It had just occured to me what would have happened if after WWI Poland had not been formed by the League of Nations and that it agreed with Germany and Russia to split the Polish territory along ethnic lines, so that Russia recieved Byelorussian and Ukranian Poland and Germany would get Western Poland, but in regards to reparations Germany still faces the same fate of a crippled ecconomy. How does this effect the origins of WWII.
This is an excellent "What If"...without the invasion of Poland, how would the conflict start? Hitler had already bullied the Allies in annexing Czechoslavakia...would he have dared attack the USSR in 1939? I don't think he would do so...maybe he would continue Germanic expansion into Eastern Europe. That is, replace the attack on Poland with Hungary and maybe Romania. This would probably be the move he would make as it would give some Lebensraum (Hungary) and economic benefits (Romania) from the Ploesti oil fields. Of course, both countries became Axis powers after Germany attacked the USSR in 1941, but how would they react to Hitler's pressure in 1939. Would they succumb like Czechoslavakia or put up a fight. If they did fight, would this trigger WWII? France and England did not have any treaties with these countries. Could the USSR pull a deal like they did with Poland and split Hungary and Romania with Germany? Interesting scenario... If Hitler did not make a move in the East in 1939, would he attack the low countries and France in 1940? I think he would leave well enough alone in the West and concentrate on Eastern European conquests.
Yes, this is a good question. It was the invasion of Poland that compelled the Western allies to declare war on Hitler. Now, Hitler has always had his eyes set towards the east. So, if there was no Poland and thus no declaration of war from the West, would Hitler have invaded Russia? Would the German Generals have allowed Hitler to invade Russia? Would the West go to Russia's aid like they did in 41? Hmmm. Lots to think about. I say he would have invaded Russia after securing alliances with the same eastern block countries (Rumania, Hungary, Bulgaria). After that, who knows. Would he have been successful in 40'? The only other possibility is that he would have compromised with his generals and held off invasion until 41' to build up fuel stocks and panzer divisions. As for the West, Chamberlain would still have been the Prime Minister so what would their attitudes have been towards the Russo-German conflict? I don't think they would have gone to the Russian's aid. I believe there was still a lot of anticommunist attitudes around.
"ethnic lines" in ploand????? can u explain this? how much do u know about the history of poland? The history of Poland don't start in 1919, it dates back thousand of years before. It was the cancellation of poland in the XIX century until ww1 that was absurd, not its rebirth in 1919. the creation of poland after ww1 was inevitable. So i guess that this scenario is just a military game, which simply ignores completely the political situation in '19 europe. well, in this case please go on.... PS: i'm not polish, i don't give a damn of any nation
As completely unlikely as this course of action is, the likelyhood is that Hitler would have eventually struck the Soviet Union without first attacking France and the low lands. The Czech "problem" would have probably still have been resolved diplomatically just because appeasement would still have been the prefered early method of dealing with Hitler by the French and British. Without a Polish campaign and having Stalin and Hitler fighting a war the British and French would likely have stayed out of the conflict prefering to just let the two dictators slug it out.
Poland was created by the League of nations only because Germany lost the war. As I have mentioned before, Lenin ceded the Polish territory to Germany in return for peace. Lets not only focus on Germany here Gentlemen. Stalin was far more clever the Hitler and was very well aware of Hitlers intensions after reading Mein Kampf. The question should also be, what might Stalin have done?
Stalin would have fortified his border just as he historically did. One has to remember that Stalin also faced a more immediate problem with Japan in Manchuria where border clashes were the norm in the late 30's. Hitler, at least on paper, poses far less of a threat having a smaller army that is untried and if we follow history, is also preparing heavy fortifications on their Eastern border. Now, the other question is: Could Germany invade the Soviet Union successfully with just their 1939 military forces? This would mean just 6 panzer divisions, one ad hoc panzer division, three light divisions, a single cavalry division and, say 25 infantry divisions at most (leaving some to defend the Western border). The SS has virtually no contribution at this point as does the Luftwaffe on the ground. While the Soviets lack T34 and KV1 tanks they also don't face any German tank with anything bigger than a 3.7cm or 7.5 cm howitzer and most of the German tank force has nothing more than machineguns on it. Germany would also lack the degree of motorization they had in 1941 meaning no panzergrenadier divisions and only a couple of motorized infantry ones.
Nah, I think Hitler was more fearful of the West than was led on. He definitely did not want war with Great Britain. He had no respect for the French but he knew that the Brits would jump in if he attacked France. His attack on France was a consequence to the declaration of war. So, no, I do not think he would even consider heading in that direction. Russia was his target. As far Stalin, I don't think he would have attacked German Poland. He would have waited until he was attacked. He has plenty of space to play with. I do think he would have taken the Baltic states to test both Hitler's reaction and the ability of the Red Army's Generals. Yes, he was schrewd but also a survivor.
