Weber's Germany: The Veterinarian Totalitarian

[Tom Colton]

Sorry this one is late, guys; the amount of research for the Battle of France is rather daunting.

Just discovered this. I love it because you've made it about Weber, how things are different, rather than just generic, X went differently TL. The war is important, but more of a way to examine how Weber's Germany is different to hitler's Germany. Very unique. Subbed.

And if you're wandering if it's realistic, I just studied Weimar and nazi Germany for half a year in history, and I'd definitely say so.

Thank you very much, and for the assertion that I haven't gone nuts with the TL!

Stay on board, as we're getting to the good stuff soon...

I think the POD was inventive, but as for Paul, has nobody in the future learned that trying to change history just results in something worse happening? 1/2 the TL's on this site will tell you that.

Time Police? Oh dear, i feel bad for Paul. Was he the first one to kill Hitler?

ASB TIME: I think he's one of the first in fiction to consider the idea, and thus on the ASB side of things, probably set temporal legal precedent for "no killing dictators to solve all your problems". So thanks for nothing, Paul. You let Nazi Germany last even longer, and now nobody can save the inhabitants of this universe from Weber by throwing him under a horse during World War I or something. Not that it would have changed much, really.

And that's the last time I'm bringing this up again, unless I feel like it.

Onwards, friends!

=======​

THE BATTLE OF FRANCE
​

​

Figure 15: British prisoners-of-war taken by the Wehrmacht at Dunkirk.​

​

Concurrent with the Scandinavian Campaign was the main phase of the Spring War, where Germany decided to end the threat to their western borders once and for all. Several plans were drawn up by the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (Supreme Command of the Armed Forces; OKW) to achieve this aim, based on the strategic goal of seizing large tracts of land in France and the entirety of the Low Countries in an attempt to hold these hostage in the hopes of achieving an armistice, if not a treaty, with the Allied powers. There were several conflicting views on how to best conduct this operation, with the only things common to all strategies being the necessity of sidestepping the massive row of French defences known as the Maginot Line, and the unreliability of the Italians in providing a sufficient diversion for French forces, given the Italians’ indifferent performance during the Second Italo-Abyssinian War and their obvious unpreparedness revealed at the Coburg Conference.

To this end, a “lightning strike” was required to pass through the Low Countries, which the Maginot Line did not extend into, and had to have a reasonable chance of success against the bulk of prepared French forces. The Italian forces would then move into place along the Alps, and engage French border troops in a massive feint, where it would be hoped that substantial French forces would be diverted southwards. Even if this was not fully achieved, German forces would engage the French in a series of encirclement manoeuvres, and the Maginot Line thus undermined. If this was achieved, the Wehrmacht would close in on Paris and coerce the French government into signing an armistice to end the Franco-British threat.

Figure 16: Evolution of Fall Gelb (Plan Yellow). Note inclusion of Manstein’s proposals.​

The OKW was not optimistic about the Wehrmacht’s chances of victory, and original plans predicted a standstill around the French border, and losses of up to nearly a half a million personnel, all in preparation for a second wave which would only be ready by 1942. However, Generalleutnant Erich von Manstein proposed a more dynamic plan involving the independent movement of Panzer formations, without infantry support or even much logistical cover, in order to secure key areas and encircle enemy units through overwhelming armoured assault. The proposals were considered bold for their time, but more in line with the predominant traditional doctrine of “manoeuvre warfare” espoused by German military academies. Furthermore, time was of the essence: the sooner any agreement ensuring no more future interference could be coerced from the British and the French, the earlier Germany could extricate itself from its economic issues by freeing itself from the blockade conducted by the Royal Navy in the Atlantic, consolidating its gains in Poland and ensuring the security of its iron ore from Sweden through Norway, and more importantly, arm itself for the soon-to-be inevitable conflict with the Soviet Union.

Weber himself stated at an OKW conference that “all we need to do is push to within bombing range of Paris and they will drop to their knees and beg us to stop. As long as we hold France and Belgium and the rest hostage, the British too will stop their intransigence.” Nonetheless, the plans for Fall Gelb (Plan Yellow) underwent several radical changes both due to the nature of Manstein’s proposals and friction between his colleague Generalleutnant Heinz Guderian, who agreed with his ideas, and their superior Franz Halder, who disliked Manstein’s increasing influence. Manstein’s proposals, however, eventually reached Weber, who agreed that a rapid end to the conflict was in Germany’s best interest.

Figure 17: Generalleutenant (later Generalfeldmarschall) Erich von Manstein, prominent Wehrmacht commander and mastermind of Germany’s strategy in the Battle of France.​

​

The timing of the invasion depended on several more factors; the preparedness of the Wehrmacht to conduct offensive operations following losses in Poland, the ability of Mussolini to prepare the Royal Italian Army for the alpine operations it would inevitably be performing, and most importantly, being able to pre-empt the inevitable Anglo-French reaction. Germany was most vulnerable immediately following their successful invasion in Poland, as its diminished forces were concentrated in the East. The only forces defending the border were dominated by Volkssturm-Vaterland recruits using outmoded equipment – even Great War surplus such as Gewehr 98 rifles. Military historians such as Fergusson, based on strength assessments in the winter and spring of 1940, generally agree that a French assault into the Saarland during this period would have at least forestalled the subsequent German-Italian invasion of France, potentially nipping the German threat in the bud. Unfortunately in retrospect, the French government instead opted to fight a defensive war, waiting for the Germans to come to them, where it was felt they would have the advantage.

The Royal Italian Army was in a state of massive disorganisation prior to its contribution – 10 out of the 30 divisions which it had committed to the invasion of France had only been prepared weeks before its entry into the war, its construction of M11/39 medium tanks was enough only to supplement and not supplant the obsolete L3/35 light tanks still in service, the commercial Engima D machines which were used to coordinate with the Wehrmacht were slow in being distributed, and less than half of its troops were fully equipped for alpine combat, where weather conditions still fell to subzero levels even in spring. The Italian merchant fleet would also have to be concentrated before committing to war. For these reasons, Mussolini informed Weber that Italy would not be ready to invade France until spring at the earliest, which would have slightly more favourable weather for alpine operations. The final timing of Fall Gelb was, in the end, decided by the continuing Norwegian front of the Scandinavian campaign. As the campaign dragged on, Weber gambled that action in France would convince the British to withdraw from Norway, and that if they did not, the French campaign would be easier without the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) supporting France. Thus convinced that decisive action was the key, the invasion of France was set for 1 May 1940 – May Day, or Walpurgis Night, as alluded to in the transmission sent to the Wehrmacht to begin operations – “Walpurgis ist jetzt” (“Walpurgis is now”.)

=======
​

Not much to say about this update other than the following points:​

• The Italians are slightly more ready than they were in OTL, although as you can see, not by much.
• The Engima D machines were used by the Regia Marina in OTL, and since the Germans and Italians are actually working in concert, more are quickly sent over for communication.
• The Mechelen incident never happens in TTL as there's no reason for him to be there. The invasion is instead delayed due to strategic considerations.

Next update: The battle starts proper.

​

 

[Tom Colton]

So within an hour then?(It's 11:00 PM where I live.)

Gorramit, this is why I always put the date when I say these things, since not all of us live in the same place/time zone (obviously).

By "Today" I mean 13th July 2014 -- which is right now!

=======

THE BATTLE OF FRANCE
​

The commander-in-chief of the French armed forces was General Maurice Gamelin, a veteran of the Great War whose “subtle mind” was respected even by the top Wehrmacht commanders. However, he was caught between conflicting ideas of military and political necessity, and his division of attention and strength between them proved to be disastrous for the Allied efforts in France and the Low Countries. He initially preferred a static defence along the Maginot Line; however, its defences did not extend into the Franco-Belgian border, and the cold winter of 1940 prevented extension works. Therefore, it was necessary for a more mobile defence to be organised.

Several proposals were submitted, most prominently the Dyle Plan (Plan D) and the Escaut Plan (Plan E), each named after the rivers that the defence was to be concentrated around. The former would have the Wehrmacht engaged by Allied forces further into Belgium than the latter, which was closer to the Franco-Belgian border. Complicating the situation was the Belgian declaration of neutrality in 1936. For reasons of better logistics, a deeper strategic reserve, and the insufficiently developed defences in Gembloux, Plan E was chosen, meaning that the Belgians would have to essentially fend for themselves [1].​

However, ironically, the initially determined defence of the Netherlands by General Henri Winkelman suggested to Gamelin that it might after all be able to stymie the German advance in the Low Countries, especially now that the defences at Gembloux were now further developed; Plan D was hastily employed, overextending French logistical lines and committing the British Expeditionary Force along the Dyle with the barest of acknowledgement by the Belgian government. The sudden Dutch capitulation in the face of continued bombardment by the Luftwaffe meant that instead of flanking the Germans as hopes, the underprepared Allied forces were now doomed to encirclements in the face of Army Group B [2].

The sudden switch to Plan D from Plan E remains one of the most controversial decisions by the Allied Powers in the Spring War. The link-up with Dutch forces had been lost, but adopting Plan D meant that a narrower front would need to be defended, relieving pressure on the line.. Fergusson suggests that it may have been justified had the Dutch forces held out merely a week longer, to give the French, British and Belgian forces enough time to consolidate and outflank the Germans.​

​

​

Figure 18: General Maurice Gustave Gamelin, commander-in-chief of the French forces during the opening stages of the Battle of France.​

The attempt by the BEF to encircle the German forces emerging from the Netherlands was thus doomed to failure when the Wehrmacht turned around earlier than expected, and tore through the unprepared defensive lines, forcing the Allied forces to hastily retreat to the better-equipped defences along the Escaut. Thankfully for Gamelin, the suddenness of the German breakout meant that relatively few units had been deployed along the Dyle, and thus were able to retreat in an orderly fashion. However, the re-commitment to Plan E meant that the Belgian forces and the majority of the BEF were now practically stranded in Belgium, and the Wehrmacht overrode the country in less than two weeks, with King Leopold of Belgium surrendering on 16 May.​

The entrapment of the BEF, which could only be relieved by escaping into France, and the confused diplomatic situation in Norway, led to total frustration with Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain. Although he managed to barely survive a vote of confidence in Parliament, Chamberlain knew his days were numbered, and drew up a proposal for the Labour Party to join his government. When the Labour leader Clement Attlee declined, stating that they would happily join the government if not for Chamberlain himself, Chamberlain met with the Viscount Halifax, who commanded considerably more popularity at this point. Halifax, in his memoirs, notes that he was “initially hesitant”, but when Chamberlain pressed on the points of Halifax’s support from the people, the political system and the King himself in their three-hour discussion, Halifax conceded that the British people would need a leader with mass support, and accepted the position. ​

Figure 19: Edward Frederick Lindley Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom after Neville Chamberlain’s resignation [3].​

Halifax’s first priority was to rescue the British forces, which were now trapped in a perilous corridor leading towards Dunkirk, on the French coast. Preparations were made for a massed fleet of various types of vessels to evacuate the BEF. However, the situation on the ground rapidly changed again when the true assault envisioned in Manstein’s version of Fall Gelb kicked into action. The massive push of German forces from Luxembourg, which had capitulated in less than a day, and southern Belgium, through the Ardenees forest on 14 May, later termed as “Sichelschnitt” (“Sickle-Cut”), took the Allies nearly totally by surprise, and soon formed an unmanageable pocket within the French border. The one major obstacle to German advances was the imposing fortress at Eben-Emael, which was practically invulnerable to all forms of air or land attack, and only surrendered well into 17 May despite enduring nearly 72 continuous hours of bombardment and assault, even after King Leopold III had announced the Belgian surrender [4].​

However, German luck soon began to run dry there. The delaying actions of the Allied forces meant that the advance of Army Group A in the north had stalled along the Escaut, and the steadfastness of the defenders of Eben-Emael meant that the Wehrmacht had to spend several precious days resupplying and regrouping, especially since the logistics train was not as motorised as the main bulk of the Heer. Fergusson notes another “wasted opportunity” at this juncture – had the Allies committed fully to a counterattack along the Ardennes Gap or in Northern France, breaking through the German lines, it would have confounded the Wehrmacht strategy and force them to concentrate on either front, leaving the other weakened to further assaults. However, events further south would soon force Gamelin’s hand – to his, and France’s, ruination [5].

[1] See here. In TTL, the Gembloux defences are considered inadequate since the invasion's even earlier, and Gamelin goes for the safe bet...at first.
[2] The Netherlands holds out for longer in TTL than OTL, and Gamelin now thinks that he can catch the Germans on their flanks. Epic fail, unfortunately.
[3] To those throwing their arms up in consternation, I only said Churchill would eventually become PM, and really, you all should have seen this one coming once I mentioned a negotiated peace. Let's see how Halifax does, eh?
[4] Weber doesn't have the slight tactical insight that Hitler had, and never twigs on to the idea of landing a glider on the roof. This small change is going to have big implications in the Spring War.
[5] "Look to my coming on the first light of the fifth day, at dawn look to the East..."
​

=======

And so we conclude this update on that massive cliffhanger...
Next update (later this week): Benito Mussolini...saviour of the Nazis??? ​

 

[Tom Colton]

Speaking of the Battle of France, a new challenger appears!

=======

THE BATTLE OF FRANCE​

Mussolini announced Italy’s declaration of war on France and Britain, in concordance with the Pact of Steel, late on the 14th of May, once the breakthrough in the Ardennes had been confirmed, and King Vittorio Emmuanelle III of Italy satisfied that the French were close to defeat (although as seen above, the German advance quickly stalled). The French armed forces were defending the alpine border with Italy along the fortified Alpine Line with approximately 90,000 troops, commanded by General René Olry. Most of the motorised troops had been pushed north in preparation for the German invasion, and the remaining troops along the Italian and Swiss borders were mostly composed of reservists in the forties; however, elite troops specially trained in alpine warfare, such as the employment of skis and mountain climbing, were also deployed.

The British had deployed Haddock Force in French airfields in a planned strike against Italian industrial zones near the border should Italy declare war on France. Mussolini, in consultation with his marshals, had determined shortly after the Coburg Conference that an assault across the Alps would be practically impossible, even with their troop advantage of approximately 300,000 more soldiers than the French, due to the strength of the defences and the terrible fighting conditions [1].​

While French attention would be directed to the Italian border, the fortifications meant that French defenders would be able to hold out without immediate reinforcements, defeating the purpose of the incursions. Therefore, it was agreed that a series of feint attacks would be made along the Alpine Line, distracting the French sufficiently from the main assaults (Operation Giulio Cesare [2]) along the Mediterranean coast, which would consist of a pincer movement – one from the French-Italian border near Menton (Operation Cesare), which Italy held irredentist claims to, and a massive amphibious landing at Nice (Operation Giulio). Monaco would be encircled and coerced to surrender, and once the sites were secured Italian armoured forces would assault the Alpine Line from the rear.

Either victory or stalemate was suitable, so long as the Germans could use the opportunity to bring the French to the negotiating table. The pocket which the Italians realistically could punch into French territory, even relatively undefended as it was, was in severe risk from counterattacks if the Marine Nationale (French Navy) rallied and cut off the force in Nice from the sea [3]. If the German offensives were successful due to the massive Italian feint, it would not be necessary for the Royal Italian Army to actually invade large tracts of France, having already “earned their pay in blood”. To quote Mussolini during the Spring War, “We do not need to waste many bullets to kill a man if we can but fire one and convince him the gun is loaded.”
​

Figure 20: Field Marshal Pietro Badoglio and General René Olry, opposing commanders during the Italian front of the Battle of France.​

Thus, even as the first troops began to clash in the Alps and on the Mediterranean border, the Regia Marina (Italian Navy) moved into place at twilight near the coast of Nice, ready to execute Operation Giulio. The operation was a hasty adaptation of the former Operation C3, involving amphibious assault on the British-held island of Malta, which was viewed as a threat to potential operations in North Africa. Plans to invade occupy Malta had been drawn up as early as 1938, but had progressed little by the outbreak of the Spring War [4].

The methodology was quickly transplanted to Nice, where the same broad methods of gaining air superiority, using paratroopers to establish footholds at Villefrance-sur-mer and Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat, and dominating the beaches with coastal bombardment to soften up the defences before releasing the troops and armoured vehicles. The structure of the Regio Esercito (Royal Italian Army), however, was not suited for such combined-arms operations, and necessitated a rapid consolidation of its branches. Marshal Pietro Badoglio was put in charge of the initially temporary, but frequently re-assembled Comando Forza Combinata (Combined Force Command, CFC).​

Badoglio was not optimistic about Italy’s ability to wage war, but acknowledged that unless the landings at Nice were successful, Operation Cesare would stall at Menton, and the Alpine offensives would become meaningless. This probably explains the nigh-overkill amounts of materiel deployed at Nice. Involving nearly 150,000 men on the ground, Operation Giulio represented the largest-scale coastal assault of the entire Spring War. Three of the six battleships of the Italian Mediterranean fleet, accompanied by supporting cruisers and destroyers, were utilised to escort the hastily assembled flotilla of transports and even quickly modified shipping vessels which were to provide the direct assault on Nice.

The few vessels of the Marine Nationale (French Navy) which could counter them were thus overwhelmed by sheer numbers. The naval guns, combined with Regia Aeonautica (Royal Air Force) sorties, provided almost continuous bombardment on the defences throughout the assault, from the early hours in the morning, after the first paratroopers had landed, to the late afternoon of the 18th, when the defenders of Nice finally withdrew. That the landings even succeeded at all, given the circumstances, was a testament to Badoglio’s luck as much as it was his skill in assembling the task force.​

Figure 21: Italian forces making landings on the shores of Nice during Operation Giulio. Note naval support from the Regia Marina in the background [5]. ​

The news that the Italians had not only broken through the border east of Menton but had also secured a beachhead at Nice sent the Allies into a panic, who had expected the Italians to opportunistically enter the war, but not so early, and certainly not with such force. Gamelin immediately set about reinforcing the Army of the Alps, as they were exceedingly undermanned compared to the armies in the north engaging the Wehrmacht. However, the problem lay in the two competing interests of time and security. Reinforcing Olry with troops defending the Ardennes Gap would be suicide, but sending forces along the Escaut southwards would take too much time.

Thus, it was agreed that some troops from the Escaut reserve would be sent to reinforce those at the Ardennes, and some would be sent southwards too, but sending a “stopgap” force comprising armoured units at the Ardennes was critical. Necessary as it was, this was the final decision that brought about Gamelin’s downfall. The Luftwaffe had at this stage of the war practically gained air supremacy (beyond even air superiority) and set about mercilessly bombarding the moving convoys. Once spotter planes noted the slight weakening of defences at the Ardennes, Gerd von Rundstedt ordered the immediate assault he had been waiting for since the beginning of Fall Gelb.​

On the 20th of May, Panzer divisions focused their strength on the relatively undefended sector near Sedan, and smashed through the French lines there, as the area was not mined and poorly fortified, and the hasty defences which had been set up were inadequate for repelling the German advance. The Luftwaffe provided its most extensive bombardment of the Spring War at Sedan, allowing the armoured units to rapidly pass through the small gap which the bombers had cleared, and subsequently cross the River Meuse, permitting a direct shot at the Allied rear [6].

The situation in the south grew even worse; Monaco had capitulated when Mussolini contacted Prince Louis II and told him in bland terms that he could choose either to surrender, or suffer bombardment from the Regia Marina, which had been freed up following the fall of Nice. With Prince Louis’s surrender, the defenders at Menton were now at severe risk of being totally surrounded, and Olry sent troops from the Alpine Line to attempt an evacuation. The Italian attempt to emulate Sedan and punch through the Alpine Line, however, was unsuccessful as poor weather conditions at the Little St. Bernard Pass meant that a similar “lightning strike” could not be executed, and the Italians could only maintain their positions [7].​

[1] Figures are as per OTL except that the Italians have managed to activate their reserve too.
[2] Yes, Mr. "All of Gaul is divided into three parts..." himself. I couldn't resist, and neither could the Italian planners.
[3] Only the French Navy was in any position in OTL to attack the Italians, and carried off some successful operations.
[4] See here.
[5] In a bit of irony, this is actually a picture of the Battle of Anzio (of The Wall fame ). I couldn't find any images of World War 2 Italian amphibious operations.
[6] As per OTL. It seemed like a given, based on the circumstances.
[7] As per OTL, and weather conditions are likely to be worse as it's earlier in the year.
​

=======​

So that was the Italian involvement in the Battle of France, which just goes to show how a little preparation can be a very dangerous thing.
​

Next update: "Never have so many had so much trouble in rescuing so few..."

 

[Tom Colton]

Well, I can't pad this one out any further, so I'll have to update at the bottom of the page. Serves me right.

[Rorschach]
​

It certainly is, pal. Don't go kill someone's dogs while you wait, all right?
​

=======

THE BATTLE OF FRANCE​

The breakthrough at Sedan was bad news for the Allies, but utterly dire for the trapped BEF, as the Heer now had the opportunity to completely cut off the Allied reserve from the forces in northern Belgium. An intense debate erupted in Parliament over the next course of action. One camp, led by Horace Wilson, believed that the cause was lost and that the only way to save the BEF was to call for a ceasefire with Germany and thus pull out of France entirely, while the other, led by now War Minister Winston Churchill, claimed that it was still possible to extract the BEF from Dunkirk before the Wehrmacht caught up with them. The proposed Operation Dynamo was a singularly daring one, requiring mobilisation of even civilian merchant vessels while other Allied forces held the Germans back. Halifax considered both proposals; although he, like Wilson, was inclined to the opinion that the BEF was almost impossible to retrieve without a ceasefire, negotiating a separate peace with Germany would be tantamount to betraying the French, even though the BEF had lost all capability for land operations. Furthermore, with the Italian entry into the war, there were no neutral parties left to arbitrate a ceasefire. The second point meant that seeking a ceasefire from Germany now would be further interpreted as unilateral capitulation [1].​

Based on these points, Halifax approved plans for evacuation proposed by Churchill. For Churchill to publicly advocate such a risky operation was a massive gamble, as the disaster at Gallipoli in the Great War had led to his downfall then. Nonetheless, he pressed on, and a veritable fleet of varied vessels was assembled to extract the trapped soldiers. Unfortunately, the delays caused by the confused strategic situation meant that the German supply wagon had caught up with their armoured divisions, and the Panzers could press straight on to the coast – which they did, commanded by General Georg von Küchler. Küchler was ordered to encircle the British before they could evacuate and thus knock the British out of the Battle of France for good. Göring informed Weber that it was a surety that the BEF would be captured or destroyed, as the Luftwaffe could render the harbours useless and dominate the beaches [2].

The battle that ensued on the shores of Dunkirk to evacuate the BEF, as well as accompanied Allied troops, has been described as “The Longest Day” – and it was certainly a titanic effort on the part of the British, who assembled a massive armada of varied naval ships, sloops, trawlers, tugboats and even river vessels – these irregular vessels being termed “The Little Ships of Dunkirk” – and scrambled them to the shores of France, even as the Royal Air Force struggled with the Luftwaffe in the skies above the main city, further from the beaches. The Wehrmacht assault was relentless, tearing through the defensive lines the Allies had set up at Lille between the German pocket and Dunkirk, although not before the British had time to evacuate between the night of the 20th and the full day of the 21st. However, by the 22nd of May, time had run out for the British, and Panzer divisions thundered through the city of Dunkirk, heading straight for the beaches. Through the tireless efforts of the Royal Navy (along with the “Little Ships”) and the RAF, a grand total of about 70,000 British soldiers were evacuated (40,000 on the last day, before the German breakthrough), along with about 20,000 Allied troops. The Royal Navy, beyond transporting evacuees, was tasked with defending the transport vessels from relentless assaults by the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine [3].
​

​

Figure 22: The Evacuation of Dunkirk by Charles Ernest Cundall, painted 1940 [4].​

Of the entire BEF deployed in the defence of France, 340,000 troops, along with an incredible amount of materiel, had fallen into German hands. The reaction of the British press to the evacuation was ambivalent, with some terming it the “Miracle of Dunkirk” – a miracle that even this number had been rescued – while others equally interpreted it as the “Disaster at Dunkirk”, given that the vast majority of the BEF was stranded in France. Halifax thus gave a grave and factual speech on the evening of the 22nd to a rapt audience all over Britain – and indeed, the free world, as President Franklin Delano Roosevelt of the United States of America was also deeply concerned by the European situation.​

Halifax announced from the BBC Broadcasting House that, “Upon the recommendation of War Minister Churchill, I approved ‘Operation Dynamo’ – the evacuation of our troops from France, such that we may rearm and regroup against the advancing German forces. As of two days ago the port of Dunkirk had not yet fallen into German hands, and it was there where we chose to execute this rescue. It was estimated that about forty thousand of our troops might be rescued."

"I can now announce that locked in titanic struggle with the enemy in the seas near Dunkirk and the skies over France, the Royal Air Force, so maligned by the army, along with the Royal Navy, aided by the valiant contribution of the numerous merchant vessels used for the operation, have permitted the rescue of seventy thousand of our servicemen, exceeding our estimates by nearly one-fold. However, this is no valiant victory, nor epic triumph. For, of the four hundred thousand we had deployed, only these seventy thousand have returned – to speak nothing of the situation in France itself,” Halifax continued, explaining the three major breakthroughs along the Escaut, through the Ardennes and at Nice.​

“We have entered a desperate new phase of the war. If the German horde is dissatisfied with their gains in continental Europe, won through trickery and brute force, it will soon be my solemn duty to call for the defence of our own shores against the forces that threaten to overwhelm our island. However, in that task we must remember that this nation has repelled foreign invasion for nigh a thousand years – whether be it in the form of the Spanish Armada, so driven from our shores, or in the fleet Napoleon assembled, so defeated at Trafalgar, both equally foiled by the brilliance and distinction of the defenders of our great nation. We must hope that it shall be many thousands years more before we ever capitulate. Victory against these invaders can only be won through the sacrifice of our blood, our sweat, and if necessary, our own lives. And should we expend all these, and should it still prove insufficient, then let the defence of our island against these forces of tyranny and oppression be known as the finest moments in the history of this nation, and of the British Empire, forevermore.” [5]

The mention of Churchill in the explanation of Dynamo had been agreed upon following discussion between Halifax and Churchill, where Churchill would accept full responsibility for Dunkirk, and quietly be reassigned to another post in the War Office should Parliament turn against him as it had following Gallipoli, to preserve continuity in leadership at this turning point [6]. The Punch cartoon of the 23rd depicts a submerged Churchill, reaching for air, chained by his ankles to two massive anchors, labelled GALLIPOLI 1915 and DUNKIRK 1940 [7]. Nonetheless, Churchill was able to survive a vote of confidence, eventually rising to Prime Minister following Halifax’s premiership.​

Figure 23: Winston Churchill, Minister of War (left) and the Viscount Halifax (right), Prime Minister of Great Britain, following the “Dunkirk Address”.​

Halifax’s statements regarding the French strategic situation were essentially accurate – the stalemate at the Ardennes had ended, and the Wehrmacht was now steadily advancing on Paris, consolidating around Creil and Meaux. Gamelin’s replacement, General Maxime Weygand, failed to make effective counterattacks into the German pocket, eventually withdrawing to defensive lines around Paris. Every day the conflict ground on was an advantage to the Germans as their supply train caught up with them. By the 28th of May, the relentless bombardment of Paris and its greater metropolitan area by the Luftwaffe was supplemented by long-range artillery.

