eurofed
Banned
Posts: 586 
Likes: 62
|
Post by eurofed on Nov 3, 2017 13:21:04 GMT
Unless the Germans bungle their act spectacularly, by seeking compensations, no doubt. Mussolini reacted with the threat of military force in 1934 since the Nazis bungled their coup but 1938 events indicate he could be won over to acquiescence about Anschluss fairly easily. Suitable means include German support to Italian ambitions in Ethiopia and the Balkans, an analogue of the 1939 agreement to transfer South Tyrol Germans to Germany, or even establishment of a bilateral demilitarized zone on the German-Italian border. Weimar Germany had zero interest in an independent Ethiopia or Albania, and might actually benefit in a geopolitical sense from the breakup of Yugoslavia, so to support fascist Italy in the fulfillment of its ambitions about these areas would cost or risk the Germans very little. Not to mention Yugoslavia was actually rather likely to collapse on its own. The Austria civil War is a good time for Weimar Germany to get involve and take over. Most certainly, and with little difficulty, assuming the democratic Anschluss does not take place even before its occurrence. If French sabotage of the Austrian and German banking had not taken place, quite possibly because the Great Depression hits France harder causing it more economic or political instability, the Anschluss would have occurred in 1931-32 as the inevitable development of the Austro-German customs union. Just for the sake of pointing out a possible development from this PoD, things might get interesting if Weimar Germany successfully weathers the Great Depression and accomplishes a democratic Anschluss, but France is thrown into serious instability and suffers a regime change or a civil war similar to the Spanish one. Not that I deem either event especially likely in these circumstances. |
|
eurofed
Banned
Posts: 586
Likes: 62
|
Post by eurofed on Nov 3, 2017 17:49:16 GMT
Speaking of civil wars, the possible occurrence of the Spanish Civil War ITTL is an interesting case. It was not a given by any means, but if it occurs more or less the same way, its alignments are going to get simplified into fascists and communists pretty quickly, with the other factions getting co-opted or marginalized. Soviet Russia and fascist Italy are going to support their respective proxies just like OTL. The choice would be suboptimal for the democratic powers but I assume Britain and Weimar Germany would find the Nationalists the lesser evil choice and support them rather than allowing Stalin to get control of Spain by proxy. France may follow their example or be paralyzed by internal divisions into inaction. The Popular Front government, assuming it occurs, might try to support to Republicans but this would intensify political polarization in France so much the PF government would be unlikely to survive.
|
|
eurofed
Banned
Posts: 586
Likes: 62
|
Post by eurofed on Nov 3, 2017 18:19:22 GMT
But i wonder with a successful Weimar Germanym what is the Soviet Union going to do. Good question. I suspect not a lot in foreign affairs terms. Its probably going to be continually isolated as it wouldn't have either the de-facto alliance with the Nazis getting it a chunk of eastern Europe and then the one with the allies which got it even more. It might try going for the Baltic states at some point or Finland but going any further is likely to result in a pretty comprehensive European alliance against it. Possibly with no clear threat from Europe Stalin might follow up Zhukov's successes against the Japanese and the Soviet support of the KMT to really plough into Japan. What it might do a bit later is be more active in anti-colonial campaigns as European powers are probably going to seek to hang onto their colonies longer without WWII. Or possibly sink into further rounds of repression and periodic purges and slaughter. I'm in basic agreement about this although I may point out that if the USSR goes on the offensive in East Asia it would likely gain eventual control of Manchuria and North China thanks to the Red Army's quality superiority on the IJA. However with an intact IJA and IJN Korea and Japan would in all likelihood be a bridge too far for the Soviets. Japan is also likely to seize all of Sakhalin as a consolation prize thanks to its naval superiority. If Stalin does intervene militarily in China, I tend to assume he would drop the KMT as too unreliable an ally, and even get the likes of Mao with ambitions of autonomy from Moscow purged from the CCP. He would likely pick the most pro-Soviet faction of the CCP leadership as his proxy of choice, and with the Red Army in North China, he would easily impose his will. The KMT would seek support from Britain, America, and the European powers to survive, with variable results. The Soviet attack would inevitably force the Japanese to pull out from China proper in order to defend Manchuria first, then Korea and Japan. Defeat would discredit the Japanese ultra-nationalists and force Japan to seek reconcliation with the Western powers. History may repeat in China with a full takeover of the mainland if the KMT screws up armed defence against the Soviets and their CCP auxiliaries despite