What terms would Germany demand of Great Britain if GB sued for peace in WWII?

Just assume for a minute that, somehow, someway, by mid-late 1940, Germany had succeeded in starving out Grest Britain and thoroughly destroying the Merchant Marine to the point that Britain was forced to sue for peace. What terms would the Germans likely demand at the table?
 
I think the terms for England itself would be relatively light: Unlike France, England generally wasn't seen as the 'old enemy' from 1918 with which Germany still had a deal to settle. Also in the long run, Germany was more interested in Eastern Europe, in particular the USSR. So I don't think Germany would make any territorial demands on the UK, even not the former German colonies in Africa and Asia. It would however demand that England pretty much withdrew from continental Europe: recognize the occupation of the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Poland, Denmark and Norway not bother about Russia, stop the naval blockade of Germany and allow German vessels into British ports.

Of course leaving continental Europe to the Germans would be completely unacceptable to the British, as this was exactly why they declared war on them in the first place. Still, I don't think a peace agreement would have any special revenge clauses as it would be the German's political victory to show : "Look, we could have given you Versailles the other way round. but we are better then the French and all of your old allies together."
 
Just assume for a minute that, somehow, someway, by mid-late 1940, Germany had succeeded in starving out Grest Britain and thoroughly destroying the Merchant Marine to the point that Britain was forced to sue for peace. What terms would the Germans likely demand at the table?

That's a lot of UBoats / Surface raiders, not really possible with the historic setup.

In any case my WAG is that as of 1940 Hitler's objectives towards the UK were fairly limited. I would say his biggest would be for the UK to accept the new order in Europe. IE German conquest of Europe. Return of WW1 colonies in Africa. Demand that UK relocate at its expense to British territories in Africa all of the Jews of Europe. Some bits of territory in the Med like Malta. With UK out right facing starvation I would tack on they have to pay some form of reparations which would most come in the form of raw materials and perhaps vehicles as Hitler would eye the Soviet Union next.

I don't see either an occupation or major arms limitations for the UK. Not unless the Germans had to invade (no I am not suggesting a debate on that topic just saying without having to do so Hitler wouldn't see the need.)
 
I think the terms for England itself would be relatively light: Unlike France, England generally wasn't seen as the 'old enemy' from 1918 with which Germany still had a deal to settle. Also in the long run, Germany was more interested in Eastern Europe, in particular the USSR. So I don't think Germany would make any territorial demands on the UK, even not the former German colonies in Africa and Asia. It would however demand that England pretty much withdrew from continental Europe: recognize the occupation of the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Poland, Denmark and Norway not bother about Russia, stop the naval blockade of Germany and allow German vessels into British ports.

Of course leaving continental Europe to the Germans would be completely unacceptable to the British, as this was exactly why they declared war on them in the first place. Still, I don't think a peace agreement would have any special revenge clauses as it would be the German's political victory to show : "Look, we could have given you Versailles the other way round. but we are better then the French and all of your old allies together."

Just adding the point that even without the blokade, Germany had a pretty strained economy. Probably wanted to secure imports of some strategic minerals. Coal and fertilizer to keep the French economy going and obviously Oil. Barbarossa would be just around the cornered.
But terms would be light if Germany could only hope to starve the British another season. Again, Barbarossa being just around the corner.
 
Historically Germany was not so much opposed to a deal with the UK before the WW2 broke out. Hitler and his followers even praised the UK to some level before the war and thought they could make a deal for sharing world power between the two.

In case Churchill somehow was replaced by a more pragmatic peacedove type PM, the UK might well have sought a truce, or peaceagreement, with the Germans possibly getting a free hand in continental Europe and the UK retaining its dominance at sea. A sort of simmilar concept had been present in the Great War between the then still neutral USA and the German Empire, before the USA declared war in 1917.

Technically speaking, the UK was more or less save in the OTL, being an Island, opposed to an opponent lacking the capabilities to force up a direct threat of invasion. U-Boote were a nuicance, but too few in numbers still to directly strangle the UK in its survival. (In 1940 at least) Germany actually wanted a deal, as it needed all it military power against the USSR, which were to be attacked in 1941, as planned before. So both sides actually had motvies to get a deal in the OTL and it was primarily the stuborness of the British governement to continue the war and eventually win it, thanks to one of the most briljant politicians of all time Winston Churchill, who paronally could motivate his people to fight on to the last. A lesser prolitician would most likely have made some sort of approach to Germany to end hostilities.
 
Historically Germany was not so much opposed to a deal with the UK before the WW2 broke out. Hitler and his followers even praised the UK to some level before the war and thought they could make a deal for sharing world power between the two.

In case Churchill somehow was replaced by a more pragmatic peacedove type PM, the UK might well have sought a truce, or peaceagreement, with the Germans possibly getting a free hand in continental Europe and the UK retaining its dominance at sea. A sort of simmilar concept had been present in the Great War between the then still neutral USA and the German Empire, before the USA declared war in 1917.

Technically speaking, the UK was more or less save in the OTL, being an Island, opposed to an opponent lacking the capabilities to force up a direct threat of invasion. U-Boote were a nuicance, but too few in numbers still to directly strangle the UK in its survival. (In 1940 at least) Germany actually wanted a deal, as it needed all it military power against the USSR, which were to be attacked in 1941, as planned before. So both sides actually had motvies to get a deal in the OTL and it was primarily the stuborness of the British governement to continue the war and eventually win it, thanks to one of the most briljant politicians of all time Winston Churchill, who paronally could motivate his people to fight on to the last. A lesser prolitician would most likely have made some sort of approach to Germany to end hostilities.

