What if the evacuation of Dunkirk had failed?

[Look More Closely Later]

Let's say the Dunkirk evacuation is a total failure. Very few (if any) British soldiers make it home and the rest are either captured or killed. What would have happened? Would Britain be knocked out of the war? Or would the brits fight on, but severely weakened?
And if Britain Surrenders, Germany can fully focus on the soviets.
If Dunkirk fails, do the axis win?
Hell, maybe operation sea-lion would happen, though I doubt that
(that plan was crazy and the nazis knew it)

As I think I've said on one of the previous umpteen occasions that this topic has come up, the capture/annihilation of most of the British Expeditionary Force on the beach at Dunkirk compounds the subsequent disaster (if that still goes ahead, approximately to schedule) of the Fall of France.
At the actual time of Original Timeline Operation Dynamo France is still in the war and fighting, so the UK government, although reeling from the blows, can stagger on with the war for a while in the hope that somehow, from somewhere, a miracle can still be found.
But, unless the Germans sit back and watch as a meteorite from outer space crashes into the shore at Dunkirk, does the effort of finishing off the British troops at Dunkirk delay or prevent the Fall of France?
And at this point, discussions get highly technical, with maps being produced and discussions of whether or not the Germans had the capability to take Dunkirk ahead of the main retreat of the British and French armies, and arguments over what Hitler said to who and why fly back and forth...
Probably fastest if you search for threads in this forum with either 'Dunkirk' or 'Dynamo' in the title.

 

[RedSword12]

As I think I've said on one of the previous umpteen occasions that this topic has come up, the capture/annihilation of most of the British Expeditionary Force on the beach at Dunkirk compounds the subsequent disaster (if that still goes ahead, approximately to schedule) of the Fall of France.
At the actual time of Original Timeline Operation Dynamo France is still in the war and fighting, so the UK government, although reeling from the blows, can stagger on with the war for a while in the hope that somehow, from somewhere, a miracle can still be found.
But, unless the Germans sit back and watch as a meteorite from outer space crashes into the shore at Dunkirk, does the effort of finishing off the British troops at Dunkirk delay or prevent the Fall of France?
And at this point, discussions get highly technical, with maps being produced and discussions of whether or not the Germans had the capability to take Dunkirk ahead of the main retreat of the British and French armies, and arguments over what Hitler said to who and why fly back and forth...
Probably fastest if you search for threads in this forum with either 'Dunkirk' or 'Dynamo' in the title.

It's not constructive IMHO to endlessly argue whether or not the Germans could have bagged the BEF. In the whirlwind of endless possibilities that is war, there is a scenario where the Germans succeed in doing so. What a lot of people who claim otherwise miss, is that POD's don't have to be right up until the last second. Frankly for the purposes of discussion it is most constructive to accept the premise, which is not half as far-fetched as determinists would claim, and move on from there.

 

[BELFAST]

Let's say the Dunkirk evacuation is a total failure. Very few (if any) British soldiers make it home and the rest are either captured or killed. What would have happened? Would Britain be knocked out of the war?

No.

Or would the brits fight on, but severely weakened?

The Brits would fight on.
The army would take much longer to rebuild. but RN or Raf are not affected.

And if Britain Surrenders, Germany can fully focus on the soviets.

Surrender was never the aim of the Germans they wanted the British to withdraw from the war and end the blockade.
with the British out of the war, the Germans are in a better position to deal with the soviets and can import oil and other important stuff needed for the war against the Soviets. Germany will still lose to the Soviets due to a lack of logistics and bad intel on the size of the Red Army and the real size of soviet industry.

If Dunkirk fails, do the axis win?

No.

Hell, maybe operation sea-lion would happen, though I doubt that
(that plan was crazy and the nazis knew it)

Sealion is doomed.

 

[Retro_Reaction]

Perhaps the number of British troops serving in the "British Free Corps/Legion of St. George" reaches as high as a peak of 50-60 men serving at a single time.

Surrender was never the aim of the Germans they wanted the British to withdraw from the war and end the blockade.
with the British out of the war, the Germans are in a better position to deal with the soviets and can import oil and other important stuff needed for the war against the Soviets. Germany will still lose to the Soviets due to a lack of logistics and bad intel on the size of the Red Army and the real size of soviet industry.

The British knew the Germans were going to go to war with the Soviets. Mark Mazower in one of his books believes that the British would not surrender as long as there was a continental rival that they could leverage against the Germans, and that Germans believed that fighting and defeating the Soviets would also lead the British to coming to terms. As long as there is a European power with an independant policy from the Germans, the British won't come to terms.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Perhaps the number of British troops serving in the "British Free Corps/Legion of St. George" reaches as high as a peak of 50-60 men serving at a single time.

