WI the 1941 Ecuadorian–Peruvian War was integrated with WWII

[DValdron]

Just to make this War be more involved lets have the South Americans Nations Get into a Naval arms Race like the Did in the 1880-1890's .

On the Andean side, that's hard to see. There were four nations with Pacific coastlines - Chile, Peru, Ecuador and Colombia, and they're all lined up in a row. The 1930's were the depression, latin America, particularly in the Andes were resource extraction economies and resource prices had collapsed. I just can't see a naval arms race.

Capital ships are expensive. They're a lot more expensive, they require a much bigger investment to build, they require a lot more maintenance, and they require a highly trained but not very flexible specialized force of sailors. They don't have the money.

It's cheaper and more sensible to give uniforms and rifles to peons and get them marching in camps outside the capital.

On the Atlantic side, we have Brazil, Arentina and Uruguay. Uruguay's not a factor, its just not large enough to be a competitor. It's sort of like Netherlands between Germany and England.

You might have a naval arms race between Brazil and Argentina. But motive? Both of these countries are expanding in different directions and focusing on hinterlands in different directions. Not likely.

Then you have the Caribbean Coast - Venezuala, Colombia (again), Brazil (again) the United States, Britain, France and Netherlands. No point. The latins can't compete with the US or the Euro-hitters at all. Colombia and Brazil have two costs to patrol (Pacific/Caribbean and Atlantic/Caribbean). Brazil's interests are extremely remote from the Caribbean.

And move the War back to 1938 and have Germany or Italy start sending Equpment to one side or the other . Lets have something like the Spanish Civil War in Latin America .

That's actually an interesting notion. Was there a civil war or imminent civil war in Latin America that was volatile enough and lasted long enough that Germany or Italy might throw in on?

Rember Both France and Italy had Air Force delegations working in the countrys of South America during the 1920's-1930's .

Interesting.

 

[DValdron]

Hmmm.

I could see Chile getting dragged into this war, particularly if Peru is feeling its oats, or sufficiently paranoid. Check this guy out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Velasco

It seems that in the 1970's, Peru was actively planning and preparing for a war of revenge upon Chile, and it was only averted by bad health and good luck.

If Velasco could carry a grudge that hard in 1975, what sort of grudges were popularly held by Peruvian leaders in the 1930's and 1940's?

Better yet, what if the Peruvians decide, rightly or wrongly, that Bolivia is receiving too much aid and comfort from Chile? What if they give Chile an ultimatum to stop trading with Bolivia?

On the part of Chile, who are they going to cheer for in a Bolivia/Peru war? Where does their advantage lay? If Bolivia goes to pieces, do they get to pick up the pieces? What if Peru overruns Bolivia or makes significant territorial gains.... what happens to Chile's strategic position? Are they willing to risk vulnerability?

Now, actually, if we go to Chile during this period, there's some pretty weird and interesting stuff going on. It turns out that Chile had its own National Socialist Party, modeled directly on and taking inspiration from Adolf Hitler himself. The Nazi movement had as many as 20,000 followers. Through the 30's, they drifted away from anti-semitism and adherence to Hitler and became more generically fascist. They seem to have peaked out in 1938, when they tried and failed to take power with a coup. The end result of failure being that a bunch of them got lined up against the wall and shot. Nevertheless, they lingered on through the 1940's.

Partly as a result of the attempted Nazi coup and subsequent massacre, a left wing progressive/technocrat named Pedro Aguirre Cerda won the Presidency and took power before dying of natural causes in 1941. He was succeeded by a caretaker named Mendez until 1942. In 1942

Now, here's something very interesting. Aguirre was a bit too left wing for the army, and so there was an abortive nonviolent coup in 1939, by a couple of Generals named Ibanez and Herrerra, using the Tacna Artillery Regiment in Santiago. Didn't go anywhere. The local officer in charge arrested Herrerra as soon as he showed up, Ibanez did an about face and nothing much happened. This was a scandal called the Ariostazo.

But here's where things get really interesting. General Herrera was pretty much a fascist. He wasn't part of the Chilean Nazi movement. Rather, he came to it from time spent in Italy and indoctrination with Italian fascism.