Napoleonic precedence has Britain holding out as long as possible, and jumping right back in when possible (in the WW2 case Barbarossa, presumably).

So I'd imagine the British will be doing their utmost to limit their problems if they do restart a war; reparations may be considered a lesser problem than losing strategic bases like Malta.

Even so, the OP makes it rather hard to judge - a collapse in British confidence they can beat Germany alone seems an easier estimate (in which case the British will be specifically looking for a chance to get back in with allies) than trying to predict a fully new case where the British merchant marine is actually almost destroyed (in which case the British will be in utter panic and unsure what to do next except beg the Americans for ships and supplies).
 
I think the cultural implications of a peace agreement with the UK would be 'interesting':

On one hand, you'd have the complete German propaganda machine doing their best to convince the English (we'll worry about the Canadians, South-Africans and even Scots later...) that despite the unpleasantness in Scapa Flow and Dunkirk, Germany is no longer an enemy, never really has been an enemy in the first place and wishes nothing but the best for the UK. Prepare for a lot of German movies and books where the main character is aided by an English 'best friend' and lots of propaganda pieces about how France and Poland are doing quite well under German occupation and that there is absolutely no worry on part of the British about Germany mistreating them. You might even see the Jews in France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Scandinavia getting a break, especially those with business ties to the UK. Meanwhile Germany and Britain battle it out in non-military competitions any chance they can: Expect lots of inter-land football (soccer) matches, sailplane competitions, aerobatic competitions, sailing races and lots of other sporting challenges. You might even see a rugby and cricket league take off in Germany, just so that there could be friendly inter-land matches...

On the other hand, internally, the Nazi propaganda machine will piece by piece distribute the image that the UK Commonwealth might be a colonial power still, but in Europe itself is pretty insignificant and that London has better skills dealing with Canada, Africa and India then having any real power in the 'civilized' world. Prepare for lots of caricatures of British white colonials appearing in movies and books that are valiant, courageous and noble, but cannot grasp that the Germans are not the natives they are used to rule in Africa and India.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

Just assume for a minute that, somehow, someway, by mid-late 1940, Germany had succeeded in starving out Grest Britain and thoroughly destroying the Merchant Marine to the point that Britain was forced to sue for peace. What terms would the Germans likely demand at the table?
Impossible barring ASB intervention in terms of the merchant fleet; they could make scary inroads, but the best bet is just a political panic following say a defeat at Dunkirk and the loss of the BEF, plus Churchill not being in power.
I think Hitler was effectively offering a white peace, so nothing from Britain other than recognizing that German ruled the continent now. I don't even think they were that interested in colonies, but it might not be totally outside the realm of possibility that Germany might get back some WW1 colonies. Basically the British empire is mostly intact minus perhaps some WW1 German colonies. But the issue then really is that Germany gets her common market on the European continent, while Britain is excluded via a tariff wall. Think EU without the European parliament and Britain excluded.
 
Impossible barring ASB intervention in terms of the merchant fleet; they could make scary inroads, but the best bet is just a political panic following say a defeat at Dunkirk and the loss of the BEF, plus Churchill not being in power.
I think Hitler was effectively offering a white peace, so nothing from Britain other than recognizing that German ruled the continent now. I don't even think they were that interested in colonies, but it might not be totally outside the realm of possibility that Germany might get back some WW1 colonies. Basically the British empire is mostly intact minus perhaps some WW1 German colonies. But the issue then really is that Germany gets her common market on the European continent, while Britain is excluded via a tariff wall. Think EU without the European parliament and Britain excluded.
Historially he wanted a white peace, but maybe some assurances for ressources or something else would be put on the table if Hitler was in fact winning.
An "easy POD" is the German torpedoes produced reliably with Churchill killed aboard the Nelson. Didn't you use that one?
 

Deleted member 1487

Historially he wanted a white peace, but maybe some assurances for ressources or something else would be put on the table if Hitler was in fact winning.
An "easy POD" is the German torpedoes produced reliably with Churchill killed aboard the Nelson. Didn't you use that one?
It was. I didn't have all German torpedoes reliable though, just the ones that hit the Nelson. But if you have the problem caught and fixed pre-war, even better if the German navy was smarter and invested in better mines and torpedoes instead of wasting huge sums on big BB gunnery research, then 1939-40 would be a slaughter in the water with a sizeable chunk of the RN (Nelson and at Norway) and British merchant fleet sunk to a relatively small number of Uboats. Churchill and the Admiralty being killed in 1939 plus the loss of the Nelson+Norway potential losses would have probably frightened the British enough that they'd get out with a White Peace, but the political fall out in Britain would have been pretty nasty to the ruling party. If then in addition Dunkirk results in the loss of the BEF then Britain is almost certain getting out with a White Peace offer that results in the return of the BEF.
 
Napoleonic precedence has Britain holding out as long as possible, and jumping right back in when possible (in the WW2 case Barbarossa, presumably).

So I'd imagine the British will be doing their utmost to limit their problems if they do restart a war; reparations may be considered a lesser problem than losing strategic bases like Malta.

Even so, the OP makes it rather hard to judge - a collapse in British confidence they can beat Germany alone seems an easier estimate (in which case the British will be specifically looking for a chance to get back in with allies) than trying to predict a fully new case where the British merchant marine is actually almost destroyed (in which case the British will be in utter panic and unsure what to do next except beg the Americans for ships and supplies).

The British Mechant Marine was far from destroyed in the OTL, as the Germans still lacked numbers of U-Boote to do so, as well as reliable torpedoes in early 1940. So that is not a factor still.
 
Top