The Luftwaffe would occasionally fly sorties dropping propaganda leaflets, warning of future bombardments and stating that “This destructive conflict need not continue. The sooner this war ends the better for all.” It is said that the majority of these leaflets were converted to pulp, scrap and toilet paper by the Parisians remaining in the city [8]. Nonetheless, the majority of citizens in Northern France began a massive westwards and southwards flight away from German forces, causing congestions all over French traffic networks. Worse yet, the Italian pocket, now well-supplied by the Regia Marina, was steadily (albeit very slowly) expanding, and the Regia Aeronautica was commencing operations against Malta in preparation for a strike against French North Africa [9].​

When it became clear that an offensive against Paris was soon to occur, which would result in a bloody and protracted struggle where any outcome would come at an incredibly high price consisting of French blood and land, Prime Minister Paul Reynaud ordered an evacuation of the French government, and preparations for an extensive siege and even guerrilla campaign, should the Wehrmacht overwhelm continental France. The German Foreign Minister, Konstantin von Neurath, began to send telegraph messages to the French government, indicating the German government “did not wish to achieve the destruction of France”, instead being agreeable to “the end of this conflict which the great powers of Europe have been drawn into through no wish of their own”, and above all, “avoidance of the trenches once again”.

Even as the missive was received, plans were being drawn up for Operation Ariel, the evacuation of Allied forces through the west coast, and when prompted for his opinion, Weygand stated that “asking for a strategy now is akin to attempting to fix a lock upon a broken door”. When the new War Minister, Marshal Philippe Pétain, concurred, Reynaud resigned in favour of Pétain, saying that “May God give you the grace to save our nation on paper; I have already tried to do so on the battlefield, to absolutely no avail.”​

Figure 24: Marshal Philippe Pétain, Prime Minister of the Third French Republic following Paul Reynaud’s resignation and signatory of the Treaty of Gutenberg.​

Weygand was quickly driven to Compiegne under armed guard, where he agreed to a ceasefire with German forces, preceding full negotiations elsewhere. Olry and the Army of the Alps were similarly ordered to cease operations. Pétain contacted Halifax, informing him of the decision to begin negotiations, and Halifax responded by asking Chamberlain, who had been reassigned as Foreign Secretary, to request a similar ceasefire. These were agreed to by Neurath and Count Galeazzo Ciano, the Italian Foreign Minister, and it was announced that negotiations were to begin immediately in Gutenberg Castle, situated in neutral Liechtenstein [10]. When Chamberlain informed Halifax of the impending negotiations, Halifax then said to him, “I have now become the modern Atlas, bearing the fate of Europe upon my shoulders. I share some of the feeling you too bore; let us hope that we may bring about a stronger peace than that which was made at Munich.”​

[1] It's commonly held that if Halifax was PM, he would advocate a ceasefire, like he did in OTL as Foreign Minister. Here, the situation is slightly different, furthermore, as Foreign Minister, he could advocate such a stand, but representing the British in the struggle, it's somewhat plausible that Halifax is more concerned about possibly projecting an image of abandoning the French.
[2] Unlike OTL, there is no Halt Order controversy, as the supply lines have caught up and Weber wants as many hostages...I mean POWs...as he can get, so he can use them as a bargaining chip.
[3] About that many were rescued on the first three days of OTL Dunkirk, although to be frank I just switched the numbers around.
[4] Apparently I'm supposed to attribute the source of this painting if I use it, so here you go.
[5] It's not quite "We shall fight on the beaches...", but then again, Halifax is not quite Churchill either.
[6] Churchill here is doing the Batman in The Dark Knight thing - as Minister of War, he can take it, but Britain going through 3 PMs in a week would be a major disruption to the leadership just when it really isn't needed. I'm aware Churchill and Halifax were hardly friends, but this is a pragmatically calculated political move by both, not an act of particular friendship or anything. (Oh god, now I'm imagining Halifax and Churchill as two halves of a tsundere thing. Don't judge me!!)
[7] I do like my political cartoons, don't I?
[8] I'm pretty sure I lifted this off some other similar anecdote somewhere else, but for the life of me I can't remember where.
[9] As in OTL, although earlier.
[10] Liechtenstein can into relevance??
​

=======
​

Next update: [OPEN ALLEGIANCE MESH] (Warning: Problem Sleuth. I bear no responsibility for hours of your lives lost due to this.)

Index has been updated!
​

 

[Tom Colton]

On to the next update! Here we go...(this is gonna be a long one)

=======​

THE TREATY OF GUTENBERG​

“This is no peace. All we have ensured today is that the next war will begin in ten years’ time.”
“Ten years is all we will need.”​

German Foreign Minister Konstantin von Neurath and Führer Friedrich Weber, after the signing of the Treaty of Gutenberg and the Quadripartite Non-Aggression Pact
​

Figure 25: Gutenberg Castle in Balzers, Liechtenstein, where the Treaty of Gutenberg and the Four Power Non-Aggression Pact were signed, ending the Spring War.​

The mood of 1st June, 1940, was a singularly tense one, as the leaders of Britain, France, Germany and Italy, as well as those of the Low Countries, Denmark, Monaco and Norway, were all assembled in Gutenberg Castle, which was located in neutral Liechtenstein and thus acceptable to all as a venue for negotiations. Weber’s wife, Mina, noted in her journal that on the morning of the 1st, the Führer “bore an expression such as that of a fox glaring at a trapped hare” [1]. When asked for the reason of this confidence, Weber is said to have responded that “this was the day of Germany’s destiny”. Mussolini shared a similar confidence in being able to squeeze concessions out of France, based on the Italian breakthroughs at Nice and Menton and the subjugation of Monaco, which had been exaggerated by Italian propaganda as a massive triumph for the Regio Esercito.

The French had decided upon attempting to negotiate an early end to the war, without having to resort to exiling their own government to North Afrca and conducting a guerrilla campaign in German-occupied France, which based on the brutal German treatment of Polish partisans thus far, could only end in massive bloodshed and suffering. Pétain’s mission was to free France from German occupation and, if possible, prevent annexation of French territory to the NSDAP regime. After deep consultation with Churchill, Halifax decided that for the sake of the 340,000 prisoners of war left in France, the opportunity to retrieve them should be at the least considered. Furthermore, the British presence at the negotiating table also meant that the British would be able to levy pressure on Germany to release their hold on France, if not the Low Countries, by threatening to immediately return to war, unleashing the power of the Royal Navy on Germany’s international trade networks and strangling the German economy – the same conditions which had hastened the end of the Great War.

Nonetheless, Weber and Mussolini both knew that they practically held all the cards in the negotiation, and consulted with each other to produce a coherent series of demands to secure their western borders against Britain and France, and attempt to secure the Mediterranean against interference from the Royal Navy and the Marine Nationale. Beyond these, Germany would need to secure the ore imports from Norway and prevent stricture of their trade flows, in addition to building a strong bulwark in France and the Low Countries against British intervention when he eventually moved against the Soviet Union. Upon this point a brief but notable rift formed in the German top leadership; Göring noted the obvious benefit in occupying France and looting its resources for future production, while using the French coast as a defensive line against interference from the Royal Navy, while Blomberg and Neurath protested that the costs of deprivation of Atlantic trade (which had already severely damaged war production) due to British blockades, and having to install permanent occupying forces in France, Norway and the Low Countries would be a burden neither the economy nor the Wehrmacht could bear should it choose to strike eastwards later.

Italy had the matter of building its colonial empire. French North Africa and especially the islands of Corsica and Malta marked strategic threats to the operation of the Regia Marina - the former described by Mussolini as "a gun pointed at the heart of Italy", and they would either have to be annexed or neutralised. Mussolini would spend many diplomatic efforts to bring Francoist Spain into his camp to ensure the security of the Straits of Gibraltar over the years to come. There was also the matter of Italy’s irredentist claims in Nice and Menton (as well as Corsica and North Africa), the former two of which were occupied by the Regio Esercito at the time of the negotiations. Beneficial to both Germany and Italy would be some form of signed guarantee against British and French interference in their future ventures in the East. Thus it was armed with these demands, Weber and Mussolini flew to Liechtenstein.

The arrangements at Castle Gutenberg were such that the palace was sequestered into three parts; the central partition was where Halifax, Petain, Mussolini and Weber, along with their diplomatic teams would discuss the terms of the treaty, while the other two sections were reserved for the accompanying powers, where both the Allied and Axis powers could separately confer terms. Chief among the Allied diplomatic party were representatives from the Low Countries, Norway and the Polish government-in-exile, although the latter was ignored by Weber; Vidkun Quisling, the Nasjonal Samling politician who claimed to represent the legitimate Norwegian government was also present at Gutenberg on Weber’s invitation. It is claimed that when Quisling and Haakon VII of Norway met in the corridors of Gutenberg on the way to the lavatory, Quisling attempted to strike up conversation, but was instantly silenced by a singularly imperious silent stare from King Haakon. Naturally, it was in the interest of the Allied leaders to demand the restoration of the governments prior to the German incursion, but Halifax and Pétain were in a very poor position to demand German withdrawal from all occupied territories. Nonetheless, Halifax still had the massive bargaining chip of threatening to choke Germany’s economy should terms prove to be unfavourable. On the stroke of noon of the 1st of June, Weber and Neurath presented the demands of the German government:

1. Britain and France are to recognise the German occupation of Poland and Denmark.
2. The Free State of Alsace-Lorraine is to be established between the French and German borders, is to be administered by Germany, but is to be demilitarised.
3. The Free City of Narvik is to be established as an autonomous enclave on the Norwegian coast and is to permit the Wehrmacht to operate within its ports and territorial waters.
4. A “Four-Power Nonaggression Pact” (also known as the “Quadripartite Nonaggression Pact”), ten years in duration, is to be signed between Germany, Italy, Britain and France, with the following terms:

a. The four nations are not to declare war on each other, nor to sign any pact or treaty with other powers which would induce a state of war between the four nations.
b. The neutrality of Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway (excluding the Free City of Narvik) and the Free State of Alsace-Lorraine, along with air space and territorial waters where applicable, is to be recognised by all four parties.
c. Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands are to be demilitarised, limited to levels necessary for internal security. The Free State of Alsace-Lorraine is to be totally demilitarised, as per Point 2.​

5. The French military is to be reduced to 150,000 men, with the size of their Navy and Air Force to be reduced proportionately.
6. In lieu of a proportion of reparations, the former German colonies of Togoland and Kamerun are to be returned to the German government.

These points are to be accepted prior to any withdrawal of German forces from France, the Low Countries and Norway sans the territories mentioned in Points 2 and 3.​

Following this, Count Ciano presented the demands of the Italian government:

1. The majority of the department of Alpes-Maritimes (containing Nice and Menton), along with the entirety of the island of Corsica, is to be annexed by Italy.
2. In addition to the above, a demilitarised zone is to be established west of the French-Italian border.
3. The Regia Marina (amended: along with the Kriegsmarine) is to be permitted use of British and French Mediterranean ports in Europe and North Africa.
4. France is to recognise the transfer of suzerainty of Monaco to the crown of Italy, as per the instrument of capitulation signed by Prince Louis II.​

The reaction of Halifax and Pétain to the demands was of surprise, to say the least. The British and French had expected a drawn-out struggle for France’s territorial integrity, and now it had transpired that the German government appeared to have an almost total disinterest in holding on to the territories it had wrested from French hands in the bloody month-long conflict. This may have been a surprise to the British and French, but these demands were perfectly in line with Weber’s overall policy (which may in turn have been influenced by Quisling’s proposals, although many of these strands can be traced independently to Weber, Schacht and Neurath).

Between Göring’s and Neurath’s camp, Weber had settled on the latter; assuming the war with both the British and French could be ended or at the least delayed, it made no sense to waste troops guarding the western border and Norway if a demilitarised zone and guarantee of non-interference could be obtained, and the resources which could be looted from France paled compared to essential materials such as rubber, chromium and tungsten, which had to be shipped in from overseas. The demands of Togoland and Kamerun were added as the war came to its closing stages, as Kamerun had proven useful for rubber production in the past and Togoland represented a convenient base to secure shipments from Kamerun, as well as a source of cash crops such as coffee. Of course, the two colonies were to gain even more, infamous, significance as the NSDAP regime consolidated its racial policies there.

In contrast with the surprisingly lenient German demands, the Italian demands were somewhat ambitious and disproportionate to the level of success their armed forces had achieved. Mussolini evidently felt that the Italian contribution to the Battle of France had proved decisive in providing a critical feint for German assaults further north, although when asked on the issue, Weber later would mention at each instance that “Germany waited for nobody,” ironically reminiscent of Wellington’s same insistence that he was not waiting for the Prussians at Waterloo. Therefore, Mussolini, in this apparently superior position, felt entitled to requesting territorial annexations such as those of Corsica, Menton, Nice and Monaco, even though the Regia Marina had only made indecisive attacks on the first.

In contrast, despite Weber’s total dominance of the Low Countries, Norway and encroachment of Metropolitan France, even the irredentist claim of Alsace-Lorraine had been reduced to a demilitarised zone. The demand of Corsica was partly due to irredentist concern, but also to neutralise the clear security threat it presented to Mussolini’s Mediterranean ambitions. This contrast was partly due to the two leaders’ differences in personalities but was broadly part of their strategy of this paper war; by appearing unreasonable and demanding, Mussolini would push the Allies further to accepting Weber’s more modest proposals, and if they accepted both, Mussolini would further benefit at no cost. However, these points were conversely easier for Halifax and Pétain to negotiate, and the following amendments were proposed:

1. The Free State of Alsace-Lorraine is instead to be administered by a Franco-German commune to enforce its neutrality.
2. The Four Power Non-Aggression Pact is to instead last five years, with the option of extending the terms every five years.
3. The French military is to be reduced instead to 250,000 personnel, with appropriate adjustments to its navy and air force.
4. The Regia Marina and Kriegsmarine are to be permitted the use of French Mediterranean ports, but Malta is to be demilitarised. The use of the ports of Corsica is permitted, but personnel are not permitted access beyond the docks.
5. Monaco is to retain autonomy and its own ruler and separately elected council, although suzerainty is to be transferred to the Italian crown.​

The first point regarding the occupation of Poland, the very issue which had brought Britain and France to declare war on Germany in the first place, was contingent to the ceasefire in the first place – Weber required Britain and France to shed their intransigence over the issue, and essentially made that transparently clear in presenting the first demand. Denmark was more easily defensible than the Low Countries, and its government had proved surprisingly collaborative. Regarding the usage of Mediterranean ports and France’s disarmament, Halifax required a freer hand, such that the British would not be hampered in its Mediterranean front, and the French could at least bring a modicum of force to bear, when they inevitably returned to arms. Furthermore, it was also absolutely clear to Halifax and Pétain what the guarantee of neutrality for the Low Countries and Alsace-Lorraine was: the four states were to form a massive demilitarised zone separating France from Germany, the Free State of Alsace-Lorraine simply sealing off the border. Pétain thus conceded Alsace-Lorraine, the same territory France had demanded from Germany on the conclusion of the Great War, with the guarantee that the interests of the native French population would be protected by a French council.

The Italian demands were also to be mostly acceded to, given the apparent close coordination between the German and Italian governments – both sets of proposals had to be accepted together or neither would agree to an armistice, following the provisions of the Pact of Steel. Corsica represented as much of a threat to France if it fell into Italian hands as it currently did to Italy, and at least the effort to attempt autonomy for Monaco had to be made. Nonetheless, the existence of the two demilitarised zones worked to Halifax’s favour as much as it did Weber’s and Mussolini’s: if it guaranteed against Italo-German aggression, it was essentially a free hand in rearmament. Furthermore, the Quadripartite Pact stated nothing against weapons exports, meaning that should Weber turn his aggressions elsewhere, Britain still would be ready to supply them with material aid. Although Mussolini raised some consternation at “losing” Corsica, most of these demands were agreed to fairly quickly, minus some minor disagreements over the precise areas to be ceded and the new borders.

[1] Inspired by this segment. This one too.

======
​

Not many annotations to make here, since I feel that this segment mostly can stand on its own. The chief inspiration for the terms of the Treaty of Gutenberg come from this TL about a Halifax premiership, which I must admit I haven't actually read through to the finish, but I reckoned made a good foundation for a set of terms which the British and French would be likely to accept.

As we can see here, Pétain has slightly more of a backbone than in OTL, although the decision to leave France alone is ultimately more of a decision of Weber's than any diplomatic genius of Halifax and Pétain. Pétain thus has a slightly more positive historical image than OTL - although people see him alternately as victim and villain, and some even the second coming of the November traitors for ceding Alsace-Lorraine (though technically not) as well as Nice and Menton, which all fell into the Italo-French DMZ in OTL anyway.
​

"Not cool, Maréchal."
​

This chapter isn't finished yet, though, because another set of players is just about to enter the fray...
​

 

[Tom Colton]

Can I add my tuppence ha'penny to the chorus of approval for update length and frequency on this TL. Tends to be just about perfect, easy to remember what happened last, and not so much info that it overwhelms you (though the relatively familiar subject matter helps with the first - just enough similarities to OTL to be plausible, just enough differences to be interesting). Though at one point I did get the odd confusion with 'The Falcon Cannot Hear', I think that was just due to initially reading both right through fairly quickly and close together. I've think I've got what happened in each fairly clear now, despite the incipient Alzheimer's

The other TL where I find updates equally good in frequency and length is 'Azure Main', which I think this may have supplanted as my favourite TL. Some others (no names, no pack drill) are updated so infrequently that you have to read back to remember where the TL has got to, others come with such lengthy updates, at such frequency (presumably mostly pre-written), that you consider unsubscribing, even on an interesting TL, because it's just such hard work to keep up.

There, will that praise warrant gentler treatment next time I forget Luxembourg?

I agree with you Tom Colton Conspiracy is a great movie. And I certainly will vote for this TL in the next Turtledove Awards.

Thank you both! Good to know I won't need to work any faster.

Conspiracy is a great, chilling, look into the thought that went into the Final Solution. Heydrich in TTL will also have his day in the limelight eventually. As for Luxembourg, it's not my wrath you'll need to deal with, but all five of theirs (they got reinforcements from last time).

On to the next update. I was thinking of delaying it, but I decided that two delays in a row was too much to bear, so here you go!

=======

THE TREATY OF GUTENBERG
​

However, Weber still had one last trick to play. About two hours into the discussions, the castle staff announced the arrival of another diplomatic party – one constituted of politicians from the French Mandate of Syria, invited by Weber. Chief among these were SSNP (Syrian Social Nationalist Party) politicians Antun Saadeh and Sami al-Hinnawi (see Part 2)[1], with whom the German government had communicated, promising a German push for independence, along with weapons aid and a leading role in Syrian politics in exchange for exclusive basing and oil drilling rights. The sudden appearance of the Syrian diplomatic team was contentious, to say the least; Pétain rose from his seat, stating the future of Mandatory Syria was not an issue to be discussed at this table.​

To this, Weber retorted that the Syrians had been waiting for an opportunity, and since the French government was present, the Germans were happy to mediate the French fulfilment of their accord of 1936 guaranteeing Syrian independence; after all, since the Germans and French were both to be bound by the Quadripartite Pact, there was no concern for worry of Germany, or for that matter Italy, pursuing aggressive ventures in French North Africa. The reduced state of the French military also hampered the utility of bases in their colonial possessions. The discussion regarding the fate of Syria was instead moved to the Bergfried (keep), where the tables and chairs were hastily set up. Pétain, backed up against the figurative wall, realised he had no choice but to accede to the demands of the SSNP, but he and Paul Baudoin, the French foreign minister, decided to take steps to prevent an independent Syria from turning into a German satellite state. To this end they proposed the following conditions:​

The French government is prepared to ratify the Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence on the following conditions:

1. An interim government led by the current President of Syria is to hold free and fair elections upon handover of power to the Syrian administration, which will work together with the French High Commissioner to facilitate a movement towards total independence.
2. Syria is to permit French military bases on its soil and use its air space as agreed upon in the Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence.
3. As an independent state, Syria is exempt from the terms of the Treaty of Gutenberg regarding use of French Mediterranean ports.​

The SSNP politicians were outraged at the terms, with Saadeh declaring that the terms of the Franco-Syrian Treaty were obsolete, and that the Syrian people would not accept “French imperialism” and demanded a full French withdrawal from “the lands of the Syrian people”, stating that “The time of the French domination of the Levant is at an end”, among other nationalistic statements, getting so heated in his attacks that he almost had to be physically restrained. At this point, Neurath, stating the German government’s interests in the “principles of national self-determination” – a subtle insult at the pretexts the Treaty of Versailles had used to partition the Central Powers – instead proposed an alternate set of conditions:​

A modified form of the Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence is to be ratified, excluding the provisions on French basing rights in Syria, contingent upon the following:

1. The French High Commissioner and an interim government led by the government is to immediately organise free and fair elections, upon which the elected government is to assume total control of the new, independent, nation’s affairs.
2. Following the elections, and for the period of this year, the French plenipotentiary is free to make recommendations to the new government, but will have no executive power beyond control of a force of gendarmes, for purposes of internal security
3. French military forces – which are to be reduced in size by the terms of the Treaty of Gutenberg – are to withdraw immediately from its bases, but the French Navy is permitted to use the territorial waters and ports of Syria for a period of one year beginning 1st June 1940, and the High Commissioner shall be empowered to deploy gendarmes for the same period.
4. Following this period of one year, the French plenipotentiary and Navy is to be withdrawn, and Syria added as a corollary to Quadripartite Nonaggression Pact from 1st June 1941 onwards.
​

Under these terms, the deadline for full French withdrawal had suddenly scaled down from 25 years from 1936 (i.e. 1961) to 1 year from 1940 (i.e. 1941). However, given the terms were surprisingly generous in that they at the least permitted one entire year for France to foster a pro-French government, and allowed continued French involvement in the form of the gendarmes to be left in Syria. However, unbeknownst to Pétain and Baudouin, Germany had been, and would continue, covertly supplying the SSNP with Great War surplus weapons, leaving the People’s Guard [2], the SSNP's paramilitary, capable of subverting French control. Germany’s key interest in aiding Syria was in finding a secondary source of petroleum and expanding its Mediterranean reach – neither the terms of the Quadripartite Nonaggression Pact nor these terms prevented weapons sales, meaning Germany could easily maintain a “guns for oil” programme, endearing the new Syrian state to Germany that much more. ​

The “Bergfried Treaty” was thus signed by Pétain and the Syrian politicians, granting Syrian sovereignty. With the strong presence of the SSNP at these talks, they were essentially assured of winning the elections by presenting themselves as nationalist heroes. The National Bloc, while a force for independence, was not much more than a disunited conglomerate of conservatives and businessmen, and had little mandate beyond gaining independence from the French, whereas the SSNP, with its nationalist and irredentist agenda, proved popular. Over the period of the next year, the SSNP’s popularity would skyrocket, aided by the People’s Guard’s paramilitary tactics. On 27 September 1941, President Sami al-Hinnawi announced the transformation of the state into the “Syrian Social Republic”, allied to Weber’s Germany in all but name.​

​

Figure 26: Flag and coat of arms of the Syrian Social Republic. [3]​

[1] Here's a link for those too lazy to go the index.
[2] If it's good enough for Gaddafi, it's good enough for the SSNP. Sounded Fascist enough, anyway.
[3] It's incredible just what swapping two colours on the flag can imply, eh?
​

=======
​

Next update, ending this chapter, will cover the myriad international reactions to this new status quo. See you then.
​

 

[Tom Colton]

Thin as a rake, beak nose, thick glasses... isn't that one of the ways the OTL Nazis characterised the Jews?

I for one, shall enjoy the irony, especially if some wag from Punch or the Times decides to modify one of TTL's anti Jewish posters to look like Weber.

That would be deliciously ironic.

Pretty much. Weber fits the exact mold of what the Nazi's considered to be a stereotypical "Evil Jew" Right down to the man's personality and sadism.

This is deliciously ironic for those Nazi monsters. Even more so then Hitler being everything that was the exact opposite of the supposed "Aryan ideal". That was funny. This is just karma here!

Truth be told, I was envisioning a political cartoon of Weber pointing to a poster of a "typical Jew", ranting that these untermenschen were to be purged. The joke? The two are indistinguishable.

With those cheeks and the jaw his head looks very much like a skull. I can imagine cartoonists going heavy for that. It will give all mockery a very morbid, sinister and creepy spin though.

It certainly won't bode well with kids. I wonder what Warner Bros. and Disney and all the other big Allied studios are going to do with Herr Meets Hare and all the other propaganda cartoons that involved the Nazis. Weber is going to be the nightmare of a whole generation of kids.

Well, it really depends. The Red Skull might be an even more spot-on analogue for the Nazi dictatorship, but then again the depictions of Goebbels (whom Weber most resembles out of the generally known Nazi cabal) generally tend towards ridicule rather than fear.

Here's my contribution: For hitler people could just say he's a complete maniac. But with weber, perhaps rather than seeing the local vets as the friendly, pet loving animal doctors, people might start to see vets as vivisectionist creeps, weird people who treat people like animals. Although that depends on how prominent that fact that weber was a veterinarian is. Hitler was an artist, but nobody associates painters with pure evil.

The anti intellectual backlash, because a smart, calculating, educated man turned into the greatest mass murderer in history, would have wider ramifications. People would be afraid the local political theorist or biology researcher might be a racist maniac, with secret plans to cause global pain and suffering. How strong that feeling will be, and how it affects the world, I don't know.

This also depends. Weber technically "rose" from being a veterinary officer taking care of the horses in the cavalry, so he'd be more associated with equines, but then again, his integration of veterinary science with the screwed up Nazi racial beliefs would certainly induce a certain kind of backlash against people practising artificial selection in the animal kingdom (basically everyone in agriculture since ever, but paranoids don't need to abide by "facts") as they get lumped with "social Darwinists".

Then again again, the governments of the world know that they need their vets (if not their intellectuals*), so the feamongering ought not to spread to official levels. Otherwise who would take care of poor Checkers when he gets fleas?
*Your mileage may vary depending or not on whether you're in a country advocating proletariat revolution

...Enough dawdling! The update beckons!!

=======

THE TREATY OF GUTENBERG
​

It was evening from Berlin to London when the news of the end of the Spring War broke across the world, with the signings of the Treaty of Gutenberg (and Quadripartite Nonaggression Pact) and the “Bergfried Treaty” occurring in the late afternoon. International reactions were highly mixed, with many relieved that the trenches had been avoided with relatively little bloodshed or damage to national pride, while others grimly noting that the British and French had basically dealt Germany a free hand east of the Low Countries.

British writer Sebastian Haffner wrote of an “Iron Curtain”falling across the borders of the new demilitarised zone, separating the free world from the totalitarianism of the German sphere of influence; the term would be repeated by Winston Churchill in his famous “Iron Curtains” speech. Clement Attlee, Labour leader, bitterly contested the treaty, stating it was merely an extension of the policy of appeasement which had led to the whole mess in the first place, in addition to stranding Poland under German and Soviet domination [2].

Others noted that the terms of the treaty left matters unresolved which were far too important to shelve, and only barred a return to arms for ten (or even merely five) years. Copies of the famous cartoon “Peace and Future Cannon Fodder” drawn by the late political cartoonist Will Dyson, having (now) correctly predicted the outbreak of war from the outcome of the Treaty of Versailles, became commonly circulated. It was sometimes appended with a sequel where Pétain replaces Clemenceau and Halifax replaces Lloyd George, where Pétain now comments, “There is that weeping again!” as the child representing the “1940 Class” is now joined by his sibling from the “1950 class”. Like its predecessor, “More Cannon Fodder” would sadly prove to be highly prescient.

Figure 27: “Peace and Future Cannon Fodder”, a political cartoon by Will Dyson published after the Treaty of Versailles. It would gain further currency following the Treaty of Gutenberg.​

The reaction in France itself was highly ambivalent: while the withdrawal of German and Italian forces was seen as a massive relief with Pétain hailed as having saved France once again (as he had done at the Battle of Verdun during the Great War), it had come at the cost of key territories such as Alsace-Lorraine (partially) and the Alpes-Maritimes (totally), which many radical elements deemed to be unreasonable concessions. Among these was a particularly disgruntled officer in the French Army, General Charles de Gaulle, who until the last days of the war had been busy developing groundwork for a massive clandestine resistance movement to sabotage German and Italian efforts, as well as plans to evacuate the French government to Algeria. These plans, naturally, had been stymied by the negotiated end of the war.

