Alternate History Idea - Hitler dies in early 1936 - then what?

[Anders]

When was the very brief Japanese-Soviet war where Zhukov proved his mettle?

[Gedrin]

To be honest, there's relatively little the Soviets and British can do to each other except along the Indian frontier ... which more or less means Afghanistan. Again, interesting to see which way the Japanese jump in that fight - and even the Turks might be persuaded to join in with Russians to fight.

I don't disagree in terms of direct conflict. It's mainland Europe I was thinking about more. The Soviets, all flavors of Russia really, have strategic interest in expanding west to gain depth and resources. The British Empire, and all flavors of England, have a strategic interest in keeping Europe from being dominated by a single power. It's not that England would pose a direct threat to Russia, or visa versa, but that their interests in mainland Europe would collide, placing them at odds. War becomes more likely with Soviet control of Germany's economic center.

I think the GB vs. Soviet arms industry, in this scenario, is probably a more advantageous comparison than the GB vs. German comparison from RL history. This means that if the British intervene in alt-Europe, they might be more effective than they were against Germany. As in RL, its a matter of recognizing the threat, and being able to respond.

You point out that TBE would have other concerns, and that's how I see the Cold War scenario evolving. The British in a number of proxy wars with the Soviets. Between the proxy battles and dangers in Europe, the British are highly constrained. These constraints are eased by the quality/loyalty of their colonies and allies. However, the Brits, even with the Empire, don't have the industrial and economic power to contain the Soviets and the Imperial Japan.

Eventually, US economic and industrial capacity come in allied to the British due to similar interests.

[Gedrin]

Originally Posted by Michele

Why the economic collapse? 1936 is still in time to rein in military spending. The generals like it, sure, but when Schacht shows them the accounts, they are unlikely to react as Hitler did.

I think Germany is too fragile at this point and wouldn't cope well with serious social disruption. It's more of a collapse in confidence than anything else. Retraction of investment, entrenchment of wealth, interest rates climb and so on... Could they pull it out and carry on? Sure, but they might not do that before the hungry powers note the big power hole in the middle of Europe.

Again, this is where the other European powers can move the line. If they bolster Germany, the lines are between Germany and Poland. If they don't, the lines are in/between Germany and France. I'm not certain that "let's send millions in economic aid to the Germans" is a politically viable idea in 1936.

[gruundehn]

Originally Posted by Anders

When was the very brief Japanese-Soviet war where Zhukov proved his mettle?

IIRC, 1940 and it was one reason that Japan turned south for resources. The Imperial Army still wanted to go north and fight the soviets for the resources in Siberia but the Imperial Navy was able to convince the Cabinet that it would be easier to go south; after all, America was divided and the UK, the Dutch and France were tied up in Europe.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

To be honest, there's relatively little the Soviets and British can do to each other except along the Indian frontier ... which more or less means Afghanistan. Again, interesting to see which way the Japanese jump in that fight - and even the Turks might be persuaded to join in with Russians to fight.

That's an old story and even there they can't really do much more then meddle with each other's Imperial politics.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Michele

That is assuming the Soviets won't meddle with Persia, naturally.

Which is like assuming scorpions will not sting.

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by BraselC5048

For an alternate history idea, what would have happened if Hitler was assassinated around late 1935-36 or so? After remilitarizing the rhineland, but before annexing Austria. I suppose the Nazi party would have picked a new leader, perhaps Goring?

Göring is the obvious pick, especially with the military. The diplomats of the era genuinely liked him, which would keep the Entente at bay for a bit. The big issue is the guy was a rotten leader, solely interested in feathering his own nest. There would be a big fight between the Wehrmacht and the NSDAP, with the rest of the German government as the spoils.

Originally Posted by gruundehn

The Nazi Party was not a single monolith but a wide ranging collection of views going from extreme left to extreme right united only by the loyalty to Hitler.

The left wing of the NSDAP, which was only on the left economically anyways (otherwise it was just as reactionary), was wiped out on the Night of the Long Knives at the end of June 1934, so it isn't important here. Otto Strasser, its lone leader left alive (Göbbels having defected to Hitler and the party right in 1928), was marginalized.

One thing that definitely would not have happened was the German-Japanese alliance. The catalyst for that was Ribbentrop, and everyone thought Ribbentrop was a pathetic clown … everyone but Hitler, that is. Göring really hated the guy, as is evident Nurenburg Diaries. Without Ribbentrop cheering Japan, Germany's ally in the east would have been China.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

A big question being do the Western Allies re-arm at all if the Anschluss and Sudentenland Crisis are averted, or do the non-interventionist factions win out? Has Britain bothered with the Spitfire without the lessons of 1939 to show the limitations of the Hurricane (let alone of clown-planes like the Defiant)

Re-armament was started by the beginning of 1936. It may well not run as fast without Hitler, but it will be happening.

