Turkey joins the Axis in 1940 After France Falls

"The Turks, although neutral, were courted by both Germany and the Allies. They staunchly maintained their neutrality to the end of the war, giving haven to Germans escaping the Russian Juggernaut in Bulgaria and Romania in 1944, and from the Allies in Greece in 1944-45.
Of course their surrendered Kar. 98K's and other equipment were immediately absorbed by the Turkish Army."


"The Turks had a dilemma as World War II approached. On the one hand, they had made a great deal of progress toward becoming a modern secular nation. Entering the war on either side would put that progress at risk. On the other hand, the Turks had lost a great deal of territory at the end of World War I. In the Middle East, they lost territory which today is Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Israel, and part of Saudi Arabia. In the Mediterranean, the Italians seized islands along the Turkish coast, some as close as 3 miles away from the mainland. A strong current of Turkish political thought said that World War II was an opportunity to take those territories back. The question was: which territories did they go for? The Italian-held islands were an affront to Turkey. On the other hand, England ran (directly or indirectly) former Turkish territory in Iraq, Jordan, and Palestine. France held Syria and Lebanon. Turkey was also interested in regaining influence and/or territory in Turkish-speaking areas of the Soviet Union. Turkey could swing toward the allies and try to recover the Mediterranean islands, or it could swing toward the Axis and try to recover lost areas in the Middle East. After the Germans invaded the Soviet Union, Turkey also had the option of trying to exploit that war to reach its goals in the Soviet Union.

Throughout the war, the Allies and Axis were very aware of Turkey's potential role. At various times both sides offered fairly major incentives to bring the Turks in. A couple of times it looked like they were about to succeed."

http://members.aol.com/dalecoz/ww2_0998.htm

 

"Armed Forces: In 1938 the Turkish standing army had 20 000 officers and 174 000 men. Military service lasted for three years. In 1939 the Turkish army was administrationally divided into three army inspectorates, nine corps, and one military governorship; the country's armed forces were composed of 20 infantry divisions, three brigades of mountain troops, one fortress brigade, and five cavalry divisions (including two reserve cavalry divisions) - altogether 132 regiments (60 infantry, six mountain troops, 21 cavalry, eight reserve cavalry, 20 field artillery, 10 heavy artillery, and seven fortress artillery). In early 1941 Turkey established 17 corps headquarters, 43 divisions and three independent infantry brigades, two divisions and one independent cavalry brigade, as well as two mechanized divisions. The armed forces were poorly equipped; weapons shipments from Germany, Great Britain, and U.S. did little to improve that condition. Just before the onset of hostilities the Turkish navy underwent a program of expansion and modernization; two submarines were ordered for construction in Germany, two submarines and four destroyers were ordered for construction in U.K. Lesser vessels were also constructed in home shipyards. After Germany delivered one submarine in 1939, the Turkish navy contained 19 naval vessels and they included one armoured ship, one line cruiser, two light cruisers, two torpedo-boats, four destroyers, five submarines, and four other lesser ships (most vessels were obsolete); with a total displacement of 55 775 tonnes (the number of naval personnel stood at 9 200). The real combat value of the navy was insignificant. By the end of WWII, the navy had one battle cruiser, two cruisers, two gunboats, three minesweepers, eight destroyers, 12 submarines, three motor torpedo boats, five minelayers, a surveying vessel, a depot ship, a fleet tug, a collier, and an oiler. By 1940 the Turkish air force was composed of four air regiments (each regiment contained six air companies), and had in possession a total of 370 aircraft (it had 8 500 personnel). Thanks to British and French shipments one more air regiment, along with five independent air wings, was formed in 1941. Shipments of military equipment from Germany replaced the shipments from Allied countries in the same year. Close to the end of the war, two air force divisions were organized; they together contained 15 air wings (or 30 flights). The Turkish armed forces did not participated in any military operations of WWII. "

The Armed Forces of WWII ( Near East ).

 

I think initially, it might have been helpful to Germany had this happened. But, because the Turks would be extremely dependent on imports for not only food and resources but arms Turkey would quickly devolve into a very expensive liability.
In the initial weeks or possibly months Turkey might be able to make some inroads into helping countries like Iraq revolt against the British. But,their help would also have a down side in that the Arab states would be leery of such help with the memory of the Ottoman Empire fresh in their minds. It does give Germany a route into Southern Russia should the Germans decide on invasion.
On the downside once the Allies get sufficent material strength, particularly after the US enters the war, Turkey becomes a huge liability. The British and US could easily have invaded and probably forced a surrender. This in turn opens up the entire Black Sea to Allied naval forces along with giving them a much better route into Russia for Lend Lease. It would also put Allied airforces in easy range of Ploesti greatly endangering German access to oil.
The problem here is Turkey is in no condition to fight a modern war at this point in their history. Nor are they in any shape to go on offensive operations outside their own nation. This makes them of little help to Germany.

