and won't be able to help Stalin either. So it will NOT be a two-front war, merely a two-enemy war.
10 ) Attack the USSR through Finland (if possible, with the Swedish route). If you can, rope in Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
11 ) Cultivate non-Russian rebellions (and Russian rebellions too, for that matter) against Stalin everywhere.
12 ) When Barbarossa starts, use Japan. Either to attack the USSR, to merely mass troops in Manchuria and Inner Mongolia (forcing the Soviets to mass troops too), or to attack Britain (if the British STILL haven't accepted to negociate a peace) south.
13 ) If the Japanese take South-East British Asia, and arrive at the Indian border, there might be a Bengal Famine like OTL (or not). Either way, British will look very weak (and BE weak) in Asia, so, push harder for an Indian rebellion (with support to nationalist rebels, agent provocateurs...). The British will be busy containing Japan (to protect Australia) and holding India, and holding the African fronts (with French and Italians), so they won't bother too much the Axis. And can't touch the Axis in Europe, of course.
14 ) Sooner or later, the Soviet Union will crumble, through Stalin heightening paranoia and violent policies, through loss of territories and resources, through rebellions, mass desertions...
14-bis ) Sooner or later, the British will come to the table. At most, after the Soviet defeat. Until then, they merely have to be contained.
15 ) Once the British and Soviets are down, Japan can focus on China, and win this war.
16 ) While the European Axis members can carve up Yugoslavia and Greece (if it hadn't been done before), and force protectorate onto Egypt, Iraq, Palestine / Transjordania. And Germans can FINALLY start their genocide in the East (for Lebensraum).
17 ) Lots of interestings possibilities, for a multipolar world and alliance systems.
Plus, once France is beaten, a Nationalist Spain MAY accept to join Germany and Italy in war, to take back Gibraltar. In return, the Spaniards may want French Morocco or at least Tangiers, an economic aid package (to rebuild after the civil war) and of course Gibraltar herself.
OTL, the Spanish took Tangiers in 1940, bloodlessly, on their own initiative (after France was beaten). Neither the British nor the Germans nor the French themselves (who had more important problems on their plate) objected.
That didn't stop Vichy to constantly try to further Collaboration with the Germans (it was mostly them who were reluctant, and only used Vichy when they needed it.
So, if ATL the Spanish enter the war in exchange for Tangiers (or French Morocco), that will displease Vichy French (and make this government look weaker). But if anything, that will also push Vichy to MORE collaboration. In the hopes of getting British territories to compensate for their losses (plus Belgian Congo). In the hope of getting military victories (hence, pride) on the British (the former ally who sank the Mers-el-Kébir fleet, and alongside the Free French, tried to invade West and Equatorial Africa, and more importantly, repeatedly bombed factories in France proper)
And in the hopes of getting real German concessions (return of prisoners, reduction of occupation zone, reduction of reparations). Better to look like "the government which lost Morocco BUT got back the prisoners, the occupation zone, gained new colonies elsewhere" than just "the governement that lost Morocco". People can forgive the loss of a colony (especially a colony not vital to the country) if things get better at home.
If Wagner is crafty, he can get BOTH Franco and Petain to enter the war together, at the same time. With a treaty that gives France the Belgian Congo (and future colonial conquests) and Spain Morocco.
Then, you can have the Italian, French and Spanish navies, the German, French and Spanish armies, and the Luftwaffe and French air force, attacking Gibraltar together. While French (and then Spanish) troops join the Italians and Germans in Egypt. And French troops open new fronts in Gambia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Togo, Cameroun, Sudan.
Next step : take Cyprus and Malta. There, too, Spanish and French navies would be a useful addition.
Moreover, with Spain on board, you can push Portugal to allow the Axis basing rights in the Azores, Cape Verde... Or AT LEAST, be sure that Portugal will NEVER open these bases to British and Americans (like OTL).
-----------------
Whether the Nationalists finally won or not, the communist atrocities in Spain (and obvious Soviet support to Spain) will help Wagner cause in the US and British opinion.
