Was a negotiated peace in Europe after Jan. 1st 1942 possible?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

After the 1st of the year 1942 was there any possibility of a negotiated end to WW2 in Europe? Obviously this assumes that the biggest obstacle, Hitler, would have to be removed, perhaps we can say as a POD if it makes it any easier that Hitler dies after DoWing the USA in December of natural causes or perhaps an overdose of amphetamines by Dr. Morell, leaving Goering in charge.
Would the Allies have taken a deal at the peak of Axis success in 1942 before they rolled back the tide and if so what sort of deal?
 
I do not think it was possible. The Germans would have to sacrifice too much, no one would believe them anyway and without the entire inner circle of Nazi being wiped out, I do not see it happening.
 
If Hitler dies, maybe. I heard something once that the USSR was sending out peace feelers around that time to the tune of restoring Brest-Litovsk, though I've never seen a source.
 
This is a very interesting idea, however, it would probably not happen, as Britain had decided under Winston Churchill that they would never surrender, and there was no way that Japan was going to end its successful conquest. Stalin would never agree to peace after the invasion, and the U.S. was demanding unconditinal surrender. There is just n way it would happen.
 
By 1942 to Britain the Word of Hitler and by extension the German State was valueless.

It would require a major change in leadership (ie the Nazi/National Socialist party) being effectively wipe out in a Coup and also for Germany to surrender most if not all of its hard won conquests at a point when it was at the height of its power in order for Britain to agree to any negotiated peace plan.

I think that this would be virtually impossible
 
Sure a negotiated peace is possible:

Negotiation:
G:We will surrender under the following terms.
A:Nope, it has to be unconditional
G: Are you sure?
A: Yep
G: (look at the situation, especially relative economies). OK


Not much of a negotiation, but there you are.
 

Deleted member 1487

Sure a negotiated peace is possible:

Negotiation:
G:We will surrender under the following terms.
A:Nope, it has to be unconditional
G: Are you sure?
A: Yep
G: (look at the situation, especially relative economies). OK


Not much of a negotiation, but there you are.

That was the situation in 1943, but in 1942 there was a lot of dying that would need to be done to defeat the Axis, so I think thinking perhaps given that the US economy was not yet ready for war, the Soviets were not yet at an economic bottom, and the British were now totally dependent on US loans that there could in some way at some point be open to talks to end the war short of total victory if the Germans started them, which means not Hitler in charge. Goering was always more open to negotiating and Hitler said no, so I wonder if he made an offer at the height of Axis conquests in mid/late 1942 (say August) as Führer and signaled willingness to discuss terms that it might get the Allies at an uncomfortable time and they'd at least try given that Goering was not Hitler.
 
Would the Allies have taken a deal at the peak of Axis success in 1942 before they rolled back the tide and if so what sort of deal?

That depends on different things:

1) Is Germany willing to make a peace deal? With Hitler, they will accept only an unconditional surrender of Great Britain and the US - since this is totally ASB, the first condition is to remove Adolf.

2) Are the Allies willing to make a peace deal? Neither, since they knwo that with their industrial power (Soviet Union + USA + Great Britain), they overproduce Germany and will, even with some defeats, ultimately win against Nazi Germany.

But, and this is the important but, 1942 is not 1943, and 1943 is not 1944. The Soviet Union is in 1942 fighting not to get German unconditional surrender - they are fighting for their lives. And this is the point which a rational German leadership (something like Göring + Manstein and Rommel) can use to get peace in the east. Stalin would accept nearly everything just to stay in power and to save USSR. A new Brest-Litowsk with a German Ukraine, German Belarus, Finnish Karelia, Romanian Bessarabia and Japanese Wladiwostok is in the cards.

3) What are the WAllies going to do after that? After the peace in the east, granting Germany nearly unlimited ressources (no Russian oil, but enough grain and man power), Germany can fight on for... a long, long time. Even if they disband roughly half of their troups to get the soldiers to work again, they can still throw 2,5 millions soldiers in the west to guard the Atlantikwall.