 

What Germany needed as an ally was a very industrialized nation of which none were available in Europe...............he ticked all of them off.

 

The "Point" of attacking North Africa was the vital Suez Canal! had Turkey entered the war no matter how obsolete their forces may have been they would have put great pressure on the already squezed and almost beaten British in Egypt and the middle east. Remember that Frence/British forces in this area were also slim and under-equiped by standards of more modern forces elsewhere.

Had the Suez fallen and the British been pushed out of Eygypt North Africa and the Med would no longer be a problem for the Axis. Agreed that North Africa was a side show and a thorn in Germany's side (to uphold Italy) but had the job been completed (possibly with the aid of Turkey) The Med would have become an Axis lake and operation Torch would have been a dismal failure. The Allied invasion of French North Africa would not have been so easy had the Germans and Italians not been fighting a multi-front war both from the invaders in the west, the British in the east and the Free French in the south. You have to admit that Turkey's intervention in this contest would have upset the fragile british hold on Egypt and the middle east during 40-41!?!

As for my coments about India; I did not mean that German divisions would push into India but that reprecussions and logistics having been hampered with the loss of Egypt and Suez would have "cut off" India from the Empire. German and even Japanese sea lanes could be established via Suez from the Med to the Pacific and The great Japanese offensives into Burma towards India may have gone differently with the British in full retreat from the middle east and with their supply lines in danger.

 

The Suez Canal was (is) a through-way from somewher to somewhere. Considering the Med was rather much a no-go area for British shipping, it looks very much like the Suez C. had lost it's pre-war importance, so no big reason to make such a song and dance about it.

 

Ha! In that case Turkey would have been better off siding with the Soviets!

 

Agreed. A red turkey is better than a nazi turkey.

 

Unfortuantly a Soviet - Russia alliance was and is never possible for the following reasons:

The violent and constant warfare between the two countrys from Ivan to the Civil war or 1917-1924 ( you can count on your hands the number of days these to Empires were NOT at war for one reason or another)

The Soviet Union was a communist atheist state and the Ottoman Empire / Turkey a deeply religious but emerging secular state.

I think the chances of a Soviet Turkey over an Axis Turkey are VERy slim indeed.

As for the Suez Canal... Egypt was the prize, the link between Brithsh Africa and the middle east. A supply and shipping center for not only the Med but the Indian ocean and the middle east also. Its loss would be a huge blow to the stuggleing British and allowed German Italian (and Turkish) access to the Indian ocean and exposed shipping lanes of the British Empire. I agree the supply into the Med via ship was negligable, however all supplies for the armies of Egypt/ the holy land and the Med came into the Red Sea and Suez shipping center.

 

This brings me to my original point. Turkey and Russia have had numerous ingagements and Russia always came out on top.

Why would Turkey consider going to war with Russia again, at a time when she was in no shape to do so and with an ally that previously cost Turkey an empire?

 

I completely agree! Turkey would not want any further war with Russia BUT, if we are talking about 1940 after the fall of France, Turkey (like many Axis allies) could or did not forsee the German attack on Russia the next year. it seemed to the world at that time (after the winter war and the division of Poland) that germany and Russia had come to an understanding and England/France were alone.

Turkey could greedily eye its former subjects with little fear of a clash with the Soviets and only limited resistance from the beaten and retreating British.

Try to see it from the perspective of 1940 BEFORE the invasion of the USSR. Turkey could have joined to settle scores and take care of REGIONAL operations not knowing that they might be dragged into the future storm on the Ost front?

 

Perhaps...

The only thing in this scenerio which I can not imagine, is what incentive Turkey would have in joining the Axis?

Surely if you are not ready for war, revenge cant be your only reason for joining, or can it?

 

Good point. Any govt with a fascist leaning would be tempted to side with Germany AND Russia in 1940 since the two were on paper allies at that time. In this context, it's plausible for Turkey to set its eyes on its former territories in the south with France out of action and UK teetering on the brink. Turkey could assume it has a secure border with the USSR since Germany and Russia had just divided Poland.
That's how I think it would look to observers in 1940.
Since the Turks were aware of their military deficiencies, I would say that the only thing that would induce Turkey to join Germany as an ally would be for Germany to successfully invade England across the Channel. In my view, Turkey would be just going for the spoils of war, much like what the Russians did to Japan in 1945.

 

I am in 100% agreement! That is my point... we can't look at the situation as we know it but how it looked to Turkey in 1940. I think you made a good point here and I conceed that a more convincing argument or a series of pro Axis events would have been needed to pull Turkey into the alliance. If Sea Lion had been launched OR Spain had joined the Axis OR the Iraq/Iran revolts had been sooner or more sucsessful (Each of those could be a "what if").

Ultamatly, Turkey sat on the fence still licking its wounds from the earlier confilct because nither side made a good case for an alliance that would benifit Turkey and have little or no risk in their weakend military state.