General Ibanez, on the other hand, was never a Nazi or a Fascist. What he was, was an actual bona fide dictator, between 1927 and 1931. He later served as an elected President from 1952 to 1958. Near as I can tell, he was a militaristic right wing shmuck. But here is what Wikipedia has to say about him, for that lovely significant period between 1938 and 1942:

Ibáñez decided to return to Chile, backed by a number of Nazi and fascist groups. His supporters, mainly the Socialist Union (not to be confused with the Socialist Party) and the Nazi National Socialist Movement, created the Popular Freedom Alliance (Alianza Popular Libertadora) and presented Ibáñez's candidacy in the 1938 elections. However, Chilean Nazis staged a coup against Alessandri before the elections. The government was able to defeat the rebels, who were arrested and executed. After this embarrassing incident, known as the Seguro Obrero massacre, Ibáñez decided to abandon the presidential campaign. Unwilling to support his arch-rival Alessandri's candidate, right-winger Gustavo Ross, Ibáñez declared his support for left-wing Pedro Aguirre, who won the election.

However, in 1939, extreme right-wing General Ariosto Herrera led a failed coup against Aguirre, the Ariostazo. Herrera's purpose was to install Ibáñez as leader, but the latter denied any knowledge of the coup and was never charged with any crime.



In 1942, the small National Ibáñista Movement (Movimiento Nacional Ibañista) declared Ibáñez their candidate for the presidency. Ibáñez quickly attracted the support of small Nazi and fascist parties. The turning point for his candidacy, however, came when, after some political infighting, the biggest right-wing parties, Conservative and Liberal, decided to support Ibáñez. In the elections, Ibáñez won 44%, losing to left-winger Juan Antonio Ríos, who had received the support of the anti-Ibáñez rightists led by Arturo Alessandri.


In 1944, Ibáñez was involved in yet another failed coup. Some Nazi soldiers and carabineros (police), with the support of Argentine president Juan Perón, tried to depose President Ríos and install Ibáñez. However, the plot was uncovered before it could take place. None of the coup leader, including Ibáñez, were arrested or tried.

Well now, he's a very very bad boy, don't you think? I'm thinking that in 1938, 1939 and again in 1942, this Goose Stepper came very very close to power. It's possible that Bonifaz butterflies might well have been enough to push Ibanez over the edge, which means that we might have had pretty much an outright Nazi/Fascist style regime in Chile right around this time?


Significant? Maybe. Maybe not. Ibanez might have ruled democratically. Right. More to the point, its not at all clear that Ibanez would have gotten involved in Bonifaz style hugger-muggery. After all, Chile had won its war with Peru, it had taken Peruvian and Bolivian coastal provinces and still had them. It had nothing to gain by allying with Bolivia, or by picking a fight with Chile. Let's all remember that Francisco Franco was a fascist bastard who got in bed with Hitler and Mussolini, but he sat out WWII. Easy enough to imagine a fascist Chile sitting out an Andean war.



Anyway, back to the third little aspect of the Ariostaza - it involved an Artillery Brigade from or named after something called Tacna.


Where's Tacna? It's right next to Arica. Where are Tacna and Arica? Why, they're right on the border with Peru. These two areas were in constant dispute since the war of the Pacific. Y'see, during the war, Chile overran both cities. 1883, Chile promised to return the two cities after 10 years. Didn't happen. Chile kept them for the next fifty years. During this period, Chile began an intensive program of 'Chileanization' with the intent of keeping these territories. In 1929, Chile finally gave back Tacna, but kept Arica. Although Chile did keep Arica, Peru retained certain rights and privileges in that city, due to treaty.



So I assume that the Tacna Artillery Brigade was either originally based out of Tacna, and had been reassigned or redeployed. Or it had been named for the region as part of a local FU gesture to Peru. In any event, there's only about 10 years of depression and antagonism between 1929 and 1938-1942. The Chilean Fascist/Nazi's/Right wingers seem the type to nurse grudges and grievances a lot longer than that. So Tacna and Arica have a lot of potential to be flash points between Peru and Chile, particularly in an extreme Ibanez regime.