Western support, like OTL. The KMT can't go to Japanese Taiwan so Hainan would in all likelihood become its subsititute. Alternatively the KMT can actually succeed to defend South China with Western support if it gets its act together, for various reasons. First, the Red Army cannot realistically spread much beyond North China for logistic reasons. Second, Soviet invasion and occupation of North China is going to make the CCP rather less popular than OTL among the Chinese people, especially once the Soviet forces start to suppress resistance to their control with their usual harsh means and make themselves the equivalent of the Japanese in brutality. So ITTL China might actually get divided just like OTL Korea between pro-Soviet PRC North China and pro-Western KMT South China. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,979
Likes: 49,385
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 4, 2017 10:50:43 GMT
Speaking of civil wars, the possible occurrence of the Spanish Civil War ITTL is an interesting case. It was not a given by any means, but if it occurs more or less the same way, its alignments are going to get simplified into fascists and communists pretty quickly, with the other factions getting co-opted or marginalized. Soviet Russia and fascist Italy are going to suppress their respective proxies rather like OTL. The choice would be suboptimal for the democratic powers but I assume Britain and Weimar Germany would find the Nationalists the lesser evil choice and support them rather than allowing Stalin to get control of Spain by proxy. France may follow their example or be paralyzed by internal divisions into inaction. The Popular Front government, assuming it occurs, might try to support to Republicans but this would intensify political polarization in France so much the PF government would be unlikely to survive. So would Weimar Germany be pro-nationalist in the Spanish civil War. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Nov 4, 2017 11:54:32 GMT
Good question. I suspect not a lot in foreign affairs terms. Its probably going to be continually isolated as it wouldn't have either the de-facto alliance with the Nazis getting it a chunk of eastern Europe and then the one with the allies which got it even more. It might try going for the Baltic states at some point or Finland but going any further is likely to result in a pretty comprehensive European alliance against it. Possibly with no clear threat from Europe Stalin might follow up Zhukov's successes against the Japanese and the Soviet support of the KMT to really plough into Japan. What it might do a bit later is be more active in anti-colonial campaigns as European powers are probably going to seek to hang onto their colonies longer without WWII. Or possibly sink into further rounds of repression and periodic purges and slaughter. I'm in basic agreement about this although I may point out that if the USSR goes on the offensive in East Asia it would likely gain eventual control of Manchuria and North China thanks to the Red Army's quality superiority on the IJA. However with an intact IJA and IJN Korea and Japan would in all likelihood be a bridge too far for the Soviets. Japan is also likely to seize all of Sakhalin as a consolation prize thanks to its naval superiority. If Stalin does intervene militarily in China, I tend to assume he would drop the KMT as too unreliable an ally, and even get the likes of Mao with ambitions of autonomy from Moscow purged from the CCP. He would likely pick the most pro-Soviet faction of the CCP leadership as his proxy of choice, and with the Red Army in North China, he would easily impose his will. The KMT would seek support from Britain, America, and the European powers to survive, with variable results. The Soviet attack would inevitably force the Japanese to pull out from China proper in order to defend Manchuria first, then Korea and Japan. Defeat would discredit the Japanese ultra-nationalists and force Japan to seek reconcliation with the Western powers. History may repeat in China with a full takeover of the mainland if the KMT screws up armed defence against the Soviets and their CCP auxiliaries despite Western support, like OTL. The KMT can't go to Japanese Taiwan so Hainan would in all likelihood become its subsititute. Alternatively the KMT can actually succeed to defend South China with Western support if it gets its act together, for various reasons. First, the Red Army cannot realistically spread much beyond North China for logistic reasons. Second, Soviet invasion and occupation of North China is going to make the CCP rather less popular than OTL among the Chinese people, especially once the Soviet forces start to suppress resistance to their control with their usual harsh means and make themselves the equivalent of the Japanese in brutality. So ITTL China might actually get divided just like OTL Korea between pro-Soviet PRC North China and pro-Western KMT South China. Apologies, I was rather vague there. The Soviets have no chance of getting to Japan itself and are likely to lose N Sakhalin but the Soviets, even in their pre-Winter war format are likely to take Manchuria and might take Korea if Stalin is determined enough although that would be likely to be very bloody. In that case you might even see a Japan forced out of China proper getting some support from western powers. Doubt the Soviets would be that successful against China if they tried occupying it although acting by proxy in boosting the Chinese communists rather than the KMT would be more successful. Without the OTL losses of post 39 war against Japan and with support more easily available for the nationalists from the west I would still say this is uncertain. Could end up very messy for China, Japan and Russia if Stalin tried that however as the Soviets could find China a serious sink even they couldn't handle. |
