Was a Cold War possible with Victorious Nazis?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

In the event of a series of bizarre circumstances that result in the Nazis winning on the continent, first by getting the British to accept terms in 1940 and then through a series of unlucky events capturing Moscow and killing Stalin in the process causing Soviet organized resistance to fracture and effectively achieving a 'victory' in the East in 1942 via occupying a end line and holding, was there a possibility that the West could ever accept a Nazi dominated Europe? Could the Nazis settle down and accept a Cold War with the West or would Hitler's prediction of an inevitable intercontinental struggle go hot? I know this is similar to a Fatherland scenario where there was a Cold War, but was that realistic given Hitler's megalomania and the victory disease that the Nazi leadership would have with their improbably string of victories?

If war did break out thereafter what would it look like? I don't think it would be Calbear's scenario given that the situation is very different after 1940, which would alter the trajectory of the TL.

Edit: The reason I bring this up is that it seems the regime was inherently unstable and would constantly need an external source of conflict to distract from its internal policies, especially once the atrocities in the East became a major part of that and Hitler tried to increasingly nazify society; plus of course Hitler was inherently unstable and seemed fixated on conflict as a way of keeping society strong (hence the Wehrbauer idea). Also the Wallies seem unlikely to tolerate such a regime controlling the continent like that because of the economic impact it would have on them. Even with trade a Nazi Eurasia would be protectionist and hold the world's largest GDP and resource base at its disposal, even if it is technologically falling behind and slaughtering the labor base. OTL's USSR didn't have quite the same power or generate the same fear in the West that the Nazis did IOTL. I just don't see that coexistence is likely given all that, but maybe I'm missing something or things would soften with the West focusing on Asia and the Nazis on rump Soviet resistance?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think Cold War is most realistic in this inherently unrealistic scenario. West would accept Nazi dominated Europe because it would have really no other choice.

As for Hitler's megalomania and Nazi world view, people on both sides of OTL Cold War said war between blocs is inevitable and logical extension of fundamental differences between ideologies. Funny how that turned out.

But it will be different Cold War because Nazism is uch less exportable than communis. Latter could be (and was) exported to pretty much every society, requiring at best minor tweaks. I somehow don't see Nazism gaining uch popualrity in Africa and Asia.
 
Cold war is the most probable scenario in this situation.
With Soviet defeat the British wouldn't consider attempting round 2 until they have a large number of nukes, and at that point Germany would have some too. The US probably wouldn't even provide lend lease to the Soviet Union with Britain out of the war. If Japan gets nuked it would most likely deter Hitler from continuing to expand after SU. Yes there is a gap between 1942 and 1945 but with the German consolidating power on the continent and building a navy war is unlikely to happen.
 

Deleted member 1487

I think Cold War is most realistic in this inherently unrealistic scenario. West would accept Nazi dominated Europe because it would have really no other choice.
You don't think the US would find any excuse to intervene after 1942?

As for Hitler's megalomania and Nazi world view, people on both sides of OTL Cold War said war between blocs is inevitable and logical extension of fundamental differences between ideologies. Funny how that turned out.

But it will be different Cold War because Nazism is uch less exportable than communis. Latter could be (and was) exported to pretty much every society, requiring at best minor tweaks. I somehow don't see Nazism gaining uch popualrity in Africa and Asia.
Nazism is far more containable in terms of colonies, but India and Iran have interests in common with the Nazis as far as getting free from Britain, while both IIRC were considered racially acceptable by the Nazis due to Aryan links, especially Iran. South America too had a lot of Fascist leanings and without WW2 bringing them on the side of the US in the conflict against Germany, perhaps Argentina and others could get feelers from Germany, especially given their German, Spanish, and Italian settler heritage? South Africa did have some racist sympathies with Nazi Germany IIRC, as did Rhodesia, especially if Britain and Germany aren't at war and colonialism is falling apart.

Cold war is the most probable scenario in this situation.
With Soviet defeat the British wouldn't consider attempting round 2 until they have a large number of nukes, and at that point Germany would have some too. The US probably wouldn't even provide lend lease to the Soviet Union with Britain out of the war. If Japan gets nuked it would most likely deter Hitler from continuing to expand after SU. Yes there is a gap between 1942 and 1945 but with the German consolidating power on the continent and building a navy war is unlikely to happen.
Would the British even consider war with nukes even if they are ahead out of fear of chemical and bioweapon retaliation?
 