As many as that?

 

[Xx_Pro_State_Exam_xX]

Something to remember is that even after Dunkirk there were still 100,000+ British troops in France with more being landed that were evacuated when the French surrendered. Even if most weren't frontline forces they could serve as such in an emergency. Britain would not be left without an army to defend itself in 1940. Then as has been said there are large numbers of troops training in Britain itself. Short of bind panic there is no reason for Britain to seek terms in the summer of 1940.

Damn, didn't know that. I thought Dunkirk kicked the British out of France completely.

 

[Xx_Pro_State_Exam_xX]

Sealion isn't happening. The end. Roll credits.

Yeah, I thought so too. Sealion was objectively a bad plan. Crazy that the nazis actually considered it though.

 

[sparky42]

Damn, didn't know that. I thought Dunkirk kicked the British out of France completely.

You can see the forces still in combat and the ”2nd BEF” in the “after Dunkirk” section:

British Expeditionary Force (World War II) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Garrison]

It's not constructive IMHO to endlessly argue whether or not the Germans could have bagged the BEF. In the whirlwind of endless possibilities that is war, there is a scenario where the Germans succeed in doing so. What a lot of people who claim otherwise miss, is that POD's don't have to be right up until the last second. Frankly for the purposes of discussion it is most constructive to accept the premise, which is not half as far-fetched as determinists would claim, and move on from there.

But the question of how the BEF is destroyed is relevant. If the Germans refuse to reorganize the Panzer Divisions and throw them against the perimeter in the state of disorganization they were in when the battle of Arras took place then it may be a pyrrhic victory. The Germans can't just snap their fingers and have things happen, men, equipment and supplies have to be directed away from one task to another and if they are expended they can't just be instantly replaced to carry out the next task.

 

[Jacarí]

But the question of how the BEF is destroyed is relevant. If the Germans refuse to reorganize the Panzer Divisions and throw them against the perimeter in the state of disorganization they were in when the battle of Arras took place then it may be a pyrrhic victory. The Germans can't just snap their fingers and have things happen, men, equipment and supplies have to be directed away from one task to another and if they are expended they can't just be instantly replaced to carry out the next task.

The Germans used several days to rest, then two PzDiv attacked and pushed the perimeter back on the 27th, taking Gravelines... and then the Germans took the armor away, sent it south instead of driving the rapier home at a point where the brits expected them to take Dunkirk in 24 hours.

They just needed to push on and it was over.

 

[Garrison]

The Germans used several days to rest, then two PzDiv attacked and pushed the perimeter back on the 27th, taking Gravelines... and then the Germans took the armor away, sent it south instead of driving the rapier home at a point where the brits expected them to take Dunkirk in 24 hours.

They just needed to push on and it was over.

No, that is not accurate, the area around Dunkirk was not good ground for Panzers and throwing them away at Dunkirk means they aren't available for Case Red.

 

[Jacarí]

No, that is not accurate, the area around Dunkirk was not good ground for Panzers and throwing them away at Dunkirk means they aren't available for Case Red.

The Germans had 10 PzDiv... they could spare the two (or just one) already attacking and advancing for a couple days and end Dunkirk.

They simply didnt care enough and prioritized Case Red.

Someone asked if the Germans could have prevented the evacuation, the answer is easily, they just have had to keep doing what they were already doing.

But the Germans had already moved on, they were focused on finishing France, that is the only reason why the brits escaped.

 

[Post]

Sealion isn't happening. The end. Roll credits.

Well, you never know. What if the British do fight on (as I expect they would), but the BoB goes slighlty better for the LW. Hitler thinks "they're down on their knees, I just have to kick the door and it will fall down," so he decides to invade. And then loses the creme de la creme of the Wehrmacht in the Channel. Bonuspoints if Hitler watches it from Cap Griz Nez and gets a stray artilleryround on his head.

 

[BELFAST]

Perhaps the number of British troops serving in the "British Free Corps/Legion of St. George" reaches as high as a peak of 50-60 men serving at a single time.


The British knew the Germans were going to go to war with the Soviets. Mark Mazower in one of his books believes that the British would not surrender as long as there was a continental rival that they could leverage against the Germans, and that Germans believed that fighting and defeating the Soviets would also lead the British to coming to terms. As long as there is a European power with an independant policy from the Germans, the British won't come to terms.

Yes minister as always explains the British attitude to the balance of power in Europe.

divide and rule.
Always make sure one power cannot dominate the rest of Europe.