|
eurofed
Banned
Posts: 586
Likes: 62
|
Post by eurofed on Nov 4, 2017 14:51:29 GMT
So would Weimar Germany be pro-nationalist in the Spanish civil War. In all likelihood yes. As the lesser evil choice, but more or less the same way the USA and the EU supported many pro-Western right-wing Third-World dictatorships during the Cold War, and for the same realpolitik reasons. Past a point, choosing a side in the SCW simply meant deciding who got to send its defeated enemies and purged rivals to the firing squads, but with a non-Nazi Germany, a Nationalist Spain is rather less troublesome to the democratic powers than a Red one. In these circumstances, Franco shall behave much the same way as OTL post-1945, apart from picking a close partnership with fascist Italy. But even together, Italy and Spain were not strong nor adventurist enough on their own to make themselves a serious problem. On the other hand, Stalin in control of Spain might mean all kinds of strategic trouble for the European powers. |
|
eurofed
Banned
Posts: 586
Likes: 62
|
Post by eurofed on Nov 4, 2017 15:48:48 GMT
Apologies, I was rather vague there. The Soviets have no chance of getting to Japan itself and are likely to lose N Sakhalin but the Soviets, even in their pre-Winter war format are likely to take Manchuria and might take Korea if Stalin is determined enough although that would be likely to be very bloody. In that case you might even see a Japan forced out of China proper getting some support from western powers. Doubt the Soviets would be that successful against China if they tried occupying it although acting by proxy in boosting the Chinese communists rather than the KMT would be more successful. Without the OTL losses of post 39 war against Japan and with support more easily available for the nationalists from the west I would still say this is uncertain. Could end up very messy for China, Japan and Russia if Stalin tried that however as the Soviets could find China a serious sink even they couldn't handle. I largely agree although I'm skeptical the Red Army would manage to conquer Korea in these circumstances unless Stalin is willing to throw the bulk of Soviet military power in Asia (something he would be loath to do if he faces a well-armed European coalition) and the Soviets do something serious to ameliorate the logistic bottleneck they had with the Trans-Siberian Railway. If the Soviets make a large-scale intervention in the Chinese conflicts, they are likely to try a mix of direct military action and arming the CCP as a proxy against Japan and the KMT. This may turn out to be less successful for Communism than OTL since the Red Army can only deploy so far in the depths of China; they can certainly overrun northern and western China but the rest of the country would be much more logistically troublesome to them. And ITTL the CCP would look to the Chinese people rather more like despised collaborationists for another foreign invader that is just as brutal as the IJA rather than heroic fighters in the resistance against the Japanese. Therefore the scenario I deem most likely would be: the Japanese Empire gets pushed back in its pre-1931 borders with N Sakhalin as a consolation prize, the militarist ultra-nationalists are discredited and marginalized by defeat in Manchuria and China, the moderates are back in charge with a foreign policy based on reconciliation with the Western powers and armed defence against the Comintern bloc. Manchuria, Mongolia, and/or Xinjiang get annexed by the USSR. North China becomes a PRC state closely aligned to the USSR, with the faction of greatest Stalinist allegiance in the CCP leadership in charge; I'm not sure who would become paramount leader of North China in these circumstances but I'm sure Stalin can find someone suitable, even if it takes a purge or three. My best guess about the core leadership of the CCP is it would include the most prominent members of the so-called '28 Bolshevik' faction, since they seem likely to have especially close ties with Moscow, with the Maoists mostly purged or marginalized apart from the occasional turncoat. South China becomes a KMT state backed by the Western powers, with Chiang in charge as usual. In these circumstances, relationship between Japan and South China would evolve to resemble the one between Greece and Turkey during the Cold War, old enemies aligned with the Western bloc against the USSR and nominal allies because of that, but with deep-seated mutual suspicion and little cooperation in practice. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,979