Also, they can use the Luftwaffe, previously tied up in the east, to protect German and European cities in general, and can develop new technologies like the V2 or surface-to-air missiles.

How are the WAllies going to break this resistance? Sure, Germany can hardly win the war in North Africa (but it can become a hard challenge for the WAllies to fight against a well supplied German and Italian army in North Africa, taking into account what the Germans achieved even with the limited ressources they had there OTL). But a succesful landing against a rational German leadership without allied air dominance:confused:.

The best issue is that the Americans elect a peace candidate in 1944 who existis the war and forces Churchill to accept a white peace.
 
If the German conservatives/military gets rid of Hitler, and right away dials up the USA and says "war over" (after all only at war 3 weeks) and agrees to 1939 borders (including Anschluß/Austria, Sudentenland) and allows Poland including parts USSR had (occupied by Germany 1/1/42) maybe.

Best way, IMHO, for negotiated end to the war in Europe is that Germany does not declare war on USA 12/41, Hitler chucked out. Britain now faces 2 wars, but it's only active ally in Europe is the USSR which is getting hammered right now. A withdrawal along the lines above which then allows Britain to concentrate on the war with Japan might very well be acceptable to Churchill. If the USA is concentrating on a war with Japan, the amount of material that will flow to the UK (to say nothing of anything to the USSR) will be less than OTL and the British should realize that absent major LL to the USSR the Soviets are in the hurt locker (this has been discussed at length here).

Hitler gone, and the 1939 or 1938 borders restored is, frankly, the best deal Churchill could get January 1942 with the USA not at war with Germany. At that point in time, Stalin is not going to try and continue the war against Germany. As a matter of practicality, with the Baltic states and Poland restored to 1939 borders, the Soviets would then need to invade these countries (or overfly them) to continue the fight. The Poles hated the Germans and Soviets equally, by January 1942 the worst excesses had not yet started, so actually the Soviet actions deporting "ant-revolutionary" elements in their sector prior to June 1941, and the Katyn massacre are as bad if not worse than what thew Germans have done to date.

IMHO with the USA at war with Germany Churchill will certainly hold out for a much more punitive peace than described, however perhaps not unconditional surrender in January, 1942. Frankly no German government would accept that in January 1942.
 

Deleted member 1487

That depends on different things:

1) Is Germany willing to make a peace deal? With Hitler, they will accept only an unconditional surrender of Great Britain and the US - since this is totally ASB, the first condition is to remove Adolf.

2) Are the Allies willing to make a peace deal? Neither, since they knwo that with their industrial power (Soviet Union + USA + Great Britain), they overproduce Germany and will, even with some defeats, ultimately win against Nazi Germany.

But, and this is the important but, 1942 is not 1943, and 1943 is not 1944. The Soviet Union is in 1942 fighting not to get German unconditional surrender - they are fighting for their lives. And this is the point which a rational German leadership (something like Göring + Manstein and Rommel) can use to get peace in the east. Stalin would accept nearly everything just to stay in power and to save USSR. A new Brest-Litowsk with a German Ukraine, German Belarus, Finnish Karelia, Romanian Bessarabia and Japanese Wladiwostok is in the cards.

3) What are the WAllies going to do after that? After the peace in the east, granting Germany nearly unlimited ressources (no Russian oil, but enough grain and man power), Germany can fight on for... a long, long time. Even if they disband roughly half of their troups to get the soldiers to work again, they can still throw 2,5 millions soldiers in the west to guard the Atlantikwall.

Also, they can use the Luftwaffe, previously tied up in the east, to protect German and European cities in general, and can develop new technologies like the V2 or surface-to-air missiles.

How are the WAllies going to break this resistance? Sure, Germany can hardly win the war in North Africa (but it can become a hard challenge for the WAllies to fight against a well supplied German and Italian army in North Africa, taking into account what the Germans achieved even with the limited ressources they had there OTL). But a succesful landing against a rational German leadership without allied air dominance:confused:.