 

[Parmenion]

In the very short term not much, those OTL survivors had no equipment, so they weren't really in shape to be sent anywhere anyway. Longer term, it could have operational consequences if the UK is running out of manpower a year or two earlier, but nothing outcome changing.

 

[RedSword12]

But the question of how the BEF is destroyed is relevant. If the Germans refuse to reorganize the Panzer Divisions and throw them against the perimeter in the state of disorganization they were in when the battle of Arras took place then it may be a pyrrhic victory. The Germans can't just snap their fingers and have things happen, men, equipment and supplies have to be directed away from one task to another and if they are expended they can't just be instantly replaced to carry out the next task.

It wouldn't be a pyrrhic victory, because it would eliminate the British Army's most experienced cadres, setting them back for years. At any rate, if they do succeed in taking Dunkirk on the fly, it would be because they've not been eviscerated. Either they will win and be in a salvageable state, or lose. Case Red, even down a couple panzer divisions resting and refitting, is a guaranteed victory, because of German air supremacy and the Allies no longer having enough men on the ground to contain breakthroughs anywhere. The French had learned, but the Weygand Line was doomed from the start. Whenever French armor got on the move to counterattack, the Luftwaffe attacked and forced them to disperse.

While taking Dunkirk on the fly before the British can garrison it properly isn't necessarily as easy as people say, it being a controversial topic amongst even the German commanders themselves, it is plausible enough to accept it for the sake of discussion. The Allied forces in the pocket were in disarray and it is not out of the question for the Germans to succeed if they try, especially with air support.

 

[thaddeus]

But the question of how the BEF is destroyed is relevant. If the Germans refuse to reorganize the Panzer Divisions and throw them against the perimeter in the state of disorganization they were in when the battle of Arras took place then it may be a pyrrhic victory. The Germans can't just snap their fingers and have things happen, men, equipment and supplies have to be directed away from one task to another and if they are expended they can't just be instantly replaced to carry out the next task.

It wouldn't be a pyrrhic victory, because it would eliminate the British Army's most experienced cadres, setting them back for years. At any rate, if they do succeed in taking Dunkirk on the fly, it would be because they've not been eviscerated. Either they will win and be in a salvageable state, or lose. Case Red, even down a couple panzer divisions resting and refitting, is a guaranteed victory, because of German air supremacy and the Allies no longer having enough men on the ground to contain breakthroughs anywhere. The French had learned, but the Weygand Line was doomed from the start. Whenever French armor got on the move to counterattack, the Luftwaffe attacked and forced them to disperse.

it seems to me there would be more apparent downside than upside (at the time), the worst scenario would be a stalled offensive rather than any British evacuation(s), which could be seen as tomorrow's problem?

so it's down to the LW and KM to stop the evacuations? rather than drain or divert the army. (and the LW kinda has other things to do!)

what could the LW change in its tactics during their historical operations or what could the KM do to stop (or slow?) Dunkirk evacuations?

 

[RedSword12]

it seems to me there would be more apparent downside than upside (at the time), the worst scenario would be a stalled offensive rather than any British evacuation(s), which could be seen as tomorrow's problem?

so it's down to the LW and KM to stop the evacuations? rather than drain or divert the army. (and the LW kinda has other things to do!)

what could the LW change in its tactics during their historical operations or what could the KM do to stop (or slow?) Dunkirk evacuations?

I think this isn't really a productive discussion for this thread, since it's been debated to death, and this is over a scenario which is rather quite flexible. It's totally possible for the campaign to by chance end up leading to the collapse of the Dunkirk Pocket without a successful mass- evacuation. We'd all be better off IMHO agreeing to abide by the plausible premise of the OP, and work from there.

 

[Derek Pullem]

The best way to not find, is to never seek.

Best way to "find" is misquote or misattribute

"...that he would be thankful to get out of our present difficulties, provided we retained the essentials of our vital strength, even at the cost of some cession of territory."

comes from an alleged statement in a secret meeting

i.e. not a direct quote

The second "quote"

"...if Herr Hitler was prepared to make peace on the terms of the restoration of German colonies and the overlordship of Eastern Europe."

Comes from this larger quote from Churchill dismissing a hypothetical as a basis for discussion.

Churchill and the Approach to Mussolini and Hitler in May 1940: A Note on JSTOR

Jonathan Knight, Churchill and the Approach to Mussolini and Hitler in May 1940: A Note, British Journal of International Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Apr., 1977), pp. 92-96

www.jstor.org

 

[cerebus]

Best way to "find" is misquote or misattribute

Thank you for looking that up and including references