Likes: 49,385
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 4, 2017 20:19:19 GMT
Apologies, I was rather vague there. The Soviets have no chance of getting to Japan itself and are likely to lose N Sakhalin but the Soviets, even in their pre-Winter war format are likely to take Manchuria and might take Korea if Stalin is determined enough although that would be likely to be very bloody. In that case you might even see a Japan forced out of China proper getting some support from western powers. Doubt the Soviets would be that successful against China if they tried occupying it although acting by proxy in boosting the Chinese communists rather than the KMT would be more successful. Without the OTL losses of post 39 war against Japan and with support more easily available for the nationalists from the west I would still say this is uncertain. Could end up very messy for China, Japan and Russia if Stalin tried that however as the Soviets could find China a serious sink even they couldn't handle. I largely agree although I'm skeptical the Red Army would manage to conquer Korea in these circumstances unless Stalin is willing to throw the bulk of Soviet military power in Asia (something he would be loath to do if he faces a well-armed European coalition) and the Soviets do something serious to ameliorate the logistic bottleneck they had with the Trans-Siberian Railway. If the Soviets make a large-scale intervention in the Chinese conflicts, they are likely to try a mix of direct military action and arming the CCP as a proxy against Japan and the KMT. This may turn out to be less successful for Communism than OTL since the Red Army can only deploy so far in the depths of China; they can certainly overrun northern and western China but the rest of the country would be much more logistically troublesome to them. And ITTL the CCP would look to the Chinese people rather more like despised collaborationists for another foreign invader that is just as brutal as the IJA rather than heroic fighters in the resistance against the Japanese. Therefore the scenario I deem most likely would be: the Japanese Empire gets pushed back in its pre-1931 borders with N Sakhalin as a consolation prize, the militarist ultra-nationalists are discredited and marginalized by defeat in Manchuria and China, the moderates are back in charge with a foreign policy based on reconciliation with the Western powers and armed defence against the Comintern bloc. Manchuria, Mongolia, and/or Xinjiang get annexed by the USSR. North China becomes a PRC state closely aligned to the USSR, with the faction of greatest Stalinist allegiance in the CCP leadership in charge; I'm not sure who would become paramount leader of North China in these circumstances but I'm sure Stalin can find someone suitable, even if it takes a purge or three. My best guess about the core leadership of the CCP is it would include the most prominent members of the so-called '28 Bolshevik' faction, since they seem likely to have especially close ties with Moscow, with the Maoists mostly purged or marginalized apart from the occasional turncoat. South China becomes a KMT state backed by the Western powers, with Chiang in charge as usual. In these circumstances, relationship between Japan and South China would evolve to resemble the one between Greece and Turkey during the Cold War, old enemies aligned with the Western bloc against the USSR and nominal allies because of that, but with deep-seated mutual suspicion and little cooperation in practice. So no major World War II in this universe but smaller isolated wars who mostly feature the Soviet Union as the aggressor. |
|
eurofed
Banned
Posts: 586
Likes: 62
|
Post by eurofed on Nov 5, 2017 17:25:20 GMT
So no major World War II in this universe but smaller isolated wars who mostly feature the Soviet Union as the aggressor. Yep, this is fairly predictable since lack of Nazism and Germany staying democratic and reasonable with the USSR being its usual Leninist-Stalinist self tends to drive the world towards Cold War conditions. There are obvious differences, such as the Western bloc being multipolar, America being still isolationist and not the boss of everyone in its own camp, the British and Japanese Empires still a thing, Germany, France, Italy still among the greats, etc. But in these conditions the USSR is the only power that has the power and the drive to overturn the international order on its own terms, and this tends to create Cold War-style polarization. This in turn tends to drive Europe (and Japan, if Soviet aggressiveness humbles it into being reasonable again) towards NATO/EU-style cooperation. Of course, since MAD does not yet exist at least for a couple decades, it is perfectly possible and not really unlikely that one of the local conflicts Soviet aggression and destablization instigate escalates because of the Western powers driving a line in the sand about it and the Soviets misunderstanding the circumstances, both sides mobilize the full sum of their military resources to settle the issue once and for all with total war, and suddenly you have an anti-Soviet WWII on your hands. If so, the proto-Cold War ends not by Communism dying its slow death of withering as OTL, but a violent end on the battlefield just like Nazifascism. |