When the news broke of the cessions, de Gaulle resigned his commission in disgust, publishing a 10-page long resignation letter denouncing the decisions of Pétain and his government; this document would be widely circulated by many similarly dissatisfied French. Even as Pétain revived Action Française as a political platform to legitimise his premiership, de Gaulle would consolidate the revanchist sentiment under the banner of the French Social Progress Party (Progrès Social Français, PSF), nicknamed the “Free France” (La France Libre) Party, with a stated aim of “freeing” France from the restrictive terms of the Treaty of Gutenberg and the Quadripartite Nonaggression Pact. The rallying cry of “À Berlin” (“To Berlin”) would be revived for the first time in nearly a century by the PSF [2].

Figure 28: Charles de Gaulle, officer in the French Army during the Spring War, later leader of the Free France Party, then Prime Minister of France [3].​

The German and Italian peoples were naturally ecstatic, with their newspapers declaring that their forces had won a massive victory against the “Anglo-French Cabal” which had been “restraining the [German and Italian] people from achieving their destiny”. Weber, in a public address, announced that the end of the Spring War was merely “the beginning of German achievement” and that they were now “free to pursue our development into the greatest power the Germanic peoples will have ever known in their thousands of years of glorious history”.

Mussolini similarly paraded through Rome in a triumph reminiscent of the ancient Roman generals, announcing that “Italy has, for the first time as an independent kingdom, finally proven on the world stage that there are none who can stand in its way” [4], and also organised triumphal parades for King Vittorio Emanuele of Italy in the newly annexed territories of Nice and Menton, as well as the subjugated Monaco, which were attended by staged crowds proclaiming their eternal loyalty for the Italian Crown. In Monaco, Prince Louis II was made to hand suzerainty of his domain over to the Italian king in a submissive ceremony held within the Prince’s Palace. Of course, these gains (in addition to Ethiopia and Albania) proved to be insufficient to satisfy Mussolini’s expansionist desires, contributing to the outbreak of the Third Balkans War, to say nothing of Weber’s own eastward ambitions, which would only fully bloom beginning in the next year.

​

Figure 29: Benito Mussolini reviews supporters assembled in Menton during a triumphal parade.​

Stalin watched the developments in Western Europe warily. With the war in the west concluded so rapidly, albeit not without difficulty, Weber’s ambitions could only turn in one other direction – towards Russia. Even as Germany and Russia had concluded the Molotov-Neurath Pact, the USSR had already been accelerating its military production in preparation for aggression from the west either by a capitalist alliance or the virulently anticommunist NSDAP regime in Germany acting in isolation, possibly in collusion with other minor Eastern European powers. Thus, both the economic and military guarantees of the German-Soviet treaties were used as means of extracting products from Germany while using the time bought to prepare the Red Army. However, Stalin was beginning from a losing position as it was – the Great Purges of the late ‘30s had decimated the experienced officer corps, most prominently Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky, who had been one of the chief advocates for modernisation of the Red Army.

These inefficiencies and weaknesses in the armed forces severely hampered Soviet performance during the Winter War, an event (along with the publicised Great Purges) which contributed further to alienating the Western powers, even those opposed to Weber’s expansionism, and brought Finland closer to the German camp by fostering revanchist sentiment among the Finns. The latter point would prove decisive when Weber launched Operation Barbarossa in concert with Finland, as joint Finno-German offensives struck decisively at the critical ports of Leningrad (now Petrograd) and Murmansk. Thus, Stalin was essentially left to slowly stock up and prepare troops and defensive positions for the inevitable eastward turn of the Wehrmacht – whenever it occurred. It would be folly itself for Weber to invade immediately after concluding two incredibly taxing campaigns, but every spring Weber waited could only aid Stalin by granting him more time [5].

Across the Atlantic, the American populace watched the situation develop in Europe with a mixture of trepidation and apathy. Many Americans had descended from populations originating from nations which were now under either German or Soviet domination, and among them there was an outcry for action against this flagrant aggression. However, many others remembered the large toll (while small in comparison to that taken on the European combatants) the Great War and the subsequent “Spanish Flu” epidemic had taken on the American populace of barely a generation ago, and had concluded based on observation of the European situation since then that a total disengagement from foreign affairs was in the best interest of the United States. This policy of isolationism was that which had been taken by most of the candidates in the Republican Party competing for the presidential nomination for the elections of 1940.

Between New York District Attorney Thomas Dewey, Ohio Senator Robert Taft and Michigan Senator Arthur Vandenberg, the aggressive gang-buster Dewey emerged victorious, only to lose to the Democrats in the election. Incumbent President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, champion of the New Deal which had helped America out of the Great Depression, had not opted to break from the “two-term” tradition, as he felt he only had grounds to challenge it if a crisis such as a global war warranted continuity in leadership. The end of the Spring War had forestalled any such plans, and he instead lent his support to Cordell Hull, the Secretary of State, who went on to secure the nomination ahead of candidates such as John Nance Gardner, the incumbent Vice President, and other Party stalwarts; New York Senator Robert Wagner was nominated for the bottom half of the ticket to even the challenge Dewey faced. Hull rode to victory on Roosevelt’s popularity, particularly the strength of the New Deal reforms and their positive effects on the economy and populace of the United States, and performed strongly at the Presidential election, although the Republicans made some small gains in the House and Senate [6].

Figure 30: Outgoing United States President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (left), in discussion with the President-elect, Cordell Hull (right).​

The Japanese military, which essentially held total dominion over government affairs, used the confused French situation and demilitarisation as an opportunity to push into French Indochina. This was a strategically necessary move in their execution of the Second Sino-Japanese War, as the Chinese forces organised by the Kuomintang (國民黨, lit. Chinese People’s National Party, usually referred to as just “Nationalists”), led by Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek (蔣介石, Jiang Jieshi) and Chinese Communist Party, led by Mao Zedong (毛澤東), were being supplied through the Sino-Vietnamese Railway connecting to Hanoi, as well as being aided by the Malayan Chinese Diaspora through there. Furthermore, an occupation of Indochina would be a necessary first step to realising their expansionist ambitions in Southeast Asia.

As such, the Imperial Japanese Army massed on the border, and Foreign Minister Kichisaburō Nomura set to badgering the French government in Paris and in Da Lat with an agreement for France to shut the Sino-Vietnamese Railway. The French forces in Indochina were outnumbered nearly tenfold, and with the terms of the Treaty of Gutenberg severely limiting the size of the Marine Nationale, there was simply no way for Pétain to exert any amount of force beyond Metropolitan France and North Africa.

As such, the French government agreed to terms permitting transit of Japanese troops and restrictions on the Sino-Vietnamese Railway in return for a guarantee of non-aggression. The pact would go on to be flagrantly violated by the next government led by then-Minister of War Hideki Tojo, eventually triggering the broadening of the Second Sino-Japanese War into the Asia-Pacific War, which would engulf all of Southeast Asia and encompass Australasia and the Pacific too. The Japanese intercession into Indochina, while strategically necessary, had alerted the colonial powers of the potential threat to their colonial holdings, prompting shifts in forces and materiel eastwards by Britain and the Netherlands, with the Dutch government hastily recognising the “self-governance” of the Dutch East Indies, terming the territory the “United States of Indonesia” to get around the wording of the Treaty of Gutenberg.

When challenged by Neurath as a violation of the agreements, Prime Minister Hendrikus Colijn [7] claimed that the terms clearly stated that Netherlands themselves were to be demilitarised, and that the forces were being transferred to the control of the United States of Indonesia. This apparent move of pragmatism would have massive implications in the Indonesian bid for self-determination once the Asia-Pacific War had concluded.

Figure 31:Troops from the Royal Indonesian Army in training in Borneo.​

While the Spring War had come to an end, all parties involved – and many beyond – fully understood that the “peace” which had emerged from it was no permanent guarantee of freedom from war for all, but merely represented an opportunity for rearmament and preparation for the inevitable next round. Thus, just as the Phoney War had given way to the Spring War, the Spring War too segued into the “Phoney Peace” [8], the second of the Cold Wars which would define the era. As Germany geared up for Operation Barbarossa, the NSDAP regime consolidated and tightened its hold on its newly-occupied territories, commencing its insidious processes of subversion and subjugation, some of which would be fully realised with the acquisition of Weber’s “Lebensraum” (“living space”) in the East.

[1] Attlee opposed appeasement from the start, and there's no reason why he'd relent here.
[2] Given that the PSF was Gaullism before Gaullism was a thing, I figured this was an organic development. The slogan was last used in the Franco-Prussian War, so you know de Gaulle's on to a winner here.
[3] You have no idea how hard it was finding a picture of de Gaulle not in uniform at the time (this picture is very cleverly cropped to hide it...oh bugger, I've given the game away! )
[4] Jeez, Mussolini, people who say that are always the villain, don'tcha know?
[5] More or less as in OTL. The leadup to *Barbarossa will be in the next part.
[6] At this point, I would like to say massive thanks to Ariosto on the points regarding American politics. With no Roosevelt third-term bid and no war in Europe, Wendell Willkie's nomination bid peters out quickly, leaving the Republican ticket as Dewey/Vandenberg. Not the last this TL will have to hear from Dewey, though. Henry Wallace is not getting to even within sniffing distance of the Presidency, unfortunately (for him).
[7] Not captured as in OTL (alternatively, set free due to the end of the war). The OTL prime minister-in-exile, Pieter Sjoerds Gerbrand, was deadset against Indonesian separation so I can't see him doing this, even if it is to flip the metaphorical bird at Japan. Have a flag of the USI:

Inspirations: Orange Free State, Naval Jack of Indonesia​

Unintentional inspirations: Flag of the United States, Flag of the British East India Company​

[8] Credit to DaveB for suggesting this. "Cold War" is now a somewhat more generic term, but will usually be interpreted as referring to a particular phase in this timeline.

=======
​

And that brings us to the end of Part 4: All Hell Breaks Loose! I'll update the index in a moment, but first, a major (and disappointing) announcement!

The next update will not be any sooner than Monday 22nd September 2014 as I will be busy with an overseas project. Internet connectivity isn't guaranteed either, but if I do get it, I'll try to post snippets of other material to flesh the world of Weber's Germany out up until around June 1940 in TTL (and of course, answer any relevant questions).

If I can't log in, you've got until around next week to ask your burning questions, after which I can't guarantee any responses from me.
​

 

[Tom Colton]

War is coming to the Rodina.

Oh hell, yes. (But that's not until Part 6 ).

this is already 05 oct 2014 16:40 greenwhich time
now where is the update?

Right now.

So, Poles are herded into ghettos, disfranchised and spoliated while the ones with an Aryan look are promoted to the status of German citizen.

That's the name of the game.

Let's begin, shall we?

=======
​

PART 5

THE CALM BETWEEN THE STORMS

“Our campaigns in Poland, Scandinavia and in the West were merely the beginning of the realisation of German glory. Now is the time to consolidate our gains, to take advantage of the peace we have won through the shedding of blood and iron, and dedicate our every energy to the first and most decisive blow to Judeo-Bolshevism.”
Friedrich Weber, addressing top-level members of NSDAP following the Treaty of Gutenberg.​

Figure 1: Warning in occupied Poland reading “Zutritt für Polen verboten!” (No Entry for Poles!)​

The rapid end of the Spring War and the Treaty of Gutenberg, carefully constructed by Weber to appease the British and French into accepting the state of affairs on the continent while also ensuring that Germany’s interests were still protected, had led to the “Phoney Peace” – the second of the “Cold Wars” which would define the middle of the 20th Century – a period for all parties involved to regroup and rearm and prepare for the second round. However, as 1940 came to a close, it became increasingly unsure just how or when this “second round” would take shape, as peace appeared to genuinely reign on the European continent even as Japan began to make aggressive stirrings in the Far East.

This peace, as later events would prove, was nonetheless a sham – Germany made few aggressive manoeuvres eastwards, instead consolidating its racist and expansionist policies in occupied Poland and in its recently regained colonies, forming bases for long-term exploitation in order to bring war production up to speed and ensure that sufficient materiel was ready for Operation Barbarossa, the strike against the Soviet Union planned to curb its influence and holdings in Europe and deprive it of any ability to defend itself against the subsequent German death-blow. NSDAP racial policies in German-occupied territories accelerated during the Phoney Peace, where officially sanctioned and ordered disenfranchisement, ghettoisation, segregation (Einteilung) and Aryanisation (Arisierung) as well as the policies and facilities enabling the Final Solution.

However, peace was soon only confined to Western and Central Europe as the brief but highly impactful Third Balkans War erupted – a manifestation of both the tumultuous politics of the Yugoslavian state constructed following the Great War and the expansionist ambitions of Mussolini’s Italy. It was then, just prior to Operation Barbarossa, that the Axis Powers first operated as a single functioning unit, this cooperation acting as a sign of the subsequent cooperation by the Eastern European powers in the Great Patriotic War, even as tensions began to emerge between the primary players in Berlin, Rome and Tokyo.

=====​

THE OCCUPATION OF POLAND​

“The General Government is our work force reservoir for low-grade work. For Poles there is only one master and he is German, there can be no two masters beside each other. The General Government is a Polish reservation, a great Polish labour camp.”
Summarised minutes of a meeting between Friedrich Weber and Hans Frank, Governor-General of the General Government (later Reichskommissar of Gothica), transcribed by Gerhard Krüger, Weber's private secretary [1].​

Figure 2: A board announcing the renaming of Łódź, Poland, to “Litzmannstadt”.​

It is in many ways simultaneously easy and difficult to account for the singularly brutal nature of German occupation of Poland, which the Treaty of Gutenberg had ensured would not be tampered with, as context exists for the aggressive establishment of not merely political but socio-cultural dominance by Germany, justified by NSDAP on flimsy racial and historical grounds. To Weber and much of the military-industrial German establishment, the state of Poland had been created at the expense of Germany’s Central European interests, existing merely to curb possible eastward expansion. The notions of historical dominance of Central Europe by Gothic tribes, and that the modern German state was a successor to these historic ethnic groups, were a key tenet of NSDAP racial ideology, and thus informed the Germanisation, discrimination and subsequent expulsion of Poles from their homes in the ambitions of creating Lebensraum (“living space”) for those whom the German government deemed to be “ethnic Germans”.

What is not as simple to explain is the massive contrast between German policies in Poland and that of their other subsequent occupied territories and puppet states, where instead of unilateral dominance, policies of collaboration or at the least pretences thereof under the concept of Scheuleder were employed [2]. This may be seen as being rooted in the differences in priorities in each of these different regions, as well as the historic and cultural context, but it is nonetheless striking to observe the radical differences in the German-occupied zones, both before and after the execution of Operation Barbarossa.

A further distinction is to be made between the areas directly annexed by Germany (Reichsgaue Danzig-Westpreussen and Wartheland) and that of the area initially termed the “General Government” (Generalgouvernement), which broadly encompassed the territories annexed by the Austrian Empire during previous partitions of Poland, and would subsequently have portions of Eastern Galicia appended to it. Several proposals were drawn up regarding the division of this area, the only thing common to them all being its dissection into several Reichsgaue. During the post-Barbarossa consolidation, the General Government was changed to Reichskommissariat Gotenreich, although its (loose) translation into Polish – Gothyka, i.e. “Gothica” – has retained in the public consciousness far more indelibly.

Reichskommissar Hans Frank actively opposed any attempts to dissolve Gothica into constituent Reichsgau for fear of losing his political capital, but was eventually ousted from this position and put in command of Warsaw – an unenviable task given that it was the primary hotbed of anti-German resistance. Gothica was thus divided into three Gaue, broadly retaining the old district borders: the rump Distrikt Warschau (Warsaw) was renamed Reichsgau Weichselland (“Vistula-land”), Distrikt Lublin and the rump Distrikt Radom were joined into Reichsgau Westgalizien (West Galicia), and Distrikt Galizien and Distrikt Krakau were consolidated into Reichsgau Ostgalizien-Beskidenland (East Galicia – “Beskids-Land”).

Reichsgaue Ostpreussen, Wartheland and Westgalizien gained several counties at the expense of Weichselland, as it was found necessary to cordon off Warsaw for fear of partisan activity spreading. As per NSDAP doctrine, these divisions either hearkened back to historic divisions of Poland – West Galicia and “East” Galicia had been holdings of Austria in the late 18th and early 19th century – or simply reflected geography as in the case of Weichselland, in a deliberate attempt to erase all trace of Polish history and identity, as was done with many further subdivisions and cities (see Figure 2) [3].

Figures 3a and 3b: Administrative divisions of Gothica and subsequent re-division into Reichsgaue. Note expansions of Reichsgaue Wartheland and Ostpreussen at the expense of Westgalizien and Weichselland, and Westgalizien at the expense of Weichselland.​

The change from commissariat to Reichsgaue also bore with it a permanent shift of policy regarding occupied Poland. Prior to Barbarossa, the General Government marked the easternmost extent of the Greater German Reich. Therefore, although oppression of the Poles was built into the administration, there were certain limits to which the NSDAP regime could sequester and disenfranchise the Poles, as they still were in the majority of the population. Furthermore, to fulfil their alleged roles as liberators of the Slavic peoples from Communist domination, the German state could not afford for their excesses to be overly publicised.

However, once Weber and NSDAP had consolidated control over their new Eastern holdings, there were now relatively fewer bounds to their abuse the Polish populace of Gothica and the rest of German-occupied Eastern Europe. To further Weber’s ambitions in converting Eastern Europe into Germany’s new colonial empire, Poles were ejected from higher-level positions in the civil service and private sector and became increasingly sequestered as Germans were encouraged to migrate en masse into the newly annexed territories. In general, the Polish population experienced a massive eastward shift from Danzig-Westpreussen and Wartheland into Gothica, then once again into the Baltic States and Ukraine in an attempt to disperse the Polish population – to quote Weber himself, “to smash the Polish people into a thousand pieces and scatter the fragments across Europe”.

This policy of “de-Polonisation” existed beyond merely renaming territories and cities – Polish was removed as an official language and replaced by German. Although the local administration still used Polish to an extent, German was used exclusively at the state-level bureaus – those who could not afford the services of translators were simply denied service, and repeat offenders were subject to harassment and even internment by the Stasi. The remaining Polish population was seen as nothing more than a body of serfs for the lowest-level agricultural and industrial work, and the local unions were all dissolved and replaced with the Hilfsdienst (see Part 2), which merely served as a body to perpetuate the oppression of the Polish workforce. Overtime pay became practically non-existent, and as mentioned before, Poles were barred from the higher levels of society, having been replaced by migrant Germans.

To this end, the Einsatzgruppen (“Special Groups”) – more frequently known as “death squads” – assisted the Stasi in rounding up and interning the Polish intelligentsia, and silencing the more rebellious ones by murdering them. The Einsatzgruppen (EG) were initially commanded by Adolf Eichmann, and then were delegated to his subordinate Heinrich Müller when Eichmann was transferred to implementation of the Final Solution. Under Müller, the EG, which primarily operated in plain-clothes and in secrecy, became the “invisible hand” of Germany – although technically subordinate to the Stasi, the EG was a force unto itself only answerable to the Führer, and frequently used to silence even internal dissent [4]. While Müller himself was relatively apolitical, all parties knew that he could well play kingmaker – a role which he ably fulfilled in the latter days of the NSDAP regime.

Figure 4: Plainclothes Einsatzgruppen agents in Lublin.​

Policies of racial separation, termed “Einteilung” (literally “classification” or “division”), became more widespread and even more intense than ever – the ghettoisation and disenfranchisement of Jews in Germany became the template for the treatment of the Poles. “Aryan” Germans, or “Ethnic Germans” were barred from marrying Poles – such unions bearing the taboo of Rassenschande (“racial shame”) and those Mischling deemed suitably “German” were rounded up and educated in strictly controlled boarding schools designed to impress upon them superiority of German culture and history, and thus an entire generation of Polish children returned to horrified parents spouting NSDAP propaganda.

Cinemas, restaurants, and even playgrounds became segregated, where Poles were confined to a small number of poorly-maintained areas outside of the higher-class “German Quarter” – sections of major cities populated by German immigrants who received the lion’s share of economic benefits This template of “reverse ghettoisation” – where the oppressed population was separated from the invaders by barring them from the “German Quarter”, would go on to be applied far and wide across areas invaded and dominated by Germany [5].

As mentioned before, some of these concepts of segregation and apartheid were not unique to NSDAP or Germany – racial communities in the United States and South Africa were subject to discrimination under the notion of being “separate but equal”, to the extent that water-fountains and public transportation were segregated in the former, and in the latter those of indigenous African descent were sequestered into “black-only” townships. The primary distinction, however, was that the implementation of Einteilung was but another manifestation of an even greater plan to convert the Poles into serfs and slaves without their notice by subliminally dividing society by race and class along the exact same lines [6].

Figure 5: A Pole attempts to enter the German Quarter of Kraków at a designated checkpoint.​

This form of total societal control extended to that of religion, particularly the Polish Catholic Church. Weber’s attitudes towards the Church in general are best described as ambivalent – while by all indications Weber was a devout but not particularly fervent Catholic (ignoring some of the more lurid conspiracy theorists asserting pagan eccentricities), having had his marriage to Wilhelmina Kneller [7] officiated by Alois Hudal [8a], Austrian-German representative to the Vatican, once he had seized power he approached the religious institutions highly cynically, only concerned with forcing them to march to the NSDAP line and ensuring their dominance of German society. Several of NSDAP’s basic tenets – eugenics and Social Darwinism – stood at odds to Catholic doctrine, and the execution of these ideas in the form of the sterilisation and euthanasia programmes drew sharp criticism from the Church.

To tighten control of the Catholic Church, with their central authority, as well as the disparate Protestant Churches, the Reichsreligionsgesellschaft (Reich Religious Association), headed by Hermann Muhs [8b], was set up. Nominally an interfaith platform, it was in fact a unilateral medium for the central government to dictate orders to the clergy. Even though the Reichskondordat signed between the nascent NSDAP government and the Holy See theoretically protected members of the Catholic Church from harassment, directive after directive from the central government came down “advising” seminarians on their behaviour and their freedom to choose their message to preach – “advice” rapidly enforced by the Stasi.

The German policy in Poland was to totally uproot the Polish Catholic Church and replace it with German Catholic collaborators, commanded by the Reichsreligionsgesellschaft, who would ensure that the Church would not prove to be a source of resistance, active or otherwise. The Einsatzgruppen ensured that any non-compliant seminarians were convinced, coerced, confined or killed. Nonetheless, the underground Polish church did indeed breed anti-German resistance, with figures such as Archbishop Adam Stefan Sapieha, de facto head of the Polish Catholic Church “in exile”, conducting sermons in secret and harbouring Jews from the Final Solution. Most notable among the attendees of these secret sermons was Friar Karol Józef Wojtyła, one of the primary leaders of the Offenbarung (“Revelation”, [Polish: Objawienia]) counter-propaganda and resistance movement, which proved critical in the weakening of the NSDAP regime [9].

Figures 6a and 6b: Archbishop Adam Stefan Sapieha (left), Cardinal Archbishop of Krakow and de facto head of the underground Polish Catholic Church until his death, and his most famous acolyte, Friar Karol Józef Wojtyła, key leader of the Offenbarung resistance movement.​

Overall, repression in the occupied territories of Poland far exceeded that of within Germany proper, and was even more extreme in Gothica than it was in the directly annexed areas. The carving up of Gothica into its three Reichsgaue was merely the capstone on a series of massive expulsions of Poles – sometimes conducted so rapidly that food had been left on the dining-table – eastwards and northwards into Ukraine and the Baltic States (and subsequently, even further afield than that), where they were selectively discriminated against not just by Germans but by the majority Baltic and Ukrainian populations of these occupied states, who proceeded to abuse and exploit the migrant Poles at the urging of their German occupiers. That the Polish state was able to survive this arduous period of oppression, however reduced or divided, is a testament to the undying energy and resilience of the Polish resistance.

=====​

[1] This guy. Does this mean no Bormann? Who knows??
[2] A reminder of what exactly Scheuleder is, for everyone's convenience. In short, it's a carefully constructed system of lies to convince the people Nazi Germany is oppressing that everything's being done in their best interest.
[3] This is my attempt to make sense of how the General Government would have been carved up if Germany had the time to do so in OTL, based on all of the proposals seen in there. Not going to lie, I almost went nuts during this part.
[4] The *Einsatzgruppen here act as a combination of their OTL selves and the Gestapo (which doesn't exist any more in TTL).
[5] Aryanisation goes on more or less like OTL except perhaps executed somewhat less violently (*Action T4 didn't have people getting dragged from their beds, for example). Poles are left with shoddy second-tier infrastructure so as to keep them occupied and compliant with the regime even as they slave away for it, instead of being totally depersonalised - fostering better conditions for long-term exploitation instead of violent reactionism.
[6] I am not drawing moral equivalence between these three groups of policies, but the more insidious system of racism in TTL's Greater German Reich does spark a more critical self-awareness of racial issues elsewhere, instead of distancing by being so extreme.
[7] Just in case everyone forgot who she was.
[8] Both of these are OTL figures: Hudal, Muhs.
[9] Told you guys to watch out for him!
​

=======
​

Next update (tentatively 12 October 2014, Sunday): The Final Solution.



​

...wait, what?
​

 

[Tom Colton]

Well, here it is. I would like to make it absolutely clear that this is not some sick revenge fantasy (except on Weber and the Nazis' part), but then again I suppose if you've been following me up to this point you'd already know that.

I'm also going to include a trigger warning for subjugation, oppression, forced labour and racial hatred, for this portion, because even though it may not involve gas chambers and ovens, how these Nazis treat their "undesirables" is still pretty heinous, and you can scroll right to the bottom of this post to get the summarised version.

I can't stall any further, so here is...

​

=======
THE FINAL SOLUTION

“Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution [emphasis added] the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labour in our new colonies. Those able to endure the living conditions and disease – since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion – will have to be treated accordingly, for if released, this final remnant would surely act as the seed of a new Jewish revival.” [1]
Reinhard Heydrich, instrumental executor of the Final Solution, Deputy Chief of the Abwehr and later Governor-General of German West Africa, addressing attendees of the Auschwitz Conference.​

Figure 7: Polish Jews being loaded onto transports headed for port facilities in Lübeck.​

The “Final Solution of the Jewish Question” (or, amongst Jews, “The Second Exodus”), officially termed the “Kolonialen Umsiedlungsprogramm” (“Colonial Resettlement Programme") was the grotesque magnum opus of Weber’s reign, combining the NSDAP doctrine’s ideological and institutional racism with the policy of Scheuleder in maintaining the pretence that the Jewish population of Germany and its annexed and occupied territories was being treated humanely, executed in a singularly amorally pragmatic fashion, and nearly succeeding in eradicating the Jewish population of Eastern Europe as the tendrils of the NSDAP regime extended further eastwards during Weber’s war against the Soviet Union.

The origins of Jewish disenfranchisement and depersonalisation have been discussed in Parts 1 and 2, but the sheer enormity of ousting millions of Jews from their homes and hastily shipping them away to slave away in work camps with rudimentary living standards, where locals were hired to act as foremen and stamp out any form of resistance and German eugenicists were free to conduct their means of racial control, requires accounting for. Several conditions predicated this permitted this to occur: the latent mood of anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe, based on old racial tensions as well as new ones, the relative secrecy of the operations, constructed as exemplars of Scheuleder, and perhaps most crucially, the acquisition of former colonies of the German Empire in the form of Togoland and Kamerun.

Prior to the possibility of regaining these colonies being raised, plans were suggested for the relocation of the Jews to Madagascar – an idea with its origins, ironically enough, in the pre-war Polish government. These were rejected as being impractical as convoys moving the Jews would have to traverse the Cape of Good Hope again and again at absolutely no economic benefit; furthermore, the safety of the vessels from the Royal Navy could not be guaranteed if the British stayed in the war. However, as the Spring War rapidly concluded at the negotiating-table, Togoland and Kamerun were selected as concessions due to their historic basis, relative proximity and economic potential.

