It's a great update, and I can't wait to see the next advances of your brilliant AH.
Regarding the immediate development of the war, it would not surprise me greatly if Churchill decides to invade Portugal -although only really happen in the Azores and Madeira, where it could establish air and naval bases solid near the Strait of Gibraltar, being perfect to replace a fallen Gibraltar in the war routes of British ships; while British developing a plan to assault the Canary Islands (idea supported by the Spanish Republican exiles in London, probably even led by former prime minister during the SCW, the Canarian Dr. Juan Negrin)-, which could trigger a Spanish invasion of Portugal -in OTL, Franco planned the conquest of Portugal, setting 1945 as the year that the invasion would restore political unity to the Iberian peninsula would be militarly feasible for Spanish armed forces-, supported widely by Axis members and fanatical Portuguese Falangists, and a British invasion of Portuguese colonies (Portuguese Guinea and Cape Verde would fall into the hands of the British troops stationed in Gambia; Cabinda, Angola and Mozambique would fall into the British troops stationed in Rhodesia and Namibia; Goa would be integrated into the British rule of India; and Portuguese Timor would be integrated into the Australian rule; instead, I think Sao Tome and Principe would fall into the hands of the Spanish troops stationed in Spanish Guinea).
Plus, if the British TRY to invade France they'll likely fail. Even the French on their own might stop them, and then there are the Germans who'll come to reinforce them quickly.
Also terror bombing is a BAD idea.
1 ) Waste of planes and pilots. Better to keep them for Barbarossa or deploy them against industrial and military assets
2 ) It would push the US to give more help to UK
3 ) It would terrify the British people yes, but also harden them and kill ANY chance of peaceful settlement (short of a successful Sealion, which won't happen).
Also, about the terms to give to NL, Belgium and France
1 ) France can part with Morocco (to Spain) and Tunisia and Djibouti (to Italy), and Indochina (to Japan). In exchange gaining Belgian Congo.
(Don't touch Algeria though).
French people won't be happy but...
2 ) If the Germans reduce their occupation to Atlantic / Channel coast, let the prisoners go home and postpone reparations it will count MUCH more than Morocco and Tunisia and Indochina.
It will even look like a good deal after such a catastrophic defeat.
3 ) Alsace-Moselle, Nice, Savoy, Corsica and whatever territory Spain occupied can remain occupied and be settled by plebiscite after the war.
Of course, the Axis powers can flood those regions with settlers.
And encourage any local German/Spanish /Italian-speaker to take their nationality.
They should do it QUIETLY though. With Axis and Vichy censorship preventing French newspapers from talking about "those Italian settlers who are flooding...".
When the plebiscite comes, they can rig it (if necessary). But not in an obvious way (like the Stalin plebiscites with 99% "yes"). Better to have results between 55% and 75% (depending the area), it will look much more BELIEVABLE.
It lets France save face while giving Germany, Italy and Spain what they want.
4 ) Then you can start Collaboration with a sound basis and without undermining the French government credibility.
5 ) France is useful as an ally. Belgium and NL are more useful as neutrals and economical (subservient) partners.
6 ) Belgium will lose Congo yes, it will sting. It's better if they lose it to FRANCE. Belgians will resent the French more than the Germans. Which helps Germany to dominate the European bloc.
Plus France is better placed to get Congo. Plus France is still neutral and not yet at war with Britain, so the Brits won't have legitimate reason to invade Congo.
NL will lose Indonesia to Japan.
Belgians and Dutch will accept it though because :
=> Economical collaboration (but no reparations)
=> Maybe have the Low Countries sell their navies (at reasonable price). It will help in the Med.
=> Military neutrality
=> No occupation.
=> Prisoners back
The Belgians and Dutch will be happy to get their prisoners back and their LAND back. And also their neutrality.
They will become economic partners like Sweden but on steroids.
7 ) The British pro-peace circles will get ammo.
"Wagner is reasonable, he treated very well France and Low Countries. Plus he didn't occupy Low Countries".
Having Germans at Antwerp was unacceptable to Britain but it won't be the case if Wagner plays well.
Anyway, Wagner has French coast to conduct submarine and aerial war, and don't even NEED bases or ports in Low Countries.