-----------------
If Spain is socialist/communist, it can be interesting too. For starters, not EVERYTHING would go the German way. Well, almost everything (for 1936-40 at least), but Spain. And I'm sure there can be interesting developments.
=> It would be a near-communist government NOT put in place by the Red Army (even if the Soviets helped), but purely home-grown. And relatively independent from the Soviets because of the distance.
=> Left-wing Spain would likely be more welcoming to refugees from France.
=> ATL, Spanish refugees in France might be Nationalists (that crossed the border illegally), who would happily help the Nazis. Which would be a reversal.
And also some anarchists and trotskyists, who were crushed in Spain by the PSOE / Communist alliance (and would be tracked by Vichy and Nazis too).
=> Wagner will not tolerate (long-term speaking) a Communist country in West Europe, and left-wing Spain will KNOW it. So they will prepare for the inevitable invasion. Which might happen after Barbarossa and British defeat.
=> Left-wing Spain will not dare to enter the conflict except if the Axis looks like it's losing.
=> I'm not sure if Allied Spain would be more a help, a liability or both or neither to the British (don't know enough about Spain military and economy at the time).
=> If Spain goes Allied, there will be a vicious war in the Pyrenees, and it's likely that NEITHER side manages to cross the mountain range for good.
=> ATL Spain might send a legion of volunteers on the Eastern front, on Soviet side. Maybe send there the far-left hotheads (like anarchists) to get them killed while being useful.
------------------
Oh and, when Barbarossa starts, since Germany already has Norway and Denmark as allies, and will likely have Finland too, maybe try to have Sweden as one further ally ? Swedish help did a lot for Finland during the Winter War, and it was volunteers (even if coming from the regular army), and Danes and Norwegians helped too. If Sweden actually enters the Continuation War, it would put the Soviets under even more pressure.
Not to mention that moving German troops from Norway to Finland (and then the Karelia/Leningrad front) is MUCH easier and faster through Sweden.
------------------
Wagner should secretly contact Rashid Ali. And maybe Palestinian leaders (there was a rebellion that ended just in 1939, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936–39_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine ), and tell them to TIME their rebellion.
So that they can start rebelling when the Germans (and Italians and French) are actually in position to help.
Of course, Mussolini was in contact with hardline Zionists (Lehi / Stern group, and Irgoun) since 1937. Those Zionists had a fascist-like ideology and would have possibly listened to a proposal like "put the European Jews in Palestine and create the nation of Israel, ruled by Irgoun / Lehi of course".
If the Axis time things well, they can have a large-scale Arab revolt in Iraq and Palestine (plus a small-scale Irgoun / Lehi rebellion), just when they managed to take Egypt, and just when German (and Italian and French) forces arrived in Syria and Lebanon.
Then, let Egypt, Iraq and Palestine have their independence. The only conditions will be :
=> Opening the Suez Canal to Axis navies
=> Remaining in the war (and maybe provide volunteers brigades, those countries can't provide full armies anyway)
=> Oepning ports, land and airbases to Axis for the duration of the war
=> Providing oil to Axis at a low price for the duration of the war.
Also, let the Arabs deal themselves with the Zionists and do the dirty work there. (Of course, once the war is finished, the Axis can always backstab the Arabs and turn them into full protectorates. After all, Mussolini DID want his New Roman Empire. Basically, have Wagner, Petain and Mussolini pull a new Picot-Sykes on the Arabs).
-------------------
Once the Axis has taken Egypt, Transjordania and Iraq, they don't even need to physically conquer the British protectorates on Arabian peninsula (except Aden, to close the Red Sea). U-boats, and Luftwaffe bombings (on Qatar, Trucial States... oil extraction plants and oil rings) would stop the Arabian oil to reach the British. Plus, local population might rebel against the British on its own (and can be supported).
Saudi Arabia was neutral, and will likely remain so (and not provide any oil to British).