But it will be different Cold War because Nazism is uch less exportable than communis. Latter could be (and was) exported to pretty much every society, requiring at best minor tweaks. I somehow don't see Nazism gaining uch popualrity in Africa and Asia.

However, people in the colonies will remember who fought for seven (?) years against Great Britain, France, the Netherlands and Belgium. And because German colonies after WWII are very unlikely (Hitler doesn't wanted of them), they will not be able to know how real Nazi rule is. So, there is no reason for them to not support the enemies of their oppressors...
 

Deleted member 1487

However, people in the colonies will remember who fought for seven (?) years against Great Britain, France, the Netherlands and Belgium. And because German colonies after WWII are very unlikely (Hitler doesn't wanted of them), they will not be able to know how real Nazi rule is. So, there is no reason for them to not support the enemies of their oppressors...
Given that the Nazis supported independence movements in India and how shockingly popular Hitler is in Asia today, maybe there was room for the Nazis to carve out allies or at least economic interests there with independent states:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Legion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Legion#Role_in_Indian_independence
However, in political terms Bose may have been successful, owing to events that occurred within India after the war.[6][7] After the war, the soldiers and officers of the Free India Legion were brought as prisoners to India, where they were to be brought to trial in courts-martial along with Indians who were in the INA. Their stories were seen as so inflammatory that, fearing mass revolts and uprisings across the empire, the British government forbade the BBC from broadcasting about them after the war.[27] Not much is known of any charges made against Free India Legion soldiers, but the Indian National Army trials that were initiated had the sentences they issued commuted or charges dropped, after widespread protest and several mutinies. As a condition of independence readily agreed to by the INC, members of the Free India Legion and INA were not allowed to serve in the post-independence Indian military, but they were all released before independence. Once the stories reached the public, there was a turnaround in perception of the Azad Hind movement from traitors and collaborators to patriots. Although the authorities expected to improve the morale of their troops by prosecuting the Azad Hind volunteers, they only contributed to the sentiment among many members of the military that they had been on the wrong side during the war.[39][40] According to historian Michael Edwardes, the "INA and Free India Legion thus overshadowed the conference that was to lead to independence, held in the same Red Fort as the trials".[39]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_in_World_War_II#Collaboration_with_the_Axis_powers
In terms of the more important Japanese efforts at Indian resistance efforts compared to the Germans, with Japan defeated Germany would be looking to carve out Asia allies or at least help, so might be far more amenable to helping and independent India as a market, military ally, and potentially resource source.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany%E2%80%93Iran_relations#The_first_Pahlavi_era_and_Nazi_Germany

How scary would a National Socialist India be?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BooNZ

Banned
But it will be different Cold War because Nazism is uch less exportable than communis. Latter could be (and was) exported to pretty much every society, requiring at best minor tweaks. I somehow don't see Nazism gaining uch popualrity in Africa and Asia.

Not entirely sure about that. In practise the extreme right and left come quite close and during the cold war many client states of the west, were/are more fascist that democratic. Even now, many in Asia appear to admire a certain German dictator as a "strong leader", until Western media explain to them how inappropriate that is...
 

Deleted member 1487

Even now, many in Asia appear to admire a certain German dictator as a "strong leader", until Western media explain to them how inappropriate that is...
And even then do they really care or just try to avoid negative publicity by toning it down?
 

Deleted member 1487

What would the fate of China be ITTL if Japan were defeated by the US and the USSR wasn't around to invade Manchuria? I imagine the Communists wouldn't get the support they needed to win, but the KMT would be a bit of a mess and still have links to the Nazis after the war.
 
You don't think the US would find any excuse to intervene after 1942?

It's not impossible but I suspect in your scenario US would write off Europe as lost and as such wouldn't want to sink any (more) money into it

Nazism is far more containable in terms of colonies, but India and Iran have interests in common with the Nazis as far as getting free from Britain, while both IIRC were considered racially acceptable by the Nazis due to Aryan links, especially Iran. South America too had a lot of Fascist leanings and without WW2 bringing them on the side of the US in the conflict against Germany, perhaps Argentina and others could get feelers from Germany, especially given their German, Spanish, and Italian settler heritage? South Africa did have some racist sympathies with Nazi Germany IIRC, as did Rhodesia, especially if Britain and Germany aren't at war and colonialism is falling apart.

The question is who can project more influence in these countries. I think Germany would be pretty much drained trying to incorporate conquests and mopping up resistance to be able to project influence that far. Latin America is similar, too close to US for Germany to be able to project any realsitic influence. That's if these coutnries don't try to carve out their own path.
 