|
futurist
Banned
Banned
Posts: 837
Likes: 12
|
Post by futurist on Apr 21, 2018 19:32:06 GMT
As requested in another thread, here is a scenario for a successful Weimar Germany. Possible PoDs for this may vary, one of my preferred ones is Chancellor Heinrich Bruning getting successful in his schemes during the early 1930s. He sets up a customs union between Germany and Austria in 1931 which soon evolves in a democratic Anschluss. France is unable to interfere by sabotaging the German and Austrian banking system because the Great Depression hits it harder than OTL. Germany buys Mussolini's compliance by giving it a compensation package that includes German support for Italian ambitions in Ethiopia and the Balkans, as well as a deal to transfer the German-speaking population of South Tyrol to Germany. Bruning engineers Germany's political stabilization by organizing a deal between the DNVP, the SPD, the Zentrum, and the Liberals to restore the Hohenzollern monarchy with the former Crown Prince or one of his sons on the throne. The former Kaiser is unable to veto the deal because of his early death, and his son approves it, securing full support from Hindenburg and the Nationalists. The Reichstag cancels the 1932 presidential election, extends Hindenburg's term, and proclaims a monarchy with Hindenburg as regent. Upon Hindenburg's death, Crown Prince William or one of his sons gets invited to assume the throne. The restored Kaiser more or less keeps the Reichspresident's powers, although most of his political decisions require the assent of the Chancellor or the competent Minister. The German government indefinitely suspends payment of reparations and starts a massive public-works program that significatively lessens unemployment. These policies please the German public opinion and support for the NSDAP and the KPD substantially lessens. The government picks the excuse of Nazi and Communist involvement in street violence to ban both parties. When their militias try to stage a clumsy uprising in a uneasy alliance of convenience, the army crushes them without too much effort with the support of the Nationalist and Socialist militias. Bruning takes the opportunity of monarchical restoration and the failed Commie-Nazi uprising to enact a comprehensive constitutional reform. It includes introduction of constructive vote of no confidence, an electoral law reform to curb political fragmentation and ban extremist parties, a change of German states' borders to make federalism balanced, and a restoration of the most prestigious German dynasties besides the Hohenzollern as heads of state in various states, such as the Wettin in Saxony, the Wittelsbach in Bavaria, the Welf in Hanover, and the Habsburg in Austria. Political reforms, foreign-policy successes, and economic recovery spurred by public-works and rearmament programs stabilize German democracy and drain support for extremist movements to fringe insignificance. The new constitutional monarchy system proves a compromise all major German political factions (Nationalists, Christian Democrats, Socialists, and Liberals) and the Heer can more or less support in good faith. Germany re-establishes conscription, expands the army to full size, and scraps all weapons limitations, with the aim of land and air military parity with the Entente powers and the USSR. However it offers a deal to France and Britain for mutual and balanced arms limitations in Western Europe that would not endanger Germany on its eastern border nor Anglo-French control of the colonies. It scraps unilateral demilitarization of the Rhineland but offers the French to establish a mutual, balanced demilitarization of Alsace-Lorraine and the Rhineland. It signs a version of the Anglo-German Naval Agreement with an extension of naval limitations to submarines. Negotiations for a forces limitation and border demilitarization treaty in Western Europe prove complex but ultimately successful between Germany, France, and Britain. When German rearmament has progressed enough, the German government starts to put increasing pressure on Czechoslovakia and Poland for a revision of the status of the Sudetenland, Danzig, and the Corridor by internationally-supervised plebiscites. Britain and France do not really care to risk a general war for the sake of territorial integrity of the Polish and Czechoslovak states, for the usual appeasement reasons magnified by the non-threatening attitude of democratic Germany and its ability to use national self-determination of ethnic Germans to win sympathy for its cause. The Czechs eventually cave in to international pressure and isolation; the Soviets offer military help but it proves impossible to provide after the Poles and the Romanians refuse to give passage to the Red Army. A plebiscite gives the Sudetenland to Germany and southern Slovakia to Hungary. The Poles stubbornly cling to the Versailles status quo and refuse all German requests about a revision of the status of Danzig and the Corridor. Out of nationalist pride and overconfidence, they overestimate their own importance and military capabilities, and underestimate resurgent