As soon as this decision had been made, it was also equally clear that to exploit the resources of these colonies, especially rubber in Kamerun, a large labour force would have to be mobilised. Meanwhile, in the annexed areas of Poland, managing the Jewish population in their overcrowded ghettos became increasingly difficult as more and more Jews were being herded into these areas not just from Poland but from within Germany proper. It is unclear when precisely the nefarious idea of solving both problems at once emerged, as even the pragmatic and deceitful Weber must have realised the dangers of leaving a paper trail for such an enterprise.

Figures 8a and 8b: Locator maps of Togoland (left) and Kamerun (right) [not to scale], the repatriated colonies of the German Empire where the Final Solution was executed. [2]​

However, the concept of utilising Jews as slave labour had definitely been codified by the Auschwitz Conference, where Deputy Abwehr Chief Reinhard Heydrich outlined the methodology of the Final Solution to top-level commanders within and without Germany, most prominently Adolf Eichmann, appointed head of the Reich Office of Colonial Policy, (Kolonialpolitisches Amt der Reich) [3] who would provide guards for the work camps and work towns that the Jews were to be sequestered in within Kamerun, and Josef Terboven, first Governor-General of German West Africa, who would become equally infamous for his tyrannical rule in Kamerun [4].

From the few surviving transcripts of the event, it is clear that the alleged conference was not consultative in the least, merely acting as a convenient medium through which Heydrich could hand down orders. The concerns which had been raised regarding the housing of the Jews were swept aside when Heydrich revealed the full extent of the transportation infrastructure already in place, and the roles which Eichmann, Terboven, and the rest were to fulfil. Even further concerns regarding the legality and feasibility of the operations were summarily dismissed as the full programme was outlined. In essence, Kamerun was to be converted into “a concentration camp the size of an entire state”, with most of the apparatus of the Reich Office of Colonial Policy to be situated in Togoland.

Figure 8: The Stanislaw Konarski High School, Auschwitz (now Oświęcim), the setting of the infamous “Auschwitz Conference”, now a memorial site and museum for the Final Solution [5].​

To this end, Jews, along with Romani gypsies, homosexuals, and all manner of ideologically determined “undesirables”, were to be transported en masse from the ghettoes and their homes by the pre-existing rail networks in Germany and Poland to ports in northern Germany (and later Denmark) such as Lübeck and Wismar, where they would be herded, with barely any room to lie down, onto massive prison ships – mainly converted ocean liners and cargo vessels – and subsequently sent to Kamerun, where they would be divvied up into work towns, made to slave away harvesting rubber for the oppressive Reich which had disenfranchised, depowered and now effectively dehumanised them.

It is fabled that the ships bringing prisoners to Kamerun were so overcrowded and dreary that there would almost certainly be at least one prisoner, unable to endure the shipboard conditions, who would escape forever by diving into the Atlantic Ocean if given the opportunity. In all of these cases, not one attempt was made by the bridge crew or the guards to make a rescue.

Recent investigation into the convoys reveals that the crews of the escorts comprising Kriegsmarine surface vessels as well as submarines (official: Unterseeboot, colloquially “U-boats”), were given orders to sink prison ships which reported revolts running the risk of hijacking the ships. These were never executed, likely due to the relative inability of the internees to coordinate, or even act upon, any such plans given their undernourishment during the journeys. If refuelling and resupply were required, this would be done at Spanish ports, where local port authorities were barred from boarding the ships for checks. When Franco protested at this unusual reticence, Weber cancelled several debts the Spanish government owed Germany for materiel sold during the Spanish Civil War and informed him his cooperation would be “in the mutual interest of Germany and Spain”, instructing him to drop the matter [6].

Figure 9: The SS Deutschland (IV), one of the many prison ships which brought those targeted by the Final Solution to their final fate in Kamerun.​

Once the prison ships arrived in Kamerun, the soon-to-be labourers were transported by train using the railway line stretching between the port of Douala and the city of Nkongsamba, constructed by engineers of the Kaiserreich, and go on to be divided into work towns and labour camps. The vast majority of these work towns were rubber plantations, such as those at Djongo, Loum and Mbanga (among many others), or those facilitating the further extension of the railway such as Melong, or those dedicated to housing labourers constructing yet more work towns. The work towns would be set up with only the most basic of amenities and barely any cultural facilities.

The wages for the labourers came in the form of “German West African Marks” (Deutsche-Westafrikanische Mark, DWM) issued by the Kamerun authorities, which effectively resembled promissory notes or ration coupons more than instruments of an actual functioning currency – they were used primarily within the work complexes where they were exchanged for goods beyond basic foodstuff, and were completely useless outside of the German West African colonies, not being recognised as legal tender anywhere else in the Greater German Reich.

Figure 10: A 1 Deutsche-Westafrikanische Mark note issued by the German government for the inhabitants of the work towns of Kamerun [7].​

Work towns were lain out to facilitate easy organisation and exploitation, much like the internment camps, with centralised yards where the entire town could be assembled – as they frequently were, to be given orders from the Reich Colonial Office by the Kolonialpolizei (Colonial Police, “Kolpo”), or to occasionally be given abject demonstrations of force, where those accused of engaging in activity deemed to be “criminal” or “damaging to the state” were summarily executed in public, and the body left for a full day before being disposed of ignominiously in the jungle.

Jews were permitted to have a central makeshift synagogue for a group of adjacent work towns, but their sermons were closely monitored by the Kolpo, who could order the entire gathering dismissed – or worse – on a moment’s notice. Deliberate efforts were made by colonial planners to ensure that extended families were split up and people from formerly near cities and towns were divided and scattered among the work towns, to contribute to the further disenfranchisement of the captive populations.

Figure 11: The sign above the entrance to the Mbanga work town, reading “Arbeit Macht Frei”– “Work will set you free” [8].​

The German administration and Kolpo was aided by the recruitment of native Cameroonians into the entire enforcement apparatus. This point was among one of the most bitterly contested at the Auschwitz Conference, as this appeared to be at odds with NSDAP racial doctrine, which ranked blacks as low as, or even lower than, Jews. In response, Heydrich stated that “the native African population – at least those that are aiding us in the resettlement – is to be treated with the same manner of respect and friendship that we lend to the guard dogs at the internment camps. If we distract them sufficiently with small incentives, and on occasion remind them that the alternative is to labour alongside the Jews, they shall follow us to whichever end we choose fit to employ them.”

A compromise was eventually reached, where the native Cameroonians would not join the Deutsche Afrika Korps (the small detachment of Wehrmacht forces stationed in Kamerun) or the Kolpo proper, instead being fed into the newly established paramilitary organisation Kameruner Sonderkommando (Cameroonian Special Unit, KSK), which broadly followed the rank scheme of the long-since dismantled Sturmabteilung, substituting “chef” for or “führer” in the ranks, as this was felt to be not only easier for the now-Francophone population to understand, but also to avoid clashes with the ideology of Führerprinzip by assigning the highly-regarded title of Führer in any form to these “Untermenschen”. The KSK, similar to other selected populations in German-dominated territories, was practically given free rein to terrorise and abuse the inhabitants of the work towns, with offenders given token punishments for their infractions and set loose again to discipline and punish the labourers.

Figures 12a and 12b: A Mann of the Kameruner Sonderkommando (left), and Gruppenchef Julius Winfred (right), leader of the KSK and briefly self-declared “Führer of the ‘Cameroonian Empire” [9].​

Weber’s ambitions for the Jewish race, and the other “undesirables” went above and beyond this form of disenfranchisement and what was effectively slavery in all but name (in contrast to the serfdom of the Poles). Not just content to expel these populations from Europe by ethnic cleansing, Weber and NSDAP set about on a programme of what can only be termed genocide, despite claims of revisionist historians and apologists. Initially, the health of labourers with regards to tropical diseases was handled with criminal levels of neglect, handled mainly by quarantine and the most rudimentary medicines, until this was determined to be unsustainable, as the same pandemics could spread out of control and affect the guards and the effectiveness of the entire workforce.

Regimens of vaccinations were thus carried out in the work towns after a particularly devastating outbreak at Djongo. However, unbeknownst to the labourers, Viktor Brack, a prime figure in the Hereditary Health Courts and leading NSDAP eugenicist, had also introduced fertility suppressants in the injections, i.e. the “vaccination regime” was constituted in part of a sterilisation programme, which also comprised exposure to excessive X-rays during checkups. It has even been theorised, with varying levels of veracity, that the Djongo outbreak was “engineered”, or at least capitalised upon by Eichmann and Terboven as a pretext to introduce this mass injection scheme [10].

Whatever the case was, it is clear that the German colonial authorities were not content with simply deporting and confining these “undesirables” away from the German mainland – the population was to be surely and slowly trimmed by sterilisation, to counteract the projected population explosion based on the limited availability of cultural participation or other means of distraction. This was not conducted randomly or indiscriminately – lists have been recovered detailing precise quotas of labourers to be sterilised, and the progress of each of their “treatments”. The Jews and Romani gypsies received the brunt of the sterilisation regimen, as these were predicted to have the most severe population increase. Those with disabilities were also heavily targeted, as the risk of “passing on” their disabilities was considered sufficiently severe. Homosexuals were entirely exempt for self-evident reasons.

The programme was effective in providing a steady decrease in the figures even as more and more labourers arrived from Europe. It is manifestly clear from all of the evidence of internment in poor conditions, wantonly brutal discipline systems and deliberate, targeted sterilisation that Weber’s “Colonial Resettlement Programme” was meant to be nothing more than a long, slow and painful death for those he had determined “unworthy of life”, beyond slaving away to harvest rubber for the Greater German Reich.

Figures 13a, 13b, 13c: Key figures of the Final Solution: Adolf Eichmann (left), head of the Reich Office for Colonial Policy and the Colonial Police (Kolpo), Reinhard Heydrich (center), deputy head of the Abwehr then second Governor-General of German West Africa, and Josef Terboven (right), first Governor-General of German West Africa, then Reichskommisar of Kamerun.​

The oppressive and totalitarian atmosphere of the Kamerun work towns, however, was not enough to stifle the spirit of the labourers, and over time, they developed covert means of communication between clusters of work towns and camps, and from there, reveal their plight to the world. However, severe censorship in Germany meant that in most cases, the letters were suppressed or replaced with forgeries with the offending content removed.

Nonetheless, some of the labourers found ingenious means of conveying their messages: a German Jew named Friedrich Schneider continued correspondence with his friend Hans Peter Richter by writing in invisible ink, and Richter proceeded to compile these into a biographical work Mein Freund Friedrich, seinen Feind Friedrich (My Friend Friedrich, His Enemy Friedrich; the second Friedrich being Weber), best known by its Anglosphere title, Heart of Evil. The diary of a Danzig-born Jewish girl, Rutka Laskier, was discovered after her succumbing to malaria in Mundemba and smuggled into Nigeria, where news about the abuses of the German colonial government spread like wildfire. These two volumes, among many others, were used by Offenbarung to highlight the depravity of the NSDAP regime and served to slowly turn public opinion against Weber and his cronies.

Figures 14a and 14b: Seminal works exposing the Final Solution. The Diary of a Young Girl (left) by Rutka Laskier, and Heart of Evil (right) by Hans Peter Richter, based on correspondence with Friedrich Schnieder [11].​

[1] This is only slightly modified from his OTL comments.
[2] The British and French portions are both ceded back to Germany by the Treaty of Gutenberg. Equatorial Guinea is under Spanish control, so the colonial authorities on Bioko (the small island) are turning a blind eye as per the later paragraph.
[3] There was a NSDAP Office of Colonial Policy but it folded when it became obviously clear there was no way Germany was getting its colonial empire in OTL.
[4] Told you he would be back.
[5] The Auschwitz Conference is TTL's version of the Wannsee Conference, naturally.
[6] There were at least four ships of the SS Deutschland's class, all of which were seized for use by the Kriegsmarine, and the SS Deutschland was holding about 5,000 prisoners and staff when it was sunk by the Allies late in the war.

So to play a perverse "numbers game":

• Even if only these four ships and the SS Cap Arcona were used, transporting 25,000 prisoners to Kamerun (and coming back with rubber, etc.) would take more or less a month (doing the sums), meaning that within a year, 300,000 prisoners would be in Kamerun, and within five years, about 1.5 million labourers would have been transported.
• Furthermore, the Nazi regime certainly would have found a way of squeezing more people on board those ships if it could find a way.
• Even furthermore, this Nazi regime isn't indiscriminately targeting all of its subjugated populace, so the total number affected is less than OTL's Holocaust.
• Modern-day Cameroon can support a population of 22 million, so this isn't totally out of the realm of plausibility.

[7] This is in fact a German Southwest African Mark, so ignore the "Swakopmunder Buchhandlung" as that actually refers to a bookshop somewhere in German Southwest Africa.
[8] Many examples of the mocking use of this slogan in OTL can be found here.
[9] As hard as it is to believe, the Nazis actually employed troops of African descent. Not wanting to tar any actual Cameroonian independence figures, I've used Samuel L. Jackson as the Octopus in this weird scene from The Spirit, "Julius Winfred" being a Germanisation of "Jules Winnfield".
[10] As alluded to before, along with Brack.
[11] Freidrich is an OTL book about the persecution of Jews in Germany, and Rutka Laskier is an OTL figure as well. Anne Frank (and her family) was never arrested by the Nazis as they left the Netherlands and the government-in-exile was restored, so that's one tiny ray of hope.
​

=======
​

SUMMARIZED VERSION: Instead of mass murder, the Jews, Romani gypsies and other populations are moved to Kamerun, where they slave away in work towns to produce rubber for the Reich, all the while being abused by the local Cameroonians and a select number being sterilised to prevent a population explosion.

So there you have it. I simultaneously hope I've written it as plausibly as I could and realise even this "alternative" is honestly no more humane than OTL's Holocaust, and I definitely do not wish to trivialise or de-emphasise the enormity of either OTL's or TTL's Nazi regime.

The next update is going to require somewhat extensive research on my part, and writing this up has been rather draining, so the earliest you can expect it is Sunday 26th October. It'll be about European politics, so it'll be slightly less heavy stuff than this.
​

 

[Tom Colton]

Right, we're back!
(Let's hope you can read this update, Johannes.)

Apologies that this isn't actually about the European politics I was intending to write about; I'd almost forgotten that I needed to write this part! But hey, more TL for you.
​

=======

OCCUPIED WESTERN EUROPE​

Figure 15: A German checkpoint on the border between the Free State of Alsace-Lorraine and Germany, prior to the escalation of defensive works and extension of the Siegfried Line.​

In discussing the extent of Weber’s dominance in German-occupied Europe, as infamous and brutal as the Germany’s hold was in Poland, it is worthwhile to also discuss the different forms of governance which the NSDAP regime instituted in their occupied territories in Denmark, Narvik and Alsace-Lorraine, and the manners in which their administration of these occupied territories evolved through the years. The variances between the treatments of the local governments and populace can be accounted for by the differences in their annexations by the Treaty of Gutenberg, the German government’s intentions regarding each nation or territory, and the extent to which the NSDAP leadership could “get away” with their vilest excesses, which was mostly governed by their physical and communications proximity to the Western powers.

Overall, while the extent of the oppression exercised by the German occupiers was nowhere as inhumane as their control of Poland or the African colonies, the inhabitants of Denmark, Narvik and Alsace-Lorraine found their political, economic and even social freedoms severely curtailed, and as the tensions between Germany and the Allied Powers escalated, martial law essentially was instituted indefinitely in the former two, whilst Alsace-Lorraine became nothing more than a massive neutral zone.

===​

DENMARK

Figure 16: An anti-German demonstration in Nørrebro, Copenhagen just prior to the enactment of martial law during Case Anton.​

The position of the Danish government during the Second Great War was a complex one to understand, and to a certain extent rendered irrelevant following the execution of Case Anton, where the German government consolidated its iron grip on Denmark in the backdrop of post-Operation Barbarossa tensions. Danish resistance had existed in many forms even from the beginning of the brief conflict during the Spring War which had led to total German occupation of the country within one day, and would only be increasingly exacerbated through the years as the Second Great War ground on its “hot” and “cold” phases.

The Danish government had initially adopted a position of collaboration with the occupying German forces, in the hopes of being able to do so on their own terms and avoid total uprooting by the Wehrmacht; these hopes began to dissolve rapidly as their concerns were bluntly ignored during the negotiations leading to the Treaty of Gutenberg where the Allied powers conceded the essentially permanent occupation of the Danish mainland by Germany, but they still maintained this position following the signing of the treaty in an attempt to maintain control of their own nation.

To a certain extent, Germany was content to maintain the state of affairs as such; their primary interests in Denmark of resources and usage of ports by the Kriegsmarine could be upheld through peaceful collaboration, and this policy of “samarbejdspolitikken” (“cooperation policy”) thus was tolerated for the time being. The Danish army was reduced in strength to slightly more than two thousand, and the Danish fleet remained under their own control. The “Free Corps Denmark” (Danish: Frikorps Danmark) absorbed many NSDAP sympathisers, growing to about 10,000 troops through the years.

Figure 17: Members of the Free Corps Denmark saluting under the Dannebrog.​

However, even this proved to be insufficient for Germany, as their brow-beating of the Danish government to sign the Anti-Comintern Pact (and thus legally chaining them to the rest of the Axis Powers) during Operation Barbarossa only served to increase anti-German resistance as the outlawed Danish Communist Party simply went underground and contributed to the resistance movement. As partisan activities began to intensify, the German government began to pile on their demands, eventually deposing the Danish government and instituting their own cabinet led by Erik Scavenius, who proved to be more compliant.

As the first phase of the Cold War ground on, it became increasingly clear to the Danish populace that the possibility of German withdrawal and return to democratic norms was distant and remote, and anti-German protests and acts of sabotage intensified. When the German plenipotentiary Cécil von Renthe-Fink sent along a list of demands, including the right for the German authorities to suspend elections, enact curfews and ban public assembly, these were flatly rejected by the Danish parliament despite the protestations of Scavenius, who stated that “[cooperation] is the last shred of our defence”. Minister of Justice, Eigil Thune Jacobsen, retorted that “cooperate any further and we will have nothing left to defend.” [1]

In reaction, with the nominal aim of “restoring order in Denmark”, the Wehrmacht stormed into major popular centres and ports as martial law was declared. The Danish government resigned, although as King Christian X did not actually accept their resignations, they were de jure a government-in-exile. The operation, officially termed Case Anton, involved the seizure of the entire Danish administrative apparatus by Germany, as well as their fleet. Although the Danish Navy had attempted to sink their vessels prior to this seizure or send them to neutral Sweden, the Kriegsmarine was still able to absorb about 30 larger ships and 50 smaller ones. The Stasi, once given freedom to act in Denmark, instituted a “reign of terror” where anyone suspected of aiding the Danish resistance movement was deported into the newly-constructed Frøslev Prison Camp.

Those Danish Jews which had not already fled for Sweden were rapidly forced into prison ships headed from ports in Havenby Havn and Ringkobing to Kamerun, where they would join their brethren in slaving away in the work towns. Elements of the Free Corps Denmark were integrated into the Stasi, with local Danes acting as anonymous informers on partisan and resistance activity. The royal family was kept under permanent house arrest in Gråsten Palace, located in Sønderborg, near the Danish-German border. King Christian X, and later King Frederick IX, nonetheless acted as a significant symbol for the resistance. Following the execution of Case Anton, Denmark ceased to exist as an independent state in all but name, instead merely becoming an extension of the German sphere of influence, and a forward base for the the Kriegsmarine.

Figure 18: Gråsten Palace, summer home of the Danish Royal Family, and its prison following the enactment of Case Anton.​

Nonetheless, despite the installation of this harsh regime, the Danish resistance was still able to communicate with the Allied Powers, and their role in ensuring that the operations leading to the eventual liberation of Europe is often understated. The policy of collaboration still remains controversial in Denmark, given its apparent futility. Nonetheless, it is certainly true that the exploitation of Denmark was certainly delayed by several years due to it; whether this amounted to a hampering of the German war effort still very much remains a matter of opinion, with the responsible politicians venerated and reviled in essentially equal measure.

===​

THE FREE CITY OF NARVIK​

Figure 19: Flag of the Free City of Narvik. Note the owl symbolism (as Narvik lies on the Ofotfjord [“Eagle-owl-claw fjord”]) and Nasjonal Samling symbol on the anchor. [2]​

The Free City of Narvik, incorporating the municipality of the same name as well as the Lofoten archipelago, was essentially governed as German overseas territory, although with considerably less heavy-handedness than their African colonies as their only interest was in controlling the important port of Narvik, both as a means of securing iron ore exports from Sweden, which still continued to supply German industrial production, as well as a potential forward base for the Kriegsmarine in the eventuality of a return to arms against Britain. A smaller benefit manifested in the historic cod fisheries of Lofoten. To a certain extent, German control was greatly aided by the remote geography of Narvik – it was not connected by rail to the rest of Norway, but was linked directly to the critical Swedish mines of Kiruna and Malmberget, making enforcement of German rule relatively easy.

Figure 20: Location map of Narvik in relation to mines of Kiruna and Malmberget, which are also served by the port of Lulea in Sweden in the summer.​

Despite its remoteness from the rest of Norway, a large proportion of the roughly 20,000 or so residents of Narvik and Lofoten, having no wish to live under German rule, began a flight by sea or by road to other regions of Norway, where the legitimate government led by Prime Minister Nygaardsvold had been restored to power, along with King Haakon VII as head of state, leaving only those who were too poor or too slow behind.

The German government, while obviously displeased by the loss in manpower, was powerless to prevent the mass migration, as the fleeing parties were still technically Norwegian subjects. They were rapidly replaced by members of the Nasjonal Samling, naturally including Minister-President Vidkun Quisling, as the returning government had wasted no time in branding the entire movement “traitors to the realm of Norway” for their guilt-by-association with Quisling in his putsch-by-radio, and announced it would soon vote on legislation to outlaw the entire party and arrest those responsible for “inviting German aggression to Norway”.

Figure 21: Weber (second from left) with Quisling (second from right), now Minister-President of the Free City of Narvik, accompanied by German military personnel, including General Nikolaus von Falkenhorst (far right), commander of the Narvik garrison. [3]​

The Free City of Narvik, though nominally led by Minister-President Quisling, was in reality governed by the German plenipotentiary (Reichsbevollmächtigter) Curt Bräuer, who had formerly served as the Reich’s envoy to Norway – a role which was apparently no longer required, as Norway had (rather understandably) terminated diplomatic relations with Germany, and would not reinstate them until some time after the collapse of the Greater German Reich. The result of the population transfer, as well as the influx of Wehrmacht personnel, meant that the population of the Free City of Narvik grew to a maximum of about 30,000.

The port facilities in Lofoten were expanded to accommodate the larger vessels of the Kriegsmarine, as well as the U-boat task force permanently deployed there. As the Second World Wars, hot or cold, continued with new weapon developments, the infamous F-boat (Flugkörperschnellboot, missile boat) force, was also deployed at Narvik, following the new German paradigm of deterrence (Vergeltung, literally “retaliation”) designed to discourage interference, especially from the British [4]. About 3,000 ground troops were stationed in Narvik, along with a small internal security garrison. Overall, due to the high concentration of Nasjonal Samling supporters and low population, the Quisling administration never ran into any major resistance or dissent among the populace.

To the rest of Norway, the puppet regime was a mockery and Quisling the biggest joke among them, with him frequently being satirised as “President Nothing”, with his domain limited to one port and handful of rocks. Overall, the Free City of Narvik was very much a pariah state within Norway, with its residents frequently barred access into the rest of Norway, as they were thrown in with the same lot as Quisling and the NS, and suspected of being German agents and sympathisers.

Indeed, many cruel jokes were made in Norwegian media during the Second World Wars about residents from Narvik speaking with suspiciously German accents and reflexive tendencies to stick their right arms out. The famed Norwegian writer Bjørn Lech-Hanssen [5] used his experiences living in Narvik to write on themes of alienation and ostracism, where even after the collapse of the Reich and the “bloodless coup” which restored the control of Narvik and Lofoten to the control of the legitimate government, reconciliation was still very slow in being achieved, due to the effects of long-term separation and years of mutual distrust.

===​

THE FREE STATE OF ALSACE-LORRAINE​

Figure 22: Flag of the Free State of Alsace-Lorraine, based on its traditional coat of arms and the flag of the short-lived Republic of Alsace-Lorraine. [6]​

The creation of the Free State of Alsace-Lorraine, constituting the entirety of the région of Alsace and the département of Moselle, was in many ways a compromise; between the revanchist and pragmatic ambitions of the NSDAP leadership, between the German schemes for the Benelux region and the attempts of France in attempting to cling on to territories it considered historic and which it had wrested from German control using the Treaty of Versailles in the conclusion of the Great War. This manifested in many fashions during the period of joint Franco-German control, where both France and Germany attempted to assert political and cultural dominance, all at the detriment of the indigenous Alsatian population; the effective demise of their language and culture counts among the many casualties of the Phoney Peace and the Cold Wars [7].

The initial German proposal was total control of Alsace-Lorraine, albeit as a separate, neutral territory such that it would form a contiguous demilitarised “neutral” zone along with the Benelux nations, which would similarly be demilitarised “limited to levels necessary for internal security”, with no effective air or (in Belgium and the Netherland’s case) sea projection power. Conscription was to be illegal, sparking mass migrations of conscientious objectors and draft-dodgers; this leak was rapidly nipped in the bud in Germany thanks to the Stasi. The Quadripartite Pact would enforce the impermeability of this border to the troops of the four signatory nations (i.e. Britain, France, Germany and Italy).

However, recently-appointed President Philippe Pétain recognised that any such permanent concession would deprive him of any legitimacy or support among the French people, given the heatedness of the issue and its significance in the Franco-Prussian and Great Wars. He thus proceeded to negotiate for only partial loss of control from the French, and a rather vague “Franco-German commune” was proposed instead, which was rapidly accepted by Weber as it achieved essentially the same goals while being an apparent concession to French demands.

The administrative system of Alsace-Lorraine, headquartered in the Palais du Rhin, Strasbourg, essentially mimicked that of the existing conseil regional (regional council), although with additional provisions to ensure that the cabinet, by appointment, had to be balanced between French and German officeholders, and that instead of a President or Prime Minister, the head of state was to be the Chairman of the State Cabinet, which was to be alternately appointed by France or Germany and subject to ratification by the State Council; essentially, in theory, the system was designed to prevent extremist factions of either nation from swaying control too far in one direction or another.

Figure 23: The Palais du Rhin, seat of the Franco-German Conseil d'État / Staatsrat (State Council), governing the Free State of Alsace-Lorraine.​

In practice, it fostered an incredibly dysfunctional system, with none of the contesting parties able to gain majorities – the only legal German party was NSDAP and the French parties were only united in their opposition to German interference. Neither the German or French halves of the State Council trusted each other, leading to scenes such as French police and German Stapo (Staatspolizei, State Police; the Stasi was not permitted to operate in Alsace-Lorraine) officers always being paired up so that each of them could bring the other to account, and a similar duplication in bureaucracy, where French and German officials would verify on the actions of each other.

Both the German and French administrators pushed for bilingualism at the cost of indigenous Alsatian ethnic identity. Among the various attempts elsewhere in Europe to entrench German nationalism, Alsace-Lorraine probably represented its most restrained extent, generally because Weber and the NSDAP government wished to avoid war between Germany and France (and inevitably Britain) arising from conflicts or clashes in Alsace-Lorraine. Nonetheless, efforts were made to identify those “ethnic Germans” (including Alsatians) and encourage migration out of Alsace-Lorraine and into Germany; a programme replicated by the French as they too attempted to draw their workforce out from the economically stagnant Free State.

