Would a victorious Nazi Germany go ahead with Generalplan Ost?

[Stompa]

One of the very reasons why for example the Final Solution was implemented was that Nazi Germany was fighting a total war and it was losing it. The Nazi leadership felt the need to kill the Jewish people under their power when they still had the time for it. Without the conditions of a desperate total war, in times of peace, it is possible not even the Nazis would have implemented plans like that. Still before the war, types of voluntary emigration or forced relocation were seen as acceptable solutions to the "Jewish Problem" - no mass murder was considered necessary. War makes all nations that take part in it more brutal, this was seen in all nations taking part in WWII. Of course how much worse war conditions, especially desperate war conditions, make a nation depend on its pre-war "baseline". The total war excesses of Nazi Germany and the USSR were much worse than those of Britain, Greece or Finland, say, because the starting positions for their systems were much worse as well.

All the events that happened in Germany and its occupied areas in 1939-1945 happened in wartime. But no country can keep a war economy and a high degree of mobilization going for ever. War economy is a type of cannibalism a state and society inflicts on itself - it can go on for only so long. Even Nazi Germany will need to do a measure of demobilization and peace time "normalization" after the war. The ordinary people and a big part of the military and the functionaries who kept the Nazi system running would want, nay, need to enjoy the spoils of victory. For the great majority of Germans, a return to peace and a measure of normalcy would not equal indefinite occupation (and genocide) duty in the East (or anywhere else in Europe).

And this is why I believe that Nazi Germany would find it very difficult to try and go "the full hog" with Generalplan Ost. The German Reich will either scale back its goals and see a period conceptually similar to the de-Stalinization in the USSR, or then it will implode due to the impossibility and inhumanity of its goals and policies, and lose control of Europe in a couple of decades.

But then I know many on the forum seem to disagree with me on this, and I can accept this - even if it puzzles me.

The most probable outcome would be a reversed expulsion of ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe following the historical WW2. Historically some 15 million Germans were expulsed from Eastern Europe in half a decade. In this scenario the reverse happens, some 30 million Eastern Europeans are expulsed from Eastern Europe within a decade.

Possibly the expulsion would have involved far less people or would have been spread over a much longer time period because the Germans simply did not have enough people to settle these regions anyway. Historically German population was increasing by 500 000 a year in 1938/39. Lets say after the war it would have been increased to 650 000 a year. This means an population increase of roughly 10 million for the 1945-1960 period. Even if ALL of these people are sent into the East (and keep in mind that by 1945 Germany/Austria/Czechia had a lower population density than today) that would be barely enough to settle half of Poland....

Realistically the occupied territories in the East would have most likely fared like the Czech protectorate during WW2. It would have been harsh, people would have been killed, but it would not have been genocidal.

 

[Max Sinister]

The nazis had planned to settle about twenty million Germans in the East in the first twenty years after the war.

 

[Julian]

DrakoFin, you're incorrect about the timeline for the implementation of more radical Nazi policies. While the final solution (In terms of the Operation Reinhard death camps) began in 1942, the orders approving those camps and ordering their construction began in late September/Early October 1941. This was when Operation Typhoon had apparently just destroyed the RKKA in front of Moscow. Chris Browning discusses this timeline in significant detail here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1431894?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Essentially, the Nazi calculus to radicalize further occurred as a result of *success*, not failure. Once Hitler and co decided they absolutely could get away with mass murder, they went through with it.

 

[Michel Van]

Generalplan Ost is madeness in purest form.

First the Nazi wanted to murder 80% of local population and use the 20% survivors as Slave race for Aryans
That around 70 million people who are to be killed and dispose there bodies.

Next they have to installed infrastructure, like Autobahns, roads, railroad, electrical power, water and communication
Also construction of new rural settlements for colonist with surveillances system for GeStapo and SS

Also of Wehrmacht garrisons and Luftwaffe Airfields for protection of and control over the settlements
The SS wanted to install series of Ordensburgen, training schools for Nazi leaders in form of a Fortress.

All those Projects need Workforce, Materials and Money
some estimation on megalomaniac project of Hitler "Führer Cities", Himmler "Vatican-SS city" and his "Free state of Burgund", Göring and Co plans and Generalplan Ost
would cost today up to 3 Trillion euros...

My guess they would start the Project, but water it down in face of it's financial and economic problems, even stop it facing a collapsing Nazi Reich...

