German war production without war with West

If Hitler hadn't declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor as per his treaty with Japan, something close to this what-if might just have happened. Roosevelt might have had a very tough time getting the US into Europe with a shooting war already on his plate. England was about bled dry. Stalin and Hitler would have been the last powers standing in Europe.

I think a lot of this would depend on how and why Britain and Germany stop fighting. In 1940 the only way Britain was going to surrender would have been following a successful invasion. I don't believe at all that the Germans could have achieved a successful invasion of Britain but if they had of done it would have cost them so many men and machines that they simply would have been just way to weak to attack Russia in 1941, in a invasion of Britain victory as much as defeat would have cost the Germans their ability to invade Russia.
Germany was in a position where at best it could not afford to knock Britain out of the war by force and at worst was just not able to. Yet if Germany was to attack Russia it could not afford to divide it's forces and fight a war on two fronts, so Germany had to think of a way of getting Britain out of the war and to secure it's western flank without weakening it's own forces.
The only way I can see this being achieved is if Germany had offered the French and British terms so good that they could not refuse them in 1940. This I think this could only have been possible at the very point where it became clear that France would fall. I am going completely into fiction of course as this is a fictional what if scenario but perhaps if the Germans had agreed to withdraw it's troops from Norway, France and the Low Country's and to give home rule to the remaining part of Poland that fell outside of Germany's pre 1918 border in exchange for oil producing parts of the Dutch and French Empires in addition to Alsace and the recognition of the restoration of it's other pre 1918 borders including those lands contained within Poland, this then should have been enough to tempt Britain and France into a peace treaty. Any such peace treaty would of course of have been conditional that it include both Britain and France and that France reduce it's forces to a size where they were only capable of defence.
Should this treaty have been agreed then it may have included an agreement with Britain to mutually guarantee Germanys newly acquired former Dutch colonies in Indonesia and also British colonies in the same region against Japanese attack.
Should this have been agreed to by all parties then the question of Russian occupied Poland would have remained open as would the future of Japanese ambitions in the far east. The Japanese in this situation may then have felt it wiser to align itself with Germany against Russia rather than attack the USA.

If nobody has taken this as credible then I hope they have at least had a good laugh at it.
The only thing I stick by is that whatever happens in order for the Germans to successfully invade Russia they need to preserve their forces while at the same time reaching peace with Britain, for the Germans an uneasy peace would be better than nothing, but the easier the peace with Britain the freer the hand with Russia.

Are you suggesting no Lend-Lease economic assistance for Soviet Union?
No RN or USN to keep Arctic sea lane open to imports?
No joint British / Soviet invasion of Iran to establish a second main supply route via Persian Gulf?
No British / American occupation of Iceland as hub for convoys heading to Soviet Union?
No use of Loch Ewe as hub for convoys heading to Soviet Union?
No British attacks to keep German navy suppressed?
No German army and air fleet tied down in Balkans?
No Italian / German army and air fleet tied down in North Africa?
No German army and air units tied down in France?

Soviet Union will be destroyed four months after German led anti-communist coalition invade.

wiking85 said:

With non-warships. Historically no Axis warships were allowed use of the Dardanelles. Merchant shipping was fine by treaty.

Click to expand...

Romanian, Italian and German warships did in fact engage Soviet naval forces in the Black Sea...

germans transported U-Boats and Schnellboots by rail to Axis ports, the Italians had access and Romania has Black Sea ports...bottom line, historically, the Axis did operate there and engaged Soviets surface vessels. Andwith this current scenario, I am sure the Germans could have renegotiated terms with the Turks.

GrauGeist said:

Romanian, Italian and German warships did in fact engage Soviet naval forces in the Black Sea...

germans transported U-Boats and Schnellboots by rail to Axis ports, the Italians had access and Romania has Black Sea ports...bottom line, historically, the Axis did operate there and engaged Soviets surface vessels. Andwith this current scenario, I am sure the Germans could have renegotiated terms with the Turks.