However, people in the colonies will remember who fought for seven (?) years against Great Britain, France, the Netherlands and Belgium. And because German colonies after WWII are very unlikely (Hitler doesn't wanted of them), they will not be able to know how real Nazi rule is. So, there is no reason for them to not support the enemies of their oppressors...

That doesn't solve the problem that Nazism is pretty much unexportable. I don't see it taking root in society that is pretty low on Nazi scale of desirability. Outside white settler communities, that is. So that makes these countries unlikely to allign with Germany based on ideology and Germany simply can't power project to smack them back in line, like US could.

If Germany would want to build on "We fought your colonial masters and now you are free" they'd likely get "Uhm, thanks. But you are on the other side of the world so......"
 

Deleted member 1487

That doesn't solve the problem that Nazism is pretty much unexportable. I don't see it taking root in society that is pretty low on Nazi scale of desirability. Outside white settler communities, that is. So that makes these countries unlikely to allign with Germany based on ideology and Germany simply can't power project to smack them back in line, like US could.

If Germany would want to build on "We fought your colonial masters and now you are free" they'd likely get "Uhm, thanks. But you are on the other side of the world so......"
German National Socialism is, but national socialism without the Germanic racial elements in is fascist form definitely is exportable once mated with the local racial/ethnic beliefs. If they were politically aligned then its about trade; since the Nazis cannot enforce dominance its about getting foreign markets and building up an allied bloc; look at how they treated Japan. They could do that with Iran and India easily and the connections with Spain could easily see them try to work with Argentina and white racist colonies in Africa.
 
Not entirely sure about that. In practise the extreme right and left come quite close and during the cold war many client states of the west, were/are more fascist that democratic. Even now, many in Asia appear to admire a certain German dictator as a "strong leader", until Western media explain to them how inappropriate that is...

Those fascist were US alligned and shared Western distaste for communism. And US was able to support them in various ways. How would Germany be able to support Iran or Argentina if US decided to counter their influence? US could at the very least fall back on anti-colonialism, democracy, freedom and other rhetoric US is so fond of. That's before "If you come and play with us you'll get this pile of money, if you play with that dirty german there will be a coup."

In any ways it would be simialr to what happened in Iraq. Germany simply wouldn't be able to exploit any pro-German sentiment because US would be in better position to intervene
 
German National Socialism is, but national socialism without the Germanic racial elements in is fascist form definitely is exportable once mated with the local racial/ethnic beliefs. If they were politically aligned then its about trade; since the Nazis cannot enforce dominance its about getting foreign markets and building up an allied bloc; look at how they treated Japan. They could do that with Iran and India easily and the connections with Spain could easily see them try to work with Argentina and white racist colonies in Africa.
But would germany be willing to adpat Nazi ideology to make it more exportable? I somehow don't see it, though it's possible since we are in uncharted territory here.

As for trade, I said earleir that US would be able to outmatch German influence.
 

BooNZ

Banned
Those fascist were US alligned and shared Western distaste for communism. And US was able to support them in various ways. How would Germany be able to support Iran or Argentina if US decided to counter their influence? US could at the very least fall back on anti-colonialism, democracy, freedom and other rhetoric US is so fond of. That's before "If you come and play with us you'll get this pile of money, if you play with that dirty german there will be a coup."

In any ways it would be simialr to what happened in Iraq. Germany simply wouldn't be able to exploit any pro-German sentiment because US would be in better position to intervene

Yes, dictators in third world countries LOVE democracy, but perhaps love communism slightly less - fascism, well that would fit like a suit.
 

Deleted member 1487

But would germany be willing to adpat Nazi ideology to make it more exportable? I somehow don't see it, though it's possible since we are in uncharted territory here.

As for trade, I said earleir that US would be able to outmatch German influence.
I don't think the Germans would export it as such, rather people would see it as powerful and adopt elements of the ideology to their local context and court Germany for aid and trade, probably trying to play off the US and Germany to get the best deal or something from both. Some are naturally biased to Germany over the US due to the US probably working with Britain to have influence abroad, because the US pretty much had to piggy back on British bases and networks after WW2 due to isolationism keeping them out of the foreign influence game pre-WW2. India and Iran both favored Germany over Britain due to colonialism and Germany being so far away it couldn't replace Britain in their countries. They did try to appeal to the US during the war, but the US was too invested in Britain to listen, which ended up being a major problem in the 1950s in Iran, India, and Indochina.