-------------------
Through Iraq, you also reach Persia, of course. Like OTL, the British will fear that Persia joins the Axis, or that the Abadan refineries (Abadan is VERY close from Iraq) stop producing oil for them. Abadan oil was vital to them.
Then you can have three scenarios :
1 ) British do nothing. Germans pressure Persia to stop producing oil for Britain. Persia doesn't comply, and Abadan refinery continue to work for the British. Then, Germans could invade Persia but it's not in their interest. Too much cost, too long logistical lines.
Then, the U-boats can target the tankers off the Abadan coast, while the Luftwaffe can target the refineries themselves. It's unlikely Persia will declare war over that, with the risk of a full invasion. So, basically, a war limited to Abadan.
British will lack oil.
2 ) British do nothing. Persia stops producing oil for them (on German pressure). Then, either the British still do nothing, or they invade Persia (which is forced into a German alliance). Which leads to next scenario.
3 ) After the Fall of Iraq, the British preemptively invade Persia and try to remove Reza Shah. Then, Persia enters the German alliance. OTL, Persia didn't resist the invasion (which was both Soviet and British). Here, if the British are alone, the Persians resist, and the Germans are next door, the British might be booted out from Central Iran, and then, Khuzestan.
Meaning that the British have lost all Persia and Near East oil, the Germans have lots of ports to carry submarine war in the Indian Ocean, and the Luftwaffe can start bombing strategical targets in India. Not to mention the British can't use Suez and have to take the long way around.
--------------------
In this scenario, Wagner could mass armies in Persia, tunder the guise of booting the British from Khuzestan and invading India. While, at the same time, having the Luftwaffe bombing strategical targets in India, and dropping leaflets. And weapons to rebels (like Subas Chandra Bose).
ATL, Britain will look weak at this point. Having lost the BEF in France, then lost Egypt, Near East, Persia. Maybe South-East Asia, if Japan takes advantage. The British will also be forced to deploy even more Indian soldiers everywhere, to raise even more taxes in India...
So, a rebellion could be started. With German agents and Luftwaffe bringing weapons on one hand. And with agent provocateurs riling up the Indian population (for example, shooting a policeman/soldier during a peaceful demonstration, turning it into a bloodbath). Even if there is only a limited and botched rebellion, it helps the German.
Even if there is the FEAR of Indian rebellion (which finally never happens, despite German attempts), it will force the British to leave more garrison in the subcontinent, to less trust Indian soldiers and civilians, and so on.
Plus, the British might come to the table just to not risk India rebelling and joining the Axis (better to have an autonomous / independent India still allied with Britain). Not to mention their oil shortages and multiple defeats.
--------------------
Wagner will proclaim that his troops in Persia were here to invade India. But he can use them to start an invasion in Central Asia instead. At the same time as Barbarossa in Europe. Plus, the Luftwaffe will be able to take the war in Central Asia.
If the Germans are good enough, they can say that Stalin started to invade Persia (by faking battles at the border). After all, Russia / SU had always looked south (for Persian oil and ports), and everyone hates the Commies. So, the US opinion might believe Wagner, or at least be in doubt and not clearly see Germany as an aggressor.
And of course, Central Asian people might rebel (like the Ukrainians, Balts... did). Even if they don't at first, Stalin will FEAR their rebellion (he was paranoid). He might start mass deportations, or mass shooting of suspects, or silly things like that, actually driving people to rebel (even if they wouldn't have otherwise).
At the same time, since Axis will be in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq (and Persia), push Turkey to join the Axis. Use the Luftwaffe to bomb Baku. Send the French, Italian and Spanish navies in the Black Sea.
Start landings (through airlifts or sea, through Black Sea or Caspian Sea or both) in Caucasus. And/or Crimea. Encourage rebellion in Caucasus.
Promise Aegean islands, Cyprus, Mosul and bits of Soviet territory to Turkey. About Mosul, don't tell Iraq. The Axis will backstab Iraq later anyway, so it doesn't change anything actually.
