The Iron Cross

[Michele]

Originally Posted by adm

The Tripartite Pact wasn't signed until 1940, it wasn't until the successful dismemberment of Czechoslovakia that Italy and Japan decided that Hitler was worth the risk of aligning with, and that France and the UK had become toothless has beens.

The Pact of Steel is indeed after Munich, but Italy had jumped down the fence in 1939, May 22, not in 1940.

[Michele]

Originally Posted by Rasputin

True, but Hitler wasn't bluffing. He really wanted a war, thought Germany would win, and was mad when he didn't get one.

Well, sure. He wanted a war - with Czechoslovakia, alone, on the assumption that the French would back away from their alliance, the British had no alliance, and the Czechoslovakians would fight, but hopelessly. He also was mad at Munich on the principle that all the haggling was beneath a warlord.

[borithan]

Originally Posted by adm

H
If France, Czechoslovakia, and Poland had ignored the UK’s self-serving cold feet* and fought back in 1938, Germany would very likely have fallen. Their primary tanks were Panzer Is and IIs, French Renaults were there equals, lacking to much of the required infrastructure for Blitzkrieg style tactics at this point, the better equipped units and markedly larger militaries of the three “Little Entente” would have ground down the German Army.

Hmm... France were not exactly keen on war either. Yes, Britain was the driving force behind the Munich agreement, but the French didn't take much persuading. I am not sure it can be clear who is more ready for war in 1938 as all the major powers put a lot of work into updating their armies between 1938 and 1940 (though having the comparatively modernised Czech army facing the German army on the East would have been a boon to the French).

However there is a chance there may have been a coup attempt in the German High Command if war was declared. Many German generals were still very nervous about the prospect of war in 1938, and I think the group who had been planning a coup if France has intervened during the reoccupation of the Rhineland in 1936 were still active. If that had been successful then I would imagine them suing for peace on pretty straitforward terms almost immediately, which would have likely been accepted by a cautious France. Poland and Czechoslovakia less willing maybe, but likely leaned on heavily by France and Britain to accept.

If the coup was unsuccessful (or didn't happen at all), then you would have had a war... but the Czech army was much more focussed on the defence (the Sudentland fortifications the German army was very glad to not have to fight through), and I don't think would have mounted aggressive operations on it's own. France was even more politically shaky in 1938 than it was in 1940, so there is no reason to suggest it would have been any more aggressive than it was then, so you would have seen a large scale mobilisation, but then slowly working the army up to preparedness. No real offensive operations until 1939 at the earliest. Poland... less sure about what shape their armed forces would have been like in 1938. However, given the Germans would not have wanted to fling themselves against the Czech or French defences along their border I imagine most of the fighting would have initially been between the two of them. Poland maybe attacking East Prussia, while Germans concentrated on the Danzig corridor? A very different fight from the one seen in 1939, as the German army is in a much different position.

Stalin and Russia
It would be in Russia’s long-term interest to see Germany split up amongst weaker powers, he may even provide Poland with some material help.

Stalin had been desperate to form an alliance against Germany, so he would have wanted to join in. It was the Soviets being frozen out of the Munich agreements that in part pushed them towards signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. He would have been very keen to help a battle against the Germans... but the Poles had also refused to allow Soviet forces (land or air) to cross their territory. They might have relented a little (materiel and maybe allowing air transport across their territory) given an actual war with Germany, but I don't see them allowing Soviet ground forces into Poland.

Stalin would also be wary of an aggressive Poland, moving on the Baltic States would recover more of Tsarist Russia, and remind the Poles that they are not big enough to tackle Russia.

The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact gave the USSR the cover it needed for action against the Baltic States. If the USSR now had allies against Germany I don't think it would risk them with an outright occupation of the Baltic states at this point. However, pressure being applied to them to align more with the USSR, or maybe allow bases and troops to be based on their territory ("to safeguard supply lines to our allies") seems plausible. For the same reason I doubt we would see overt aggression against Finland.