The best issue is that the Americans elect a peace candidate in 1944 who existis the war and forces Churchill to accept a white peace.

This is more along the lines of what I think it possible, a slightly more rational Nazi cutting a deal with Stalin and then offering a deal with the West given their new Eastern Empire and resources making invading Europe a daunting proposition. The big issue though is what happens when the Soviets recover? Would the Wallies offer aid to Stalin to help him recover and reenter the war? Would Stalin take a deal that cuts off two major entry points for foreign supply Vladivostok and Murmansk? Stalin knows that no matter what happens the USSR is going to bleed more in the pursuit of victory, so if he takes a deal in August/September 1942 and exits the war to rebuild, recover, and return later when ready, he's potentially cutting off all external support to staunch the current bleeding, let the Wallies and Germany fight it out for a while, and then return when he thinks they're sufficiently weakened. But do the Wallies then want to pay the price a one front war would cost now that the USSR is out?


If the German conservatives/military gets rid of Hitler, and right away dials up the USA and says "war over" (after all only at war 3 weeks) and agrees to 1939 borders (including Anschluß/Austria, Sudentenland) and allows Poland including parts USSR had (occupied by Germany 1/1/42) maybe.

Best way, IMHO, for negotiated end to the war in Europe is that Germany does not declare war on USA 12/41, Hitler chucked out. Britain now faces 2 wars, but it's only active ally in Europe is the USSR which is getting hammered right now. A withdrawal along the lines above which then allows Britain to concentrate on the war with Japan might very well be acceptable to Churchill. If the USA is concentrating on a war with Japan, the amount of material that will flow to the UK (to say nothing of anything to the USSR) will be less than OTL and the British should realize that absent major LL to the USSR the Soviets are in the hurt locker (this has been discussed at length here).

Hitler gone, and the 1939 or 1938 borders restored is, frankly, the best deal Churchill could get January 1942 with the USA not at war with Germany. At that point in time, Stalin is not going to try and continue the war against Germany. As a matter of practicality, with the Baltic states and Poland restored to 1939 borders, the Soviets would then need to invade these countries (or overfly them) to continue the fight. The Poles hated the Germans and Soviets equally, by January 1942 the worst excesses had not yet started, so actually the Soviet actions deporting "ant-revolutionary" elements in their sector prior to June 1941, and the Katyn massacre are as bad if not worse than what thew Germans have done to date.

IMHO with the USA at war with Germany Churchill will certainly hold out for a much more punitive peace than described, however perhaps not unconditional surrender in January, 1942. Frankly no German government would accept that in January 1942.
I'd like to stick to a hard 1942 negotiated peace to have the US in and make things interesting. I don't think the peace needs to be made in January, but say if negotiations start after Hitler's death and then the Axis goes on to have their good first 3 quarters of 1942 and try and split the Allies by say negotiating with Stalin separately and offering a deal, perhaps then things would shake out differently than you're allowing for.
 
That depends on different things:

1) Is Germany willing to make a peace deal? With Hitler, they will accept only an unconditional surrender of Great Britain and the US - since this is totally ASB, the first condition is to remove Adolf.

2) Are the Allies willing to make a peace deal? Neither, since they knwo that with their industrial power (Soviet Union + USA + Great Britain), they overproduce Germany and will, even with some defeats, ultimately win against Nazi Germany.

But, and this is the important but, 1942 is not 1943, and 1943 is not 1944. The Soviet Union is in 1942 fighting not to get German unconditional surrender - they are fighting for their lives. And this is the point which a rational German leadership (something like Göring + Manstein and Rommel) can use to get peace in the east. Stalin would accept nearly everything just to stay in power and to save USSR. A new Brest-Litowsk with a German Ukraine, German Belarus, Finnish Karelia, Romanian Bessarabia and Japanese Wladiwostok is in the cards.