Click to expand...

I didn't say Axis warships didn't operate in the Black Sea, but rather that they didn't use the Dardanelles to get there. The Romanians were already there, the Germans used the Danube to ship in ships. The Italians to my knowledge did not arrive via the Dardanelles; if you have some proof that the Turks allowed them to move their warships into the Black Sea via the Dardanelles, I would very much like to see it.

Let me expound on that.

Russia seized provinces of Kars, Ardahan and Batumi at gunpoint during 1877 to 1878. Turkey wanted them back.

If Britain and USA are out of the equation Turkey will almost certainly want a piece of the action to get their stolen territory returned. Germany won't need to negotiate very hard to obtain naval access to Black Sea....

Sounds like WAY too much has to go both differently and just right for it to be a realistic scenario for me to consider.

davebender said:

Soviet Union will be destroyed four months after German led anti-communist coalition invade.

Click to expand...

The Soviet Union might well fall (I think it would)....to be replaced by a more traditional Russian nationalist Gov.
I do not think that would be an easy push-over, particularly if receiving outside support.

davebender said:

Let me expound on that.

Russia seized provinces of Kars, Ardahan and Batumi at gunpoint during 1877 to 1878. Turkey wanted them back.

If Britain and USA are out of the equation Turkey will almost certainly want a piece of the action to get their stolen territory returned. Germany won't need to negotiate very hard to obtain naval access to Black Sea....

Click to expand...

Turkey would be like Spain IMHO: it would only jump in once the USSR seems to be about to fall. Letting warships use the Dardanelles is pretty much going to be viewed as a DoW on the USSR, so it would only happen when Turkey is ready for war, which wouldn't be until the USSR was ready to fall apart.

Germany and Turkey had a neutrality agreement as well as a trade agreement. In the event that Germany wanted to expand on access to the Black Sea with capital ships I am sure they could have been more persuasive.

In the event that Turkey wouldn't agree to that, Hitler had a way of...shall we say "diplomacy".

Remember, Germany and Russia had a neutrality pact, too...

I don't see the comparison.

Spain has just completed a ruinous civil war. They are economically devastated. Furthermore Spain has no territorial dispute with Russia / Soviet Union.

davebender said:

I don't see the comparison.

Spain has just completed a ruinous civil war. They are economically devastated. Furthermore Spain has no territorial dispute with Russia / Soviet Union.

Click to expand...

Turkey was devastated repeatedly in the late 19th and early 20th century, so wasn't eager to jump into the next war after the experiences of WW1 and the invasions of the 1920s. IIRC Turkey's PM at the time said of WW2: "At least I didn't create any orphans".

I agree.

However a chance to recover three provinces from Russia with little risk would be too good an opportunity to miss. If Turkey doesn't claim them they will probably end up as independent states aligned with Germany.

Getting back on track, what could Germany produce without the pressures of the war with the Western powers?

Just about everything and be able to do so in relative peace. No RN blockade of overseas trade could also improve the quantity of scare imports. You might see reliable jet engines in '43 as well as "tougher" drive chains for Tigers and Panthers. Prob a lot more my damaged brain can't think of right now....

what could Germany produce without the pressures of the war with the Western powers?

Click to expand...

Same stuff they produced historically except the entire German field army and Luftwaffe bomber force goes east. Plus at least three Me-110 geschwader performing ground attack rather then operating as night fighters. Plus an additional field army supplied by Italy and at least one field army supplied by Turkey. Plus the German airborne corps and transport aircraft historically used up invading Crete. Logistical units and supplies which historically supported these units in west would of course go east with their parent units.

More then enough to destroy Soviet Union in a single campaign season.

davebender said:

More then enough to destroy Soviet Union in a single campaign season.

Click to expand...

Sounds far too close to that nonsense about (to paraphrase) 'only having to kick the door in and the whole rotten edifice will come down'.