Now, it seems to me that an Ibanez/Fascist Chile is entirely possible in this timeline. But it has no vested interest in attacking Peru. On the other hand, we can guarantee that its relations with Peru are going to be pretty frakking poor. This is good for Bonifaz because it means that Peru has to tie down troops on the Chilean border as well as the Bolivian.


Poor relations with Peru means that if there is a Peru/Bolivia front, then Ibanez is probably going to support Bolivia. He has no love for Bolivia, but a lot of antagonism with Peru. A weaker Peru is in his interests. A strong Peru is not. A collapsed Bolivia with Peru directly or indirectly in control is totally not. So, initially, Chile sits out the Peru/Bolivia war, and just allows trade and traffic, arms and supplies to filter through to Bolivia. This doesn't help Peru/Chile relations. I could see situations going bad.



Meanwhile, Peru's nursing a grudge of its own, it lost whole provinces to the War in the Pacific in 1883, and we have to assume that there are large segments, particularly on the Peruvian right wing and military, who dearly would like to see those provinces back. On the other hand, Peru is also fighting a one, or even two front war, with Ecuador and maybe Bolivia. I don't think that Peru would be enthusiastic about expanding that to a possible three front war. Still, lets assume that the Bolivia campaign happens, and it goes really well, or Chilean meddling becomes intolerable... the Peruvians might go for it.

 

[DValdron]

Well, I could proudly call my Grandfather a WW2 Vet (he fought in the Ecuadorian-Peruvian war ), but the chances of him living through all of is probably slim (which means I never get born )

I'm pretty sure Peru would have been Japan's ally in South America, since they had a good amount of Japanese People living there, and Ecuador being friendly to the US.

Wow, you had a grandfather in the Ecuadorian/Peruvian war? Given the small numbers engaged and the short duration, that's absolutely amazing and thoroughly cool.

 

[DValdron]

One final point to make about a guy I don't know anything about.

I've based these timeline speculations around a General Bonifaz. Pretty much everything I've argued relates directly or indirectly to butterflies of Bonifaz.

This doesn't mean that I consider him a Hitler or Mussolini analogue, and for the purpose of Bonifaz butterflies, he doesn't have to be.

Without knowing much about the man, I can make only a few guesses. I assume that as a General and as the brief leader of a coup in this timeline, he possessed the usual roster of skills and discipline we would expect in a South American military leader - education, discipline, hierarchy, some political connections and skills, and a certain amount of charisma.

His faction seems to have been at least somewhat estranged from elites and military, and seems to have drawn its support from both right and left populism. I assume that his ideology, if anything, was eclectic and pragmatic.

I also assume that he was more than capable of blood and brutality, and making hard decisions. There's that 4 day bloody mini-civil war that takes place in our timeline before he gets ousted. Well, I assume a high ranking South American general isn't afraid of a little blood, or a lot.

The change I postulate for Bonifaz need not be radical. He gets to be a slightly better diplomat or politician, he has slightly more loyal friends in the military. Some intangible squeaks through and allows him to cling to power and get a better grip.

That's the butterly.

But here is the thing: We assume Bonifaz is not a stupid man, then he has to be bright enough to see the conflict with Peru coming. He gets his nose rubbed in it in the Peru/Colombia war. He can't avoid the war. Instead, he's got 10 to 12 years to prepare for it, to figure out how to win, to look for allies. All of the rest of this follows from Bonifaz, and he doesn't have to be evil for it to happen. Just rational, pragmatic and active.

 

[Ward]

Here is a site that gives the militarys of South America pre WWII and during the War .http://members.tripod.com/~marcin_w/index-soam.html

This will give us some idear of the How able these countrys would be able to fight a war .

 

[DValdron]

Fascinating. I guess you can find anything on the net.

One of the interesting things about an Andean Theatre war, is the sheer diversity of geographical environments that the fight could sprawl across - Ecuadorian and Peruvian rain forest and rivers, mountain and hill country up and down the Andes, coastal regions, deserts and highlands, and of course, the high seas as it looks like Chile and Peru have enough strength for a sea battle or two.

I'd really encourage someone to do a timeline.

 

[DValdron]

Okay, here's how the war expands.