German military power, the threat of Soviet intervention, and their own growing isolation. The pro-German government of the Free City of Danzig eventually loses patience and sets up a plebiscite under its own authority. When it approves union with Germany, the Danzig authorities move to enact it and sever all ties with Poland. The Poles send their army in the Free City to suppress the union, and the Danzig Germans appeal to Berlin for military protection. Fighting between German and Polish troops starts in the Free City and soon escalates to a state of war. Britain and France refuse any aid to Poland under these premises and the German army proves much more effective than the Poles had expected, quickly seizing the upper hand. The fate of Poland is sealed when the Soviets opportunistically invade the eastern Polish territories; the Polish army is utterly crushed in the two-front war, despite the poor performance of the Red Army. Despite mutual distrust, the Germans and the Soviets agree out of common interest to a partial partition of Poland. Germany annexes Danzig, the Corridor, and Upper Silesia. Being mindful of their past bad experiences with Polish separatism, the Germans enact a forced population exchange of the Polish population in the annexed territories and the remaining German minority in Poland. The USSR annexes the eastern Polish territories, and their inhabitants become subject to Stalinist terror. This scenario is generally pretty realistic, but I think that it would better serve Germany's interests to keep the Sudeten Germans inside of Czechoslovakia so that they can act as a Trojan Horse there. Specifically, Germany could push the Sudeten Germans to push Czechoslovak politics forward in the direction of some kind of economic union with Germany. For instance, this can be done by having the Sudeten German political party/parties make closer economic ties with Germany a precondition for being a part of any Czechoslovak governing coalition. As for Poland, I think that Britain and France might need some kind of German and perhaps Soviet "concession" to save face. Perhaps Poland is allowed to keep Gdynia and Lviv and a plebiscite is held in the remainder of the Polish Corridor? |
|
raunchel
Commander
Posts: 1,795 
Likes: 1,182
|
Post by raunchel on Apr 22, 2018 13:05:47 GMT
South Tyrol is a bit complicated. As far as I know, large parts of the population didn't like being in Italy, but there was no real way for any Italian government to give it up. It was a major part of what they got from WW1, and the price had been truly enormous. Only losing a war could ever justify having to give it up again.
|
|
futurist
Banned
Banned
Posts: 837
Likes: 12
|
Post by futurist on Apr 22, 2018 20:25:16 GMT
South Tyrol is a bit complicated. As far as I know, large parts of the population didn't like being in Italy, but there was no real way for any Italian government to give it up. It was a major part of what they got from WW1, and the price had been truly enormous. Only losing a war could ever justify having to give it up again. Nazi Germany and Italy had a transfer agreement for the South Tyrol Germans in 1939. Basically, South Tyrol Germans had a choice between staying in Italy and being forcibly assimilated or moving to Germany. I suppose that I could see a surviving Weimar Germany make a similar deal with Italy. After all, it could be seen as a good way to improve relations with Italy. That said, though, a surviving Weimar Germany could also keep the status quo in South Tyrol in the hopes of forcibly snatching South Tyrol from Italy if/after a revolution occurs there. |
|
perkeo
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 25
Likes: 6
|
Post by perkeo on Apr 23, 2018 6:05:28 GMT
That said, though, a surviving Weimar Germany could also keep the status quo in South Tyrol in the hopes of forcibly snatching South Tyrol from Italy if/after a revolution occurs there. Especially since Germany only needs Italy to not win a shooting war over Austria. The Nazis needed their help in future aggressions. Weimar can handle a pissed off, saber rattling Mussolini - they just need to ensure he doesn’t have powerful allies. Britain’s and France‘s opinions matter, his doesn’t. |
|
James G
Squadron vice admiral
Posts: 7,608
Likes: 8,833
|
Post by James G on Apr 23, 2018 11:23:34 GMT
Weimar Germany was always crippled by internal political issues with the way it was set up. Make some changes after a nazi and/or communist scare and that improves things. Internal non-state actors like militias need eliminating too. There is room for a non aggressive, strongly led Germany in Europe even without expansion into ethnic territories belonging to others.
|
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Apr 23, 2018 16:55:54 GMT
Weimar could easily have survived.
THe main problem was the harsh french reaction to unification in 1929 and the pressure on the austrian government. Some say that this caused the depression to be VERY negative in germany AND austria.
So, if the germans and austrians in 1929/30 do not push for unification or france do not press to stop that by some economic "war" methods mean that the worst consequences from the depression could be avoided.