About Aegean Islands, Italy can give the Dodecanese. And Greece can be carved now. With Turkey and Bulgaria taking their share, and Italy forcing Greece into a protectorate. It's likely Metaxas won't say "No" if the Germans support the Italians right from the start, and the British are out of the Med. So, Italy gets Greece without fighting.
If Metaxas still says "No", Greece carving can always wait for the end of the war.
In such a scenario, Stalin would be in deep trouble :
=> Attack from west AND south. And if Barbarossa only happens a few months after the Germans arrive in Persia, the Soviets won't have time to build up defences there.
=> Possibly, mass rebellions in Central Asia and Caucasus (on top of Ukraine, Byelorussia and Baltics)
=> Lutwaffe attacks on Baku and any key infrastructure in Caucasus or Central Asia
=> No lend-lease (British or US) through Persia. Nor through Murmansk (thanks Finland and Norway). Maybe not through Vladivostok if Japan joins later.
=> Turkish and Persian troops (even if it's not much) joining the fight.
=> Wagner not treating Soviet civilians as subhumans (maybe planning to backstab them, but later) and actually liberating them (and getting them to work willingly for the German war effort). Maybe THE most important point.
-----------------
To sum it up :
1 ) If Spain is nationalist, rope her in. Take Gibraltar. If not, use Spain as a commie scarecrow.
2 ) Rope in Vichy France, too, if possible.
3 ) Have Italians, Spanish and French work together to take Egypt. Send Afrikakorps if you have to (but maybe the three countries together will pull it).
4 ) Better coordination. So, when Vichy enters the war, the Axis troops (and Luftwaffe) are ready to be deployed in Syria and Lebanon. And have the Arab (and maybe Zionist hardliners) rebel at THIS time.
5 ) Give the Arabs actual independence (with Axis bases and access to oil for the duration of the war), and only backstab them (by forcing unequal treaties) later.
6 ) When Iraq falls, depending on Persian and British reaction, either use U-boats and Luftwaffe to interrupt the Abadan production, or help Persia to repel British invasion.
7 ) If a Persian-British war starts, deploy troops in Persia, and boot out the British.
8 ) Pretend to prepare an invasion of India through Persia, while cultivating rebellion (or fear of rebellion) in India. The British might come to the table (or not).
9 ) Attack the USSR in Central Asia and Caucasus, through Persia and Turkey. Whether the British come to the table or not. Having your troops in Persia (with a legitimate reason : invade India) is a GOLDEN opportunity for such a surprise attack. So, even if the British are still in the war, it's worth fighting both at once. The British won't be able to do much to threaten or harm Germany (or Italy or France or any important ally) at this time, and won't be able to help Stalin either. So it will NOT be a two-front war, merely a two-enemy war.
10 ) Attack the USSR through Finland (if possible, with the Swedish route). If you can, rope in Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
11 ) Cultivate non-Russian rebellions (and Russian rebellions too, for that matter) against Stalin everywhere.
12 ) When Barbarossa starts, use Japan. Either to attack the USSR, to merely mass troops in Manchuria and Inner Mongolia (forcing the Soviets to mass troops too), or to attack Britain (if the British STILL haven't accepted to negociate a peace) south.
13 ) If the Japanese take South-East British Asia, and arrive at the Indian border, there might be a Bengal Famine like OTL (or not). Either way, British will look very weak (and BE weak) in Asia, so, push harder for an Indian rebellion (with support to nationalist rebels, agent provocateurs...). The British will be busy containing Japan (to protect Australia) and holding India, and holding the African fronts (with French and Italians), so they won't bother too much the Axis. And can't touch the Axis in Europe, of course.
14 ) Sooner or later, the Soviet Union will crumble, through Stalin heightening paranoia and violent policies, through loss of territories and resources, through rebellions, mass desertions...
14-bis ) Sooner or later, the British will come to the table. At most, after the Soviet defeat. Until then, they merely have to be contained.
15 ) Once the British and Soviets are down, Japan can focus on China, and win this war.