 

[sloreck]

The only restraints on Generalplan Ost would have been logistic. Given that death through labor and starvation would have been the cause of death for most of the Slavs, you don't need to transport them to death camps. Those would be reserved for special categories. It is easy to kill people through starvation (and disease) - simply give them no food or medical care. BTW it worked just fine for Stalin and millions of kulaks, Ukrainians and others. For a percentage of the population such as skilled workers who can be exploited faced with the choice of working for the Nazis and living, maybe even your family surviving or being killed, starved etc it is pretty obvious what most will do.

As far as the "humanity" of the German populace, and also many of the occupied countries get real. All of the Jews in your town disappear and all their goods are distributed. The trains of deported in boxcars which are sealed are not invisible. In spite of some attempts at secrecy, word of the camps is circulating. In the USSR and in the east you had locals either working with the Nazis enthusiastically, and going through mass graves as the Germans retreated (and after the war) to look for valuables that were missed by the camp apparatus. Was what happened to French Jews awaiting deportation at the Velodrome d'Hiver in Paris some big secret.

While if many of the Germans and other local populations had seen some of the ugliness in front of them it would have been disturbing, but it would not have stopped it. BTW how many southerners in the USA before the ACW were all that upset by slavery? Mistreatment of slaves was considered low class but slavery, breaking up of families, severe punishments...

There is zero doubt in my mind that Generalplan Ost would have been implemented. perhaps the time frame somewhat longer than originally planned but...

 

[Michel Van]

What is the Vatican SS city?

Himmler hab buy the Wewelsburg and make it to HQ of SS, but he not stop here he wanted some thing Big very big center of SS.
the entire town of wewelsburg had to be move to new settlements in the east

the castel in town and what Himmer had in mind for center of complex...

 

[Vuru]

They can try but the guerilla warfare is going to be horrid until nazi Germany collapses

Then in the aftermath i'd be surprised there's any germans east of the Elbe

 

[Faeelin]

Realistically the occupied territories in the East would have most likely fared like the Czech protectorate during WW2. It would have been harsh, people would have been killed, but it would not have been genocidal.

One fifth of Poland's population died. Belarus lost a quarter of its population. And this was only over a few years.

 

[Augenis]

One fifth of Poland's population died. Belarus lost a quarter of its population. And this was only over a few years.

Belarus and the Baltics only lost a quarter and more of their population if you count the Soviet deportations and atrocities during WW2 as well.

 

[varyar]

They can try but the guerilla warfare is going to be horrid until nazi Germany collapses

Then in the aftermath i'd be surprised there's any germans east of the Elbe

Guerrilla warfare without outside support is not likely to succeed against people who are undistracted by massive conventional warfare and who already want to kill all of you anyway.

 

[Vuru]

Guerrilla warfare without outside support is not likely to succeed against people who are undistracted by massive conventional warfare and who already want to kill all of you anyway.

Who said there won't be outside support?

The slavlands would probably have the highest concentration of spies anywhere in the world in this scenario

 

[Halagaz]

Outside support or not, there's going to be a huge population with nothing to lose; and an absolutely massive space to carry out guerilla warfare in. So the question is, how many German soldiers and German settlers can the Nazis afford to get killed before someone considers a different policy?

 

[varyar]

Who said there won't be outside support?

The slavlands would probably have the highest concentration of spies anywhere in the world in this scenario

Who's going to support them? Under this scenario, the USSR is gone and, presumably, the UK has made peace with Germany. The USA might back the partisans, but we're still back to "The Germans want to kill almost all the Russians anyway." How can you conduct a successful guerrilla war if the occupying power is already intent on genocide?

 

[Halagaz]

Realistically the occupied territories in the East would have most likely fared like the Czech protectorate during WW2. It would have been harsh, people would have been killed, but it would not have been genocidal.

What reason is there to assume the East would have fared like the temporary state of the Czech lands, instead of
1) like actual Nazi occupation policies in the East, which were a semi-genocidal bloodbath only partially restrained by wartime concerns;
2) like Nazi plans for the future of the East and the Czech lands: fully genocidal mass murder on an unprecedented scale;
3) something between (1) and (2)
?

One fifth of Poland's population died. Belarus lost a quarter of its population. And this was only over a few years.