Russia will also be taking a hard look at Manchuria, and the Japanese Army’s limited resources, expect this “Pacific” war to fought on main land Asia with Japan out of Manchuria, China, and Korea. We may even get an earlier Red China.

With action limited on the Western Front by the different rsults there (action against Germany, but with allies who are reluctant to accept direct help), I could see more focus being sent Eastwards. Sending more support to the Chinese Communists might be a possibility.

I would expect a much lower intensity war in this case, until France eventually brings itself into a position where it is happy to mount offensive action. It still would be quite cautious, but facing a continued, probably more mobile, war with Poland and the encroaching steamroller of France Germany would sue for peace... or if Hitler was unwilling (entirely likely), a likely take over by the military who would then sue for peace. Germany I guess could take Poland out before France could intervene, but that seems less likely in 1938 than in 1939, but given a Polish collapse the Soviet Union would have a pretext to intervene ("to protect the Polish people from German aggression"), and the 1938 German army, already sapped from a two front war likely could not take on the Red Army (but given their performance in the Winter War, it is going to be a bloody mess of an offensive by the Soviets).

I guess also this may all be made moot by a French political collapse meaning they don't get involved at all, at which point you probably get a bit of a slog of a German victory, which the Soviets don't intervene in (but possibly move on the Baltic States and Finland). Then you have the perfect set up for the Soviet vs German set up Stalin feared Britain and France were maneuvering him into.

*The UK was not ready for a war in 1938, and were not really ready until late 1941 or 1942, the English Chanel, Royal Airforce and Royal Navy saved the UK in 1940.

While I would agree Britain was not ready for war in 1938, I would say it was in 1940. The BEF was a respectable fighting force (with some issues, like it being forced to use a mishmash of transport and the perennial problem of the reliability of British tanks), and the RAF was in a reasonable (and improving) position. France and Britain were actually quite confident about the outcome, expecting to hold the Germans and then win the fight, and the longer the Germans delayed the stronger their position would become. The problem was that the disaster of the French campaign suddenly left a huge quantity of equipment last on the continent which needed to be replaced, setting the British Army back about a year, both in readiness and updating equipment.

[The Colonel]

I take it we're familiar with Mr Turtledove's take on the "1938 War" scenario.
As normal for his work, it starts out okay, then hands a large idiot ball to everyone who isn't the USA and proceeds to get a bit weird.
I recall he had the Poles decide to ally with German for some reason, then the Russians invaded Poland and Germany invaded France ... and then for some reason Britain and France allied with Germany to fight the Russians and I gave up...

[borithan]

Looking the series up The French and British switch sides again in the next book... so I am guessing he realised how dumb a decision that was and undid it?

I could maybe see Poland siding with Germany if the Soviets attacked them and Germany offered support. Just deciding to side with Nazi Germany before any war broke out, on the other hand, is just ridiculous.

[adm]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

Why do you assume that? "Fascist" was not a D and D alignment, it is a vague cluster of vaguely similar ideological positions usually including ultra-nationalism and charismatic dictatorship. By definition each fascist government would be as much inclined to self-interest as top hat wearing nineteenth century oligarchs and far more ruthless about it. Fascist governments in Europe during World War II tended to support Germany but they could just as easily have decided not to as indeed Greece did.

Originally Posted by Michele

Indeed. Consider Poland. After a military coup in 1926, it could hardly be described as a functional democracy. It still had a parliament but the Communist Party was outlawed, its leader was a general, it was strongly nationalistic, militaristic, and it took its slice of Czechoslovakia right after Germany.

Portugal was no democratic heaven either, and it eventually sided with the Allies.

Excellent points. After the Holocaust, Fascist=NAZI became ingrained in West European culture, by pre-WW II definitions, Putin and Edrogan are running Fascist states.

[adm]

Originally Posted by Michele

I would cast a glance to Sakhalin. Not a secondary prize here. The two sides are facing each other along the 50th, and there's oil fields there.

Given the USSR's lack of any serious naval assets, and that Japan had the best trained and equipped navy in the world at the time, I think the ocean would be a hard limit on Russian expansion. Anything surrounded by ocean is Japan's.

