What would a Nazi-Polish vs. Soviet war in 1939 look like?

CaliGuy

Banned
Had Britain refused to give guarantees to Poland in March 1939 and thus Poland would have agreed to allow Nazi Germany to annex Danzig and to ally with Nazi Germany (which appears to have been Hitler's original plan), what would a joint Nazi-Polish invasion of the Soviet Union in either 1939 or 1940 have looked like?

Also, would Britain and France have remained neutral in this war? In addition to this, what would have been the ultimate outcome of this war?
 
The Polish would never willingly give away the Polish Corridor, and that would be the major claim by the Nazis, as in OTL, so I don't think this is even possible. I saw a infamous book about one where the Polish and Germans defeat the Soviets and then the Polish defeat the Germans. Cant remember the name, but the author was Polish.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
The Polish would never willingly give away the Polish Corridor, and that would be the major claim by the Nazis, as in OTL, so I don't think this is even possible.

I said Danzig--not the Polish Corridor. Also, AFAIK, Hitler initially only wanted a road across the Polish Corridor--not the entire Corridor.

I saw a infamous book about one where the Polish and Germans defeat the Soviets and then the Polish defeat the Germans. Cant remember the name, but the author was Polish.

It's this book, isn't it? :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pact_Ribbentrop_-_Beck
 

orwelans II

Banned
Had Britain refused to give guarantees to Poland in March 1939 and thus Poland would have agreed to allow Nazi Germany to annex Danzig and to ally with Nazi Germany (which appears to have been Hitler's original plan), what would a joint Nazi-Polish invasion of the Soviet Union in either 1939 or 1940 have looked like?
Where the hell would Poland and Germany get enough oil and trucks for such an invasion without invading France and the low countries first as well as trading with the USSR like the Germans did IOTL?

I do think that France and Britain would remain neutral or give aid to Germany in such a war because that was the ultimate goal of their foreign policy in Europe at the time-use fascists to destroy communism. German war effort might even depend on their aid and they could try and dictate any future peace settlement.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Where the hell would Poland and Germany get enough oil and trucks for such an invasion without invading France and the low countries first as well as trading with the USSR like the Germans did IOTL?

Couldn't they import oil from whichever neutral countries produced it back then?

I do think that France and Britain would remain neutral or give aid to Germany in such a war because that was the ultimate goal of their foreign policy in Europe at the time-use fascists to destroy communism. German war effort might even depend on their aid and they could try and dictate any future peace settlement.

Supporting the Nazi-Polish alliance after their carve up of Czechoslovakia might be too distasteful for people in Britain and France, no? Plus, wouldn't it become even more distasteful and tragic if large numbers of Jews begin being killed in the East?
 
I said Danzig--not the Polish Corridor. Also, AFAIK, Hitler initially only wanted a road across the Polish Corridor--not the entire Corridor.

What Hitler wanted and what the Poles were willing to concede were very different things, they had no interest in becoming a Nazi puppet.
 

orwelans II

Banned
Supporting the Nazi-Polish alliance after their carve up of Czechoslovakia might be too distasteful for people in Britain and France, no? Plus, wouldn't it become even more distasteful and tragic if large numbers of Jews begin being killed in the East?
Supporting carving up Czechoslovakia was distasteful too, but their governments did it IOTL anyway. As for the Holocaust, they didn't belive Soviet reports about the liberated camps untill they themselves came across the camps.

As for the oil, Romania and other neutral powers would probably sell it to them, that's true. They'd need less as they would be less motorised than otl Barbarossa.
 
Someone did a TL of the Germans/Poles beating the Soviets.

It had a, er... bit of criticism against it, which I'm going with for my post. The Germans are much weaker even with Polish help (assuming the space bats join them politically), and the Soviets proportionately much stronger, even without the supply issues.

The invasion probably eventually stalls out well short of the OTL Barbarossa advance, and then the Germans/Poles get crushed in the inevitable counteroffensives.
 
Supporting carving up Czechoslovakia was distasteful too, but their governments did it IOTL anyway. As for the Holocaust, they didn't belive Soviet reports about the liberated camps untill they themselves came across the camps.

As for the oil, Romania and other neutral powers would probably sell it to them, that's true. They'd need less as they would be less motorised than otl Barbarossa.
They would need less if there was not war with western allies too.
As to motorization. I am not sure how much exactly they got through war booty from French army. However during war occupied France manufactured app 100000 trucks for Germans. App. 30000 a year.
OTL before war Poland manufacture since 1935 over 15000 PZI 621 (Fiat) trucks and was switching to PZI 703 trucks. Of course their production wouldn't make big difference.
 

orwelans II

Banned
It's also questionable if they'd manage to catch the Soviets with their pants down like they did IOTL. Think about this series of events from Stalin's perspective:

-Britain, Poland and France allowed for Hitler to take over Czechoslovakia.
-Britain and France turned down Soviet attempts at creating an anti-Hitler pact (unless Litvinov doesn't even try in this timeline)
-German and Polish right wing governments are settling their dispute peacefully, both are very hostile to the USSR.
-Just maybe, I should bolster the numbers and readyness of the troops in Belarus and the Ukraine.
 
