WI if the Smolensk plot to kill Hitler had succeeded

I am wondering if there are any timelines or alt history books on what would happen if the Smolensk plot to kill Hitler had succeeded?

Thank you

"It came on 13 March 1943, when Hitler finally visited troops on the Eastern Front at Smolensk...Tresckow, however, had a backup plan. During the lunch in question, he asked Lieutenant Colonel Heinz Brandt, who was traveling with Hitler, whether he would be good enough to take a bottle of Cointreau to Colonel Helmuth Stieff (who was not yet a conspirator at that time) at Hitler's headquarters in East Prussia as a payment for a lost bet. Brandt readily agreed. The "Cointreau" was actually a bomb constructed of a British plastic explosive "Plastic C" placed into the casing of a British magnetic mine, with a timer consisting of a spring which would be gradually dissolved by acid.[24] Before Hitler's Condor plane was to take off, Schlabrendorff activated the 30-minute fuse and handed the package to Brandt, who boarded Hitler's plane. After takeoff, a message was sent to the other Berlin conspirators by code that Operation Flash was under way, which they expected to take place around Minsk. Yet when Hitler landed safely at his East Prussian headquarters, it became obvious that the bomb had failed to detonate (the extremely low temperatures in the unheated luggage compartment probably prevented the fuse from working). The message of failure was quickly sent out and Schlabrendorff retrieved the package to prevent discovery of the plot.[25]"
 

Deleted member 1487

I'm pretty sure that there has been some threads about this already, the question is could the conspirators quickly get into action and take over Berlin. The Nazis are not as powerful as they'd be in 1944 to resist if the military successfully killed Hitler, so they've got a better shot to overthrow the Nazi regime with Hitler apparently dead in a plane accident. I don't know the details about who was supposed to take over in 1943 if it succeeded or if they'd do it and watch while the Nazis ripped themselves apart finding a successor. Right after the defeat at Stalingrad Hitler and the Nazi popularity was at a then all time low, so it might have been an ideal time to kill him and then try and set up a non-Nazi government after letting the Nazi bureaucrats fight it out and discredit themselves to the public. That said it seems unlikely that the Allies would then seriously cut a deal, as the unconditional surrender pledge had already been made. Perhaps though if the terms given by the non-Nazi military government were good enough the war could end by the end of the year...but I doubt it. Likely it grinds on with a non-Hitler led military making better choices as they were losing and retreating, but eventually they'd have to bow to the inevitable and surrender probably some time in 1944 when they realize that they couldn't get decent terms (to them).
 

CaliGuy

Banned
I'm pretty sure that there has been some threads about this already, the question is could the conspirators quickly get into action and take over Berlin. The Nazis are not as powerful as they'd be in 1944 to resist if the military successfully killed Hitler, so they've got a better shot to overthrow the Nazi regime with Hitler apparently dead in a plane accident. I don't know the details about who was supposed to take over in 1943 if it succeeded or if they'd do it and watch while the Nazis ripped themselves apart finding a successor. Right after the defeat at Stalingrad Hitler and the Nazi popularity was at a then all time low, so it might have been an ideal time to kill him and then try and set up a non-Nazi government after letting the Nazi bureaucrats fight it out and discredit themselves to the public. That said it seems unlikely that the Allies would then seriously cut a deal, as the unconditional surrender pledge had already been made. Perhaps though if the terms given by the non-Nazi military government were good enough the war could end by the end of the year...but I doubt it. Likely it grinds on with a non-Hitler led military making better choices as they were losing and retreating, but eventually they'd have to bow to the inevitable and surrender probably some time in 1944 when they realize that they couldn't get decent terms (to them).
Question--wasn't the Germans' military situation worse in 1944 than in 1943? If so, why exactly were the Nazis more capable of resisting internal coup attempts in 1944 as opposed to in 1943?
 

