WI No Soviet Occupation of Germany

Stalin cared sufficiently about Poles—as a security threat—to deny the petition from polish communists to become part of the USSR.

Perhaps you’d want to be more specific regarding your personal biases? No nation has singular interests.

That was just calculation. Imagine if the Soviets tried to forcibly incorporate Poland into the USSR, basically the same reason why Stalin tepidly accepted Finnish independence.
 
That was just calculation. Imagine if the Soviets tried to forcibly incorporate Poland into the USSR, basically the same reason why Stalin tepidly accepted Finnish independence.

I recall reading somewhere that back during the Polish-Soviet War in 1920, when victory for the Red Army over Polish forces seemed likely, there was a fierce debate in the Politburo about the incorporation of Poland into the USSR directly. Lenin was advocating for its integration into the Union while Stalin actually was quite against the idea and advocated for a “fraternal republic” based in Warsaw. I can’t recall the source for it, but if it was simply calculation (which it pretty likely is) at least this was something he remained consistent on.
 
The division of Germany was agreed upon at Yalta OTL before anybody made it into Germany. If I had to guess, if the WAllies caused the Germans to collapse in the west sooner there'd be a similar conference in which occupation zones would be agreed upon earlier. The Soviets are bound to get a slice.
I suppose the Soviet slice could be limited though. The Allies could agree to Germany's eastern border being on the Oder and the Soviets would enact their revenge upon the German population east of the Oder. There'd probably be a portion of Berlin that they occupy too, although I'm guessing that if Berlin is jointly occupied the Soviets wouldn't let their men do as they please - there'd be too many outside observers.



If there's no Soviet occupied Germany, that creates a different issue though: The prospect of a unified Germany right after the war. West Germany and its rearmament was controversial enough OTL, and West Germany wasn't a polity bigger and potentially stronger than France. The urge to break up Germany in the west might be stronger. Alternatively, there might be more western willingness to have Germany lose territory in the west. Part of the reason that none of the Bakker-Schut Plan Proposals were accepted was because Germany already had 14 million refugees from the east. There'd still be expulsions from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, etc but if the border is on the Elbe that probably means some 5.5 million fewer expelled Germans.

I think the maximum territories desired under the Bakker-Schutt Plan are unlikely. The Dutch PM Wim Schermerhorn wasn't all that into the idea of annexing German territory, but Queen Wilhelmina was. Per wiki...
In 1946, in the name of the Dutch government, he officially claimed 4,980 km2 (1,920 sq mi) of German territory, which was not even half of the area envisioned by Van Kleffens. The Dutch-German border would be drawn from Vaals via Winterswijk to the Ems River, so that 550,000 Germans would live inside the Dutch national borders.

550,000 Germans annexed to a country of 9 million doesn't seem that unworkable - there might not even need to be that many people expelled.

In 1947 there was another proposal put forward by the Dutch Government.

At a conference of foreign ministers of the western allied occupation forces in London (14 January until 25 February 1947), the Dutch government (Cabinet Beel I) claimed an area of 1,840 km2 (710 sq mi). This claim included, apart from the island of Borkum, large parts of the Emsland, Bentheim, the cities of Ahaus, Rees, Kleve, Erkelenz, Geilenkirchen, and Heinsberg; and the areas around these cities.

In 1946, about 160,000 people lived in this area, of whom more than 90% spoke German. This plan was a very simplified version of the C-variation of the Bakker-Schut Plan. The KVP considered this proposal much too small, while the CPN rejected any kind of reparations in the form of territorial expansion.


The drafters of the Bakker-Schutt plan seemed open to the idea of letting Germans be naturalized as Dutch if they (1) had no family members up to the second degree in the rest of Germany, (2) had made efforts for the Dutch during the war, or (3) spoke Low Saxon instead of High German.



The annexation of Southern Schleswig back to Denmark could occur too.


The Belgians had their own annexation goals that by 1949 they gave up. Interestingly, they were pretty minor (mostly amounting to absorption of some municipalities just across the border) and the Belgians didn't plan on expelling anybody, though they did expect (at least provisionally) the people there to retain German citizenship (so no voting in Belgium, I suppose). There were (and still are) German exclaves surrounded by Belgian territory. There was a railroad the Vennbahn that goes through Belgium and Germany, and the railroad itself was (and I think is) considered Belgian territory. There were some other small municipalities and forested areas just over the border that they wanted too.

Luxembourg's demands started with wanting back the Luxembourgish lands lost in 1815 at Vienna, plus expansion of the border to the Saar River. Most Luxembourgers thought this was a bit much though. Eventually they lowered the demands to all or part of the German districts of Bitburg, Our, Saarburg, and Prum (31,188 people) - 20% of the lands lost to Prussia.

France might be able to directly annex Saarland and keep Kehl.

upload_2019-10-15_11-56-21.png



Heligoland could to Denmark or back to Britain.



As for chopping up Germany, Adenaur was a Rhenish nationalist at one point IIRC. The idea of dividing into a North and South German state also was proposed (Roosevelt Plan, Churchill Plan, Adenaur Plan, etc). Division into a Rhenish West German state, a SwaboBavarian South German state, and Prusso-Saxon East German state could perhaps have some sticking power.


upload_2019-10-15_12-4-4.png

Three-way division, with France, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, Denmark, and UK getting a piece.
Ruhr is under international administration.​
 
Last edited:
Well, you would have to butterfly away the topic at the Yalta Conference. It would pit FDR's skills at decision avoidance against Stalin's skills of demanding things. You MIGHT be able to accomplish that with one of the many assassination plots against Hitler. If the US/UK are in contact/support with a group of plotters that plan to eliminate Hitler and than put the whole of the Wehrmacht into the Eastern Front to buy time (but in early 1943, not late 1944), FDR and Churchill may decide to postpone a postwar occupation decision until "later". Even if the coup does not come off, Stalin will make no deal once he figures out what was going on behind his back. An open "race to Berlin" from both sides diverts Lend-Lease aid from the Soviet Union to the UK, Free French, etc. to both slow the Russians, and speed the Allies. Basically, the same process as otl, but with allies that frankly, openly, and vocally do not trust or like each other.
 
Remember peace of Versailles was harsh ( and russians were nowhere close to Victors in 1918) dont think western allies cannot be just as vengeful as Soviets esp when they have no reason to prop up a west german state as a frontline to Soviets.Esp if they "liberate " most of western Poland.Then a quasi fascist Poland would be the FRG

Why Poland would be quasi fascist?
 
Could the British and the Americans evaded Germany from Demark

Evaded, no.
Invaded, yes - provided that they first land in Norway, so that they have land-based fighter aircraft within range of the Danish beaches. Then they land in Denmark. Then they have a very narrow front along which they have to predictably advance.

In other words, why should they? Apart from the issue of a predictable and short frontline. The Germans are the ones having problem in moving stuff from factories and barracks to the front lines, what with the Allied strategic bombing campaign focusing on the transportation network in early 1944. So it makes sense for the Allies to take their second (after Italy) foothold on the continent as far away from the German factories as possible.
 
Top