It's also questionable if they'd manage to catch the Soviets with their pants down like they did IOTL. Think about this series of events from Stalin's perspective:

-Britain, Poland and France allowed for Hitler to take over Czechoslovakia.
-Britain and France turned down Soviet attempts at creating an anti-Hitler pact (unless Litvinov doesn't even try in this timeline)
-German and Polish right wing governments are settling their dispute peacefully, both are very hostile to the USSR.
-Just maybe, I should bolster the numbers and readyness of the troops in Belarus and the Ukraine.
Interestingly with Poles in even Ukrainians may be more inclined to fight for Soviets from start.

On other side, let say it happens in 1940. Against France Germans fielded 141 division, add at least 39 Poland's divisions and some 16 brigades (fully mobilized). Plus bit more modernized Polish air force. Still Polish Air Force would be very possible doing pretty well against Soviets in 1940. OTL Romanian Polish fighters show down over 30 Soviet bombers in 1941.
OTL Finland and Romania fielded against USSR in 1941 14 and 13 divisions.

I guess with no Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact there will be no Winter war and no occupation of Besarabia. Much less reasons for Finaland and Romania to join. Now on Romania Germans can put much more pressure then on Finland. With Norway unoccupied, no Winter war and Soviet Union attacked actually its Germans who are sean as bigger danger in Finland. I would scratched Finland out.
If Baltic countries are attacked by German/ Polish alliance they are on one side quickly defeated on other they are pushed to Soviet camp without Soviet pressure of 1939/40.

Romania. How you get Romania in if Bessarabia is still Romanian? Threaten them with OTL 2nd Vienna Accord? It will push them more to Soviet camp or at least make them neutral. Especially if Soviets said they are fully respecting Romania pre 1939 borders. Romanians were trying to balance their relations between France and Germany OTL till fall of France. With France intact i do not think you can make them to commit to war against Soviet Union. Hungarians were hasitant as it went OTL 1941. They were trying to balance between Italy, Germany and western allies as much as they could too. They didn't even confirm their commitments against Czechoslovakia during Munich crisis. Of course they always used opportunity to regain territories of old Hungarian crown.
Will Italy send some expeditionary Forces? Possible. They can even supply more Fiat trucks to Poland.

So just Poland and Germany, let say with neutrality of Baltic states broken by Berlin-Warsaw Axis front goes from Baltic to Kamenets Podolsky However before Baltic states are gone, Soviets have some time prepare defense there. So intially forn goes somewhere along Polish Soviet Border from along Daugava river to Kamentets Podolsky.
Soviet army is unaware f problems it has due to no 1939 Polish campaign and no Winter war. On other side. Germans do not have experience with Polish, Norway, low countries and France campaigns. Same goes for Poland. Soviets at least do have some experience from Chalchyn Gol. How much good it will do to them is different story though. On other side Stalin's line is not dismantled.

Without Polish aggression against Poland and Finland France and British do not have reason to support this Axis. Actually due to Soviet France alliance from 1935 France would be actually on Soviet side. It would do to Soviets probably same good it did to Czechoslovakia, on other side they could expect at least some aid. Plus strong leftist parties in France may push France to aid Soviets in some way - technically, financially, diplomatically if not directly engaging at war. Plus keep Romania and Turkey on right side of border by their political pressure.
Without Germany able to move at least some assets down the Danube to Black Sea and without Romanian navy, Black sea is more or less Soviet lake - unless Germans managed to Swing from Belaruss, northern Ukraine towards Odessa and Crimea. Which would make their logisitcs, withou Romanian and Hungarian railways... pain in the ass. Of course Baltic is German lake with some nuisance rides of Soviets subs and Air Force.
 
It's also questionable if they'd manage to catch the Soviets with their pants down like they did IOTL. Think about this series of events from Stalin's perspective:

-Britain, Poland and France allowed for Hitler to take over Czechoslovakia.
-Britain and France turned down Soviet attempts at creating an anti-Hitler pact (unless Litvinov doesn't even try in this timeline)
-German and Polish right wing governments are settling their dispute peacefully, both are very hostile to the USSR.
-Just maybe, I should bolster the numbers and readyness of the troops in Belarus and the Ukraine.