Figure 24: French Sûreté screen French nationals wishing to enter the French Consulate Zone.​

As tensions between Germany and the Allied Powers rose, so did relations within the Free State of Alsace-Lorraine. Massive defensive fortifications were slowly built up on both ends; the Maginot Line had been constructed within the territory now encompassed by the Free State, necessitating defence works in the départements of Meurthe et Moselle and Vosges. The Siegfried Line was expanded and tightened up, and people wishing to enter from Alsace-Lorraine were subject to inspection for fear of the French Deuxième Bureau employing spies from the Alsatian population.

Whilst the entirety of the Free State was meant to be technically neutral, the “security areas” around the respective French and German consulates of the main population centres steadily grew as well, accompanied by the equipment of the “guards” within these exclaves of French and German territory (and hence not subject to the clause outlining the neutral and demilitarised nature of Alsace-Lorraine). The increasing isolation of Alsace-Lorraine by both sides brought further economic and social stagnation within its borders; essentially, as the Cold War dragged on the Free State became a massive No Man’s Land, useful for nothing but separating the French and German spheres of influence. Similar to Narvik, the isolation of the Free State had a massive cultural impact not only on its own residents (and thus subsequently within France and Germany) but beyond, as it became emblematic of the divisive nature of the Second World Wars in the West.

Figure 25: Checkpoint K (Kontrollpunkt K, also known as Kontrollpunkt Kaufmann), one of the many militarised checkpoints separating the Free State of Alsace-Lorraine from Germany. [8]​

===​

[1] The Telegram Crisis is butterflied (Weber wrote a page-long greeting and didn't get pissy when Christian X telgraphed him two sentences), and this argument was originally about Denmark entering the Anti-Comintern Pact; I've rejigged it so that it's now about the final nail in the coffin for Danish freedom. Not too much to say about Denmark apart from that it's essentially like OTL, except with Case Anton referring to the German seizure of power in Denmark instead of Vichy France, which doesn't exist in TTL.
[2] Inspirations: Narvik, Ofotfjord, Nasjonal Samling logo (it's the cross in the anchor.) Colours are of course based on the Norwegian flag.
[3] That's not actually Weber but Terboven, who's busy executing the Final Solution right now, but hey, one bespectacled Nazi leader is as good as another.
[4] What's this all about, then? I'll elaborate on this in a later chapter.
[5] This is an OC, although someone with that surname did live in Narvik at the time.
[6] Inspirations: Coat of arms for Alsace-Lorraine, Flag of the Republic of Alsace-Lorraine, which existed very briefly after World War One.
[7] The more things change, the more they stay the same...
[8] I shouldn't have to spell this one out too much, should I?
​

===​

​

This was supposed to be a short-ish snippet, although it wound up being longer than the segment on the Final Solution. The best laid plans of mice and men, I guess. Bits and bobs of foreshadowing in here, and there's even an added hint of the terminus ante quem of the Greater German Reich! ​

​

Next update will be in a few weeks' time; I've still got a lot of work to plough through in school. ​

​

 

[Tom Colton]

Will Romania suffer the Second Vienna Award, Craiova Treaty and the occupation of Bessarabia, as OTL?

And will Ion Antonescu come to power with the help of the Iron Guard?

You'll just have to read it to find out, won't you?

=======​

THE ROMANIAN SITUATION​

“Though the Rumanian Army made a show of resistance, it has no chance of stopping the Russians without help, and Germany had already acknowledged Russia's claim to Bessarabia. Romania accepted her destiny in the new Europe that Weber plans…”
TIME article, “Weber’s Europe”, printed in July 1940 [1].​

Figure 26: Refugees flee the Soviet occupation of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, prior to its conversion into the short-lived “Moldavian SSR”.​

Many of Weber’s diplomatic intrigues in the interim years of the Second Great War would be shaped by Romania, primarily due to its strategic oil reserves, proximity to the Soviet Union and access to the Black Sea, all of which would prove critical to the successes of Operation Barbarossa when Weber repudiated the Molotov-Neurath Pact and set loose his schemes to realise Germany’s Lebensraum in the East, fully aided by Romania’s new autocratic regime.

Germany’s courtship of Romania can be dated back to the NSDAP regime’s flagrant intransigence regarding the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, following former Romanian attempts at building diplomatic links with France, in the framework of the “Little Entente”, formed following the Great War as a concept of a mutual pact to prevent a resurgence of the Hapsburg Monarchy, and also with Soviet Russia, with whom Romania briefly considered rapprochement, but was forestalled by internal politics. King Carol II, and the Romanian government with him, interpreted the Franco-British responses to the Sudetenland Crisis as enshrined in the Munich Agreement as unwillingness to step in to protect Romania from foreign aggression.

No matter how imagined or real, the threat of Soviet intervention into Czechoslovakia during this critical period drove Romania closer towards the German camp, as the former was seen as a perennial threat while cooperating with the other (for the time being) would at least manage Russian pressure, leading to overtures such as the Romanian subscription to the EWG (Europäische Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft, European Economic Community), as a German placation, literally fuelling Weber’s war efforts. [2]

The Molotov-Neurath Pact, even minus the release of the secret provisions stating Germany would not interfere with Soviet overtures in Bessarabia, provided a major hindrance in the continuing German-Romanian relations, as Carol had hoped to play Germany and Russia off each other to maintain their territorial sovereignty. Weber nonetheless recognised the strategic importance of Romania, and Germany took to the policy of contacting pro-Axis elements even as external events fostered displeasure and grievances against the autocratic government lead by King Carol. Most of these diplomatic efforts in 1940 arose from the weaknesses in the Romanian situation, especially following the Spring War. The results brought by the Treaty of Gutenberg in the wake of the devastating (if somewhat fortuitous) German-Italian offensives, namely the practical demilitarisation of France, the primary patron of the Little Entente and the associated Quadripartite Non-Aggression Pact, which essentially locked the French and British out of the region for the time being.

Figures 27a and 27b: Kings Carol II (left) and Michael I (right) of Romania. Carol was forced to abdicate in favour of a government led by Antonescu, with Michael as constitutional monarch, in late 1940 following the triple cessions of Moldova, southern Dobruja and Transylvania.​

Soviet interest in Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina and Hertza had originated with the formation of the Soviet Union itself, with the Russian government never releasing their claims over what the region, which they termed Moldova and regarded as an integral part of the USSR despite Romania’s long-standing de facto administration of the territory. With the secret provisions of the Molotov-Neurath Pact outlining the extension of the Soviet sphere of influence to the Curzon Line (however modified) and Bessarabia, Stalin was further encouraged to take decisive action to reclaim Moldova for the USSR.

Diplomatic correspondence indicates that Stalin informed Weber that their expansions into Bukovina would be limited to Northern Bukovina, which Weber accepted for the continued existence of the economic and non-aggression pacts enabling the reconstruction of the Wehrmacht following its losses in Poland, Norway, the Low Countries and France.

Figure 28: Ion Victor Antonenscu, dictatorial Conducător of Romania, signatory of the Tripartite Pact and staunch ally of Weber throughout the Axis domination of Europe.​

Thus, upon the arrival of the Soviet ultimatum to cede the aforementioned territories, King Carol found incredibly little surcease with the Anti-Comintern Pact, where Germany and Italy took a united stand to simply stand by and let the Soviets enter Bessarabia and North Bukovina, as the Axis had neither the ability nor the will to stop them at this stage. However, Weber secretly dispatched missives to pro-Axis elements of the Romanian political system, primarily Ion Antonescu, the former Defence Minister, who had resigned in disgust over the dismissal of his patron Corneliu Zelea Codreanu (and the associated fascist Iron Guard movement) by the increasingly authoritarian Carol.Antonescu himself would be placed under arrest within a monastery when he continued to protest against the government. The surviving missives indicate that Weber offered promises to Antonescu and the Iron Guard of aid in a potential putsch in exchange for a guarantee of Romanian aid in the future.

Thus, in late June and early July of 1940, Soviet forces rolled into Romania from Ukraine to limited resistance, proclaiming the occupied areas the “Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic” and intensifying dissatisfaction with the increasingly isolated regime of Carol II. Encouraged by these results, Admiral Miklós Horthy, authoritarian regent of Hungary, took steps to realise the ambitions of “Greater Hungary”, primarily the repatriation of Transylvania. Unaware of their intentions, Carol sought to ingratiate himself to the same Axis camp which had stood by as the Soviets had absorbed Bessarabia and Bukovina into its territory, and set up a new pro-German cabinet mostly composed of the National Christian Party, including three members of the Iron Guard, although still lacking Antonescu, who remained under confinement. It was this cabinet which negotiated the cession of Southern Dobruja to Bulgaria, another Axis-leaning party, which was received with less acrimony than Bessarabia and Bukovina, and certainly much less than the final resolution of the Transylvania issue.

Figure 29: Maps detailing the ethnic distribution of Northern Transylvania.​

The intractableness of the situation arose from the ethnic distribution of the contested territory; to cede the areas with Hungarian majorities to Hungary would create a Hungarian exclave (which would also be an enclave) in Romania and vice versa; hardly an acceptable resolution to the contesting claims. While a population exchange between its northern and southern portions would unite Romanians and Hungarians, this did not fulfil the historic components of the tensions. Ultimately, Weber chose Horthy’s continued cooperation over Romanian strength, as firstly, the further intercession would grant Germany even closer access to Romanian oilfields through Hungary, which would doubtless be ingratiated to Germany for arbitrating in their favour. In exchange for this, Weber further demanded secret talks for Hungary’s full accession into the Tripartite Pact, and opened discussions with the Romanian government with regard to a mutual defence treaty, pending its membership in the Anti-Comintern and Tripartite Pacts.

Reduced as the demands were from Hungary’s initial ones encompassing 69,000 km² of territory with 3,803,000 inhabitants, almost two thirds of which Romanian, to more modest ones transferring 43,492 km² with a population of 2,667,000 people thanks to German diplomatic efforts, the news of the Second Vienna Award led to massive demonstrations and riots in Romania, whose anger at the Axis Powers soon shifted towards King Carol. In this chaotic environment, an Abwehr-commanded Brandenburger special forces team led by Oberleutnant Hans-Albrecht Herzner [3] met practically no resistance in liberating Antonescu from his imprisonment – it is even fabled that Antonescu initially thought that the armed men were present to execute him on King Carol’s orders [4].

With aid from the Germans, Antonescu quickly returned to the national sphere, forcing Carol to bestow upon Antonescu the same dictatorial powers which Carol had held, and subsequently abdicate in favour of the 19-year old Michael I. Antonescu rapidly filled the cabinet with members of the Iron Guard, and rapidly established his autocratic hold of power in Romania. The relationship between Antonescu, the Iron Guard and King Michael would prove to be the key defining political dynamic shaping Romania throughout the Second Great War and the Cold War.

In order to secure Romanian cooperation during the lead-up to Operation Barbarossa, Weber and Antonescu signed several secret treaties during the Phoney Peace (covert such as not to tip Weber’s hand to Stalin) following the explicit guarantees of Romanian borders in exchange for accepting the terms of the Transylvanian resolution, including permitting German troops passage through Romania, as they proceeded to do during the Third Balkans War, and a last-minute entry into the Anti-Comintern Pact just as the first Wehrmacht forces blitzed across the Curzon Line.

In one of their first meetings, Weber is recorded as informing Antonescu that “[The] Bessarabia and Bukovina situation shall be a strictly temporary hardship for the Romanian people to bear.” While Weber did not explicitly mention Transylvania, the fear of Germany reneging on their mediation also spurred Horthy to quickly involve Hungary in Barbarossa. As the dust eventually settled on the Eastern Front, the Transylvanian situation would return to haunt Weber as he attempted to balance the competing interests of his allies during the Cold Wars.

===​

[1] An OTL quote, more or less.
[2] More or less as in OTL, for the reasons outlined above.
[3] You have no idea how badly I wanted this to be Otto Skorzeny, but he wasn't really active in 1940. Herzner was responsible for the (ITTL successful) Jablonkow incident.
[4] In OTL, Antonescu was pretty much able to walk out of the monastery, although he did get some help. Here, Weber wants to make sure his investment's paying off.

=======​

Most of this is pretty much as in OTL, as the motivations and circumstances of most of the players aren't any different from those in OTL. The only major difference would be explicit German involvement in Antonescu's coup.​

Next update: The Third Balkans War, and with that, the conclusion of Part 5: The Calm Between the Storms.
​

"What could-a possibly go wrong?"
​

 

[Tom Colton]

That's fine man, priorities are priorities. I guess I'll see the update next year, ha.

Hope you had a good Christmas.

And a good 2014 year.

Same to You!

That`s fine Tom Colton and Happy holidays to you too.

Thank you for the holiday wishes, everyone! I had a good time with my family over the break.

Rather semantic but this news doesn't exactly leave me being thrashed or kidnapped so you're not quite Krampus yet, though I do get the sense of another Christmas figure whenever I think of this TL...

Not really sure if Paul would fit as Scrooge mind, can time travellers be shown their future?​

​

"But what of Corporal Addie?! He may not live to see next Christmas!" (Guess what, he didn't).

Well, they won't really know their own future if their time machine's confiscated, would they? Paul's intrusion into the past was his first - and only - one in this timeline, anyway.

I nominated this for a Turtledove, you deserve one.

I couldn't agree more.

Thank you both, that's high praise indeed. Hope it lives up to the hype.

With that, I may as well make the first update of the new year - I intended to post the Third Balkans War as one big update, but due to length I decided to split it into two, meaning I can post the Yugoslavia half first!

=======​

THE THIRD BALKANS WAR​

“I said that we would break the Negus [of Ethiopia]'s back. Now, with the same, absolute, certainty, I tell you that we will take the entire Balkans and break their collective backs upon the Italian knee.” [1]
Benito Mussolini in his balcony speech at the Palazzo di Venezia, just prior to the Italian declaration of war on Yugoslavia, which would eventually broaden into the Third Balkans War. His mention of the Negus of Ethiopia refers to the outcome of the Second Italo-Abyssianian War.​

Figure 30: Mussolini during the Grecian Campaign of the Third Balkans War.​

Much like the Spring War before it, the Third Balkans War would radically redraw the map of Europe, this time in its east. The dissection of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, formed from the remnants of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the subsequent subjugation of Greece derived their origins as much in Weber’s pragmatic political needs as they did in Mussolini’s grandiose territorial ambitions in reconstructing the Roman Empire. This conflict stands as a watershed for a number of reasons, primarily as it represented the first instance where the European Axis acted together against a common foe, including a new ally in the form of Romania, who had just been placated despite the incredibly disadvantageous resolution of Transylvania, and even the normally neutral Bulgaria involved itself in carving Yugoslavia up.

Thus, the Third Balkans War in fact served as a prelude to many of the elements which came into play during Operation Barbarossa, and would have long-term implications in defining the relations of the Tripartite Pact. The spark igniting the war was to be found in the direct aftermath of the shift of Romania to the Axis camp, and the placation of Hungary. Of the entirety of Southeast Europe, only Yugoslavia and Greece remained outside of the Axis sphere of influence (not counting the Moldavian SSR). King George II of Greece remained in the British camp (unsurprisingly so, given his upbringing in England), a stance generally endorsed by his dictatorial prime minister Ioannis Metaxas, who imitated many fascist norms but stood firmly against any form of Italian expansionism at Greece’s expense. Therefore, to prevent Allied intrusion into the solidly Axis Southeast, decisive action was deemed necessary by Weber to bring Yugoslavia into the Axis camp, and reduce Greece to a client state.

Figures 31a and 31b: Balkan monarchs – King George II of Greece and Prince Paul, Regent of Yugoslavia. Both leaders would inevitably be drawn into the Third Balkans War [2].​

Mussolini, however, had ambitions which exceeded these practical considerations. Much of his expansionistic rhetoric was based in pan-Italianism and hearkening back to the days of the Roman Empire, and the reclamation of territories which would bring the Kingdom of Italy to imperial glory. These ambitions included the already-annexed areas of Libya and Albania, the latter of which was subjugated in the interwar period, followed by the permanent shift of the Franco-Italian border to the Rhône River as well as the cession of Corsica to Italy – both of these had been half-fulfilled by the Treaty of Gutenberg – and then the annexation of the Slovene and Dalmatian coast in Yugoslavia (accompanied by the reduction of Yugoslavia or its constituents as puppet states) and the conquest of Greece to complete the restitution of Imperial Rome.

Further territorial ambitions which were never pursued in any form due to geopolitical realities were northwards expansions into Switzerland and the reduction of Spain, Bulgaria and Rome from equal allies to client states, or various expansions in Africa into Tunisia (although the ports were demilitarised and opened to the Regia Marina after the Spring War), Egypt, Sudan or the Somaliland, as the Treaty of Gutenberg had halted hostilities between Italy and the Allied powers. Thus, to Mussolini, the subordination of Yugoslavia was a logical stepping stone to realising Italian domination of the Aegean.

Figure 32: Map detailing the maximum territorial ambitions of the fascist-era Kingdom of Italy.​

Thus, the two primary European Axis Powers entered negotiations with the Kingdom of Yugoslavia with already diametrically different aims, neither side aware of precisely what the other wanted. Yugoslavia had formerly courted Britain, an arrangement which existed in one form or other during the interwar period, and shared intelligence with the British forces practically as soon as the Second Great War broke out with the German invasion of Poland. In a parallel development with Romania, Allied support dissolved with the signing of the Treaty of Gutenberg and the effective exclusion of Britain from the Mediterranean with the clause permitting the use of French ports (and the pre-existing agreements with Francoist Spain).

However, this second development propelled Yugoslavia into the attention of both the Axis and Allied powers, as it now (along with Turkey) represented the only neutral coastline in the entire Mediterranean. Its borders with Italy (and its protectorate of Albania), Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria also meant that any pact permitting Allied ground forces through its territory would be a massive threat to the Tripartite Pact. The successful accession of Romania to the Axis camp (and with it access to its oil fields – the energy arrangements Germany had made with Syria had yet to bear fruit) further led Weber to pressure the Yugoslavian regent, Prince Paul, to accept terms which would secure Yugoslavian allegiance.

The Allied Powers were divided and hamstrung over the Balkans issues; while Halifax recognised the threat of an Axis Yugoslavia early on, force projection was severely limited, with the only friendly power (besides France) in the Mediterranean being Turkey, directly on its opposite end – and even then, there was no concrete alliance between the two powers, only an agreement between the two for the extension of military credit from Britain to Turkey (although this would rapidly change following the events of the year), and Turkish President İsmet İnönü was incredibly reluctant to enter any conflict given that the previous war had destroyed the Ottoman Empire and Turkey was in many senses still recovering from this massive upheaval [3].

As for France, Halifax had run out of patience for Pétain, returning from many a meeting (including the critical one of May Day) utterly frustrated with his contemporary’s total unwillingness to extend any form of military aid or even permit troop passage for British forces. While Pétain’s adamant neutrality has frequently been interpreted by critical historians and subsequently stereotyped as cowardice by de Gaulle’s Free France Party, it is not difficult to empathise with his situation; with an effective fighting force of barely 250,000 personnel, no exclusive usage of ports on the south coast or in Tunisia and Algeria, no friendly forces between France and Germany, and having witnessed first-hand the rapidity of the Wehrmacht even with said allied forces intervening, any antagonistic action on France’s part would be tantamount to suicide. With no guarantees of aid, Halifax reluctantly accepted Axis control of the Mediterranean as he had been convinced by the Admiralty that with hostile ports at every coast between Gibraltar and Alexandria, the Mediterranean would rapidly turn into a “meat grinder” for the Royal Navy [4].

Figure 33: Demonstrations in Belgrade against the planned entry of Yugoslavia into the Tripartite Pact, a decisive factor in enabling the fatal coup which led to its Axis invasion.​

These considerations shaped the document which Prince Paul would eventually sign on April 1st, 1941, stating Yugoslavia’s accession to the Tripartite Pact as an “observer”, subject to the relatively lenient terms, with no terms dictating passage of Axis troops through Yugoslavian territory or ports, only the lifting of trade barriers, pending accession to the EWG, the usage of Yugoslav ports for refuelling and resupply, accession to the Anti-Comintern Pact and a guarantee of territorial sovereignty in return for these. A suggestion for Yugoslav usage of Albanian ports as a further security was flatly refused by Mussolini.

However, even these terms were unacceptable to the officer corps (primarily its Serbian members), and thus emboldened by a similarly unimpressed public, a coup d’etat was launched, ousting Prince Paul from power and placing the 17-year old Peter II on the throne. To a certain extent, the coup plotters simplified the situation for the Axis Powers; with such an explicitly hostile act, Weber could repeat the same methodology he had employed in Poland with Danzig, interpreting the putsch as an “unambiguous act of war from those factions of the Yugoslav government hostile to the construction of a permanent peace in Europe. For the purposes of the restoration of order to the region and the prevention of the spread of unmitigated chaos, Germany and its allies must act decisively to save the continent from anarchy.” [5]

Mussolini, who was pleased by this turn of events and wishing to realise his irredentist goals, mobilised the Regio Esercito and invaded Yugoslavia in coordination with Germany, through both the Italo-Slovene border and Albania. Eager to please his new patrons, Antonescu complied with Romania’s terms of permitting the Wehrmacht passage through his nation’s territory. Hungary quickly accompanied the rest of the Axis, both to similarly realise territorial gains as well as to ensure that Weber would not recant on the Second Vienna Award. Thus did the unexpectedly brief Third Balkans War erupt on the 4th of April (the date memorialised as 4/4 in partisan propaganda).

The Yugoslav armed forces, encroached upon from all sides save Greece and utterly unfairly outnumbered, were forced to capitulate within barely two weeks, with Ante Pavelić announcing the secession of the “Independent State of Croatia” from Yugoslavia even before any formal surrender terms had been accepted. With the capitulation of the remaining pockets of regular resistance, all that was left to do was to carve the former kingdom up along irredentist and ethnic lines.

Figure 34: Division of Yugoslavia amongst the Axis Powers. Bosnia-Herzegovina was a later modification to the “Independent State of Croatia” following unrest due to the repressive methods of the Ustaše regime [6].​

The divisions essentially reverted Yugoslavia to its pre-1922 ethnic boundaries and former kingdoms, with adjustments from the Axis Powers. Hungary absorbed elements of Slovenia, Croatia and Vojvodina, while Germany installed a caretaker government in the rump Serbian territory while also creating a new “Protectorate of Carinola and Styria” from the remainder of Slovenia once Italy was done annexing Slovenia as well. Macedonia totally ceased to exist as Italy expanded its Albanian protectorate to absorb its western half while Bulgaria seized its eastern half. Pavelić’s Croatia represented the rest of the territory, minus some elements of the Dalmatian coast which Italy had taken as per its irredentist goals.

Partisan activity was rife in many of the new areas, with Germany eventually releasing limited control to the puppet Serbian government as a mild concession following the conclusion of Operation Barbarossa. When Pavelić’s repressive methods eventually grew too overbearing even for his Axis counterparts, Italy initiated an internal coup, renaming Croatia to the “Grand Duchy of Croatia and Bosina-Herzegovina”, directly subservient to the Italian throne but with similar limited autonomy. However, the Communist partisans grew weaker and weaker as the Soviet sphere of influence was driven further eastwards during Operation Barbarossa, and the Axis Powers played the Chetniks off against the other partisans, weakening both in the process [7].

[1] Slightly modified from an OTL speech, with 100% more Bane.
[2] There's a Beatles joke to be made here somewhere, I know it...
[3] As per OTL, mostly. But with Syria in the Axis camp starting in late 1941...
[4] I hope this is sound enough justification for excluding Britain from this particular conflict, without making Halifax (and to a slightly smaller extent, Pétain) too much of a wuss. Pétain remained popular in France even after Case Anton, so I'd imagine de Gaulle would actually be in the minority here...at least for now.
[5] It's been ages since I wrote some Weber dialogue, hasn't it? The best line of the TL is yet to come, though.
[6] Not much to modify here, minus some name changes to reflect the altered treatment of the constituent states and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Hitler was actually pretty pissed off with the Ustase's more-nuts-than-the-Nazis policies in OTL, so if the opportunity arises, they're going out the window.
[7] The Chetniks collaborated with the Axis in the short term to fulfil long-term anti-Axis goals. Here the Axis leadership uses them as long as they're useful then goes all Elliot Carver on them once the dust settles. (If you prefer your Bond references more classy, SPECTRE's model works too).

=======
​

Next update (Saturday, 10th January): Mussolini's Greek Tragedy.
​

 

[Tom Colton]

I wonder if the Balkans war will encourage intra Axis cooperation? In OTL of course, the Axis made the Allies look like an indivisible perfectly united front in comparison, but Webber's model is much more institutional than Hitler's OTL, so might we see some sort of Axis General staff and some industrial cooperation? One weakness that might be exposed in a limited war such as this that Webber might be inclined to actually do something about is the crappy state of everyone else's tank corps, the Italians were operating mostly tanketts, and IIRC the Yugoslavs should have had enough AT to give them a few really nasty bloody noses, even if they're generally rolled over by weight of numbers. If Germany looks at building a simple export tank en masse it would put them in good stead longer term and strengthen the weak reed that was their allies OTL.

Greece, why always Greece. Joking aside, while i see ITTL Greece campaign going as OTL due to Benny being high for his success and believing even more his own propaganda regarding his military genius; the Greeks are still toasted, Italy is not fighting in North Africa and can, later, concentrate all his force in a single objective...still will be more similar to the Winter War with Italy instead of the Russian.

I believe both of these questions are answered quite adequately in this next bit, which is just barely on time! And things were going so well...

=======

THE THIRD BALKANS WAR
(continued)
​

It is at this point where Mussolini’s ego overstretched the boundaries of his competence and nearly threw all of Weber’s plans for Russia astray, and threatened to reactivate the state of war between Britain and the Tripartite Powers – an interruption which might have proved fatal to the successes of Barbarossa had it actually occurred. Emboldened by the successes in Yugoslavia, Mussolini contacted Tsar Boris III of Bulgaria in late April, and the two militaries planned for a coordinated strike on Greece, where Italy would invade through Albania, and Bulgaria from its annexed Yugoslav territories and its common border into Greek Macedonia.

The Italian and Bulgarian armies had already been mobilised and were still in fairly good condition following the Yugoslavian campaign, and thus on 23rd April 1941, Italian and Bulgarian troops massed on the Greek border, whereupon the Greek government was accused of assisting partisan activity in Macedonia and harbouring Yugoslav deserters (a trumped-up charge if there ever was one) and was given 24 hours to permit Italian and Bulgarian troops to cross the border in pursuit, or there would be war. It was essentially a document designed to be rejected, and when it predictably was, Italian and Bulgarian forces struck into Greek territory [1].

Figure 35: Greek Army troops entrenched against an Italian offensive during the Grecian Campaign of the Third Balkans War.​

However, the 24-hour deadline had not only alerted the Greek Army, which had drawn up plans for such a strike (albeit not considering the Yugoslav Front) as early as the 1930s, but also spurred Halifax into action. Having already come under attack from the hawkish elements of Parliament for inaction, Halifax was eager to make a show of strength, and with support from the Conservative majority and Labour minority, quickly sent an envoy to Greece with an alliance proposal announced that “if the Axis Powers do not end their flagrant violation of Greek sovereignty, Britain will take every measure within its power to protect Greece from foreign aggression.”

However, Halifax had spoken prematurely; he had no support from Pétain, and could not guarantee any meaningful response from the Royal Navy. Nonetheless, the threat of British action was enough to spur a reaction from Germany, who had not committed to the invasion yet. It is as this juncture that the normally calm and collected Weber flew into an incredible rage which was described as “apocalyptic” by his personal secretary Krüger, where he ranted at length to Neurath, demanding to know where the Italian ambassador was.