The Spitfire first flew in 1936, and as designed at the same time as the Hurricane. It took a long while to start production, because it used new construction techniques that hadn't been used in the UK on a factory scale before. The Hurricane was the final iteration of the inter-war steel, wood and fabric techniques, and Hawker had to use the new methods for their next aircraft, the Typhoon. That was one of the reasons it was late, and had structural problems.

Is whoever has taken over also a rabid anti-Semite or are some of the very talented Jews who fled Germany in our timeline still at home doing their bit?

Anti-Semitism had been a major and popular feature of the NASDAP from early on, and the Nuremberg laws came in in September 1935. It may change after the civil war has happened, but doing that would not be a quick route to popularity.

Originally Posted by Anders

When was the very brief Japanese-Soviet war where Zhukov proved his mettle?

August 1939. Happened at the same time as the invasion of Poland, so wasn't much noticed at the time.

[BraselC5048]

Originally Posted by Michele

This. I wouldn't even call it a proper civil war, more like some serious unrest and rioting. In 1936, not only the Nazis aren't a monolith as you mentioned, but there's still plenty of other actors that haven't been as marginalized as they'll be in a few years, yet - and in particular, yes, the Wehrmacht does take control. In a short time.

Yes, but not with the final 1938-39 acceleration of our history. The German generals will want to rearm, and they will have a general agenda of "righting Versailles", but they will definitely lack Hitler's brinkmanship.

Originally Posted by Anders

I think the military will support Goering. Not only is he a military man, he is also sufficiently guidable.

Likely rule by the head of the German general staff as about half the real power, and Goering as the other half and head. The military will fight as a block, and what they say goes, because they're the army and they have the guns. Before Hitler, they weren't even completely loyal to the German Republic!

Also, messed up formatting in the post, so apologies for who's quote isn't attributed.

Originally Posted by Michele

Yes, but not with the final 1938-39 acceleration of our history. The German generals will want to rearm, and they will have a general agenda of "righting Versailles", but they will definitely lack Hitler's brinkmanship.

Which is pretty much exactly what I would guess would happen. They might want a "rematch" with Britain and France, at some point in the future, and are rearming for that. And pretty much exactly what I'm looking for.

Originally Posted by The Colonel

A big question being do the Western Allies re-arm at all if the Anschluss and Sudentenland Crisis are averted, or do the non-interventionist factions win out? Has Britain bothered with the Spitfire without the lessons of 1939 to show the limitations of the Hurricane (let alone of clown-planes like the Defiant) Without mad Uncle Adolph's big tank big gun obsession, does the PzIII arm above 37mm? (IIRC it was his personal intervention that brought the 50mm gun on as early as it was). Without fighting Matildas and some of the nastier French tanks, have the Germans worked up HEAT and APCR to the degree that they did? Is the Reich as feudal as it was in our timeline, with all the duplicated effort and wacky special projects? Is whoever has taken over also a rabid anti-Semite or are some of the very talented Jews who fled Germany in our timeline still at home doing their bit?

The western allies rearm because Germany is rearming.

The Panzer III still has the 37mm gun it had in 1940. The Germans don't have panzerfusts, and the allies to have bazookas. They didn't work on APCR as much, but it wasn't exactly all that important IRL, IIRC. Tigers and Panthers and the like didn't really need it, since regular AP with a bursting charge went straight though pretty much everything at any range anyway. It was facing T-34's and KV-1's that drove the Germans to develop Tigers and such. Still likely just as much duplicated effort. The Spitfire and the Hurricane were both ordered at the same time IRL, and before the war started. Basically everybody gets the military they wanted in 1939 or 1940, not what they actually had. It pretty much stays close to there, the armies of 1940 being based on prewar doctrine and ideas.

The US Navy gets most of the US defense budget, and the army and army air force are a laughable as they were before the war started on pretty much the same budget, although the air force gets better planes, but not anything much past the P-40 and B-17.

Originally Posted by The Colonel

As to the US, I suspect with even less excitement in Europe, whatever they are up to is likely to be based mostly on what the Japanese are doing ... an alt-history Pacific War with duelling BBs might be quite impressive... but if the Russians drew first, perhaps the Japanese end up fighting them instead, going after Siberia rather than southeast Asia...

There's a huge alt-history genre, mostly in wargaming, about a "War Plan Orange" scenario, what the Japs and the US go to war in the Pacific. Anytime from the mid-20's to when it actually happened. Both the US and Japan, and their navies, saw each other likely opponents, and it's great for wargaming.

[adm]

German armor production will be markedly lower if they do not take Czechoslovakia and the Skoda factories, furthermore; without Hitlers support concentration of armor into panzer divisions will be less likely as well.