Originally Posted by Michele

I doubt it's a matter of hardware. The Soviet units that invaded Finland were entirely another kettle of fish in comparison to the Soviet Far East Army. The former had a heavily purged officer class, a bad overall commander, and appalling logistics. The latter had not really been touched by the purges, had good commanders, and their success in Mongolia was built on good logistics.

Good points, I will add that 1938 was in the middle of the Army Purges, several capable army officers that were dead in 1940 could be sent east to fight Japan.

[adm]

Originally Posted by Michele

The Pact of Steel is indeed after Munich, but Italy had jumped down the fence in 1939, May 22, not in 1940.

True, I was concentrating on Japan's status, but should have noted Itaily's earlier commitment. In any event, it was France and the UK's unwillingness to stand up for Czechoslovakia that persuaded Italy that Germany was the future.

Originally Posted by Michele

Well, sure. He wanted a war - with Czechoslovakia, alone, on the assumption that the French would back away from their alliance, the British had no alliance, and the Czechoslovakians would fight, but hopelessly. He also was mad at Munich on the principle that all the haggling was beneath a warlord.

Precisely, if France had had a post WW I de Gaulle, Germany would have been stopped before WW II started. My assumption on this timeline is that there is a Statesman capable of rallying Germnay's neighbors now, before it is too late. These three powers knew that they were on Hitler's to do list, and this is the first clear line he crossed that was not either an internal matter, or a largely willing joining together. The Anschluss was approved in Austria by petition, however quick Hitler was to jump the gun.

[adm]

Originally Posted by borithan

Hmm... France were not exactly keen on war either. Yes, Britain was the driving force behind the Munich agreement, but the French didn't take much persuading. I am not sure it can be clear who is more ready for war in 1938 as all the major powers put a lot of work into updating their armies between 1938 and 1940 (though having the comparatively modernised Czech army facing the German army on the East would have been a boon to the French).

For this to work, you would need a statesman who survived WW I that can pull these three nations together. Of Germany, France, UK, Poland, and Czechoslovakia, Poland and Czechoslovakia were the most prepared, Germany talked a good game, but was not ready to face France or Poland with any certainty of winning, yet.

Originally Posted by borithan

However there is a chance there may have been a coup attempt in the German High Command if war was declared. Many German generals were still very nervous about the prospect of war in 1938, and I think the group who had been planning a coup if France has intervened during the reoccupation of the Rhineland in 1936 were still active. If that had been successful then I would imagine them suing for peace on pretty straitforward terms almost immediately, which would have likely been accepted by a cautious France. Poland and Czechoslovakia less willing maybe, but likely leaned on heavily by France and Britain to accept.

IF Poland decides to go to war now, I doubt any amount of "leaning" will do much good, Poland will want it's pound of flesh.

Originally Posted by borithan

If the coup was unsuccessful (or didn't happen at all), then you would have had a war... but the Czech army was much more focussed on the defence (the Sudentland fortifications the German army was very glad to not have to fight through), and I don't think would have mounted aggressive operations on it's own. France was even more politically shaky in 1938 than it was in 1940, so there is no reason to suggest it would have been any more aggressive than it was then, so you would have seen a large scale mobilisation, but then slowly working the army up to preparedness. No real offensive operations until 1939 at the earliest. Poland... less sure about what shape their armed forces would have been like in 1938. However, given the Germans would not have wanted to fling themselves against the Czech or French defences along their border I imagine most of the fighting would have initially been between the two of them. Poland maybe attacking East Prussia, while Germans concentrated on the Danzig corridor? A very different fight from the one seen in 1939, as the German army is in a much different position.

Poland was likely the best prepared for a war of any of these five powers in 1938, but I am assuming that France is a bit more stable, even if it (likely) isn't. The threat of France will be important. Without a significant number of tanks, German military capability will not be markedly ahead of it's neighbors. Czech T35s and T38s will be the best on the field, but they will not have Blitzkrieg tactics. I would expect the Czechs to fix the deployed German units, while Poland armies start taking Prussia and east Germany. Once Germany starts to collapse I would expect France to move in, and take most of the credit.