When the ambassadorial aide Emilio Fagliano reported to the Führer’s office, Weber dressed him down for a full quarter of an hour, saying that Mussolini’s “ego outstretches his intelligence by so much that one wages war in Greece while the other rots in Rome”, and at the rant’s most obscene, stating that “His head is lodged so far up his own rectum that were he to void his bowels he would grant himself a full head of hair” [2]. Weber’s careful planning to knock the British out of the war by holding France hostage and the guarantee of their non-interference for the next half of a decade was now on the brink of ruination, and he acted decisively to end the Grecian quandary quickly.

Weber immediately sent missives to Mussolini and Bulgarian Prime Minister Petar Gabrovski, demanding that Italy and Bulgaria immediately cease operations, instead offering to reduce Greece to what the Axis had originally planned for Yugoslavia in return for an assurance of territorial sovereignty. Neither party was particularly pleased with this, but the threat of British intervention also loomed heavily and Greek resistance had been far stronger than anticipated, as patriotic sentiment had burst into fervour upon the outbreak of war. The British threat was actually weaker than the Axis had perceived; beyond the aforementioned difficulties with force projection into the Mediterranean, the timing of the ultimatums meant that it was actually illegal for Britain to declare war on Italy due to the terms of the Quadripartite Nonaggression Pact, as it would be “signing a pact which would bring it into war” with Italy, in direct contradiction with its first point.

Halifax, however, could prevent German intervention by utilising the exact same clause, and thus a series of tensions where actions were dependent upon the actions of the others slowly emerged [3]. Prime Minister Alexandros Koryzis, who had ascended to the premiership upon the death of staunch anti-Italian strongman Ioannis Metaxas [4] consulted with George II of Greece, convincing him that the situation would be hopeless upon German entry and that the longer the war ground on, the more brutal reprisals would be after the inevitable Axis victory. Koryzis pressed that diplomatic means ought to be pursued if they could be used to ensure Greek sovereignty.

Figure 36: Alexandros Koryzis, Prime Minister of Greece and signatory of its submission to the Triparite Pact powers.​

Given this intricate mosaic of actions and counter-actions, it is difficult to accurately judge who “blinked first”, although the events of April 30th – May 2nd were decisive in reshaping the conflict. Weber essentially stepped over his two allies in presenting an alternative proposal to the Greek government on the 30th – Germany would pressure Italy and Bulgaria into ceasing operations in exchange for a non-aggression pact between Greece and its neighbours, accession to the EWG, and permission for their naval vessels to dock at Greek ports similar to Italy’s arrangement with Corsica, and the long-term loan of several of the Aegean islands (including Corfu).

Halifax, having caught wind of this proposal by loyalists to King George, immediately contacted Pétain, flying to Paris to discuss how they could subvert the proposal and nip the Axis attempt to control the Aegean Sea in the bud. Pétain proved as intransigent as ever (although, as mentioned above, justifiably so) during the May Day meeting, finally telling a beleaguered Halifax that “je ne peux pas vous aider” (“I cannot help you”), even as Halifax pressed that the Quadripartite Nonaggression Pact was not designed to be “a screen behind which Mussolini and Weber could freely conduct aggression” – prescient words given the outcome of the Great Patriotic War. Pétain’s response was quoted in the French press as a simple “Non” – this “Day of the No” remains one of infamy in Greece, and soured relations between the two states even after the war.

With no other options left, Koryzis signed the “Second Four Power Nonaggression Pact” (more commonly known as the “Treaty of Athens”, despite actually being signed in nearby Peristeri to prevent the Axis potentiates from being lynched by an outraged public), whereupon the German terms were, with some small modifications, agreed to, granting the Italo-Bulgarian force 12 hours to withdraw behind their borders. It was an agreement which nobody was wholly agreeable to: not Weber, nor Mussolini or Boris III, and certainly not the Greeks. Nonetheless, it nominally achieved Axis security goals in the Aegean, and halted any British plans for interference, which was enough for Weber, and the island transfers could be exaggerated as territorial gains in Axis propaganda, implying that the invasion had not been for naught.

The reactions were generally expected; ambivalence from Germany, annoyance by Mussolini and Boris III, although tempered by the small gains, and outrage in Greece. Koryzis was forced to resign within hours of the announcement of the decree, and was later found dead, with a brief suicide note explaining his actions, ending with “I have done everything I could, with no help forthcoming from any of the great powers which could have delivered us from foreign aggression, to preserve the continued existence of our nation, among the oldest and most ancient in the world. I only regret that I could not have done more. Heaven help our King and our nation.” [5] History has re-evaluated Koryzos as a man trapped by circumstances; his reasoning that continued resistance without even the hope of British or French support would lead to brutal reprisals would be vindicated by the savage treatment of Yugoslav partisans throughout the period of Axis oppression.

Figure 37: Sir Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom during the Second Great War and Asia-Pacific War following Halifax’s fall from grace.​

The consequences of the resolution of the Greek situation spread beyond the Aegean, where Halifax had to face a public which now regarded him as a hypocrite, full of bluster on defence against Axis aggression one moment then utterly flaccid the next. Hosts of cruel editorials and political cartoons were produced, including one where a worried Halifax looks into a mirror only to see (the recently deceased) Chamberlain, and marginally kinder caricatures such as one where Halifax ineffectually curses at Weber and Mussolini (as Pétain hides), as his hands are tied behind his back with a ribbon labelled “GUTENBERG”.

Despite having just won re-election for the Conservatives in the 1940 elections [6], Halifax could not survive a vote of no confidence, conceding the premiership to Churchill, under the threat of Labour withdrawing their support. A coalition government was formed with a continuing War Cabinet, with Attlee as War Secretary. Halifax was not finished yet, though – he was placed by a sympathetic Churchill as Secretary of State for the Colonies and Dominions and sent to fortify Britain’s Far East Colonies against the inevitable Japanese strike. It has long been argued that Halifax’s true efficacy was as “Prime Minister of the British Empire” and not the United Kingdom proper, given his admirable conduct in the Asia-Pacific War and its aftermath, especially during decolonisation [7].

Bulgaria was left ambivalent following the agreement, and their indifference and neutrality during the Great Patriotic War can thus be more or less ascribed to their mixed experience cooperating with the Tripartite Pact. The rift between Germany and Italy, created by Weber’s interference in what appeared to be the cusp of Mussolini’s greatest triumph, would be suddenly reshaped by the Third Balkans War’s final, fatal, legacy. While Mussolini had begrudgingly granted materiel aid (especially in fortifying Germany’s relatively weak logistics train), Italy remained undecided on whether to send front-line troops, given its comfortable gains in the Balkans and general lack of enthusiasm for future cooperation with Weber. The decision was left pending as Mussolini finished a tour of the Dalmatian coast in Albania, culminating in a motorcade in its capital Tirana.

Figure 38: Mussolini embarking on his fatal motorcade in Tirana, on 22nd June 1941.​

There, two Albanian patriots, Vasil Laçi and Pëllumb Koka [8], emerged from the crowd, screaming “Long live Albania! Down with fascism!”, as they fired their Beretta M1915 pistols at Mussolini’s Alfa Romeo. The Duce was struck twice in the chest and once in the stomach, clinging onto life just long enough to give one last command – “Guidare!”(“Drive!”). News footage of his car speeding away while carabinieri (military police) frantically attempted to control the panicking and agitated crowd remains iconic even to this day. Laçi and Koka fled into the streets, but incensed fascist supporters soon caught up with them, lynching the duo and leaving them hanging from nearby streetlamps, where their corpses were abused until the carabinieri hastily cut the bodies down and buried them.

Massive reprisals began in Albania, and upon the suspicion that they had been aided in the assassination by Yugoslav partisans (despite the hasty and opportunistic nature of the killing), also spread into the Italian-occupied Yugoslav territories, leading to the infamous “Week of Terror” where Italian soldiers freely stormed houses, made warrantless arrests and conducted summary executions on the thinnest of pretexts. In the meantime, a brief but critical power struggle erupted in Rome over who would succeed Mussolini. Marshal Italo Balbo eventually emerged as the victor by allying himself to Foreign Minister Count Ciano, Mussolini’s son-in-law, efficiently purging opponents such as Dino Grandi. Balbo, in addition to taking up the position of Prime Minister, styled himself Premier, to avoid upsetting devotees to the former Duce. To prevent a diplomatic snub from Weber, Balbo sent several volunteer brigades to fortify the Axis forces to assuage the Führer on Italy’s reliability, but would soon carve out a new path for Italy – one which would be radically different from Mussolini’s impulses [9].

Figure 39: Marshal Italo Balbo, Premier of Italy following Mussolini’s assassination.​

[1] Mussolini asked Boris III about this in OTL but the Tsar was kind of 'meh' on the idea. Here, Bulgaria has already committed to Macedonia and things have actually been going pretty well, so they've no reason not to make this opportunistic grab.

[2] I'll accept that Turtledove nomination for "Best Quote" now, thank you very much. This anecdote is clearly this TL's version of this infamous scene, and will be given many gag subtitles by interweb humorists, including topics as frivolous as the cancellation of Weber's Atari Arcade account.
[3] Some people have speculated how the Quadripartite Nonaggression Pact works outside of the four powers, so here's a case study of how it get used (and abused).
[4] Metaxas died on schedule in January 1941.
[5] Poor man can't catch a break between realities, as he committed suicide OTL under the stress of the Nazi invasion. At least here he manages a Vichy-esque deal, although Greece really caught the short end of the stick.
[6] Based on Seleucus's analysis/critique. Labour made some modest gains in 1940 as many disagreed with Halifax's decision to sue for peace, and Attlee held onto his hawkish stance. The first draft had the elections being held in this year, but since the war technically ended in 1940, I could find no cogent reasons to suspend them for so long.
[7] Halifax was a generally well-liked Viceroy of India, and Churchill isn't totally cold-hearted (and doesn't want to appear to be ruthlessly power-grasping either), and would much rather hand India off to be someone else's problem too.
[8] Well, Laci got to kill a symbol of the authoritarian Italian regime in TTL, at any rate.
[9] Don't say I didn't tell you guys. ​

=======
​

...well, then. I think that shakes things up, doesn't it?

See you later this month for Part 6: Drive to the East.
​

 

[Tom Colton]

(I make a "no animated gif" exception for Bernard Hill.)
=======

PART 6​

DRIVE TO THE EAST​

“We will strike into the heart of the Soviet territories and bomb Moscow until they are ready to make a settlement from their ruins. The French capitulated in an identical manner and so will the Russians.”
Friedrich Weber, outlining the policy of Operation Barbarossa to the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht just prior to the outbreak of hostilities.​

Figure 1: NSDAP propaganda poster outlining origins of soon-to-be German colonists, assessments comprising their bid to colonise Eastern Europe [1].​

The (First) Great Patriotic War, generally synchronous with Operation Barbarossa, represented the fourth major stage of NSDAP-driven German expansionism (after Austria, Czechia and Poland, the latter along with its reclaimed colonies), and final stretch of Weber’s ambitions in turning Europe into a massive German colony, where the principles of a privileged German minority exerting economic and political control, all under the guise of “self-determination”, manifested in this most refined form of Scheuleder.

These ambitions may be considered a continuation of the Great War-era Mitteleuropa policy, first enunciated by Friedrich Naumann, of expanding the German sphere of influence into the Baltics, Poland and Ukraine, which would be converted either into colonies or puppet states, and exploiting them for wealth and resources, all as a bulwark against the Russian Empire and to compete against the British Empire. Weber’s influences from Naumann’s work are already clear when examining the treatment of the German-annexed areas of Poland, later termed “Gothica” (see above, Part 5), and their subsequent influence over Serbia, especially the German-dominated Free State of Banat. These policies would be massively expanded come the execution of Operation Barbarossa, with the selective support of anti-Soviet uprisings and subsequent manipulations of their conquered territories.

===​

THE RISING STORM​

Figure 2: Heer personnel, Army Group North, c. October 1941.​

The methodology with which Operation Barbarossa was executed requires elaboration before discussing its effectiveness and consequences, both short and long term. The preparations for Barbarossa involved the strengthening of the Axis military, the development of the logistics train meant to support the strike into the heart of Soviet territory, and perhaps most importantly, the massive misinformation campaign conducted by Abwehr Deputy Chief Heydrich – considered up until then as his magnum opus as far as counter-intelligence was concerned – to convince the Soviets that German attention was not at Moscow.

By June 1941, the continued rearmament programme – funded at least in part by the the economic agreements the Molotov-Neurath Pact was predicated upon – had led to the expansion of the Wehrmacht to its maximum size of nearly 9 million troops, encompassing all branches and support personnel. The Third Balkans War represented a convenient test-bed for the expanded armed forces, and the diversion of manpower was minimal compared to the forces levied against the Soviets; the troops involved probably could not be as adequately supported by the German logistics train at any rate. At this point, the modernisation efforts had also resulted in the complete replacement of the obsolete Gewehr 98 with the newer Karabiner 98k bolt-action rifle and the Luger with the Walther P38 (the former two being relegated to the Volkssturm), along with the mass introduction of Panzer IV tanks, which proved decisive against otherwise equally-matched Soviet armour among many other improvements from the experiences of the Polish Campaign and the Spring War.

Figure 3: A Panzer IV Aus. C tank, Army Group Center, in Eastern Poland [2].​

The Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine, relatively uninvolved since the Phoney Peace had begun, were also well-equipped for the operation. The Messerschmitt Bf109 and its variants, tried and tested in Polish, French and Yugoslavian skies, along with the newer Bf110 and the Focke-Wolfe Fw190, would prove critical in the successes of the German advance, with the Bf110 being particularly important in aiding bombing campaigns in deeper Soviet territory. These were, however, hampered in part by the lack of an actual strategic bomber due to Göring’s dominance of the Reich Air Ministry and his and Udet’s subsequent obsession with dive-bombing, which four-engine bombers simply were not capable of. Nonetheless, the Heinkel He111 and Junkers Ju88 and the hastily-adapted Ju188 served as the “workhorse” of the Eastern bombing campaigns, with their devastating bombings of Leningrad being decisive in the fortunes of Army Group North [3].

As regards the Kriegsmarine, the Baltenflotte (including the legendary Bismarck) was assembled with the explicit goal of destroying the Soviet Baltic Fleet. With regards to the Black Sea, one of the first terms which Weber had insisted Antonescu accept was basing rights off the Romanian coast. The Romanian Navy, with only two destroyers in the area, was ill-equipped to deal with the Soviet Black Sea Fleet, and a land incursion into Crimea was deemed necessary to decisively lock the Soviet fleet out of the area. About 20 or so U-boats were transported overland along the Danube – the Bosphorous was off-limits due to Turkey’s neutrality and later cooperative pact with Britain – in an attempt to bolster efforts there, but the Soviet presence in the Black Sea persisted. Cruisers Scarnhorst and Gneisau were based in the Free City of Narvik, and were rapidly sent to Murmansk on the opening of the joint Finno-German strike.

Figure 4: The Bismarck photographed from the Prinz Eugen, both part of the Baltenflotte [4].​

In preparation for the monumental task of Barbarossa, Weber met with other the Axis leaders intimating that “the tipping point of history” was about to be achieved, and that “the Greater German Reich would be ingratiated to its allies in their support in this decisive moment”, keeping terms carefully worded as not to tip off the Soviets. Mussolini’s anger over the resolution of the Grecian issue was placated by promises of German materiel aid in the future, although Balbo would later discard any plans for further colonial and irredentist expansion which Mussolini had planned, exchanging these for greater economic cooperation. Boris III was even less impressed, but lent some minor materiel aid, and Bulgaria would eventually house the war as fought through diplomacy.

Antonescu, who had purged the Iron Guard’s leadership on the “Day of the Judas Kiss” (Romanian: “Ziua sărut Iuda”) following a particularly brutal (and more importantly, overly overt) anti-Jewish pogrom and used loyalist elements to build his new government [5], essentially jumped at the opportunity to reclaim the territory labelled by the Soviets as Moldova, a decision which prompted Horthy to enter the war to prevent Weber reconsidering his loyalty and thus the resolution of the Transylvanian question.

Antonescu harboured even greater ambitions across the Dniester, although these would be tempered by political reality. German potentiates met with a cabal of revanchist Finnish officers, whereupon it was agreed that mobilisation would essentially occur behind the central government’s back, culminating in the “Finno-German Treaty of Friendship” which established Finland as an Axis co-belligerent, but not a signatory of the Tripartite Pact [6]. The treaty would be invoked in Weber’s subsequent campaigns against Communism.

Figure 5: A Romanian propaganda stamp denoting its alliance with Germany in their “holy war against Bolshevism” (bottom row).​

As discussed at the close of Part 5, one of the important contributions which Germany’s Tripartite Pact allies made to the Barbarossa effort was the strengthening of its logistics train. The “Blitzkrieg” manoeuvres of the Spring War were in fact incredibly risky given that German armour would often be racing far ahead of their train-borne and horse-drawn supplies; essentially, had they been held to a stalemate at any of the critical junctures mentioned by Fergusson, the Spring War might have ended disastrously for Weber as Allied counterattacks could have annihilated the undersupplied German forces.

Worse yet, thanks to engineering decisions made in the last century, Russian rail gauges were wider than those westwards of Poland, meaning that train-borne supplies would only go so far. To this end, the rapid construction of variable-gauge trains, with designs looted from Poland, was instituted, allegedly for “greater coordination with the new protectorate of the Reich”, along with the early decision to focus construction on the Mercedes-Benz L3000, which would practically become emblematic of the Reich as it spread eastwards, with the heavy trucks often carrying troops and supplies eastwards and prisoners and soon-to-be victims of the Final Solution westwards, with their civilian export being practically ubiquitous in the new conquered territories.​

Figures 6a and 6b: Trucks and trains: a Mercedes-Benz L3000, “workhorse of the Reich” (left) and a reconstructed Polish armoured train conveying materiel (right), Byelorussia [6][7].​

​

[1] An OTL graphic.
[2] No North Africa Campaign, so plenty of these kicking about.
[3] No Battle of Britain, so plenty of these kicking about.
[4] No Battle of the Atlantic, so...you know the rest.
[5] More or less as per OTL, but the name "Iron Guard" sticks around. Cordneau's dad is still around.
[6] Alluded to way back!
[7] Both of these are as per suggestions made really far back in the thread, so thanks iddt3! The decision to standardise one kind of truck shouldn't require magic amounts of foresight, nor should the realisation that one might not be able to steal all the required trains.
[8] That Polish armoured train is actually in England, funnily enough.
​

=======​

Next update: "Now, Heydrich, now is your time!"​

 

[Tom Colton]

All right, enough canvassing for votes. Let's get to the update!

=======

THE RISING STORM
(continued)​

Such elaborate preparations could not go unnoticed, and the Abwehr was tasked to pull the proverbial wool over Stalin’s eyes, a task slightly aided by Stalin’s disbelief that the Germans were ready for such a decisive war so soon after signing the Molotov-Neurath Plan. To this end, Operation Poseidon, a massive misinformation campaign which suggested that Germany’s – and the Tripartite Pact’s – eastward attention was directed towards Turkey and not Russia, generally built upon the emerging associations between Turkey and Britain, Italy’s extant colonial ambitions, the ascendancy of the Axis-aligned SSNP in Syria and the relative proximity of the real and false targets. The fictional attack was titled “Operation Konstantin”, after the founding and final Byzantine Emperors (and coincidentally Foreign Minister Neurath’s first name), and involved a four-pronged assault.

One thrust, Operation Harpune (Harpoon) would involve German troops stationed in Serbia, in coordination with Bulgaria, invading from Western Thrace and overrunning Istanbul and Eastern Thrace, the second would send sorties of the Regia Marina and the Kriegsmarine from the loaned Aegean islands and the Yugoslav coast to assault the south coast of Turkey in Operation Dreizack (Trident), blockading Cyprus to prevent British retaliation, matched in turn by the third prong from Romania in Operation Rochen ([Sting] Ray), which would divert its fleet southwards and force landings on the north coast [1].

Finally, SSNP elements in Syria would prompt an invasion of Hatay, which had been ceded to Turkey shortly before Syrian independence. The primary aims of Operation Konstantin would thus be the neutralisation of Turkey along with the fulfilment of Bulgarian and Syrian irredentist claims. If Britain attempted to interfere, plans were made for Scarnhorst and Gneisau, along with a task force of smaller ships, as well as a flotilla of U-boats, to swing round to Scapa Flow from Narvik and decisively engage the Royal Navy in Operation Haifisch (Shark) [2].

Figure 7: The fictitious Operation Konstantin directed against Turkey (blue), comprising a land thrust from Bulgaria (Harpune) and naval offensives in the Black Sea (Rochen) and the Cicilian Sea (Dreizack). The Hatay offensive and Operation Haifisch are not depicted [2].​

The deception was effective because much of it was at least in part based on some kind of reality. As long as the Germans and Italians were at a quasi-peace with Britain, dismantling potential British allies in the Mediterranean made sense to ensure dominance of Italian interests in particular. An Axis-leaning neutral Turkey would be seen as more of a threat to Britain than Russia so long as the pretence of their territorial impermeability was maintained – some of the last few missives sent to Stalin before Barbarossa involved nebulous offers of the Turkish pie in exchange for guaranteed neutrality along the Caucasus border. Boris III had barely been satisfied by his gains in Western Thrace, which did not quite restore the pre-war border with Greece, and the Turkish campaign would be interpreted as a logical follow-up to the Third Balkans War.

The SSNP politicians in newly independent Syria campaigned primarily on irredentist ideals of a “Greater Syria” including Hatay, Lebanon and even portions of Iraq, and their involvement would thus be a logical step in achieving such aims. Thus, the existing movements of troops into Romania and the transfer of ships and submarines to the Black Sea and Narvik could easily be explained away as necessary towards the execution of Operations Rochen and Haifisch respectively. Nonetheless, to complete the artifice, Wehrmacht proceeded to conduct drills heading broadly southward and eastward, yet with the ability to swing round from Bulgaria and southern Romania back into Romania and Poland at a moment’s notice, along with “exercises” shuffling the Baltic Fleet from Danzig and Lübeck through the Kiel Canal to the Danish Sea and back, in “preparation” for Haifisch.

German propaganda aimed at furthering the deception ironically benefited from Churchill’s accession to the British premiership, and his known hawkish positions. Goebbels denounced the outcome of the leadership struggle as a “critical defeat in the pursuit of peace between the German and British peoples”, calling Churchill a “bloodthirsty warmonger, evidenced by his blatant aggression in Norway and disregard for its sovereignty, and his further poisoning of the mind of Halifax, who was thus emboldened to interfere in Greece.” (In a private aside to Churchill, Halifax would state precisely which orifice Goebbels ought to shove his praise.

Elements of the deception was made especially effective due to the Reich’s total disregard for human life, where anti-German demonstrations were instigated in Warsaw and Krakow by Einsatzgruppen operatives and a number of actual Polish dissidents, unaware that they were being manipulated, then summarily crushed by a massive wave of eastbound troops in the week prior to Barbarossa – thus the massing of troops on the Polish border was justified as a matter of “internal security”, and Abwehr documents indicate that a certain Operation Schnitzel involved a small vessel “crewed” by Polish prisoners containing plans for Haifisch and Dreizack which encountered an “accident” in the Baltic Sea with no “survivors”, complete with obituaries and documentation, and subsequently allowed to beach on the Lithuanian coast, where they were naturally recovered by the Red Army [4].

Franz von Papen, former Vice Chancellor and now Ambassador to Turkey, was targeted in a bomb plot (probably outlined by Heydrich) which inflicted second-degree burns, prompting Germany to unilaterally terminate diplomatic relations. Thus, the numerous warnings of Germany’s actual intentions to strike east, which were passed along to Stalin by various diplomatic potentiates within the Axis Powers, were interpreted as a smokescreen for Konstantin, and as mentioned, Weber even went to far as to offer concessions in Turkey to Russia to placate Stalin [5].

Figure 8: The Soldbuch (identity book) of “Robert Brussart”, a creation of Operation Schnitzel [4].​

One unavoidable consequence of this manipulation was the paranoia instilled in the İnönü administration by the troop deployments in Bulgaria and naval movements in the Black and Cicilian Seas, accompanied by a heightening of German and Syrian anti-Turkish propaganda. Under the impression that an Axis invasion was imminent, İnönü sent Şükrü Saracoğlu, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, to England in early June to negotiate a secret bilateral pact, signed in a train carriage near Waterloo Station.

This defence arrangement, a successor to similar efforts in 1939-1940 aborted by the Molotov-Neurath Pact, provided for British materiel aid from Cyprus, which Turkey ceded its claims to in return for shared basing rights [6] and the creation of an Anglo-Turkish Defence Council in the event of foreign aggression by the Tripartite Pact – Saracoğlu had tried to bargain for guarantees against Soviet aggression, but Churchill could not afford to give up the USSR as a counterweight against Germany, and wished to avoid the awkward position of being dragged into war against Stalin.

This Anglo-Turkish Defence Arrangement [7], despite being drawn up in secret against a threat which never quite materialised, would go on to be instrumental in defining the world order during the Cold Wars, forming the basis of the expansion of the sphere of influence of the future North Atlantic Treaty Organisation out of its initial Anglo-American context [8].

Figure 9: Şükrü Saracoğlu, Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs (later Prime Minister) and signatory of the Anglo-Turkish Defence Arrangement.​

Beyond the false Operation Konstantin, other measures, such as the aforementioned redirection of propaganda from deriding Communism to that of British intransigence, were adopted, with Weber even being so cynical as to use the one-month anniversary of the birth of his own son, Johann Adolf, as a distraction from his true intentions. Johann Adolf, named after Weber’s own father and (of course) Hitler, was born on May 20th 1941, having probably been conceived some time during the Phoney War, and would be followed by a daughter, Luise Eleonore (named after Princess Louise of Prussia and Eleonore Baur, a key early supporter of NSDAP since the Beer Hall Putsch) the very next year.

The discussion of the role the Weber children played in the propaganda of the Greater German Reich and their final fate will be discussed later. When the state press reported in June that Weber would be travelling back to Munich to spend some time with his newborn son, the Führer in fact was being transported to a forward base in East Prussia, with his brother Bernhard acting as a body-double. The stage was thus set for Operation Barbarossa to make its first, devastating, strikes into the USSR.

Figure 10: Johann Adolf Weber, age 1 [9].​

[1] Haifisch and Harpune were faked invasion plans of England, basically "repeating" Sealion, so as to distract Soviet attention away from Germany. I hope this plan sounds at least plausible enough to fool Stalin for just long enough.
[2] Don't forget Saadeh, al-Hinnawi and company!
[3] This map is not 100% accurate as it's edited from an OTL map of 1942 Europe, hence Romania's weird wobbly border and super-Bulgaria, which didn't quite happen in TTL.
[4] Operation Mincemeat in reverse, as I joked about some time back, but am now taking seriously! Having less morals than the British, the Abwehr didn't bother finding corpses with tuberculosis - they just rounded up a bunch of Poles, dressed them in Kriegsmarine uniforms, loaded them on an old E-boat and drowned them while rescuing the Kriegsmarine pilot and crew - kind of like a reverse Operation Himmler, which didn't happen in TTL. Picture of the Soldbuch is from here.
[5] Rule #1 of Franz von Papen is that Franz von Papen can never prosper. If it's not OTL Soviet assassins it's TTL Abwehr agents.
[6] Whaddyaknow, I think I just solved the Cyprus conflict!
[7] Turkey was flirting with an alliance with the British and French until Molotov-Ribbentrop happened in OTL. This "Defence Arrangement" is more in line with the OTL Five Power Defence Arrangements, so while not binding, Churchill is going to be more than happy to abuse it as a casus belli if it comes to that, which it doesn't, at least not right now. The train-wagon incident happened in OTL except the other way round. I also enjoy the delicious irony of an invasion of the Dardanelles (real or fake) bringing Britain and Turkey together - thanks to Churchill, no less!
[8] What's this? Foreshadowing?
[9] Source image from here. Isn't it cute? BUT IT'S THE FÜHRERBPRINZ! (turn your volume down a wee bit)​

=======​

Next update (tentatively Friday 28th February): It hits the fan.​

 

[Tom Colton]

I fear no man when it comes to semantics!