16 ) While the European Axis members can carve up Yugoslavia and Greece (if it hadn't been done before), and force protectorate onto Egypt, Iraq, Palestine / Transjordania. And Germans can FINALLY start their genocide in the East (for Lebensraum).
17 ) Lots of interestings possibilities, for a multipolar world and alliance systems.
I honestly do not think there was much delay with respect the OTL Spanish civil war with German support to the Nationalists. German aid was only 16,000 troops (and most of them were technical staff and instructors, as the Condor Legion was composed in about 6,000 troops), while the Italian Corpo Truppe Volontarie exceed 50,000 soldiers. Besides, the German aid did not materialize until the night of 25 to 26 July, when Hitler decided to support the Nationalists. Mussolini had already supported the preparations and decided his help when saw the Spanish army in Morocco needed the Italian aircraft to cross the Strait of Gibraltar. And if Wagner did not want to get directly to Germany in this conflict, his help would be based on financial, military aid (deliver weapons, planes and tanks, as well as sending instructors to train the nationalists in the new German military strategy), but he doesn't send German troops to enter into combat against the Republicans.
In fact, the crux of this matter are two other facts:
- If the coup is not leaked to the Republican authorities (as happened on July 17 in Melilla; for that reason the coup was ahead there, the coup was to begin at 05:00 July 18) is possible increased the effectiveness of putschist generals in several areas that ultimately fell into Republican zone (eg, Santander, Gijon, Malaga and Barcelona -and with the latter city under Nationalist control, Valencia and Cartagena would probably have joined Nationalists soon-), to convince/coerce the senior officers of the security forces (Guardia Civil/Civil Guard and Guardia de Asalto/Assault Guard) -in reality it was this aspect that determined the success or failure of the military coup in different territories-.
- The Soviets did not help the Spanish Republic -Stalin not decided to help Republicans until 14 September 1936-, or that the Soviet aid arrives too late to avoid the Nationalist conquest of Madrid, which would probably cause the collapse of the Republican military.
And a Nationalist Spain [probably Franco would remain the putschist General appointed as Head of State Spanish because of his military prestige among their peers and his position at least politically concrete, but he might have to deal with a stronger Falangist sector due to the survival of General Mola -who was the one who prepared the coup, his real objective aims to establish a Republican military junta (the new dictatorial regime maintained the Republican tricolor flag and would be similar to that military junta led by Pinochet in Chile of the 70s), and had more sympathy for Falangism that Carlism-], with the war finished in late 1936, would be a much more reliable members of the Axis partner -in OTL Franco wanted to enter the WW2 after the fall of France, but the Spanish internal situation completely discouraged it. But after the battle of England and study the report by the then Chief of Operations of the General Staff of the Navy, Luis Carrero Blanco, decided to maintain Spanish neutrality and take long to German pressure, if Hitler not promised large territorial acquisitions for Spain or replace the huge foreign trade necessary for the Spanish economy, which would immediately suffer the British naval blockade after Spain attacking Gibraltar-, especially if your intention is to delay the onset of World War II to 1941, date on which Spain could be largely recovered.
What do you think about it?
This is correct. Originally, Wagner refrains from aiding the Nationalists for the purpose of making the west more concerned about growing Soviet influence. However, it has been convincingly argued that a Republican victory would not actually result from such restraint, and the relevant chapter will soon be edited to reflect this input.
Interesting suggestions as always! I think you'll be pleased at the extent to which they anticipate the course of the TL.
The idea of a quick Nationalist victory along the lines you mention is an intriguing idea in its own right, but what in particular about the events of this TL would bring it about? Could reduced/no aid to the Nationalists from Germany cause Stalin to likewise abstain from aiding the Republicans?
Count Valerian
Banned
IMVHO, Stalin would view Nazi Germany's unwillingness to support the Spanish Nationalists as either weakness i.e. 'Wagner is a broken reed' or a sign of provincialism/limited perspective i.e. Wagner is an example of the 'shallow, self-interested nature of imperialists and fascists'. Either way, he won't let the opportunity to expand his influence in Europe pass, and probably increase aid to the Communists.