Indeed. I don't know how one can look at the Nazi actions and plans in the East and conclude that they "wouldn't have been genocidal". Hell, not sure how one can look at Nazi occupation policy as it already was and conclude that it was anything other than genocidal.

 

[John Dusk]

On the issue of partisans in the Nazi occupied USSR CalBear and @wiking respectively summed it up perfectly in previous threads:

What is often forgotten when discussing revolutions and partisan activity is that the effort requires support. Partisans without any base of support for weapons and some sort of leadership are little more than bandits. Partisans facing well led opponents with good supply, armor and air cover, will always lose. If the organized force has a totally unfettered ROE the Partisans will be obliterated, usually by eliminating the civilian population that supports it.

It is important to remember that the Nazis were perfectly willing to kill EVERYONE in a community, just to make a point. We are not talking about U.S. or even Red Army forces which had limitations on what they were allowed to do. We are discussing forces where the COMMANDERS are encouraged to be exceptionally brutal. What would get you a noose or firing party in an Allied Army or a bullet behind the ear in the Red Army, would get you a decoration or promotion in the SS. The Party intended for ALL land forces to be Waffen SS once the war was over (can't really trust the Army, too many old fashioned ideas, like honor, ingrained there).

You repeat the barbarism of Lidice (and the lesser known, but even more brutal razing of Lezaky) 40 or 50 times and people stop being willing to do ANYTHING to help the partisans. Often they will begin to inform, especially if they are starving and informing means getting enough food to survive for a week longer.

Most people would be more concerned about trying to eat, rather than fight. No guerrilla movement has ever succeeded without external sources of major support, so if the USSR collapses then there is little supply, reinforcement, or training that could sustain a movement like that. IOTL it was really not a movement until it was clear the Soviet government would survive and Moscow began organizing, directing, and supplying and sending reinforcements to resistance behind the lines. If the Soviets collapse then all the necessary elements to make the partisans a significant issue are gone. The Wallies are too far away to sustain them and once Moscow goes the major staging base for getting resistance going falls apart. At that point various groups will try and make deals with the Nazis to survive and if that fails they will just flee to the forests and try to scrape out a living, because all resistance does is call down the Nazis and their brutality down on them. IOTL the Soviet partisans at least have something to fight for beyond day to day survival: victory. They fought in support of the front lines further East, but here ITTL it wouldn't exist, so it falls apart, with bandits doing what they can to stay low and survive.

 

[DrakonFin]

DrakoFin, you're incorrect about the timeline for the implementation of more radical Nazi policies. While the final solution (In terms of the Operation Reinhard death camps) began in 1942, the orders approving those camps and ordering their construction began in late September/Early October 1941. This was when Operation Typhoon had apparently just destroyed the RKKA in front of Moscow. Chris Browning discusses this timeline in significant detail here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1431894?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Essentially, the Nazi calculus to radicalize further occurred as a result of *success*, not failure. Once Hitler and co decided they absolutely could get away with mass murder, they went through with it.

Take into account that a lot of things happened in the last weeks of 1941 that changed the original provisional plans for the Final Solution and Generalplan Ost. The latter apparently at first called for forced deportations of the European Jews to the East after the USSR is conquered, to be used as slave labor. There are sources that say that Hitler only approved a plan that called for actual direct extermination policies to be used against Jews in December 1941, after the the declaration of war to the US and the beginning of the Soviet counterattack that finally destroyed the prospect of a quick victory over the USSR. This is essentially what the minutiae of the December 12th 1941 meeting at the Reich Chancellery seem to support.

Wikipedia about the events leading to the Wannsee Conference:

Between the date the invitations to the conference went out (29 November) and the date of the cancelled first meeting (9 December), the situation changed. On 5 December, the Soviet Army began a counter-offensive in front of Moscow, ending the prospect of a rapid conquest of the Soviet Union. On 7 December, the Japanese attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor, causing the U.S. to declare war on Japan the next day. The Reich government declared war on the U.S. on 11 December. Some invitees were involved in these preparations, so Heydrich postponed his meeting.[34] Somewhere around this time, Hitler resolved that the Jews of Europe were to be exterminated immediately, rather than after the war, which now had no end in sight.[35][a] At the Reich Chancellery meeting of 12 December 1941 he met with top party officials and made his intentions plain.[36] On 18 December, Hitler discussed the fate of the Jews with Himmler in the Wolfsschanze.[37] Following the meeting, Himmler made a note on his service calendar, which simply stated "Jewish question/to be destroyed as partisans".[37]