If we then follow the historical changes, germany get rid of the versailles treaty (basically a dictate) - this could and would be enough to avoid a chancellor hitler...
why?
well, hitler came only to power because in the depression - that really hurted the german society into its mark and opened a lot people to vote for the one person who promised to "solve all problems" (A.Hitler) he gained a lot influence. So much that - after some failed governments Hindenburg did his fatal failure, thinking that he could use Hitler for the own purpose.
if things goes better in 1930-33, say instead of 7 million unemployed "only" 4 millions and the reforms getting speed BEFORE the last two elections (in that Hitlers NSDAP went down in seats), then he and his Naziparty is not interesting enough for the Reichspresesident...
This means in the follow up:
Schleicher or better Brünning stay chancellor, the reforms show that germany recovers (and in the same time all the negotiations in 1928-32 to remove Versailles had allready been done!) and the Nazis get teared appart by their internal struggle (they had their hard core right wing extremists and their hard core leftist wing extremists (Basically Hitler and Strasser), add in the Röhm-problem and the NSDAP blow up in 1934. Esp. with no more money from Hugenberg and co who financed him.
You see the nazis grow from 1928 (2,3%) to 1930 (18,3%) to july1932 (37,3%), but much more interesting is, that in Nov1932, with SOME reforms working, the nazis dropped by 4,2% to 33,1%...
Even in march33, with no longer "free" elections the nazis only gained 43%...
The chances are high that without announcing Hitler Reichskanzler in January33 the nazis will drop to around 25% in march33...
so the next elections still face a brown problem, but it is no neckbreaking event - also with Hindenburg dead in 1934 there is a huge chance that some sane person (Hugo Eckner for example) could get Reichspräsident.
If that happen the nazis will NOT come to power and - by their own structure blow up in 1934 with Roehm pushing for his revolution - and the army will crush him like a bug.
So some realistic timeline could be this:
No discussions about german-austrian unification (say that the discussions about that in february30 will not happen)
The depression is around 20% lesser in austria and germany as OTL...
this mean the nazis gain in the 1932july election only 26,5%, in the november32-election they drop to 22%...
with this defeat the nazis - here in leadership of Roehm - try to putsch and fail. Hitler, Roehm, Goehring are either shot or commit succide after they failed to take munich. The bloody december as it is called (14th-15th december 1932) cause the Reichspräsident to forbid the SA, SS and the NSDAP as a party.
Untill 1936 some diehard-nazis try to fight the republic, causing the death of Reichspräsident Hindenburg in june 1933.
1933 - the recovery of the german economy gain speed, lots of "building projects", like "Landgewinnung West" but also the Autobahn-building...
1933-08-05 Reichspräsidentenwahl - in a hard fought election Hugo Eckner gain the majority (57%) and follows the killed Hindenburg into power.
The secret building of the army, navy and a secret airforce is still followed, but the connections to the USSR is intensifyed. Eckner visits 14 countries by Zeppelin, he starts intensive negotiations with the US government to get helium for his beloved zeppelins.
1935-07 - in a new election - necessary because another nazi-troop killed the chancellor from the Zentrum - give the SPD a 24%, the Zentrum 25%, the KPD 11%, the DNVP 18% and the DVP 16%
The new Zentrum/DNVP/DVP coalition push for a rearmament, using the failed "disarming-clause" of the VT as the setup.
After the Saarland get rejoined into the german reich there is ano
From 1936 to 1939 is a civil war fought in spain, the germans use this "testbed" to use their newly build weapons - a Legion Condor (around 1/2 the size of OTL) is send to help Franco against the communists. This is only doable because the conservative government supports that. Ironically this does not end the german-russian cooperation, basically they test together new strategies and fight later against each other with them. Germany gain some important informations, but even massive italian support doesn´t help Franco, so the republicans win in early 1939. The Legion was evacuated in 1938 (personally i see the spanish dictator fail without a full scale Legion... )
1935 - more and more workers find new jobs, the economy grows (around 2/3 of the OTL nazi growing, but on a healthy ground), still the conflicts with the french hardens. After the conference of Lausanne (1932) they had accepted the reduction (basically the end) of the reparations...