However after the Nuremberg Accord, he will with chagrin realize his past mistake to dismiss Wagner as a broken reed/provincial dictator. Much like with OTL Barbarossa, Stalin tends to have unusual blind spots every so often.
However after the Nuremberg Accord, he will with chagrin realize his past mistake to dismiss Wagner as a broken reed/provincial dictator. Much like with OTL Barbarossa, Stalin tends to have unusual blind spots every so often.
I don't think Spanish assistance is required to take Gibraltar, it just requires basing rights in French North Africa (even without Morocco), cooperation of the Italians, and experience from taking Malta (along with other airborne operations). Besides that, I think that once North Africa is taken (at least to the Suez Canal), then in addition to Persia, Germany can begin pushing a front down the Red Sea Coast, along the continuous line of British colonies. It will take major investments in infrastructure, but there is a contiguous mass of Allied colonies that stretches right down to South Africa, including the resource-rich Congo. It will take a long time (possibly a decade) to build the infrastructure to wage war over such distances without relying on sea lanes for logistics, but it can be done. Ironically, the best way to do this would be to slowly but surely construct a Cairo to Cape Town railroad that keeps up with the front line as Germany pushes south. Eventually, Germany can capture most of Africa by advancing south along either the eastern coastline (Italian Somalia), the Nile, or the western coastline, avoiding the Sahara Desert.
Doing so would divert many troops from other fronts, most likely stopping expansion into the Middle East and India, but if they can capture areas like the Congo and South Africa, then they will deny the Allies some precious resources (most notably industrial diamonds), even if they can't use them themselves due to limited logistics between Germany and Sub-Saharan Africa. It's kind of an either-or situation; send the armies used to capture North Africa to go south and build infrastructure as they go, and ultimately deny all of Africa to the Allies (especially the diamonds and gold of South Africa), or send them to the Middle East to deny the Allies the Persian oil fields and open a direct front to the Baku oil fields and India.
If Wagner wants Barbarossa, he will rather go for Middle East.
In Africa the Axis would want to take Egypt. Maybe Sudan, to secure Egypt and Libya, secure the Red Sea, to be able to target all Arabian oilfields. Plus Sudan will help Vichy France to hold Belgian Congo and Italy to hold Abyssinia and Somalia.
Even then, better to let the Italians and French hold their own territories (plus Egypt and Sudan) with German divisions helping at the borders, than a full occupation.
For Germans, going further in Africa would be a logistical nightmare (enemy territory). Natives likely wouldn't be too friendly. And more importantly, losing all African colonies would be a heavy blow to Britain but not mortal.
On the other hand, going for Iraq, Arabia and Persia will cut the OIL that Britain needs.
It will threaten India which was more important than African colonies (in terms of resources). Even more importantly, India is THE Jewel of the Crown, so more psychological impact too.
Plus going East is easier. Germany can have lots of friends in Near East, Iraq, Persia, even India. Not to mention Japan.
While it would be even harder for the British to ship troops and colonies to Middle East (and Far East) going around the Cape, than to go in South and East Africa.
So, it's a better strategy against Britain to go east than south.
And going east means being able to attack the Soviets directly in Caucasus and Central Asia.
On the contrary, if Wagner goes south, the British will be able to bring in Africa troops from Britain, India, Malaya, Canada, Australia, NZ... And African colonies of course.
They will ONLY have to defend Africa (instead of defending Africa at Italian and French borders while fighting the main war in Asia).
So Germany would be forced to send more and more troops in Africa. Meaning cancelling Barbarossa or postponing it for years (and later the Soviets will be ready).
Worse, with so many Axis troops deployed in Africa, the Soviets might attack first.
In fact, an African strategy would only make sense with an actual Soviet alliance (and the Soviets going for Near East, Persia and India, against the Brits).