"But ich bin kein Mann. Du are nicked für offenses against der Deutsche language."

Ah, shit. Next update will be when someone pays my bail to get me out of Grammar Gestapo custody, I guess.

=======

OPENING MOVES​

“At this moment a march is taking place that, for its extent, compares with the greatest the world has ever seen. I have decided today to place the fate and future of the Reich and our people in the hands of our soldiers. God aid us in this fight.”
Joseph Goebbels, Reich Entertainment and Propaganda Minister, broadcasting nationwide on the first day of the German invasion [1].​

Figure 11: German motorised infantry advancing through Eastern Poland, June 1941.​

With assurances from Heydrich and the Abwehr that Stalin and the Red Army would have their attention sufficiently diverted from a potential invasion – at least in the near future – by Operation Poseidon, Weber authorised the opening of Operation Barbarossa, following delays postponing its initiation from late May to mid-June, specifically 16th June 1941 [2]. The delays can generally be ascribed to the poor weather conditions from the previous spring, meaning that most transport routes would be mired in mud, and the diversion of Wehrmacht personnel into what (for Germany, minus their small gains in Slovenia) was the sideshow that was the Third Balkans War.

It is nonetheless still debatable whether the addition of the German forces would have changed much of the outcome, or even whether they could have been supported by the arguably overstretched Axis supply wagon, even when bolstered by the aforementioned new trucks and reconstructed Polish armoured trains. The aim of achieving “total strategic surprise” for the invasion could never be truly achieved, given the suspicions raised by the inherent contradictions between the National Socialist and Communist ideologies and ambitions, along with the gradual but steady failure of Germany to meet its trade goals in the economic agreements that the Molotov-Neurath Pact – now reduced to less than pulp in worth – was based on.

From the beginning, Weber and the inner NSDAP circle acknowledged that this would not be the war in which the final fate of the continent would be decided – it was simply impossible with the resources they had managed to gather up until this point and under current political conditions, for the Axis Powers to achieve the total destruction of Bolshevik power in Europe, even with the considerable manpower they had mustered. Instead, a strategy similar to that which had worked in France would be adopted – the rapid invasion, occupation and domination of the Baltic States and Ukraine (as well as Moldova) while striking deep into the Russian homeland to force a peace deal similar to that which the Kaiserreich had squeezed out of the Provisional Government at Brest-Litovsk.

The objectives of Operation Barbarossa were summed up in the planned “Leningrad-to-Rostov” line, also nicknamed the “Left-to-Right” (“links nach rechts”) Line, representing the maximum extent to which the Axis forces were expected to advance [3]. Rostov was the furthest extent the Ukrainian offensive could go and still be reasonably justified as a war of liberation, as the conflict would rapidly be reframed. Leningrad, along with Murmansk in Lapland, were the two sole warm-water ports which the Soviet Union had control over, and dominating these would, to quote Weber, “strangle the Russians where they stood”.

As both were directly adjacent to Finnish territory, it was deemed crucial to obtain Finnish cooperation in both offensives to complete the planned encirclements and pincer movements. The secret “Finno-German Treaty of Friendship”, essentially a more binding version of the Anti-Comintern pact pledging support against (solely) the Soviet Union, was signed between German potentiates and a covert Finnish “War Cabinet” led by President Risto Ryti and Commander-in-Chief Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim and was subsequently used as part of Weber’s sham casus belli.

Figure 12: Map of the Leningrad-Rostov (“Left-to-Right”) Line [4].​

The overall strategy was fairly simple, and drew inspiration from previous campaigns during the Great War as well as the conduct of Fall Gelb – the Wehrmacht was to be split into Army Groups North, Centre and South, each with their own specific goals and aims. Army Group North would invade the Baltic States in coordination with the Finnish Army, with their efforts congregating at Leningrad, which would be neutralised along with the Soviet Baltic Fleet. Murmansk would be bombarded by the task force led by the Bismarck, and overrun on land to choke potential relief from the West [5].

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania would thus be “liberated” as a fait accompli. The same logic applied to Ukraine and Crimea, which would similarly be “liberated” by Army Group South and the Black Sea Fleet, which would be bolstered by Antonescu’s Romania, which would reoccupy Moldova. Here Antonescu’s aims, mentioned above, would affect the makeup of the subsequent occupied territories as he aimed to not only reclaim Bessarabia and Bukovina but claim territory beyond the River Dniester, with the aim of incorporating these lands into Romania proper further down the line. It is to be noted that these aims were not compatible with the entirety of the Romanian populace, who did not wish for Romania to interfere with the sovereignty of the Soviet Union and be saddled with baggage from a war of aggression.

Army Group Centre was to act as a bulwark against encirclements from the Red Army against either Army Group North or South, and steadily press onwards to Moscow, establishing airfields in its wake for the Luftwaffe to conduct merciless bombing runs on Moscow and the surrounding areas, to sweeten the offer of a peace settlement (see above quotation, section “Drive to the East”).

Figure 13: General strategy of Barbarossa, thrusts by Army Groups North, Centre and South marked.​

With these goals in mind, the Wehrmacht advanced on the 16th, with Army Group North led by Georg von Küchler [5], Army Group Centre by Fedor von Bock and Army Group South by Gerd von Rundstedt, all of whom had been promoted to Field Marshal following the ending of the Spring War. Generalleutenant Erwin Rommel was posted to Northern Finland to spearhead the operations to capture Murmansk in coordination with the Arktisflotte force led by the cruisers Scarnhorst and Gneisau, in what was termed Operation Silver Fox.

​

Figure 14: Rommel (first from left) and Rundstedt (second from left) discuss strategy in the OKW.
​

Weber announced Germany’s declaration of war on Russia as troops had already crossed the Curzon Line and entered Eastern Poland, on the grounds of “the illegal annexation of rightful Finnish territories and the formerly independent Baltic states into the Soviet Union”, and that “Germany and its allies act now to liberate the continent of Bolshevism and the aggressive expansionism of the Communist International”.

While this was mocked in the international press as completely hypocritical, technically speaking, Germany had not annexed any of the General Government, as it was still regarded as a protectorate like Czechia (Reichsgaue Danzig-Westpreussen and Wartheland were hand-waved as the restitution of their corresponding Prussian provinces); furthermore, the Molotov-Neurath Pact technically did not state that either party was bound to tolerate acts of annexation, only the “emergency police actions including movement of troops and temporary occupation” thereof (emphasis added).

Therefore, by incorporating territories won during the Winter War into Russia’s own territory and Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (Moldova was an exception as its ownership was negotiated separately from the Molotov-Neurath Pact) as Soviet Socialist Republics, Stalin had (by Weber’s incredibly specious interpretations) already violated the Pact as early as in 1940. The above arguments are with the qualifier that they represent the twisted perception of the situation by Weber – the Reich’s treatment of the General Government was indistinguishable in structural terms from the corresponding actions of the Soviet Union in the Baltics and Moldova, and Weber’s war aims were definitely not aligned to this casus belli, as blatantly evidenced from Germany’s policies in the post-Barbarossa consolidation.

[1] An OTL speech.
[2] I know the mud was still a major problem even 2 weeks before the 22nd, but the 16th shouldn't have too many issues, right?
[3] Herein lies the key difference between Hitler and Weber's war aims - Weber's indeed aiming for Brest-Litovsk 2, and exploiting the Baltics and Ukraine for what he and the Nazi leadership predict will be the Götterdämmerung-scale clash between Nazism and Communism.
[4] You have no idea how stupidly happy it made me that the "L-to-R" pun worked in both English and German. Ignore the mistakes on the base map - they're really weird.
[5] Sweden permits troop passages, as per OTL.
[6] Küchler got promoted to Field Marshal ITTL for singlehandedly (in Germany's perception, although we know it was a little bit more complicated than that) forcing the Brits to the negotiating table by capturing the majority of the BEF at Dunkirk. Leeb was a conservative who never quite meshed with the NSDAP leadership, and was replaced by Hitler when it was politically convenient.

=======
​

See you all next month for the next update, when it actually hits the fan!

Also, if you feel my effort deserves it, go ye forth and vote for it for Best Timeline! Thank you!
​

 

[Tom Colton]

I'm ok with the delay.

Can't wait for the update.

Sakes alive man, can you wait or can't you?!

Well, never mind that, it's here now!

=======​

NORTH​

As mentioned above, the stated objectives of Army Group North, striking from East Prussia, were the seizure of the Baltics and the neutralisation of Leningrad, along with the Soviet Baltic Fleet. To this end, Field Marshal Küchler commanded the 3rd [1], 16th and 18th Armies, along with the 4th Panzer Group comprising 33 divisions in total, assisted by Air Fleet 1 as well as seven divisions of the Finnish Defence Forces on the Finnish border at Leningrad. The battleships Bismarck and Prinz Eugen, leading the Baltenflotte and its attached U-boats along with Finnish mine-layers and motor-torpedo boats lay in wait at Danzig, ready to trap and destroy the Soviet Baltic Fleet the moment it attempted a breakout from Tallinn. They were in turn opposed by Red Army’s North-Western Front commanded by Colonel-General Kuznetsov (subsequently Major-General Sabennikov) consisting of 34 divisions in total.

​

Figure 15: Panzers and infantry advance into Lithuania, July 1941. [2]​

Mere hours after the codeword “Mjölnir” was given on the 16th, the Luftwaffe made bombardments in Eastern Poland, and by noon Army Group North had stormed through the River Neman, with the River Daugava remaining the last major natural obstacle between the Wehrmacht and Leningrad. By the end of the first week, the Daugava too had been crossed, and Küchler ignored direct commands from the OKW to halt and wait for the infantry divisions to catch up, instead entrusting the 15th and 21st Panzer divisions [3], which had been held in reserve, to hold the flanks and committing his remaining armour to encircle and destroy the remainder of the Soviet Mechanised Corps, which were routed before they could retreat behind the River Luga, greatly diminishing their ability to defend Leningrad.

Within the first week of the Wehrmacht offensive, armed uprisings had broken out in the Baltic States, forcing the Red Army to expend troops to suppress them. Weber capitalised on the uprisings, declaring that “the iconoclastic barbarism of the Communist International has failed to extinguish the nationalist spirit that strengthens the Baltic peoples against their cultural destruction”. Upon learning that the Lithuanians had declared independence and named their representative in Germany Kazys Škirpa (whose Lithuanian Activist Front shared ideological similarities with the Reich) as their leader, Weber quickly declared Škirpa the head of the Lithuanian government-in-exile, along with the Estonian Johannes Soodla, a resistance leader resident in Germany, as his counterpart. In reality both men, along with Gustavs Celmiņš of the fascist Latvian Pērkonkrusts (Thunder Cross) party, were little more than puppets of the German government, and were ultimately subordinated to the Reich’s administration.

Figures 16a – 16c: Puppet liberators: Johannes Soodla (left) of Estonia, Gustavs Celmiņš of Latvia (centre) and Kazys Škirpa of Lithuania (right) [4].​

As the Wehrmacht converged on Tallinn in mid-August, Admiral Vladimir Tributz attempted to evacuate the Soviet Baltic Fleet. Unfortunately for him and the fleet, this was the precise eventuality which the Baltenflotte had prepared for, and the vast majority of the Soviet Baltic Fleet was either bombed into oblivion or was sunk when the vessels struck mines laid by the Kriegsmarine and the Finnish Defence Fleet. Tributz himself met little success as his forces attempting to escape the gauntlet were ambushed by the task force led by the Bismarck. Tributz’s command ship Kirov, following an exhausting battle and chase, was finally sunk by the Bismarck off the coast of Naissaar, with the whole debacle representing a massive victory for the Kriegsmaine which would be immortalised in German propaganda, with the “Battle of Tallinn Bay” (Tallinn itself would revert to its German name, Reval) hailed as the “German Tsushima”, drawing a parallel to that decisive battle in the Russo-Japanese War [5].

Figure 17: Sinking of the Kirov.​

All elements of Weber’s fait accompli in the Baltic were essentially achieved by the end of August, but there remained one last objective – Leningrad.

===​

CENTRE​

Army Group Centre, based in the General Government and commanded by Field Marshal Feodor von Bock, was given the aims of acting against potential flanking actions from Byelorussia threatening either Army Group North or South while simultaneously pressing on towards Moscow and its surrounding municipalities, which would be relentlessly bombarded by the Luftwaffe, with any actual Russian territory being “held hostage” much like France and the Low Countries had been during the Spring War in the hopes of forcing Stalin to the negotiating table much like Halifax and Pétain had been in that same conflict. The army group comprised the 4th and 9th Armies as well as Panzer Groups 2 and 3, with the 2nd Army held in reserve for a total of 51 divisions, supported by Air Fleet 2.

Achieving similar early success to Army Group North, by noon on the 16th, just about as Goebbels was announcing the initiation of Barbarossa to the German public, the border between the General Government and the Soviet-controlled portions of Poland had been overrun, and over a thousand planes of the Soviet Air Force had been destroyed on the ground, soon to be doubled by the end of the day. The “Białystok Pocket” would be totally encircled by the 22nd, and the Army Group North now primed itself at assaulting Minsk, the Byelorussian capital. The Red Army, still not having quite grasped the enormity of the assault, attempted counterattacks but with fuel and supply depots having being destroyed by relentless artillery and airborne bombardments, these amounted to little.

​

Figure 18: The ruins of Minsk, July 1941.​

The twin Panzer spearheads eventually converged at Minsk, as planned, but encountered incredibly fierce Soviet resistance in the form of five whole armies (16th, 19th, 20th, 21st, and 22nd) which had been deployed in reserve when they attempted to advance further. The ensuing Battle of Smolensk resulted in the destruction of three of these armies and the decimation of the other two, although at massive cost to Army Group Centre – nearly half of the tank strength of the Panzer divisions in Groups 2 and 3 had been lost, with insufficient replacements to bring them up to full fighting strength. Other limitations quickly became clear – the Red Army had begun enacting “scorched earth” policies as best as they could whilst retreating behind Minsk, meaning that the Baupionier (combat construction engineers) had little to work with when repairing rail lines for supply, despite the new variable-gauge trains theoretically being able to resupply the front-line with minimal delays. Furthermore, the destroyed airfields and associated difficulties in refurbishing them for air support also meant that the Luftwaffe could not effectively capitalise on its initial air supremacy.

Figure 19: Junkers Ju88 bombers being refurbished on airfields hastily rebuilt by Baupionier units [6].​

Thus, despite the achievement of the majority of strategic goals in Byelorussia by late June, the steady thrust into the Russian heartland was delayed until mid-September after heated debate within the OKW, with Bock demanding permission to press onwards towards Moscow at a steady rate immediately as agreed upon in the overall strategy and Minister of War and OKW chief Werner von Blomberg arguing in favour of a radical change of strategy to a lightning strike into Moscow, similar to Guderian’s Sedan offensive which had punched a hole through French defences and opened the route to Paris. Ultimately, Weber bypassed Blomberg and informed Oberkommando des Heeres chief Walther von Brauchitsch that any attempt to advance on Moscow within the month would be considered treason, although he relented after receiving reports of airlifts outpacing the slower supply trains, reducing the delay to two weeks instead after pleas from Bock to press on with the offensive.

Weber’s reasons for delaying the assault have been debated by historians through the years, even during the period of the Greater German Reich. Most assessments generally state that Blomberg’s suggestion, which he claimed would have ended the war up to a month early, was the most misguided of the three, as a hasty strike would have broken against the Soviet defensive reserve. There is little consensus as to whether Bock’s or Weber’s views were the most suited; the supply chain eventually proved suitable to the Moscow assaults, but the delay ultimately did not affect Army Group Centre’s abilities to prevent the Soviet vanguard from flanking the other two army groups. One definite result of the debacle was that of Bock’s and Blomberg’s oppositions to Weber’s decisions, which would long-term consequences on their careers during the post-Barbarossa consolidation [7].

===​

SOUTH​

Figure 20: “Act of Proclamation of the Ukrainian State”, signed by Stepan Bandera of the OUN-B (Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists).​

The objectives of Army Group South, commanded by Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt, were structurally similar to those of Army Group North – the storming of the Ukrainian SSR and presenting its occupation as a fait accompli once Moscow was within reach, as well as the seizure of the Crimean peninsula to limit the ability of the Soviet Black Sea Fleet from relieving Red Army positions along the coast, and for the merchant fleet to transport supplies.

The fleet itself would be neutralised by the Luftwaffe and U-boats acting in conjunction with the Romanian Navy, and its dismemberment would be demanded at the negotiating table. Army Group South comprised the 6th Army, which included the Romanian 3rd and 4th Armies, the 11th Army, with contributions from Italy, the 17th Army, assisted by the Slovak Expeditionary Force and the Hungarian Mobile Corps, and the 1st Panzer Group, amounting to some 60 divisions in total, supported by Air Fleet 4. The Romanian Navy, assisted by twenty U-boats shipped overland, would strike at the Soviet Black Sea Fleet and support the Axis advance along the Black Sea coast [8].

The successes of Army Group South cannot be fully explained without an understanding of the Ukrainian underground and involvement of partisan action during Operation Barbarossa. The treatment of the Ukrainian SSR under Stalin, including acts such as the Holomodor (discussed above, Part 3), which claimed millions of lives due to essentially deliberate neglect and the terminations and impounding of Ukrainian intelligentsia, had turned much of the Ukrainian populace against Soviet rule, spurring the creation of several resistance movements. Chief among these was the OUN (Організація Українських Націоналістів, Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists) formed in the interwar period to protect Ukrainian interests through political violence, and was as opposed to Polish domination of ethnic Ukrainian territories it had won during the Polish-Soviet War as it was to the Soviet administration, and OUN elements were active in the German invasion of Poland.

By 1940 a fundamental divide had already occurred between the establishment and radicals who felt that the OUN had failed to achieve its goals, termed the OUN-M and OUN-B respectively, the latter faction led by Stepan Bandera. Bandera’s OUN-B collaborated with the Abwehr in early 1941, forming the Nikita and Bogatyr battalions in the General Government, along with a small network of partisans in the Soviet-annexed regions of Poland. This network represents one of the few directives handled by Abwehr chief Bauer independently of his nominal deputy Heydrich, who was more concerned with Operation Poseidon at the time [9].

Figures 21a and 21b: Stepan Bandera, leader (“Vozhd”) of the OUN-B (left) and his deputy Yaroslav Stetsko, first Minister-President of the Ukrainian (Autonomous) Social Republic (right).​

Thus, as the Wehrmacht and the international detachments pushed across the border from Poland into Galicia and the Ukrainian SSR, Bandera opportunistically declared Ukrainian independence on June 22nd (later known as Liberation Day) calling for the newly-independent state to “work closely with the National-Socialist Germany, under the leadership of its leader Friedrich Weber, which is forming a new order in Europe and the world and is helping the Ukrainian People to free itself from Muscovite occupation.” The response to the proclamation was practically universal support, with church leaders declaring for the OUN-B, and Ukrainians taking to the streets and singing patriotic songs.

Whilst the Ukrainian support for the invading forces was made known to OKW through Bauer, the sheer amount of energy behind the OUN-B was unprecedented. Weber immediately called Blomberg and Bauer to the chancellery, stating that the Wehrmacht would accept aid from the OUN-B in the meantime and weed out OUN-M elements to endear themselves to Bandera, the idea of Ukrainian independence (as opposed to autonomy) was “unacceptable to the aims of the Greater German Reich” and that the Einsatzgruppen were to keep a close eye on Bandera and the OUN-B to ensure that the Ukrainian state would learn to fall in step [10].

Thus, with the additional chaos generated by the Ukrainian declaration, Army Group South was able to overcome the energetic defences of the South-Western and Southern Fronts of the Red Army, penetrating the half-constructed Stalin Line soon after Bandera’s proclamation. However, these successes did not have the associated rapid destructions of Soviet formations which the Wehrmacht were able to achieve further north generally due to more competent Soviet leadership under Major Generals Rokossovsky and Vlasov, the latter of which would go on to have continued (largely strategically pyrrhic) tactical successes against Army Group Centre as they eventually pressed on Moscow. The Romanian forces stormed into Moldova, rapidly regaining Bessarabia and Bukovina and returning them to Romanian control, leading to Antonescu being declared “Marshal of Romania” in triumph.

However, Antonescu – much to the consternation of elements of the Romanian government, as well as the OUN-B – took his war into across the River Dniester into Ukraine. The siege of Odessa, whose wider region was subsequently renamed “Antonescu Mare” (literally “Great Antonescu”) in a supreme act of egotism, was a long and bloody affair, stretching the entirety of August and diverting resources from Army Group South, whose end was hastened by the blunting of Soviet relief through the port by a lengthy U-boat blockade, spurring intermittent but extremely costly confrontations between the Romanian Navy (and associated Kriesgmarine vessels) and the Soviet Black Sea Fleet which severely depleted all involved navies, preventing decisive naval action when German attention turned to Crimea [11].

[1] The "new" 3rd Army, formerly commanded by Küchler, comprises mostly units not tied down in France and Norway with the peace, beefing up Army Group North
[2] Attentive readers will be wondering where Figure 14 is, which is this picture of Rommel and Rundstedt intended to go into the last part because the text formatting worked better like that in my document, and it's already been retroactively added, Orwell-style.
[3] Ergo this, except in somewhat different terrain now.
[4] Instead of ignoring/crushing indigenous declarations of breakaway from Soviet Control, Weber is instead co-opting them, reckoning he can just crush any particularly uppity collaborators afterwards anyway, what with the massive Wehrmacht presence. It probably helps that the *Nazis aren't planning Generalplan Ost.
[5] Ironically enough, that's a model of the Bismarck sinking in a film. While the evacuation of Tallinn was already essentially the greatest naval disaster of all time in OTL, it got ignored in the larger context of Barbarossa. Now with Bismarck and Prinz Eugen involved, it doesn't take Goebbels to spin a great story out of that.
[6] Yes, that is the correct term for Heer construction engineer units. I'm not 100% sure on whether they actually had such capabilities, but the "disappointing" performance of the Luftwaffe here is compared to a theoretical ideal situation and not OTL.
[7] Well, so much for Weber listening to his generals more, eh? I suppose two weeks is still slightly better than a month, but the arguments for and against are up there to read; I hope they're cogent enough. Blomberg is skating on thin ice as it is now.
[8] Mentioned in the last part, "The Rising Storm".
[9] Mostly as per OTL.
[10] Same logic as the Baltics. The German-Ukrainian relationship is going to be interesting during and post-Barbarossa.
[11] The increased German naval presence compared to OTL means that the encirclement of Odessa is achieved earlier, ending the siege a month early, but still at heavy cost on land and sea.

=======
​

Next update, weekend of Saturday March 28*: Development and Sacrifice, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Cross the Finnish Line.
*not a counting error this time, sorry, busy with coursework and the like
​

 

[Tom Colton]

Re: The Morning After

As a student in one of the drinkingest countries on the face of the planet, I can't criticise you too much I can only send my best regards for the hangover, the educational assessment which led to the celebrations giving birth to said hangover, and for whatever shenanigans you may have gotten up to whilst getting there

Eagerly awaiting the next update so I have something decent to do to procrastinate from my own latest assignments!

No worries sir, I am working of quite the Sunday morning hangover now so I am in no position to complain.

Strangely, I find that an acceptable reason for delaying.

Marc A

Thanks for the sympathy, guys.

===
​

Re: Germanic vs. German

Read only the first post and am hooked. And before I forget, is there any significance to the title of the early post about the Greater German Reich? Does this signify the Deutsche rather than Germanic?

Thank you, do stay on board!

As for the terminology? Not much. Just consider it Early Installment Weirdness, although Weber is a bit more relaxed than Hitler when it comes to broadening definitions of "German".

===
​

Re: Laval

On page 28 and I must say I am surprised Laval has not shown up yet. I am somewhat sympathize to him as I am to Quisoing, despite being part Norwegian. Mostly he meant well, had the courage of his convictions, and did not flee to Spain like the Belgian collaborator who came to visit did. As for Laval, he is certainly someone who should show up more often in timelines as he had constantly attempted to help France survive, only to have others screw it up for him before the war. Then again, don't know much on his policies or how he handled sending of the guest-workers to Germany. Just posting this show how pleasantly surprised I will be if he shows up.

Well, we haven't really heard much from France, but once Southeast Asia goes straight to hell (handbasket optional) you just might.

===
​

Re: What update?

THIS F____ING UPDATE

=======​

DEVELOPMENT AND SACRIFICE

“The pressure of the East has always stood against us. We are now going to war to remove this pressure, to vanquish this eternal threat, to safeguard the happy and peaceful lives of future generations. And this time we perhaps have better chances to succeed than we ever did before. The Lord of Destiny, who holds the life of our people in His hands, shall guide us to final victory.”
Risto Ryti, President of Finland, announcing the Finnish declaration of war on the Soviet Union, following the Finno-German Treaty of Friendship [1].

Figure 22: Residents of Leningrad bury their fellow citizens during its protracted siege, 1941.​

The second phase of Operation Barbarossa can broadly be defined by (in addition to the general halts on the Central and Southern fronts) the beginning of Finnish involvement in the Great Patriotic War (referred to in Finland as the Continuation War to signify continuity with the Winter War), as demonstrated by the aforementioned Battle of Tallinn Bay as well as the twin joint strikes at Murmansk in the north in Operation Arctic Fox, aimed at isolating and overrunning the warm-water port, and at Leningrad where the efforts of the Finnish Defence Forces and Army Group North would converge to achieve the capitulation of the Baltic port, which would cement the “strangulation” of Soviet Russia, and (hopefully) force Stalin to the negotiating table when confronted with the reality of no relief from the continent-scale siege.

The actions of the Finnish Defence Forces must be understood in the context of their overall diplomatic policy regarding the German Reich and the Soviet Union. While invasion paranoia and revanchist sentiments were at all-time highs, as was Finnish irredentism encapsulated in the concept of “Greater Finland” with its eastern border extended to the White Sea, engulfing the whole of Murmansk Oblast and Karelia, these ambitions did not extend southwards into Leningrad, explaining their reluctance to complete the encirclement of the city and Küchler’s bloody attempts to do it with only the resources of Army Group North. Furthermore, the Finnish public in general and Ryti in particular were sceptical – even disturbed – by the authoritarianism of the Tripartite and Anti-Comintern Pact powers, maintaining their democratic traditions even as war raged on. These factors thus further explain Finland’s co-belligerent status, short of any full alliance with the Reich.

Figure 23: Marshal Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim (extreme left), commander-in-chief of the Finnish Defence Forces, and President Risto Ryti of Finland (third from left) reviewing bicycle infantry.​

The Finno-German Treaty of Friendship provided for sharing of military intelligence and weapons systems, building upon the secret military cooperation between Finland and Germany during the First Interim Peace. German munitions factories were able to study Soviet tanks during the Winter War and adjust the designs of newer Panzer IVs in response to Soviet armour, and Generalleutenant Erwin Rommel consulted with his counterpart General Hjalmar Siilasvuo regarding the challenges of local terrain, especially along the mountain ranges separating Finnish territory from Soviet Karelia in planning the Murmansk assault [2], Operation Polarfuchs (Arctic Fox) – the singular operation that would grant his wartime epithet along with his promotion to Field Marshal [3].