8 ) If Britain starts to bomb Belgian and Dutch industries, it will harm Churchill domestically (British opinion won't like too much outright bombing neutrals), and MASSIVELY harm British image in the US and world.
Same thing if the British ever try to invade Europe through neutral Low Countries.
Such an invasion attempt would fail, thanks to Belgian and Dutch armies, plus Wehrmacht coming FAST.
9 ) It will also help with the US opinion to give back their freedom to Belgium and NL.
Basically Wagner can
=> Have France as a useful neutral, and soon ally. While still satisfying German, Italian and Spanish claims in France proper (but later, after peace and "plebiscite"), and giving some minor colonies to Italy and Spain
=> Give Indochina and Indonesia to Japan (in exchange for later help)
=> Have the Low Countries as useful neutrals
=> Reduce your occupation zone to merely French coast (which is just as secure but FAR less costly)
=> Undermine the Interventionists in the US and the warhawks in Britain by looking reasonable.
France and Low Countries won't be happy at the territorial losses but WILL be happy to escape the TOTAL defeat nearly unscathed (instead of being crushed or even destroyed as countries). France will also gain Congo (nice bonus).
Oh, and Wagner should not annex Luxemburg now. It will still be there at the time of final peace, there is no rush.
It's a nice great planning. I agree with you in most of your post, but I would add two changes:
- Algeria is considered a French metropolitan area susceptible of a subsequent Spanish/Italian annexation after the war, due to an earlier occupation of part of French Algeria during the European war -established by the French armistice because Franco and Mussolini alleged to protect many Spanish/Italian citizens in these areas (Oran region for Spain, Constantine region for Italy).
- If Italy immediately receives two French strategic colonies after the French armistice, at a minimum, Spain should receive a small extension of the Spanish Guinea and the promise of acquiring the French colonial territory forming the Greater Morocco -ie, Mauritania, the Malian regions of Gao, Kidal and Timbuktu and the Algerian regions of Bechar and Tindouf-, plus the possibility of annexing the Algerian province of Adrar, El Bayadh, Naama to establish a more defensible border in case of a Spanish annexation of the region of Oran.
- This could be seen as a Spanish justified claim, for the eyes of the Nationalists and the Axis, as a form of French compensation for facilitating arms smuggling that benefited Republicans during the SCW, needlessly prolonging it.
PS: Although it is a nice touch that Wagner delays the payment of French reparations after the war, in order to join the new French State to Axis, I think it is necessary to establish that the French subsequently shall bear the total cost of the German occupation and establish guarantees for it -for example, Petain is forced to recognize German as guardians of French gold reserves-.
PS2: By the way, I have some doubts about some customs that socially taken root in OTL Nazi Germany. For example, the Nazi salute is still Heil Hitler! or it was changed to Heil! or Heil Wagner! or Sieg Heil!?
And continue the Nazi plans to rebuild Germany and its cities by great monuments and avenues, as the projected called Germania by Albert Speer? After all, this was constantly encouraged by Hitler, who was a frustrated artist. And regarding this, we must bear in mind that the beginning of the Europea war has been delayed to 1941. Therefore, it exists the possibility that any of the projects megalomaniacs imagined by Speer could have built before the war.
And what is the social impact of the composer Richard Wagner and his music with this alt Nazi Germany led by a Nazi named Robert Heinrich Wagner? Adolf Hitler was an admirer of Wagner operas and saw an incarnation of his own vision of the German nation. There is still debate about how they might have influenced the views of Wagner in the Nazi thought. The Nazis used the thinking part of the composer who was useful for their propaganda and ignored or suppressed the rest. Although Hitler himself was an ardent follower of Richard Wagner, much of the Nazi hierarchy it was not and they were deeply resented the opportunity to attend these long epics because of their insistence.
There is evidence that Wagner's music was used in the Dachau concentration camp in 1933-1934 to "reeducate" political prisoners by exposure to "national music". However, there is no evidence to support the claim, sometimes sustained, that his music was used in Nazi death camps during World War II.
PS3: I have problems with my computer and have appeared while I editing this post. For this reason, I have been forced to reedit it.