The problem is that the purges are still recent events, the performance of the Red Army was poor in the OTL invasion of Poland and in Finland for the first few months, and in OTL the Soviet did not begin mobilization efforts until the invasion of Poland and those efforts were still underway in June 1941.

So while he may try to get the Red Army ready, it is not going to be enough.
 
The problem is that the purges are still recent events, the performance of the Red Army was poor in the OTL invasion of Poland and in Finland for the first few months, and in OTL the Soviet did not begin mobilization efforts until the invasion of Poland and those efforts were still underway in June 1941.

So while he may try to get the Red Army ready, it is not going to be enough.

I don't think you can compare Soviet mobilization efforts prior to Barbarossa OTL, which were being conducted at a relatively lax pace, with what would be undertaken if the Soviets are going full-bore following a sudden Declaration of War upon them. One should also not ignore that while Soviet combat forces are smaller and less experienced... so too are the Germans, so in that respect it's really a wash. Where it isn't a wash is in logistics, which utterly cripple the Germans compared to OTL. only have ~30% of the trucks they did for OTLs Barbarossa. Aditionally, Soviet defenses and dispositions are further back along the Stalin line meaning that not only do the Germans have to exhaust and string themselves out a bit even before they engage the main Soviet forces, but those Russian forces are also closer to their own supply depots and thus better able to fight. The lack of OTL's loot from Western Europe and Soviet imports in 1940-41 likewise royally screws over Germany's ability to sustain it's war economy compared to OTL.

What is liable to happen is after inflicting defeats upon the Red Army, the Polish-German forces stall out roughly around the D'niepr river. This leaves the Soviets not only with the bulk of their industry and manpower centers intact and undamaged but also with much of the historical experience needed to reform the Red Army and all at a relatively lower cost, allowing them to build up the overwhelming force to crush the Germans and Poles and march onto Berlin.
 
Last edited:
What is liable to happen is after inflicting defeats upon the Red Army, the Polish-German forces stall out roughly around the D'niepr river. This leaves the Soviets not only with the bulk of their industry and manpower centers intact and undamaged but also with much of the historical experience needed to reform the Red Army and all at a relatively lower cost, allowing them to build up the overwhelming force to crush the Germans and Poles and march onto Berlin.

Is it possible to have the remaining border force retreat in an orderly way towards the Dniepr and anchor their next line of defense on it, or will the Soviets have to move in reserve or mobilized forces from the interior? (In other words, are the border troops still as doomed as they were OTL?)
 

Deleted member 1487

Someone did a TL of the Germans/Poles beating the Soviets.

It had a, er... bit of criticism against it, which I'm going with for my post. The Germans are much weaker even with Polish help (assuming the space bats join them politically), and the Soviets proportionately much stronger, even without the supply issues.

The invasion probably eventually stalls out well short of the OTL Barbarossa advance, and then the Germans/Poles get crushed in the inevitable counteroffensives.
One thing to consider is that the Soviets were just ending the Great Purge in 1939 with AFVs and aircraft that were easily killable by German-Polish AT guns and fighters respectively.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge
If the Soviet invasion of Poland and the Winter War were anything to go by, the Red Army was seriously degraded in capability. The T-34 wasn't even fully conceived of and the KV was nowhere near ready.

ON is right that Germany is missing out on a lot of stuff and wasn't ready for war in 1939...but the USSR was effectively on it's ass in terms of leadership and organization and hadn't had time to shake out a lot of the problems of 1939-41 that were identified in their operations in that period (which of course weren't worked out as of June 1941). Soviet industry wasn't as ready as it would be in 1941, though the Soviets will benefit from having an intact Stalin Line and being further back in their own country, rather than forward deployed. Might well be a wash, but this book does not indicate thing were going great for the Soviets as of 1939 as a result of the Purges:
http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/?GCOI=80140100610430

More likely than not though Hitler, if getting Polish buy in to his plans, wouldn't attack until at least 1940 if not later due to industrial plans.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One thing to consider is that the Soviets were just ending the Great Purge in 1939 with AFVs and aircraft that were easily killable by German-Polish AT guns and fighters respectively.

The purge historically was just the icing on the cake of (over?)-rapid expansion. The wheat are going to be separated from the chaff in any case by the first battles.

As for AFV vulnerability, the same applies to the Germans against Soviet artillery and antitank guns.

If the Soviet invasion of Poland and the Winter War were anything to go by, the Red Army was seriously degraded in capability. The T-34 wasn't even fully conceived of and the KV was nowhere near ready.

And the Germans are rolling in Panzer Is and IIs if you want to play the equipment game. So they're fighting by and large the same opponents as they did in OTL Barbarossa-with inferior equipment of their own.
 