===​

MURMANSK
​

The majority of the Heer contingent that would provide the northern thrust of Polarfuchs, Operation Platinfuchs (Platinum Fox), had been transported from the Free City of Narvik essentially covertly through Axis-leaning neutral Sweden, and by June Rommel had assembled the Narvik Corps consisting of two mountain divisions and additional regular regiments, which would be joined by a Finnish brigade to provide direction in the difficult terrain. Coastal support would be provided by the Arctic Fleet led by vessels Scarnhorst and Gneiseau, which would be opposed by the Soviet Northern Fleet [4]. Upon learning the difficulties involved, the experienced 5th Mountain Division was reassigned by Rommel to lead the thrust through Salla, Operation Silberfuchs (Silver Fox) coordinating with the Finnish 6th Division to complete the encirclement of Murmansk from the south by reaching Kantalahti on the coast. Paratrooper forces (Fallschirmjäger) were deployed to support Silberfuchs upon the outbreak of hostilities [5].

Figure 24: Map detailing the overall strategy of Operation Polarfuchs (Arctic Fox), the Finno-German offensive aimed at isolating and overrunning Murmansk.​

Thus, on the 16th of June, following the initiation of Barbarossa and the border battles, Operation Rentier (Reindeer) went into action, with the Narvik Corps linking up with their Finnish counterparts, with Platinfuchs launching on the 22nd. The Soviet troops on the border were caught by surprise by the size of force which thundered across, with the 2nd Mountain Division capturing the Titovka Valley and the 3rd securing land access to the Rybachy Peninsula on the first day of operations. Although the terrain was unfamiliar, close coordination between Finnish and German forces ensured that momentum went ahead at an acceptable rate. Soviet counterattacks were blunted by the actions of the Arktisflotte, which engaged the Soviet North Fleet in a continuous and bloody stream of naval engagements, limiting Soviet resupply [6]. By July, a large bridgehead had been secured across the Litsa River.

Figure 25: Troops of the 2nd Mountain Division assault Soviet positions in Lapland, July 1941.​

Difficulties began to mount once the front came to be established by mid-July, but Soviet troops were also similarly stretched as Silberfuchs went into action on the 27th of June. The initial assaults on Salla shared the same success stories as the rest of the Polarfuchs offensives, with the 5th Mountain Division managing to dislodge the Soviet defenders by the end of June, and the Finnish 3rd and 6th Divisions achieving even better progress than the Germans. The offensive against the railway lines kicked into action in late August following the slowing of progress, permitting resupply.

Fallschirmjäger assaults on the railroad supplying Nyam managed to isolate the Red Army’s 122nd Division, permitting its encirclement and destruction [7]. By September, the front lines had receded to the formidable pre-war Soviet defences and were at risk of stagnating again until news of the impending fall of Leningrad forced Red Army Colonel Roman Panin to divert troops to attempt to relieve the besieged city, hoping that the fortifications would act as a sufficient force multiplier.

Figure 26: Generalleutenant (later Field Marshal) Erwin Rommel, “The Arctic Fox”, commander of the task force which isolated Murmansk, strangling Soviet supply lines. [8]​

Unfortunately, this also coincided with the decisive assaults on Murmansk itself, preceded by heavy bombardment by the Arktisflotte, which had managed to neutralise the Soviet North Fleet, at the cost of the Scarnhorst. Mannerheim finally conceded in October to permit an assault on Belomorsk to severe the main railway routes supplying Murmansk given the situation around Leningrad [9], and the three thrusts struck on 12th October 1941. Even though fierce street fighting in Murmansk, Kantalahti and Belomorsk persisted into December, with units having to be informed through poor communication networks that the war was effectively over by then, Goebbels addressed Germany on November 7th - the anniversary of the October Revolution - stating that “the struggle in Murmansk and Lapland has witnessed the strength of the Finnish and German peoples triumph over Bolshevism for all time.”

[1] Shout-out to DrakonFin for being a cool guy.
[2] The Germans thus have vaguely better intelligence, and perhaps more importantly, a slightly better understanding of the terrain, butterflying into manifestations of better performance, as we'll see.
[3] Wait for it... [8]
[4] See the update "The Rising Storm" for more details.
[5] Tied up in Crete and the Balkans in OTL. The zealous but inexperienced SS men are replaced by competent, experienced mountain troops, permitting a stronger first strike.
[6] Soviet counterattacks are severely hampered by the lack of naval support, especially since the Royal Navy isn't around to harangue the Kriegsmarine.
[7] Much like OTL, except the severance is permanent instead of temporary.
[8] I couldn't resist.
[9] Mannerheim nixed this in OTL due to mostly political reasons such as fear of US involvement (which doesn't exist in TTL) and the slowness of the Leningrad assault (which doesn't exactly exist either in TTL?).

=======​

This update was basically written in one night, so if there are any major glaring errors, please do point them out to me. I can't handwave poor terrain and lousy fighting conditions away, even with Rommel in the driver's seat (especially since this isn't really his sort of bag, but hey, a pun is a pun), hence why Murmansk doesn't actually fall sensu stricto, unlike -

"I've fallen and I can't get up."​

- next update (this weekend...?): One guess.

 

[Tom Colton]

Ooh, redacted! Kremlin Joe's in trouble, I imagine...

Because a TL about sane-ish Nazis winning for longer; we're all here for the smiles and hugs Reading Gulag at the moment and from what I can tell, the Soviet peoples are really screwed either way here, aren't they? Sure, Weber's not in for complete extermination, but I don't see the German incentives for labour being any less brutal than their Muscovite counterparts.
All shall be revealed, I suppose.

Indeed it shall.

Mine is the last voice that you will ever hear.
Don't be alarmed. [0]


=======​

LENINGRAD​

Figure 27: German troops topple a statue of Lenin. Leningrad, November 1941. [1]​

“Leningrad” has entered the common lexicon to refer to prolonged struggles, particularly those marked with grave bloodshed, even as early as the very next year during the (Great) Asia-Pacific War, where comparisons were drawn by British politicians and the press between the fierce battles in Peninsular Malaya in general and the defence of Singapore in particular, regardless of the applicability of the comparison.

Regardless, the ordeals of Leningrad promulgated – by both sides – as “The Legend of Leningrad” have contributed to a mixing of fact and fiction, especially regarding the strategic importance of the city, the nature of its “fall” – i.e. the extent to which it actually did – and the overall significance of the Leningrad offensive to the campaign and momentum of Operation Barbarossa.​

Within German strategy, Leningrad was one of the key objectives of Army Group North – while the strategic and political objectives were primarily the permanent seizure of the Baltics from Soviet control, this could not be by any means assured unless Leningrad was neutralised. With Tallinn and the other Baltic ports lost, Leningrad represented one of Soviet Russia’s few warm-water ports – the other key one, Murmansk, also being assaulted – and its loss would choke potential supply from the West, in addition to the massive propaganda victory that seizing the former Russian capital and the wellspring of the October Revolution would represent.

However, with these realised, a paradox emerged. Leningrad would have to neutralised, but capturing the city itself would necessarily involve feeding its captive population – a difficult task for the Wehrmacht given its already overtaxed supply lines – but cutting lines of communication and supply were a necessary factor (militarily and politically) for the success of Barbarossa. Eventually, it was decided by the OKW that the greater area around Leningrad would be encircled with the aid of the Finnish Defence Forces and any resupply from the shores of Lake Ladoga interdicted, and the city bombed, bombarded and starved into submission.

The infamous Führer Directive #18, issued to OKW chief Blomberg in July 1941 stated: “No surrender from Leningrad is to be accepted unless its strategic value is already neutralised or two-thirds of its population is estimated to have been exhausted, whichever of the two conditions is first met.” Weber, in issuing the directive, is said to have declared: “The Caldedonian, Calgacus, once said of the Romans ‘they make a desert and call it peace’. We shall make a crater and call it peace.” [2]
​

Figure 28: Map detailing the encirclement of Leningrad, strategic situation by September 1941.​

To this last end, massive volumes of Luftwaffe assets, once ready for deployment thanks to the actions of the Baupionier combat engineer units, were brought to bear on Leningrad. It is estimated about a hundred bombers were deployed dropping hundreds of tons of ordnance every day and night at the height of the siege. Since the objective was simply to kill as many residents of Leningrad as possible, incendiary bombs and parachute-mines were introduced as part of the “terror bombing” doctrine.

The Baltenflotte, slowly being shifted to Estonia as the harbour was demined following the Battle of Tallinn Bay, conducted regular bombardments of the city in the latter phases of the campaign. The actions of the civil defence forces in evacuating civilians and putting out ensuing conflagrations while preventing the outbreak of total chaos were instrumental in maintaining morale and discipline in the city despite this relentless campaign, and the entire city was collectively awarded the Order of Lenin following its return to Soviet control.

Weaknesses in the Luftwaffe and its coordination with the Kriegsmarine became more and more apparent as the campaign ground on – the lack of strategic bombers and proximate airfields (both properly developed and makeshift) meant that only a fraction of Heinkel He111 and Junkers Ju88 bombers were able to be funnelled to Leningrad, with critical bottlenecks formed by the lack of ordnance supply and airfields. Junkers Ju188 bombers, a cobbled-together “upgrade” to the Ju88, introduced late in the campaign as an attempt to make the more distant airfields usable, failed to have a meaningful impact in the overall Leningrad offensive [3].​

Figure 29: Nurses help the wounded following a Luftwaffe bombardment, September 1941.​

The ground offensive followed the broad lines of the Battle of Dunkirk, where Küchler once again sacrificed logistics for speed in an attempt to “knock out” the defenders at Lagoda and to isolate Leningrad from resupply from across the lake to achieve the neutralisation as rapidly as possible. The 15th and 21st Panzer divisions were deployed and given orders to press onwards to the railway lines and destroy them. Isolated from the main body of Army Group North, this task force was highly vulnerable to being encircled and destroyed, were it not for the successful offensives conducted by the Finns further north and their sustained presence around Lembelovo, preventing Soviet commanders Voroshilov and Popov from being able to relieve the Lagoda defenders.

Therefore, by the end of September, the encirclement, while not complete, had ensured that the “Road of Life” representing the only logistics chain between the lake and Leningrad could not continue to function adequately [4]. The encirclement could not be completed as the Finns were unwilling to press further south – as mentioned above, any further intercession southwards into Soviet Russia stood at odds with their foreign policy – and Mannerheim vetoed linking up with the Germans, much to Küchler’s consternation.

The effect of the attempted relief by using troops from Murmansk on that campaign has been discussed above, and was slow and ineffectual due to the interdiction of the “Road of Life”. Even then, the city did not yield, partly because no quarter was given by the Wehrmacht anyway at this point and partly due to the valorousness of its defenders in this period termed simply as “The Ordeal”, after novels of the same name by Alexei Tolstoy (“Хождение по мукам”, lit: “The Road to Calvary”) [5].
​

Figure 30: Heinkel He111 bombers in the skies above Leningrad. October 1941 [3].​

However, as September ground on into October it was becoming manifestly clear that the overstretched Wehrmacht was rapidly approaching the limits of its effectiveness, especially around Moscow, where a stalemate was becoming more obvious by the day. It was decided that the fall of Leningrad would provide a convenient opportunity to drive Stalin to the negotiating table once and for all by convincing the Soviet commanders that continuing hostilities in this form was a lost cause.

To this end, Operation Nordlicht “Northern Light”, aimed at overrunning the city, was approved in early October, with objectives of disabling Leningrad and convincing the Finns to join a coordinated strike in Polarfuchs (see above) [6]. The dire conditions in the city due to massive destruction of infrastructure, coupled with nigh-total isolation from resupply (unsubstantiated rumours of cannibalism are limited to sensationalistic Soviet propaganda, with the food situation only becoming truly dire in the final phases) only increased with the opening of Nordlicht, where concentrated bombing of a corridor into the urban areas commenced the assault.
​

​

Figure 31: Heer personnel in Leningrad urban zones, November 1941.​

The fighting was brutal. In terms of sheer death toll, Leningrad is often a key contender among the bloodiest battles of all time, although it would be surpassed within the decade. The aerial and naval bombardments were immediately followed by a massive tank charge to dislodge the defensive emplacements, although this stalled once they reached the denser urban areas. Much like Trotsky’s defence of Petrograd during the Russian Civil War, Leningrad degenerated into building-to-building fighting, giving rise to the newly-termed concept of “urban warfare”.

The Kriegsmarine efforts (codenamed Polarstern [Polaris]), coordinating with Fallschirmjäger units, to capture the island of Kronstadt (see Figure 28), which was acting as a submarine base for the Soviets, proved costly. Nearly 30 vessels were lost to submarine assaults and the paratroopers were decimated in their efforts to disable the island’s artillery defences [7]. Nonetheless, by the end of October, the Soviet defenders had been forced to fall back to the Baltic coast, where they were caught in a deadly pincer between the Heer and the Kriegsmarine, with the Luftwaffe constantly bombarding them. Efforts intensified to end the siege by November 7th for propaganda purposes, prompting Goebbels’s “October Revolution” address (see above) but the city’s defenders proved to be too tenacious.​

Judging if and when Leningrad “fell” is thus problematic; although by November, the strategic utility of the city was totally gone, it still represented a large sink for the Wehrmacht and its logistics train, and was still “active” as such despite the vast majority of the wider urban area securely under German control. In his award for the city, Stalin specifically cited “the valour of its defenders, who never surrendered, not even in the face of utter and certain death” while Goebbels’ “October Revolution” address stated that “the collapse of the Leningrad Front thus marks a turning-point in the Eastern Campaign. Now with Russia totally deprived of the city’s logistical support, the fall of the old Russian capital can only herald the impending end of the war…”

The reasons for the lack of a surrender despite the situation are various, but chiefly the “terror bombing” had proved a double-edged sword: while it was incredibly effective in levelling urban areas and inducing mass casualties, the survivors were as a result greatly hardened against the prospect of a truce, feeling that the Germans had no intention of honouring such a peace [8].​

This was further aggravated by reports that the Einsatzgruppen following the Heer in the greater peninsular area had conducted mass killings of prisoners-of-war and civilians, such as Einsatzkommando leader Franz Six forcing residents to the shores of Lake Lagoda, telling them they faced a choice of either swimming back to Soviet Russia or certain death at his troops’ hands. Those detachments which did surrender were treated inhumanely, being barely given any food, in a bid to starve them to death to free up supplies for the Wehrmacht. These brutal attitudes certainly go far to explain the total unwillingness of the defenders of Leningrad to concede [9].​

Be that as it may, when an armistice was finally declared, the street battles in Leningrad continued to rage on until commissars had to be shipped in from across Lake Lagoda, escorted by Heer personnel, to convince the defenders to stand down. While about three-quarters of the city had fallen into German hands, the holdouts had continued to sap their efforts, remaining impregnable till the very end despite repeated – essentially continuous – naval and aerial bombardment. Bodies and debris littered the streets; when all was said and done, the total number of casualties for the entire Leningrad Front was in the magnitude of millions. As mentioned above, Stalin would proceed to grant the Order of Lenin to the city as a whole – although by this point there were few left alive to express gratitude.​

[0] Shout-out to The Red for introducing me to the music of Frankie Goes to Hollywood. My life hasn't been the same since.
[1] This particular toppling is actually much more recent. DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT CALLING ANTI-RUSSIAN UKRAINIANS NAZIS.
[2] Very much as in OTL, where the plan was also to starve the city out. Calgacus for the classically untrained.
[3] Since they didn't get chewed up in the skies over Britain, Weber is free to bring the Blitz to Leningrad - adjusted for the conditions of the airfields. The Germans are learning the concept of strategic bombing the very hard way here.
[4] This is an important change. One of the contributing factors to the failure of the Siege of Leningrad in OTL was that the city still managed to receive supplies, albeit in very fragmentary forms. Here they're interdicted/bombed the hell out of, slowly choking Leningrad to death.
[5] I did the research, mmkay?
[6] This would have occurred in OTL if not for Soviet counterattacks elsewhere. The different strategy butterflies the successes of the Soviet counter-offensives, which I'll get to later on.
[7] Imagine the OTL naval clashes around Krondstadt with a slight garnishing of Crete.
[8] A key problem with OTL's Nazis as well - giving no quarter means you should expect none. Given that surrender and getting overrun would have essentially the same results, the Leningrad residents decide it's best to take down as many Germans as they can with them.
[9] Speaking of key problems with OTL's Nazis...well, much of this isn't changed because every dead Russian is a Russian they don't have to put somewhere behind their own lines, food or no. Russians and Jews are getting the full brunt of the Hunger Plan, as opposed to the groups Weber actually wants to work with in the future.​

=======​

TL;DR version: OTL's Leningrad + the Blitz + Stalingrad = this clusterf__k.

Next update ought to be on schedule (ergo the weekend of 25th April 2015), and I'll try to wrap Part 5 up before term ends. No promises, though.
​

 

[Tom Colton]

Don't have a cow, man.

=======​

UMAN AND KIEV​

Figure 32: Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt (foreground, second from left) at a forward post. Kiev, August 1941.​

In the meantime, Army Group South continued its struggle to consolidate the Wehrmacht’s control of Ukraine, despite the acceptance of Bandera’s unilateral declaration of independence in late June and the subsequent routs inflicted on the Red Army. Although the arrival of Axis forces had been widely celebrated by the local populace, seizures of food supplies for the Wehrmacht, even though mostly limited to the Jewish and Polish minorities as far as possible, along with the Romanian incursion into Odessa with the intention of annexing the city and wider municipality served to blunt the enthusiasm somewhat, and recruitment into the Nikita and Bogatyr battalions declined after a massive burst of enthusiasm.

Furthermore, Soviet resistance was intensifying, and the OKW general staff began to realise the enormity of their task as they found army after army confronting them despite the Wehrmacht’s continual mass encirclements and routs, with Halder coining the term “Umkehrtrichterwirkung” (“Reverse funnel effect”) for the situation – instead of a regular funnel which concentrated effort, the Axis armies found themselves having to expand their operations across a broader and broader front into a massive hinterland which the Russians were familiar with. [1]

These factors, combined with the debacles in Murmansk and Leningrad, led to the first major apprehensions among the upper echelons of the Wehrmacht as to the odds of success if the Soviets refused to concede as Weber had gambled. Two possibilities emerged: a series of decisive victories which would force the Soviets to the negotiating table, or the evacuation of Soviet industry eastwards, which would force a prolonged conflict the Axis would lose as Napoleon had more than a century earlier.

It was with these arguments, along with the emerging situation with Army Group Centre, which eventually convinced Weber of Bock’s and Rundstedt’s arguments to end the halt early and press onwards to Moscow, while directing several detachments south from Army Group Centre to Army Group South to relieve pressure on the Ukrainian front, especially since the Odessa siege had stalled. Rundstedt was able to achieve relatively rapid encirclements and destruction of Red Army forces at Uman by August, subsequently forcing the defenders of Odessa to begin withdrawals, although the city was only fully captured in September. The southward turn of General Heinz Guderian’s 2nd Panzer Group from Army Group Centre, along with the deployment of the Ukrainian volunteer battalions, was intended to achieve the total encirclement of Kiev.

This marked the second time Weber would clash with his generals over the conduct of the war, with Weber stating that Army Group Centre could afford to reduce its complement as it did not actually require resources to storm Moscow, but only develop airbases to permit its terror bombing prior to offering peace terms. Army Group Centre commander Bock, OKW chief Blomberg, OKH heads Brauchitsch and Halder, the last two of which had been the messengers of Weber’s “Halt Order” in August, all decried the proposition, stating any attempt to destroy or seize the industrial zones in Eastern Ukraine and pre-empt evacuation was suicide, and terror-bombing’s effectiveness had yet to be tested – the prolonged ordeal in Leningrad would vindicate this view.

When informed of Weber’s intransigence, Halder offered his resignation and suggested Brauchitsch do the same. When Brauchitsch did not, Halder attempted to retract his, but Weber, having finally run out of patience with him, replaced Halder with the more compliant Field Marshal Wilhelm List, who did not offer resistance to Weber’s plan of diverting Guderian’s forces. The dismissal of Halder, who had practically been an institution in the Wehrmacht up until then, thus served as a warning to Blomberg and Brauchitsch that further complaints would not be tolerated. [2]

Thus, Guderian was finally ordered to bear south and complete the encirclement of Kiev, linking up with Kleist’s 1st Panzer Group in the vicinity of Lohkvitsa. Semyon Budyonny, commander-in-chief of the Southwestern Front, was withdrawn, and without consolidated top-level leadership, the Red Army forces, numbering about 500,000 were slowly but steadily destroyed and captured, marking the greatest setback to Soviet forces since Minsk in July. Despite plans for Guderian to rejoin Army Group Centre and assault Moscow from the south, a push towards Rostov, as part of the “Leningrad-Rostov Line” plan was instead prioritised. Blomberg and Brauchitsch did not protest, having been cowed by Halder’s dismissal.

===​

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT​

Figure 33: Einsatzkommando units round up and blindfold prisoners prior to their summary execution in Palmiry near Warsaw, Poland. June 1941.​

Any account of the Great Patriotic War, and of the rise of the Greater German Reich, would be (even criminally) incomplete without a discussion of the treatment of the civilian populace and reactions to partisan activity by both the Wehrmacht and its allies and the Soviet Union. While nationalistic and ideologically motivated accounts span the breadth of collaboration and resistance, a more complex mosaic emerges from the different goals of the Reich within and between its zones of operation. Overall, the German policy appears to have been that of temporarily accepting help from collaborators while systematically exterminating Communist and other resistance movements with their assistance, and proceeding to decapitate collaborationist movements and replacing them with compliant regimes if they demonstrated too much initiative.

Many of these anti-partisan operations were executed by the Einsatzkommando, militarised detachments of the Einsatzgruppen, formed during the invasion of Poland with orders to evacuate and/or exterminate Jews, Poles, the intelligentsia of both, and any other “political enemies” of the Reich. These followed the Heer advance and proceeded to round up these “undesirables” in general and Jews in particular. [3]

The apparatus for the Final Solution was well in place at this point, with thousands already in Kamerun [4], but for the “pragmatic” reasons of lessening logistical requirements, it was preferred to simply murder them if any pretext could be found. In many of these cases local collaborators willingly handed over their Jewish population, with the practical fear of reprisals from the Einsatzkommando and wishes to be seen as cooperative and thus not being labelled as Communist agitators, along with long-running strains of anti-Semitism in the Baltic States, Byelorussia and Ukraine.

Thus, Jews determined to be “enemies of state” by the hasty military tribunals were summarily executed and all those whose deaths could not be justified had all their possessions except their bare essentials stripped from them (sometimes even encompassing these too) and shipped westwards in whatever transportation could be salvaged (operators of captured railways would joke amongst themselves that they were “trading supplies for Jews”) to meet their final fate in Africa. In other cases, especially in the Einsatzkommando units following Army Groups Centre and South, the disenfranchised and dislocated Jews were, as political prisoners, turned to slave labour, repairing damage to railroads and logistics channels damaged by retreating the Red Army and lingering partisans.

Figure 34: German anti-Communist poster, captioned with “Bolshevism unmasked”. Note the Star of David, as part of the continuing propaganda line of “Judeo-Bolshevism”.​

Similar fates faced the members of the Communist Party in the territories of the Soviet Union, where the infamous Commissar Order (Führer Directive #21) declared that “all political officers in the Red Army […] are to be separated from the prisoners of war immediately and are to be handed over to representatives of the Stasi…”, which almost invariably led to a hasty tribunal at the hands of the Einsatzkommando and a summary execution, as the commissars were deemed too dangerous to even work as slave labour due to their potential “poisonous influence” over the populace.

Records of the reception to this order among the OKW and OKH reject the popular impression of a Wehrmacht opposed to these barbaric orders: even the combative Halder agreed with the intentions of the order, writing that: "Troops must participate in the ideological battle in the Eastern campaign to the end", along with more ideologically aligned commanders such as Küchler, who agreed that commissars were “criminals who ought to be shot”, dutifully handing them over to their Einsatzkommando units, who proceeded to summarily execute the captured commissars alongside other mid-to-high level Comintern and Communist Party members. [5]

Figure 35: An infamous photograph of grinning Einsatzkommando personnel posing with a teenaged Byelorussian partisan they are about to execute. August, 1941. [6]​

As mentioned above and in other sections, these were often conducted in cooperation with local collaborators in their war of extermination. Along with Johannes Soodla of Estonia, Gustavs Celmiņš of Latvia and his crypto-Fascist Pērkonkrusts, Kazys Škirpa of the Lithuanian Activist Front and of course the OUN-B and its members in Ukraine, there was a broad mosaic of collaborationist movements on the Eastern Front, including the Byelorussian contributions of their Auxiliary Police and “Black Cat” commando units.These worked hand-in-hand with the German authorities in weeding out Jews and other political prisoners, but were equally subject to purges and even the same trials which they had been responsible for if they were declared to be beyond the needs of the Greater German Reich.

Bandera became increasingly sidelined following Operation Barbarossa as the Reich consolidated its control over the Ukrainian (Autonomous) Social Republic. Similar fates awaited collaborators in the Baltics and Byelorussia as the apparatus of the Reich enforced its dominance over them in the pursuit of Mitteleuropa. A climate of fear and paranoia was freely fostered by the German authorities as they assured local collaborators that Soviet retaliation was not only imminent, but inevitable, justifying any number of extra-judicial actions by the Einsatzgruppen and Einsatzkommando units to prevent these future horrors.

Figure 36: Distribution of food to Soviet prisoners-of-war near Vinnytsia, Ukraine. July, 1941.​

One of the most inhumane policies executed by the Reich authorities through the Wehrmacht, representing the dovetailing of genocidal ideology with sickening pragmatism, was that of the “Ration Plan”, masterminded by Reich Minister for Agriculture Richard Walther Darré and NSDAP functionary Herbert Backe, and founded on the (sadly accurate) assumption that German logistics and food supply would be insufficient to support both the military personnel on the opposed sides and the civilian populace of the occupied Soviet Union.

Thus, prioritising German needs above those of Jews, prisoners-of-war, and other “undesirables” would achieve logistical needs while reducing considerations of what to do with them once the war ended – beyond disposing of the bodies. It is estimated that by the end of the war, ghettoised Jews in Axis-occupied territories were barely receiving 20% of their dietary needs, and Soviet prisoners-of-war even less. This stands in contrast to the comparable numbers of British, French, Belgian, Dutch, Norwegian, etc. prisoners-of-war taken during the Spring War, which boasted considerably lower mortality rates.

While the effects of the Ration Plan were minimised among the civilian populations which the Reich wished to court (at least nominally) this did not extend to the populations of Russia proper, who were treated similarly to other “undesirables”, as can be seen in the savage Leningrad campaign – a good proportion of the casualties, military or civilian, towards the end, were from starvation. Towards the end of the war, seizures of grain began to affect Baltic and Ukranian populations, cultivating distrust of the Axis forces – however, the rapid end of the war permitted this to be justified by “emergency circumstances” by the German authorities, and the matter was quickly dropped. [7]

[1] I cannot for the life of me remember who brought this comparison up on this very subforum, but thanks, whoever you are.
[2] Halder offered his resignation in OTL but retracted it when Brauchitsch told him it would change nothing. Weber doesn't give up this opportunity to start his own version of the Great Purge, with more forcible retirement and less show trials (for now). The logic of diverting to Kiev remains the same across timelines since Weber's strategic aims are Ukraine (and the Baltics) and not Russia proper, after all.
[3] Although under a different command chain (Stasi instead of SD), the Einsatzgruppen essentially fulfil the same tasks as they did in OTL, doing the Reich's "dirty work" just behind the front lines in the name of "internal security". Consider them totally amoral gendarmes with a very loose leash.
[4] Lest we forget...
[5] Similar to OTL except with more euphemising, although the tribunals are essentially a rubber-stamp court for death warrants.
[6] As part of my continuing aversion from using actual scenes of mass murder in this TL (sorry if this strangely inconsistent with my describing them), this is in fact a still from Come and See.
[7] Similar to OTL except exclusively limited to POWs, Jews and mostly "just" Russian civilians. Ukranians began to be affected towards the end, as mentioned above.

=======​

Next update, closing Part 6 (weekend of 9th May 2015): Check and Resignation.