Deleted member 1487

Question--wasn't the Germans' military situation worse in 1944 than in 1943? If so, why exactly were the Nazis more capable of resisting internal coup attempts in 1944 as opposed to in 1943?
Himmler had greater power over the nation than ever before in 1944; technocrats like Speer, who in 1944 had been losing major influence, were more ideologically flexible about working with a non-Nazi post Hitler government and he was probably one of the most powerful Nazi bureaucrats in 1943, so the military working with him (he was a Hitler appointee, not necessarily going to survive in a post-Hitler Nazi government) would really help their control over the country.
 
Even if the military successfully takes over (doubtful imho) I can't see them offering the sort of terms the Allies were likely to accept, Tresckow Beck et al were old school German Nationalists, that's why they hated Hitler aka the Bohemian Corporal but on keeping Silesia, Elass-Lorthigen, the Sudetenland, Bohmen under Mahren etc. they were as one and the Allies are not going to accept Germany on it's September '39 borders plus Elass-Lorthigen which would be the absolute minimum the conspirators would have offered, their starting position would have included keeping most of Poland.
 
Do you think that Tresckow Beck etal would have stop the Jews from going to the death camps? Also would they started to provide basic food. medicine, and shelter to the Jews and Russian POWs in exchange for working in factories or farms and repairing damaged infrastructure?
 
Do you think that Tresckow Beck etal would have stop the Jews from going to the death camps? Also would they started to provide basic food. medicine, and shelter to the Jews and Russian POWs in exchange for working in factories or farms and repairing damaged infrastructure?

I think they probably would have. The Wehrmacht may not have been clean but I think they probably would have realized that the Holocaust mass killings and forcing starving people to do hard labor was a big waste of resources and that committing tons of war crimes at the very moment it looked like Germany was going to lose wasn't a good idea.

It actually has interesting implications for Israel because so many more Jews would have survived and been able to go there. Makes for a much larger Haganah/Irgun with a lot of implications for the 1948 War of Independence. There might not be a divided Jerusalem.
 
An alternative German government should offer whatever it takes to get the Soviet Union out of the war. Even to the 1914 borders of Germany (The Soviets getting the Baltic states, Warsaw, Krakow, all of Galacia, Ruthenaia to the Carpathians, Bessarbia and Finland. I see no other scenario that doesn't end in complete defeat of Germany just the same (of course millions get to live which is a good thing, but if the new government wants to keep stuff it has to get the Soviets out of the war at any price.)
 

Deleted member 1487

An alternative German government should offer whatever it takes to get the Soviet Union out of the war. Even to the 1914 borders of Germany (The Soviets getting the Baltic states, Warsaw, Krakow, all of Galacia, Ruthenaia to the Carpathians, Bessarbia and Finland. I see no other scenario that doesn't end in complete defeat of Germany just the same (of course millions get to live which is a good thing, but if the new government wants to keep stuff it has to get the Soviets out of the war at any price.)
The problem was they weren't trustworthy after getting what they wanted. They might sit back for a while (or not) and let Germany bleed itself against the Wallies as they built up and prepare for round 2. Likely though the Soviets just reject anything the Germans have to offer even if it meets their desires (immediate return to 1941 border) as there is some indication that by 1943 any clandestine talks with Germany by the Soviets was just to leverage the Allies into getting the 2nd front going ASAP, rather than a serious attempt to negotiate. No rational German government would trust that upon returning to the 1941 border the Soviets would stay there long after Hitler broken his agreement with Stalin, making him more concerned about revenge rather than upholding agreements with Germany, even a post-Hitler government.
 
Post Stalingrad and couple months before the last of the Afrika Korps surrenders the Nazis were going to lose. There was nothing that could be done about that. However, there are things they could do at this stage to hold the allies back just a little longer. The Soviet Crossing of the Dnieper that took place in August of 1943 was one of the worst battles of the entire war for them. They suffered millions of casualties, roughly equal to or greater than half of the overall force that was allocated for the operation. And all of that was with the Nazis having time to construct only rudimentary defenses (Hitler ordered the construction of the defensive line only two weeks before the battle).