Originally Posted by borithan

Stalin had been desperate to form an alliance against Germany, so he would have wanted to join in. It was the Soviets being frozen out of the Munich agreements that in part pushed them towards signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. He would have been very keen to help a battle against the Germans... but the Poles had also refused to allow Soviet forces (land or air) to cross their territory. They might have relented a little (materiel and maybe allowing air transport across their territory) given an actual war with Germany, but I don't see them allowing Soviet ground forces into Poland.

Agreed, getting weapons and other material, sure, actual Russians, no.

Originally Posted by borithan

The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact gave the USSR the cover it needed for action against the Baltic States. If the USSR now had allies against Germany I don't think it would risk them with an outright occupation of the Baltic states at this point. However, pressure being applied to them to align more with the USSR, or maybe allow bases and troops to be based on their territory ("to safeguard supply lines to our allies") seems plausible. For the same reason I doubt we would see overt aggression against Finland.

The Russian occupation of the Baltic States was carried out in 1940 as you describe, it wasn't an outright annexation until 1944/45.

Originally Posted by borithan

With action limited on the Western Front by the different rsults there (action against Germany, but with allies who are reluctant to accept direct help), I could see more focus being sent Eastwards. Sending more support to the Chinese Communists might be a possibility.

I would expect so. The tossing Japan off the mainland would only be a part of this.

Originally Posted by borithan

I would expect a much lower intensity war in this case, until France eventually brings itself into a position where it is happy to mount offensive action. It still would be quite cautious, but facing a continued, probably more mobile, war with Poland and the encroaching steamroller of France Germany would sue for peace... or if Hitler was unwilling (entirely likely), a likely take over by the military who would then sue for peace. Germany I guess could take Poland out before France could intervene, but that seems less likely in 1938 than in 1939, but given a Polish collapse the Soviet Union would have a pretext to intervene ("to protect the Polish people from German aggression"), and the 1938 German army, already sapped from a two front war likely could not take on the Red Army (but given their performance in the Winter War, it is going to be a bloody mess of an offensive by the Soviets).

I doubt Germany could disengage enough from the Czech front to attack Poland, and the mobility of this war would be more like Eastern Front WW I, not Blitzkrieg. Poland can fight a largely armorless Germany, with help from the Czechs and French.

Originally Posted by borithan

I guess also this may all be made moot by a French political collapse meaning they don't get involved at all, at which point you probably get a bit of a slog of a German victory, which the Soviets don't intervene in (but possibly move on the Baltic States and Finland). Then you have the perfect set up for the Soviet vs German set up Stalin feared Britain and France were maneuvering him into.

This could be a risk, will Poland and the Czechs be able to fight Germany to a stalemate, or will one side or the other pull out a win?

Originally Posted by borithan

While I would agree Britain was not ready for war in 1938, I would say it was in 1940. The BEF was a respectable fighting force (with some issues, like it being forced to use a mishmash of transport and the perennial problem of the reliability of British tanks), and the RAF was in a reasonable (and improving) position. France and Britain were actually quite confident about the outcome, expecting to hold the Germans and then win the fight, and the longer the Germans delayed the stronger their position would become. The problem was that the disaster of the French campaign suddenly left a huge quantity of equipment last on the continent which needed to be replaced, setting the British Army back about a year, both in readiness and updating equipment.

The UK was not ready for a war in 1940. Their front line tank was the Matilda I https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matilda_I_(tank). They lacked machine guns and artillery and ammunition. Their training was inadequate. The RAF was the best prepared in 1940, but just barely. The RN lacked convoy escorts, and trained men for the ships they had, relying too much on reservists. The fact that Germany had to effectively rebuild a navy from scratch was a life saver.

[AlexanderHowl]

What would an alternative World War Two have looked like if the USA had stayed out of World War One and the UK and France had turned to Japan for assistance (which was something that Japan had been preparing for before the USA jumped in)?