Now they demand to get 4 billion goldmark, because they miscalculate the political situation in europe.
in 1935 the germans also declare that they will rearm - to a moderate level, but still FULL rearm without Entente-restrictions... the german airforce by his founder Weever will build in the next 5 years a lot different modern planes, in the same time the lack of high output engines cause the germans to seek different methods to drive planes (Jets). Overall the german airforce is behind the other nations in numbers, but the quality of new airplanes helps em to close the gap (compared to OTL the Weimar-Airforce is around 50% the 1939er-Size. But overall germany spent only 1/3 of the money into arms as the nazis did OTL. This cause the germans - who get threatened with "invasion" to demand the end of the arms limitations (basically a "we can´t live in peace with evil french threatening our lives"-propaganda) and full souveranity (for the ruhr-area).
With his good connections to the USA Eckner achive massive pressure on france, who is forced to give up all demands.
IN the same time a german-british naval treaty comes to live, germany is allowed to join the washington/London conference with 30% of the british tonnage... later for subs raised to 70% and coastal subs to 100% of the british tonnage.
This means that the german navy could restart - they had finished two more PBB, slightly better protected and 1kn more speed, the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau....
1939 the austrians demand - at the League to unify with germany, just as they tried to discuss in a taxunion in 1930. Mussolinis Italy try to stop it, threatening with war. But stresa has wiped out by the brutality of italian occupation and wars of agressions and there is hold a quorum about the "Anschluss". 80% of the austrians and 65% of the germans vote for the Anschluss.
the date of the anschluss is 1939-07-01
What could happen after this? No clue...
for sure Weimar would intensify its connection with china, getting in the other camp as japan.
With Eckner doing 2 terms, he will use his good connections to the US companies and the government to improve relationship.
But Weimar would not change much about Austria, the Sudetenareas or Danzig. For all germans these were "german" and every weimar-government (outside the communists) would try to change that fate.
Also rearment - the germans would not accept to be "helpless" and surounded by agressive nations (poland, france, italy)
With less insane rearmament by the government the economy will recover better - also the armed forces would build up slower and "better". As long as weimar existed the germans tried to keep with the others (secretly) but were not found to "push the edge"... this could lead to interesting developments...
maybe a Mark-IV-only-tank-production (easier to build, more potential), no rushed rearmament mean also that things that bite the nazis in the butt could be avoided.
On the other hand, the nazis also pushed quite some developments, so things would be much slower. For sure no Goerings Airforce... Udet would be famous, but would not gain influence in the airforce. Planes would be build more for maintanence (to keep costs low) as for the last 5% of "the best"...
There are a lot bridges to take, they all could change a lot... esp. with other things changing... say legion condor is smaller, or they send none at all. Huge negative effect on combat effectivity, but also better standing in the west.
The conflict with france is not to solve - france want the river rhine as the border and - best case for them - that poland gains berlin. For UK this weimar is interesting, but the tendency of germany to get used as a weapon for british politics is nil.
The red bear is interesting, with no nazis, would they try to take the baltic states? Or attack poland?
I could see a smart diplomatic operation, in that russia give germany "back" their old borders of 1914, if they keep their mouth closed if russia take what is "rightfully russian" (or how they would call it).
Or a conflict between germany and poland for Danzig (95% for Anschluss to germany).
The Sudetenareas could stay with the state or want to come to germany, both is possible. Benesch wasn´t known for his pro-german attitude, if he needs internal succsess he could blame the germans, that could cause a conflict.
Austria is a given - in the 30ties the austrians and the germans wanted to unify, as hard as they could. Only french and italian pressure to NOT unify stopped that.
With a democratic weimar this attraction is even greater, because the austrofaschists are not seen as an option (maybe for Mussolini)
The second world war could start because italy try to forbid the Anschluss, together with france and poland (hoping to gain bounty). Germany - still in rearmament - call for help and get it by the russians and the british, who fear to loose their balance.
But Uk do a U-turn, after russia invade poland... dropping germany in its needs.
I doubt that in such war UK would declare for france, but it could be a neutral leaning to france, with germany and russia working together (the fate of poland would still be the same - doomed), with italy and france trying to invade germany (failing - french army wasn´t ready to do that in the 30ties and early 40ties, italy lacked anything to advance into austria or germany)
Lots of scientifics would stay in germany - a crushed nazi party and a still democratic weimar republic means that a lot smart minds stay in the country... this alone has huge fallout in case of a war, something one could not easily recalculate.
Maybe one write such TL?
|
|