Rommel was one of the people who would defintely be prominent in a German military government (very popular and would have lent it a lot of legitimacy, so he was way too valuable of an asset not to use). He was a prominent advocate of pulling back to more defensible borders instead of Hitler's no retreat policy. With the influence of him and others, the Nazis could begin fighting a delaying action while constructing a proper fortification line months before the Soviets could arrive at the Dnieper. That could hold them up for quite a while, although they would eventually get across.

Also, they could have pulled back in the Baltic States (some people in the OKW wanted to do this). If Bagration starts a long way further west than the outcome is very different.

On the Western Front, there were a large number of divisions in the Balkans, Norway, and Inner Reich that could have been moved to France (although that would have meant essentially ceding large areas of the first one to guerillas). That would have delayed D-Day for a while.
 
An alternative German government should offer whatever it takes to get the Soviet Union out of the war. Even to the 1914 borders of Germany (The Soviets getting the Baltic states, Warsaw, Krakow, all of Galacia, Ruthenaia to the Carpathians, Bessarbia and Finland. I see no other scenario that doesn't end in complete defeat of Germany just the same (of course millions get to live which is a good thing, but if the new government wants to keep stuff it has to get the Soviets out of the war at any price.)

They weren't taking anything other than unconditional surrender. The Germans up to this point had just broken too many treaties and become too aggressive to trust. Stalin would also have little reason to accept such an offer given that he pretty much knew by this point he could end the war at the Rhine.
 
I am assuming that the new German government would try to get as many German troops out of Tunisia before the surrender. Also I am assuming that the Germans would try to make a deal with the guerillas, the Germans would stop any attacks in exchange the guerrillas ie Tito would refrain from attacking the retreating Germans.

It is my understanding that there was some prisoner exchanges. The prisoner were wounded or ill soldiers who could not return to duty. I am assuming that the German government would expand these exchanges as a way to build some good will. Do you think the Western Allies would ever agree to exchange healthy POW's?
 
Post Stalingrad and couple months before the last of the Afrika Korps surrenders the Nazis were going to lose. There was nothing that could be done about that. However, there are things they could do at this stage to hold the allies back just a little longer. The Soviet Crossing of the Dnieper that took place in August of 1943 was one of the worst battles of the entire war for them. They suffered millions of casualties, roughly equal to or greater than half of the overall force that was allocated for the operation. And all of that was with the Nazis having time to construct only rudimentary defenses (Hitler ordered the construction of the defensive line only two weeks before the battle).

Rommel was one of the people who would defintely be prominent in a German military government (very popular and would have lent it a lot of legitimacy, so he was way too valuable of an asset not to use). He was a prominent advocate of pulling back to more defensible borders instead of Hitler's no retreat policy. With the influence of him and others, the Nazis could begin fighting a delaying action while constructing a proper fortification line months before the Soviets could arrive at the Dnieper. That could hold them up for quite a while, although they would eventually get across.

Also, they could have pulled back in the Baltic States (some people in the OKW wanted to do this). If Bagration starts a long way further west than the outcome is very different.

On the Western Front, there were a large number of divisions in the Balkans, Norway, and Inner Reich that could have been moved to France (although that would have meant essentially ceding large areas of the first one to guerillas). That would have delayed D-Day for a while.
Guderian would certainly be prominent as well.
 
I think a non Nazi government would want to make peace with the Western allies. If they can commit to peace in the West then why would Churchill continue the war? FDR would be under extreme pressure to focus on Japan instead.

A non Nazi government would (yes I know its a wehraboo cliche) probably try and liberate an independent Ukraine and Baltic States while gradually restoring the legitimate governments of Denmark or Vichy France. Though a military presence would be maintained for obvious reasons.

If the allies decide to leave the Soviets out to dry and focus on Japan, even without making official peace with Germany. A reversal of 'Germany first'. This could get interesting.
 
Top