In any case, nobody can deny that a) the Nazi leadership's plans were both massively evil and inhuman and that b) they changed all the time due to how the events of the war progressed. The Nazi plan was to get rid of the Jews one way or the other, and what happened with the war affected significantly how they went about with that final goal in mind. The Final Solution, as implemented after December 1941, has to be understood as happening in conditions where the Nazi leadership knows that there is no quick victory in sight, that the war will go on for probably years more and that the resources of the nations now arrayed against the Third Reich outstrip it by a wide margin. The same applies to other wartime, post-1941 Nazi policies as well.

 

[Michel Van]

One fifth of Poland's population died. Belarus lost a quarter of its population. And this was only over a few years.

Himmler plans for Poland after "Final victory" the moment the concentration camps had exterminate the last jew, it would be next the Polish to died there
Some SS documents advise to "processing" 80% of remaining Polish population in concentration camps and keep 20% as slaves
They even proposed to "Improve" the concentration camps to exterminate humans more effective and faster, to have schedule for 5 years until concentration camps finally are closed and destroyed. after exterminate the last polish there.
For East Europe and occupied Russia, the SS simply wanted locals to to die of hunger in combination of mass executions.

In the face of this madness, i'm a shamed to be a German.

 

[pjmidd]

I fully believe that under Hitler or Himmler, or some of their "best" Nazi disciples, an effort at Generalplan Ost would be made. But my realistic assessment would be that it would be soon scaled down to a more manageable program, almost necessarily, due to all the other things the post-war Nazi state would have to do, not least rebuilding back in the Reich proper. More emphasis post-victory would be to try to erase the negative impacts of the war to the German people and homeland rather than punishing and killing the occupied peoples. Those people would be needed for work, and some bright spark in charge of the massive work of rebuilding would realize that giving workers as much food to allow them survive for longer than days or weeks gets you more resources to complete said work, and lessen the need to make the "true Aryans" rebuild their cities themselves. And from thereon, the idea of "why kill these lesser peoples when they can keep working so that we don't have to" would seem like a very agreeable one to the German people physically and mentally exhausted by a war and a seemingly unending state of emergency, trying to run their overextended European empire. It would be touted as a return to normalcy. A very totalitarian, horrible kind of a normalcy, sure, but one that would be different from the period of war and emergency that preceded it.

Would be nice to think the above but not one shred of evidence to back it up. Lots of evidence that Nazi indoctrination meant they were not seeing Slavs as people just things or numbers, no evidence that the killing was having any pushback effect. Lots of evidence the younger people were the more indoctrinated they had become. Nazis were not nice people, hand wringing and saying but they would have got better does not cut it with those who lost kin to their practices.

 

[Clandango]

Was it official or just a trope of AltHist where the Nazis demand a hundred thousand laborers a year from the rump Soviet Union in Siberia? Depending on how long it takes to win, they might decide on keeping some areas as labor reserves while continueing the plans of some to break up Russians and others into multiple ethnic groups. Of course they might just use the French for their forced labor deals for after they try wiping out the Eastern Europeans in three decades. And I will take it that the various Turkic and Mongol-descended peoples will get the ax as well?

 

[Mr.Wigglemunch]

On the issue of partisans in the Nazi occupied USSR CalBear and @wiking respectively summed it up perfectly in previous threads:

However, you have to remember Russia alone west of the Urals constitutes 38% of Europe, when you add the Caucasus nations, Ukraine, Poland etc you must be at 50% in the east, if you add France, Norway etc you're well over 60%. The logistics of supplying from East Prussia to the Urals will be a nightmare, aircraft range of the Luftwaffe is awful... And despite a probable official surrender, the Soviets would still have millions of men and women of fighting age, the likes of Zhukov and other generals and Party members have probably fled past the Urals to re group.

As for Landice style tactics to suppress the population, well, EAM--ELAS were up against reprisal killings for years, it's awful, demoralising, but not everything.

And outside support, sure, that will be a problem, but they will also have the scope of from the Urals to Occupied China to get their shit together. And in the occupied Soviet Union there are going to be a fair few weapons about.

Hmm, an interesting TL would be this and Zhukov and an army and co go volunteer with Mao Tse-Tung in return for help liberating the Motherland later. Heheh