Germany tried in 41 and failed and again in 42 and failed (long before the bombing ramped up), yes U-boat production consumed resources but under the already laid out plans much of that would happen anyway assuming the UK was potentially an opponent in any war until late 1939.
Similarly the superior T-34 would have appeared in this scenario (and the tank factories out of the LW's reach were happening anyway).

German production levels were woeful and given the Nazi leadership's historic reluctance to go over to a 'total war economy' (until it was far too late, if it ever would have made much difference given their opponents) and their fixation on quick victories (the effect on R&D are obvious) why should that change even if the war in the west is avoided?
If they stick to how they ran things in reality (and I see no reason to change that) Germany would still be frittering resources and time away on a zillion 1 projects with gross duplication, the negative often highly ignorant interference of Nazi politics personalities and no sane coordination to avoid it.
Throw in the leadership's desire to keep the German populace content by not going over to a 'total war economy' and not allowing the armed forces to consume so many resources and this easy victory is in my view a pipe dream (and an highly questionable one at that).

It's also worth pointing out that with no war in the west German armed forces do not learn some of the lessons they did apply successfully in 41 42.

This 'what if...' has so many caveats that ignore the nature of the situation in Germany as to be frankly absurd in my view.

Gixxerman said:

Similarly the superior T-34 would have appeared in this scenario

Click to expand...

I would say that the Panzer IV with the "longer barrel" was comparable if not better than the T-34-76 in technical aspects. BTW: I'm curious about which grow the German tank production and employment could have reach without the war with the West.

German production levels were woeful and given the Nazi leadership's historic reluctance to go over to a 'total war economy'

Click to expand...

Actually they were pushing for it since the war started, but the results only appeared later. Read Adam Tooze's The Wages of Destruction.

As for the proposed scenario: assuming an Aglo-German peace in 1940, followed by Germany invading the USSR in '41 as historically, would result in the first two years of war being somewhat as historically. I will not comment beyond this.

Interesting point, Gixxerman. I may or may not agree in the end, but you make some valid points that should be discussed. My feeling has LONG been that if the Germans could have ramped up production, they WOULD have when they had the chance during the "Phony War" and any other delays. That they didn't tells me they had not evaluated the threats very realistically.

That said, if there had not been a western war, what WOULD have made them knuckle down and BUILD more stuff? Bombing didn't do it. Maybe a quick-but-not-decisive defeat would have.

I can't say. The leadership was not rational and Hitler thought he could overwhelm anything. He couldn't all at the same time, as many leaders in the past have found out. At least the USA fought a holding action in the Pacific until the ETO was won and THEN concentrated on Japan. That might not have been optimum, but it WAS possible. Doing both might not have been at the same time.

Jenisch said:

I would say that the Panzer IV with the "longer barrel" was comparable if not better than the T-34-76 in technical aspects.

Click to expand...

Do you mean the late Pz IV Ausf Ausf F with the KwK 40 L/43 gun or the G with the KwK 40 L/48 gun? The first is a mid 1942 version and the latter is a mid 1943 version, Jenisch?
Either way production numbers are unimpressive, wiki lists less than 800 E, F, F2 G in 1941 (with reference) and 880 for 1942 (without) and against T 34 numbers are all in my view.

GregP said:

Interesting point, Gixxerman.

Click to expand...

Thanks Greg.

GregP said:

The leadership was not rational

Click to expand...

This is where so much of Germany's trouble lie in my view.
All that 'national socialist spirit/will' cobblers....and an obsession with ruthlessly competing personal ambitions being allowed to cloud judgement waste time resources when there ought to have been (at some senior level) a clear (or at least attempted) over-view deciding where cooperation and combined resource management was necessary given the strategic objectives.
It was there at the top and was encouraged it appears to work all the way through to the management of the various companies supplying their war effort.

TBH so much appears to have been done on the hoof or whim - and I accept Germany is far from alone in this - but they seem to have made it into an art of how not to do things.
I hate to stereotype but it seems very much at odds with the usual disciplined, thoughtful, analytical and logical German approach we see today.