Bolivia literally falls apart under Peruvian pressure. The state apparatus disintegrates. Peru moves troops in as a 'peacekeeping measure' supporting a nominal government. Argentina, Paraguay and Chile, citing concerns about the expansion of Peruvian forces in the region, also move their troops into adjacent regions of Bolivia, and support their own nominal Bolivian governments.

Suddenly, Peru's troops are face to face with Argentina's, Paraguays and Chile's. Paraguay really has no significant military capacity. Neither the Argentinians nor the Peruvians are eager to go to war with each other.

But Chile is a different story - lots of animosity and grievances built up there. The Peruvians demand that the Chileans withdraw from Bolivian territory and recognize the Peruvian backed government. The Chileans decline. The Peruvians advance on Chilean forces in Bolivia, and the war is on.

The war goes badly for Peru at this point. Chile establishes naval superiority, the coastal provinces bog down in trench warfare. Chile, with Argentine support and shorter supply lines, strikes out into the Bolivian desert and highlands.

Relations deteriorate between Argentina and Brazil, and the two countries drift into a state of cold war. The Peruvians demand Paraguan withdrawal from the Chaco, on behalf of their Bolivian puppet. But the Paraguayans only withdraw to their treaty borders.

Paraguay is limited to 8000 troops, so they're well out of their depth and vulnerable. Argentina occupies Paraguay and withdraws forces from Bolivian territory, in a sort of quid pro quo. Paraguay is later incorporated into the Argentine federation.

The cold war persists between Argentina and Brazil, but neither are in a position to do much about it. The two countries avoid direct military conflict.

Argentina supports Chile in its conflict. Brazil supports Peru, but is unable to offer much - although Brazil borders on Peru, Columbia and Bolivia, most of these border regions are near impenetrable rain forest without adequate roads or pathways to move troops or provide logistical support.

Indeed, the only place that Brazil can strike easily is Argentina. This deters Argentina from intervening too heavily and crossing the rubicon, as it were. Thus, while Chile and Peru are at war, Peru and Argentina are not. Instead, the two countries make a point of staying out of each other's way - which results in the Argentine withdrawal from Bolivia, and Peru's acceptance of Argentina's consolidation of Paraguay.

However, Peru has another ace in the hole. In this case, support and lend lease from the United States. Chilean efforts to blockade Peru are frustrated by their unwillingness to target American shipping. Instead, it finds itself restricted to shoreline raiding and ill advised amphibious assaults. Meanwhile, materials and supplies from the United States keep pumping blood into Peru's war effort.

Chile has come late to a war footing under the Ibanez government, and even with Argentine support, has difficulty gearing up for its the war effort. The result is that months of hard fighting eventually exhausts the initial Chilean forces. In the intervening time, before full mobilization can take place, the Peruvians break through the trench warfare and drive down the coast.

Argentina intervenes, moving troops en masse into southern Chile, at which point the Peruvians halt their advance. Chile is bisected into North and South Chile, under the control of the Peruvians and Argentines respectively. The Peruvians install a puppet government in Northern Chile which they then sign treaty with. The two Chiles each claim dominion over the whole.

However, their puppet masters are unwilling to go to war - Peru because it simply cannot take on the overwhelming Argentine military, Argentina because a war with Peru may bring a war with Brazil.

Meanwhile, Brazil, allied with the United States and at war with Germany and Italy, allies with Peru and joins the war between Peru and Colombia, though its role is relatively minimal.

Colombia, in the north, faced with an active war with Peru, a state of war with Brazil, and American intervention, folds.

Not everyone is fighting everyone else - but the only South American countries that do not get involved in some way end up being Uruguay and Venezuala.

The two heaviest hitters, Brazil and Argentina, despite being on opposite sides, have the sense not to come to blows. Although a full on dust up between the two might end up being interesting.

The United States isn't happy about the situation, but its diplomacy is always a day late and a dollar short in a fluid latin American situation that is constantly in flux. It's distracted by more serious concerns in Europe and Asia, so its relatively late to intervene fully, but when it does so, its decisive.

Of course, its all implausible hijinks. But no more implausible than the shenanigans that went on in Europe at various points in the first half of the twentieth century.

 

[Joke Insurance]

Yeah but integrated how? Which nation would siphon of supplies, etc. to this front? Doesn't seem worth it.

I suppose reading what some users have already posted. That should give you a good indication