The Versailles treaty Gents!!! We cant forget Hitlers hatred for that embarrassing treaty which Germany was forced to sign. He blamed that treaty for Germany's miss fortunes as much as he blamed the Jews and Bolsheviks. Declaring war on the Soviet Union would mean his back was open for retaliation as France and Great Britain would now see Hitlers true intensions.
Agree with above Hitler would have definately attacked the Soviet Union: Question is when: 1940 or 1941? And how much stronger/weaker the participants would have been (Germany, Soviet Union)... Every year Hitler waited just let the Red Army to recover more from the purges and the Soviet industrial power to increase. And which side would have England supported, if any? _
From 1939 to 1941 Hitler received invaluable supplies from Stalin and military information which both nations shared with each other. Attacking the Soviet Union would mean doing so with less supplies, having less men and experience, attacking an enemy completely blind and leaving his back exposed to the same nation which imposed such embarrassing reparations on his country and people. Hitler afterall wasnt stupid.
Have you heard of the Curzon Line of Demarcation, Germany and the Soviet Union agreed that any invasion of Poland and the subsequent subdivision of Poland would follow the Curzon Line. I have used this as a basis of the question, according to several books on European history the Polish State arrose and dissapeared dozens of times in the last 1,500 years. But will you stick to my thread if not then don't contribute, i clearly ask, no post WWI Polish State.
Hitler was aware of the Soviet military purges of 1938, however he was not sure that the military power of the Red Army would have been so much weaker, until the Winter War. This led to two things: Hitler being adamant that he could win in a short campaign, and Stalin making huge changes to the Red Army´s equipment and tactics. So without the Winter War which was following the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact Hitler would not be willing to attack east first, I think.
I would like to change the contents of the first post a bit. What if Poland would be created based on territory of the Napoleonic Duchy of Warsaw; that is Danzig and west part of Silesia would be German, east part of Silesia is Byelorussian or Ukrainian. Byelorussia and Ukraine would be independent countries instead of S.S.R's. Then because no Holodomor on their territories but Soviet and witnessing what Soviet population suffered next door, the two nations would at least stay neutral. From German perspectives, Germany solved the problem of deployment as Army Group South and Center did by political coersion and German military just thrusted onto Moscow, maybe from Leningrad. I think more importantly is that Eastern European nations were under developed in human development such as agriculture dominant over industry, illiteracy over education etc. Just look at Italy, about 1/3 of the population after ww2 were only illiterate or elementarily educated. Italy in ww2 were still regarded as medium-size power; who knows about the Eastern European countries in 1930s that would have less human development than Italian already low development.
In that case why go for Russia at all? Wasn't the "Lebensraum" Hitler wanted in the Ukraine? Maybe the Soviets and Germans split Byelorussia and the Ukraine as well as Poland.
Thanks for your attention: you have asked the unspoken contents of my idea. If the USSR would be defeated as Moscow occipied by German forces and a ceasefire like that of the Battle of France was agreed. States in Caucasus and Central Asia would be encouraged by the Soviet Union's defeat, inviting Persian and Turkish intrusion like in 1920s. Then with the USSR occupied to quell these uprisings in Central Asia and the Caucasus, German would be free to take on Ukraine and Byelorussia. With the Red Army occupied, a blitzkrieg into Ukraine created the Lebensraum. Human development would still be needed but the Fuhrer preferred the shortest but inhumane way possible. You see, many things had to fall in the right places after different territorial configurations after ww1, discussion of which would be leading to more empty or dreaming-on discussions
But why even try to defeat the Soviets? The Ukraine was where Hitler wanted his "Lebensraum". If it is independent then there is no need to attack the Soviets. Indeed if Germany borders on the Ukraine (I'm not sure exactly where the borders run based on your suggestion) there may be no need to attack Poland. In that case it might be Poland and Germany splitting the Ukraine. Or the USSR and Germany splitting both Poland and the Ukraine. The west could easily be left out of this as well.
Moscow would still be a Bolshevik threat to the Fuhrer's regime, regardless of different territorial configurations after ww1. Other than this statement, I think this discussion and hence my following typing are harboring on dreaming-on. Thank you all for your attentions. If Poland would be created in territorial size very similar to the Duchy of Warsaw, this new Poland had no land connection to the Baltic Sea from the Polish corridor. The Polish corridor and Danzig would be German or a new Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth would give this new Poland land connection to the Baltic.
