WI Halifax PM but WW2 goes on

Suppose Lord Halifax had managed to get appointed in 1940 but he did NOT do a deal with the Nazis.

We are without the Churchill personality.

1) Without Churchill are the Fascist beaten sooner, his actual military judgement is at least sometimes disputable?

2) Do the Tories lose more heavily in 1945?

3) other impacts on the influence of the House of Lords

4) Anything else,
 
This is quite likely IMO. Halifax wanted a settlement but not at any cost, and I doubt that the Nazis would have made an acceptable offer in the end. The Nazis never learned that Diplomacy =/= Master Race Tells Everyone Else What To Do And They Do It.

Before one gets to 1945, the first thing that comes to mind is whether Halifax is ruthless enough to mount the Mers-el-Kebir operation, and if not what effect that might have in the USA - delayed Lend-Lease perhaps.

He might also have hesitated to send reinforcements to Egypt in autumn 1940 which might mean no operation COMPASS and the North African front not getting moving until 1941. As a result Rommel might have ended up on the Eastern Front. I assume butterflies would not affect Barbarossa; empire in the East was Hitler's lodestar.

If no COMPASS, then perhaps the German subs and air forces aren't sent to the Med, or they send fewer. That then might butterfly the damage to Illustrious that put her out of action for most of 1941, and the sinking of Ark Royal. Having an extra CV or two in turn might have big consequences in the Far East.

This thought process makes me wonder whether the effects of COMPASS, though clearly a great and heartening victory, were actually a net negative for the Allies. But here I have already strayed some way from the PoD.
 
Barbarossa in '41 was not written in the stars.

Following the fall of France, Hitler was genuinely expecting peace, although he also expected his enemies to come begging on their knees. He had begun disbanding a number of infantry divisions and was mostly discussing plans to cement German domination of continental Europe - even going as far as saying that the issue of the east and of the global balance of power might have to be left to his successor - all pending Britain's expected peace offering of course :rolleyes:.

But then the British didn't even consider making an offer, which puzzled Hitler. Then, he received from Stalin a telegram sent to him by Churchill, inquiring about fostering better relations. At that point, Hitler got the idea that Britain was holding out in the hopes of Russia joining the war (which was false); this fed into his pre-war beliefs about Lebensraum yadda yadda yadda, thus making him arrive at the conclusion that war with the USSR was necessary ASAP because it was both inevitable and because it would also lead to Britain quiting the fight, and thus peace and ultimate victory.

Absent Churchill's telegram to Stalin, and it's quite possible that Hitler remains focused long enough on his goal of winning one front at a time (in this case the front against Britain), that by the time he finally DOES decide to take on Russia, it would be too late for preparations to be ready in time for a '41 launch. Any peace overtures made by Halifax would only serve to reinforce the above reasoning that all it would take would be 'just a little bit more' and Britain would be willing to offer "reasonable" terms.

And if Barbarossa is delayed into late spring '42, then that opens up a whole can of worms.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
Barbarossa in '41 was not written in the stars.
For Hitler it was, or any other operation invading russia. It WAS his one and only main goal (read "Mein Kampf").

Following the fall of France,...
Already before the final of France (Compiegne II), he asked and was keen for planning on Barbarossa.

He had begun disbanding a number of infantry divisions and was mostly discussing plans to cement German domination of continental Europe ...
as part of preparation for the east-campaign (upgrading panzerdivisionen i.e.)

- even going as far as saying that the issue of the east and of the global balance of power might have to be left to his successor - all pending Britain's expected peace offering of course :rolleyes:.
Could you give a source for that ?
 
Suppose Lord Halifax had managed to get appointed in 1940 but he did NOT do a deal with the Nazis.

We are without the Churchill personality.

1) Without Churchill are the Fascist beaten sooner, his actual military judgement is at least sometimes disputable?

2) Do the Tories lose more heavily in 1945?

3) other impacts on the influence of the House of Lords

4) Anything else,

This 'POD' is pretty much how I believe things would have panned out had Halifax taken the job.

While I can see Halifax being far more likely to be looking for a peaceful end to hostilities in May 1940 - he would still be a PM in a situation where the peace Germany would offer would be no where near something that was acceptable to Britain and so even with Halifax at the helm - he would still have been PM of a Nation at war.


1) Yep - much as I admire his superb leadership and 'Special Relationship' with the US he was no military genius - I would expect Halifax to be less likely to make those 'from he heart' decisions that made no or very little impact on the conduct of the war (in many cases a detrimental impact) - and Churchill had already proven that he was unfit for the task of First Lord of the Admiralty where he had interfered with an already rushed plan for the sending of troops to Norway - in one case resulting in one Brigade, that had been loaded onto 3 Cruisers - being turfed off in a hurry when Winston sent the 3 Cruisers off on a fools errand - the Battalion's and sub units of said Brigade ended up arriving peace meal without much of their equipment (which had been left on board the Cruisers).

Maybe less adventurism in places like Greece would see the Commonwealth armies not having to absorb the unnecessary loss of a Division+ of troops plus 4 divisions worth of Artillery, trucks and equipment as well as multiple fleet and air force assets desperately needed elsewhere at the time.

That 'up to' 4 divisions of equipment might have been useful in North and East Africa at the time!

2) I don't see why they should - Britain voted for a Socialist government due to the austere conditions in which they had been living and who can blame them them after years of such privation! I don't think it was anything to do with the Conservatives conduct over the previous 10 years.

3) I think that the example of Halifax taking the position of PM in this POD would be seen as an 'extraordinary' act during 'extraordinary' times with regards to the normal activities of both Houses and therefore very unlikely to be repeated.

4) The only issue is that 2 or 3 weeks of 'wobble' around the period when France fell. Churchill deserves his reputation for that period alone when he managed to keep firmly in the war. This would be my only concern. Not that I believe that Britain would have made peace at any cost.
 
IF Halifax can garner either Peace or a cessation of hostilities / truce to last the duration of the first two or three years from 40 to 42..

And get Italy to stop fighting the British..

German and Italian military assets and supplies can be diverted to Ops Barbarossa instead of being in operational status against Great Britain over England and North Africa....

maybe....
 

Ryan

Donor
even going as far as saying that the issue of the east and of the global balance of power might have to be left to his successor - all pending Britain's expected peace offering of course :rolleyes:.

I can only recall Hitler saying that the showdown with the US will be up to his successor, not the showdown with the USSR.
 
Aside from Churchills stratigic decisions there is the matter of his choices for CIGS. He has some weight in the matter of appointing Dill, tho I dont know what the alternatives were, then he was a major factor is removing Dill. Alanbrooke may or may not have been the next inevitable choice, tho Churchill did favor him. But lets assume ther ehad been a Halifax/Dill combination from mid 1940. How would that change circumstances & decisions through mid 1942? Then, assumming Dill stays on as CIGS what might change after 1942?
 
Top