Deleted member 97083

If Germany and Poland are allied, it's basically like the Germans have fast-forwarded 2-3 weeks into Barbarossa with the extra territory, as long as the Soviets aren't clued in to the date of Barbarossa.

Also, the Germans could bluff to the Soviets and act like they want to encircle Poland before invading it, citing Danzig and Slovakia as proof, while still saying they'll give the eastern half to the Soviets. Perhaps the Germans could acquire Lithuania in an alternate Molotov Ribbentrop, while giving Latvia and Estonia to the Soviets.

But the Germans never invade Poland (secretly seeking its collaboration against the Soviets), so the Soviets never invade.

While this would be cause for Soviet concern, when war starts between Germany and the Allies due to some other reason (maybe Yugoslav Slovenia), Stalin naively assumes the best about German intentions, like OTL, and thinks Germany is preparing for a war against Britain and not against the Soviet Union until 1942, despite evidence to the contrary.

Effectively Germany has Poland and Lithuania, so that completes the fast forward 2-3 weeks into Barbarossa.

After Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, and France fall, the Germans and Polish secretly prepare for a 1940 or 1941 war against the Soviet Union.

In the end the Germans still lose because they don't have enough fuel, tanks, or trucks.
 

Deleted member 1487

The purge historically was just the icing on the cake of (over?)-rapid expansion. The wheat are going to be separated from the chaff in any case by the first battles.
Other way around, the 1940-41 expansion just exacerbated the problems caused by the Purge. The issue isn't that combat would fix the problems, they would make them even worse when officers had even less experience and were less willing to buck Stalin than ever. Japan hasn't become afraid of the USSR yet either and is in a low level war with them in the East and not yet alienated by Germany's 1939 reconciliation with the Soviets, plus have the Anti-Comintern pact in effect. If anything, assuming the Soviets check the Germans+Allies on the Stalin Line, then Stalin also thinks his abilities aren't as bad as they really are and remains 'hands on' for longer. In the meantime any Soviet officers that fail, even with skilled officers, they will be purged as traitors. Also Zhukov is in the Far East fighting Japan from 1938-39, so won't be available for the fight against Germany unless recalled and wasn't yet part of the Soviet general staff or Stalin's personal advisor, so you would probably have someone like Voroshilov directing national military policy.

As for AFV vulnerability, the same applies to the Germans against Soviet artillery and antitank guns.
Sure. Difference is Soviet maintenance and spare parts availability was even worse than the Germans, so like in 1941 they will break down en masse and thanks to the Purge eliminating heaps of engineers industry won't be able to fix the issues for a while. Also German artillery was a lot better off than Soviet artillery as of 1939.

And the Germans are rolling in Panzer Is and IIs if you want to play the equipment game. So they're fighting by and large the same opponents as they did in OTL Barbarossa-with inferior equipment of their own.
Sure and the Soviets have their tankettes too (as did the Poles). But then factor in the air component, the Bf109E was superior to anything the Soviets had flying as Spain demonstrated. As bad as the German equipment situation is, the Soviet one is actually worse; they built a lot in 1939-41 and were phasing in their latest equipment as of 1941, but now due to Soviet manufacturing practice, won't switch out their 9 types of AFVs for the T-34 and KV-1/2 to keep up numbers when losses become devastating.

Also remember that the Soviets were planning on counterattacking and trying to carry the war into enemy territory, so they will be conducting as many attacks as possible regardless of cost, just like in 1941.
 
I don't think you can compare Soviet mobilization efforts prior to Barbarossa OTL, which were being conducted at a relatively lax pace, with what would be undertaken if the Soviets are going full-bore following a sudden Declaration of War upon them. One should also not ignore that while Soviet combat forces are smaller and less experienced... so too are the Germans, so in that respect it's really a wash. Where it isn't a wash is in logistics, which utterly cripple the Germans compared to OTL. only have ~30% of the trucks they did for OTLs Barbarossa. Aditionally, Soviet defenses and dispositions are further back along the Stalin line meaning that not only do the Germans have to exhaust and string themselves out a bit even before they engage the main Soviet forces, but those Russian forces are also closer to their own supply depots and thus better able to fight. The lack of OTL's loot from Western Europe and Soviet imports in 1940-41 likewise royally screws over Germany's ability to sustain it's war economy compared to OTL.

What is liable to happen is after inflicting defeats upon the Red Army, the Polish-German forces stall out roughly around the D'niepr river. This leaves the Soviets not only with the bulk of their industry and manpower centers intact and undamaged but also with much of the historical experience needed to reform the Red Army and all at a relatively lower cost, allowing them to build up the overwhelming force to crush the Germans and Poles and march onto Berlin.

The Soviets went into high gear when France fell, for a year, so I think we have a pretty good model.
 
Top