South American Fascist inclined governments were also wary of US influence in their countries and were willing to court the Nazis for a while before, during, and after WW2 to avoid that (to no avail).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_America_during_World_War_II
The politics of fascism were not all that was attractive, as in the pre-war years, the Germans also enjoyed growing economic penetration using strict binational trade agreements to ensure that the economic relationship with various Latin American nations would be equal. Brazil, Mexico, Guatemala, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic all had trade agreements with Nazi Germany. Brazil's trade with Germany, for example, doubled between 1933, when Hitler came to power, and 1938, the year before the war began. With the start of the war in September 1939, Axis ships could no longer cross the Atlantic for commerce, and so trade between Latin America and Germany and Italy ceased. Losing trading partners hurt some of the Latin American states, and in most cases the United States was the only country that was able to replace the Germans and Italians.[1]
Without exclusive increased trade with the US due to the war with Europe Latin America would be more open ITTL IMHO post-war, especially if the Nazis end the war in 1942 and have open trade from 1940 on.

With the trade disruption lasting 12 months or less (war with Britain lasting from September 1939 to July or so 1941) the trade relations between the Nazis/Fascists of Europe and Latin America would resume before US dominance really set in.

Almost all of the Latin American states had to respond to Axis espionage activity. Mexico, and to a lesser extent Brazil, cooperated with the United States in shutting down Axis cells. Chile and Argentina, on the other hand, allowed enemy agents to operate in their countries for most of the war, which was a source of considerable discord between the two nations and the United States. Many of the Latin American states also had to deal with large numbers of immigrants from Axis countries. Colombia, for example, had a population of about 4,000 German immigrants in 1941, as well as a small village of Japanese farmers in Cauca. Many of the Germans in Colombia were involved in the air transportation industry as employees of SCADTA, so the United States was concerned that they might be engaged in espionage or even plot to convert civilian aircraft into bombers for an attack against the Panama Canal. As result, the United States government pressured Colombia into monitoring and interning the immigrants or, in some cases, deporting them to the United States. The same occurred in other Latin American countries as well.[1][1]


The threat of German and Spanish espionage was much more real. Throughout much of the war, the Germans operated spy networks in all of the most prominent countries of the region, including Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, Brazil, Cuba, Mexico, and others. Operation Bolivar, as it was called, was centered on clandestine radio communications from their base in Argentina to Berlin in Germany, but it also utilized Spanish merchant vessels for the shipment of paper-form intelligence back to Europe. The latter was possible because of Spanish cooperation with German intelligence agencies during the war. Although Argentina and Chile eventually "cracked down" on the Axis agents operating in their countries in early 1944, some Bolivar activity continued up until the end of the European war in May 1945.[2][3]


In addition to German espionage and sabotage in Latin America, the United States was also concerned about Nazi propaganda. For example, Germany's embassy in Guatemala City served as the distribution center for Nazi propaganda in Central America. Prior to the beginning of the war in 1939, the propaganda focused on the superiority of German manufactured goods, and claimed that Germany was the center for scientific research, because it had the "world's most advanced educational system." Between September 1939 and late 1943, the propaganda focused on German victories and the superiority of its military equipment. From Guatemala the propaganda made its way to the German embassies in other countries, often as packages aboard the Salvadoran airline TACA.[5]
Nazi propaganda would be a lot more effective if they won even bigger and locked in their hold on Europe from 1942 on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BooNZ

Banned
But would germany be willing to adpat Nazi ideology to make it more exportable? I somehow don't see it, though it's possible since we are in uncharted territory here.

As for trade, I said earleir that US would be able to outmatch German influence.

Iraqi, Iranians, Indians nor Japanese scream Aryan to me...

OTL USA went toe-to-toe with Russia, which since 1900 had endured an abysmal autocracy, loss to Japan, serious revolts, disastrous WW1, revolution and civil war, dictatorship and purges, and disastrous but ultimately successful WW2. Was Russia ever really a contender?

In the POD Germany is significantly stronger and the USA might still be hiding under a rock somewhere.
 
Iraqi, Iranians, Indians nor Japanese scream Aryan to me...
Ideologically, they would be compatible. IOTL, the Grand Mufti was an official state guest in Berlin during the war. He rather liked the Nazi Jew-hatred and, as an Egyptian, the war against Britain. Certainly people like Saddam Hussein had their affinities with the Nazis.
 
Top