Colour me sceptical. January 1942 is at the end of the Soviet Winter Offensive, when the Germans were driven back up to 150 miles from the gates of Moscow and before the German summer offensive. The idea that the Soviets would sue for a humiliating peace involving huge territorial concessions immediately after securing a crushing victory is simply not on the cards. They're more likely to assume the worst was over and demand a full German withdrawal and return to the Status Quo Ante borders.
 

Deleted member 1487

Colour me sceptical. January 1942 is at the end of the Soviet Winter Offensive, when the Germans were driven back up to 150 miles from the gates of Moscow and before the German summer offensive. The idea that the Soviets would sue for a humiliating peace involving huge territorial concessions immediately after securing a crushing victory is simply not on the cards. They're more likely to assume the worst was over and demand a full German withdrawal and return to the Status Quo Ante borders.
I didn't say the deal had to be offered in January.
 
I didn't say the deal had to be offered in January.

Okay then, probably the peak of Axis success is after the 6th army reaches Stalingrad in August but before it gets bogged down in siege warfare. I think you also need to get the offer made and accepted before planning for Operation Uranus starts in September. After that, and with Stalingrad holding, I wouldn't have thought the Soviets would be interested in negotiating until they saw how Uranus went. So you've got a window of maybe a month to persuade the Germans to discuss a peace that will involve them making significant territorial concessions - Stalingrad and the Caucasus are well outside Ukraine, after all. I don't see it myself - they are winning, after all - but this is probably your best time for it.
 

Deleted member 1487

Okay then, probably the peak of Axis success is after the 6th army reaches Stalingrad in August but before it gets bogged down in siege warfare. I think you also need to get the offer made and accepted before planning for Operation Uranus starts in September. After that, and with Stalingrad holding, I wouldn't have thought the Soviets would be interested in negotiating until they saw how Uranus went. So you've got a window of maybe a month to persuade the Germans to discuss a peace that will involve them making significant territorial concessions - Stalingrad and the Caucasus are well outside Ukraine, after all. I don't see it myself - they are winning, after all - but this is probably your best time for it.

So you see Stalin accepting ceding everything west of the Don river and Kuban in exchange for the Germans pulling back to the Baltic states in the north Smolensk in the Center, and across the Don in the South? Perhaps also giving away Karelia to Finland. Also in exchange the Soviets have to turn over some oil and metals as part of the deal? With an August offer of course. I think that's be a tough one to swallow for Stalin, but if he did how would the Allies react and how would his own people/military react?
 
The evidence for the Soviets ever contemplated a separate peace is based on rumors and hearsay. No solid evidence for it has ever emerged. Stalin himself later observed that had the USSR attempted to make peace with Germany, the Soviet people would have probably revolted.
 

Deleted member 1487

The evidence for the Soviets ever contemplating a separate peace is largely based on rumors and hearsay. No solid evidence for it has ever emerged. Stalin himself later observed that had the USSR attempted to make peace with Germany, the Soviet people would have probably revolted. And there was no way Hitler was ever going to accept any peace with the Soviets short of their absolute submission... so the whole idea is academic from the start.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/260160?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1861311?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
There does seem to be some legs to it and of course the Russians will never open that part of their archives.

Where and when did he say that?
 

takerma

Banned
Some time in summer of 1942 seems likeliest. Situation after Kharkiv was quite bad. With Hitler dead and Germans offering some sort of reasonable terms? It might work. Stalin knows he can stay in power and is not going to try anything for atleast few years. With all of the Luftwaffe transferred to Europe, things in Mediterranean are going to get nasty.
 

Deleted member 1487

Some time in summer of 1942 seems likeliest. Situation after Kharkiv was quite bad. With Hitler dead and Germans offering some sort of reasonable terms? It might work. Stalin knows he can stay in power and is not going to try anything for atleast few years. With all of the Luftwaffe transferred to Europe, things in Mediterranean are going to get nasty.
Assuming that happens could the Wallies than think about peace if it were offered? Stalin is out of the war and Germany is focused on them with an Eastern resource base.
 
Top