In Africa the Axis would want to take Egypt. Maybe Sudan, to secure Egypt and Libya, secure the Red Sea, to be able to target all Arabian oilfields. Plus Sudan will help Vichy France to hold Belgian Congo and Italy to hold Abyssinia and Somalia.
Even then, better to let the Italians and French hold their own territories (plus Egypt and Sudan) with German divisions helping at the borders, than a full occupation.
For Germans, going further in Africa would be a logistical nightmare (enemy territory). Natives likely wouldn't be too friendly. And more importantly, losing all African colonies would be a heavy blow to Britain but not mortal.
On the other hand, going for Iraq, Arabia and Persia will cut the OIL that Britain needs.
It will threaten India which was more important than African colonies (in terms of resources). Even more importantly, India is THE Jewel of the Crown, so more psychological impact too.
Plus going East is easier. Germany can have lots of friends in Near East, Iraq, Persia, even India. Not to mention Japan.
While it would be even harder for the British to ship troops and colonies to Middle East (and Far East) going around the Cape, than to go in South and East Africa.
So, it's a better strategy against Britain to go east than south.
And going east means being able to attack the Soviets directly in Caucasus and Central Asia.
On the contrary, if Wagner goes south, the British will be able to bring in Africa troops from Britain, India, Malaya, Canada, Australia, NZ... And African colonies of course.
They will ONLY have to defend Africa (instead of defending Africa at Italian and French borders while fighting the main war in Asia).
So Germany would be forced to send more and more troops in Africa. Meaning cancelling Barbarossa or postponing it for years (and later the Soviets will be ready).
Worse, with so many Axis troops deployed in Africa, the Soviets might attack first.
In fact, an African strategy would only make sense with an actual Soviet alliance (and the Soviets going for Near East, Persia and India, against the Brits).
Adding on this, then, here's my outline for the revised Spanish Civil War-it breaks out as OTL, the Soviet leadership views German hesitance to aid the Nationalists as weakness and increases aid to the Republicans. As a result, the war for them goes better initially than it did historically, which however causes Wagner to begin large-scale assistance (greater than OTL) to the Nationalists after the Rhineland remilitarization, resulting in them wining in the middle of 1938 and Spain suffering somewhat less war-related damage than in OTL.
What do people think?
All sorts of interesting possibilities are opened up by a stronger Axis position in North Africa, aren't there? I think in the end you'll both be pleased with the way Wagner makes use of them. As a small hint, don't forget the potential of diplomacy to gain what cannot be obtained through force of arms alone.
Count Valerian
Banned
It could work, and the Spanish Communists could be the herald of war for Europe much like the Nazis were in OTL when they intervened in Spain. Well they still are here, but the delayed entry of the Nazis into the war along with overt Soviet support would mean the Nazis would come in looking not like aggressors, but people genuinely trying to 'save the free people of Spain from the Communist yoke'. It could also be useful as a factor in leading Daladier and Chamberlain to let the Rhineland re-militarization go, as well as being willing to negotiate over Czechoslovakia at Nuremberg.
Well, the Belgian Congo might have defected as part of their surrender, and France's colonies might do so too, but they do need to be defended against the Free French forces backed up by the Allies, as they were defeated by them OTL. In any case, they were cut off, so better logistics and infrastructure down there would be a must (really, anywhere outside Europe needs better infrastructure at this point to conduct campaigns). Perhaps better terms with the French or Belgians can prevent the rise of such powerful resistance forces ITL? In particular, the Belgians were known for their stiff resistance in both World Wars. If the colonies of France and Belgium can be effectively made to join the Axis with their parent countries, and better logistics and infrastructure be set up, then the British colonies in Africa could be seriously threatened by the Italians, leaving the Germans to take the Middle East and Persia.
Right, the chapter which included the Spanish Civil War has been edited in accordance with the delayed German intervention scenario. It now also mentions somewhat increased oil production in Germany itself to reflect Detlef's input some pages back.
Given that the Italians are more effective than they were in OTL...