Western Allies accept Rundstedt offer to not resist the D Day Landings

stubear1012

I have read various references that General Rundstedt secretly offered to not resist the D Day Landings. I have not seem much detail but I am assuming that the offer was that the German army would withdrawal from Western Europe, Hitler would be overthrown, there would be an armistice in the West, and Germany would be allowed to continue the war with the Soviet Union.

Is my assumption correct that the offer was to stop the war in the West in exchange for being allowed to continue the war in the East?
 

The Red

Do you have a source for this? As far as I'm aware Von Rundstedt wasn't involved in any of the plots against Hitler.
 

Carl Schwamberger

I've not heard this story before. Rundsteadt was under suspicion of trying something like this, but so was everyone else. Rommel was in on the July plot, and was to negotiate a cease fire and withdrawal had the coup succeeded.
 

Carl Schwamberger

Thanks, I'd really like to have that reference & see a brief summary. Knowing the origin would be really interesting. By mid 1943 most Germans understood the war was lost & were thinking about a exit strategy. That and the various resistance groups creates a chaotic picture with lots of holes. A jigsaw puzzle with 70% of the pieces missing.
 

Garetor

Gone Fishin'
Never would have happened. Even assuming Runstedt had the ability to pull it off, neither Roosevelt or Churchill would have agreed. The idea of a united front against the Soviets was the bedtime story of the hopelessly deluded after 1943.
 
SsgtC

SsgtC

Banned
Garetor said:
Never would have happened. Even assuming Runstedt had the ability to pull it off, neither Roosevelt or Churchill would have agreed. The idea of a united front against the Soviets was the bedtime story of the hopelessly deluded after 1943.
Click to expand...
I actually could see this happening. But it requires a lot more than just the Allies accepting this offer. It would need Stalin doing something monumentally stupid and pissing off both FDR and Churchill enough that they're willing to screw him over. Something that makes them decide Stalin is more trouble than he's worth and they'd honestly rather deal with the Germans.
 

Skinny87

I'm supremely sceptical of how von Rundsted would have even been able to influence events in support of the Normandy landings.
 

James G

Gone Fishin'
SsgtC said:
I actually could see this happening. But it requires a lot more than just the Allies accepting this offer. It would need Stalin doing something monumentally stupid and pissing off both FDR and Churchill enough that they're willing to screw him over. Something that makes them decide Stalin is more trouble than he's worth and they'd honestly rather deal with the Germans.
Click to expand...
It would have to be quite something.
The West and the Soviets were allies of convience against a common enemy yes, but that enemy was Nazi Germany. Churchill and Roosevelt had their dumb moments yet still... Germany was Germany, even a not so nazi but only a bit nazi Germany.
 

Carl Schwamberger

A Bulgarian diplomat claimed that in October of 1943 he carried a inquiry from Stalin to Hitler about a armistice. He gave it to a German undersecretary & never received a response. Perhaps had that gone into negotiations the West Allies would have found out & lost faith in the USSR as a ally? I know that about that same time a delegation of Red Army generals toured Italy, demanding proof the Allies were actually doing any fighting. Not sure if they toured elsewhere in the UK or whatever.
 
SsgtC

SsgtC

Banned
James G said:
It would have to be quite something.
The West and the Soviets were allies of convience against a common enemy yes, but that enemy was Nazi Germany. Churchill and Roosevelt had their dumb moments yet still... Germany was Germany, even a not so nazi but only a bit nazi Germany.
Click to expand...
Oh I agree. Extreme long shot. And it would have to be something VERY stupid.
 

Carl Schwamberger

I suspect that had such thing been negotiated the actual landings would have been heavily modified. While the beach landings may have remainder similar the airborne & commandos/rangers diverted to one of the RANKIN plans. That is seizing a port on day one as the Germans evacuate. That would allow restoration & operation of a port a month earlier than OTL. Maybe even faster.
 

Skinny87

Carl Schwamberger said:
I suspect that had such thing been negotiated the actual landings would have been heavily modified. While the beach landings may have remainder similar the airborne & commandos/rangers diverted to one of the RANKIN plans. That is seizing a port on day one as the Germans evacuate. That would allow restoration & operation of a port a month earlier than OTL. Maybe even faster.
Click to expand...

But would the defection, or at least assistance of von Rundestedt only have allowed something like this to happen?

Even if he had given such an order I can't imagine Wehrmacht and especially any SS troops in the area going "Well I guess he knows what he's doing come on lads" and not mutinying or deposing von Rundstedt instead
 

Redbeard

Banned
I haven't any sources at hand, but I at least remember having seen before references to considerations in the German leadership about simply letting the Wallies advance as far east as possible and then hope for the Russians to be pissed enough about it to have a new German-Wallied alliance created - or at least not having Russians on German ground. I haven't heard about Rundstedt being involved but Hitler apparently was enough involved to flatly refuse any further thoughts in that direction.
 

ObssesedNuker

Smells like post-war Wehrmacht apologism. Most of the evidence we have of what German generals thought at the time indicates they were still playing for keeps. Rundstedt in particular is on record as eagerly participating in the "Court of Honor", overseeing the courtmartialling and even execution of a number of his compatriots who had dared raise a hand against Hitler. And he continued to execute his orders to resist the WAllies with as much energy as he could muster, regardless of how much he complained about the more insane directives.

Carl Schwamberger said:
By mid 1943 most Germans understood the war was lost & were thinking about a exit strategy.
Click to expand...

Kinda. Between Stalingrad on the one hand and D-Day and Bagration on the other, most Germans understood that total victory as envisioned pre-Stalingrad was impossible but they still held out hope for a negotiated peace with either or both sides that would leave Germany with some of it's territorial gains and in a dominant, independent position in Central Europe. Rundstedts shouting "Make peace you fools!" should be understood in this context. It was only after mid-1944 with the invasion of Normandy and the Soviets obliterating a trio of Army Groups in the east that it became obvious that wasn't in the cards and the delusion became counting on a falling out between the WAllies and the Soviets.
 
Last edited:

KACKO

Carl Schwamberger said:
Thanks, I'd really like to have that reference & see a brief summary. Knowing the origin would be really interesting. By mid 1943 most Germans understood the war was lost & were thinking about a exit strategy. That and the various resistance groups creates a chaotic picture with lots of holes. A jigsaw puzzle with 70% of the pieces missing.
Click to expand...
Couldn't it be somehow misquoted, misunderstood von Rundstedt, when
after invasion he was suppose to say "Make peace, you fools!"??
 

thaddeus

Donor
KACKO said:
Couldn't it be somehow misquoted, misunderstood von Rundstedt, when
after invasion he was suppose to say "Make peace, you fools!"??
Click to expand...

wasn't he also in favor of holding reserves back? vs. Rommel plan (crudely simplified) of everything at the waterline? so THAT might be misinterpreted as "helping" an invasion, when it was his scenario on how to defeat one?
 
SsgtC

SsgtC

Banned
thaddeus said:
wasn't he also in favor of holding reserves back? vs. Rommel plan (crudely simplified) of everything at the waterline? so THAT might be misinterpreted as "helping" an invasion, when it was his scenario on how to defeat one?
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, outside of Wake Island (which the Japanese tried to half-ass and do it on the cheap) has any defender been able to successfully defeat an amphibious assualt in modern history (during or since WWII)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top