Hitler dies in 1936, Schacht's strategy is followed

[sillygoose]

What if Hitler died, either through a clandestine assassination that causes him to die of a heart attack or something or of natural causes, and Goering takes over Germany, but due to political weakness has to listen to and keep Schacht in charge of the economy? Schacht, as the above book details, wanted to limit the pace of rearmament to focus on exports and continue to build up a trade empire not dissimilar to the current Chinese belt and road strategy. Given the British obsession with the 'heartland theory' would there still be a war, just with different causes or would Germany be allowed to build up its trade empire and threaten US and British economic interests? Before the war Germany had been building up major trade networks in Europe, Latin America, and Asia (though the latter case was cut off by the Japanese though eventually working together offered some window into the region) that were proving to be very alarming to US and British interests, especially since they relied on barter agreements and cut out the city of London from getting a cut of the trade.

Assuming that they are allowed to continue to trade and build up a neo-colonial empire, how does the rest of the 1930s-40s play out and same with the rest of the century?

 

[WolfBear]

I suspect that the Anglo-Americans might be displeased by this but not enough to go to war with Germany over this, obviously. They Anglo-Americans could try using the idea of an Austro-German union as a bargaining chip in order to get Germany to change some of its trade deals with third countries to make them a bit more favorable to Britain and/or the US, I suppose. Other than Austria, I don't think that Goering would actually be willing to risk engaging in territorial changes unless he can get them through peaceful negotiations. Maybe take another stab at purchasing Eupen and Malmedy? Stresemann tried in the 1920s and Belgium was open to this but France vetoed this deal back then; would France be more interested in supporting this deal this time around? And would Poland actually be willing to negotiate over Danzig with Germany if Britain is not going to be willing to fight over it?

I could see a lot of German-Chinese economic ties developing, which could make the Soviet Union nervous sooner or later. I could also see Germany and France engaging in a bidding war in Eastern Europe in order to secure and attract Eastern Europeans' loyalty. The "Jewish problem" in Germany probably gets solved at a slower rate through mass Jewish emigration, which of course could motivate other countries in the neighborhood such as Poland to eventually follow the German model in regards to this, simply in a less brutal manner (no Nuremberg-style laws, for instance). This could eventually create huge pressure for a Jewish state to be created in Palestine so that an outlet for all of this Jewish emigration could be opened up. The world could reluctantly take in most of Germany's Jews, but not Poland's Jews. Way too many of them, after all.

I wonder if the Soviet Union will still eventually collapse and break up in this TL--and, if so, whether it occurs at the same time that it did in real life.

 

[ATP]

What if Hitler died, either through a clandestine assassination that causes him to die of a heart attack or something or of natural causes, and Goering takes over Germany, but due to political weakness has to listen to and keep Schacht in charge of the economy? Schacht, as the above book details, wanted to limit the pace of rearmament to focus on exports and continue to build up a trade empire not dissimilar to the current Chinese belt and road strategy. Given the British obsession with the 'heartland theory' would there still be a war, just with different causes or would Germany be allowed to build up its trade empire and threaten US and British economic interests? Before the war Germany had been building up major trade networks in Europe, Latin America, and Asia (though the latter case was cut off by the Japanese though eventually working together offered some window into the region) that were proving to be very alarming to US and British interests, especially since they relied on barter agreements and cut out the city of London from getting a cut of the trade.

Assuming that they are allowed to continue to trade and build up a neo-colonial empire, how does the rest of the 1930s-40s play out and same with the rest of the century?

Soviets would still want war,and use alliance with germany for that/Only to stab them in back later/
So,if germans fall for that,nothing change.
If not - dunno what happen.

 

[Buba]

Further events are IMO impossible to predict. Besides "WWII as we know it" not happening.
Without Hitler at the helm I cannot imagine the Anchluss or Munich happening. And nobody but a dictator is capable of pulling a Hitler-Stalin pact like in OTL.
No Soviet expansion, that's almost a given. The Colonial Powers +USA may dogpile Japan in the early 1940s.

 

[sillygoose]

I suspect that the Anglo-Americans might be displeased by this but not enough to go to war with Germany over this, obviously. They Anglo-Americans could try using the idea of an Austro-German union as a bargaining chip in order to get Germany to change some of its trade deals with third countries to make them a bit more favorable to Britain and/or the US, I suppose. Other than Austria, I don't think that Goering would actually be willing to risk engaging in territorial changes unless he can get them through peaceful negotiations. Maybe take another stab at purchasing Eupen and Malmedy? Stresemann tried in the 1920s and Belgium was open to this but France vetoed this deal back then; would France be more interested in supporting this deal this time around? And would Poland actually be willing to negotiate over Danzig with Germany if Britain is not going to be willing to fight over it?

Certainly they'd be more likely to negotiate. However I've seen a pretty convincing argument that due to the Great Depression the regime in Warsaw was pretty unstable and for domestic reasons were too afraid to make concessions for fear of being overthrown; they also apparently convinced themselves that the Allies would have to come to their aid no matter what due to them being the only proxy in Central Europe regardless of Allied ability to actually offer any material help. So they might still risk war even without Allied support based on flawed assumptions. However if there is no Austria or Sudeten annexations Danzig probably won't become an issue, as it seems the Danzigers were creating pressure on Berlin to annex them based upon the previous border revisions and Memel successfully rising up and achieving annexation earlier in 1939.

Still Austria and Czechoslovakia were annexed IOTL due to more than simple ethnic reasons, Austria provided a direct border with Hungary and Yugoslavia for trade as well as created pressure on Czechoslovakia to bend to the will of Germany as well as offering economic enhancements to Germany (hence the 1931 customs union effort, which might be revived ITTL) which the Czechs were a trade competitor and French and Soviet proxy in the region, which was very anti-German. Annexing them would still have strong economic/strategic reasons even assuming the ethnic pressures aren't a factor.

I could see a lot of German-Chinese economic ties developing, which could make the Soviet Union nervous sooner or later. I could also see Germany and France engaging in a bidding war in Eastern Europe in order to secure and attract Eastern Europeans' loyalty. The "Jewish problem" in Germany probably gets solved at a slower rate through mass Jewish emigration, which of course could motivate other countries in the neighborhood such as Poland to eventually follow the German model in regards to this, simply in a less brutal manner (no Nuremberg-style laws, for instance). This could eventually create huge pressure for a Jewish state to be created in Palestine so that an outlet for all of this Jewish emigration could be opened up. The world could reluctantly take in most of Germany's Jews, but not Poland's Jews. Way too many of them, after all.

I wonder if the Soviet Union will still eventually collapse and break up in this TL--and, if so, whether it occurs at the same time that it did in real life.

Question is whether the OTL Japanese invasion would still be allowed without major sanctions. With Goering in charge due to his good relations with the British the impression that Europe is more stable overall even with the SCW and Ethiopia running the US and British could well feel that they have a safety margin to act against Japan unlike OTL. If Japan is forced to withdraw then the German-Chinese relationship would continue to develop and probably piss off important American interests (the Rockefellers were arguably the major driving interest behind the FDR administration and they have very deep economic interests in China); Stalin and Chiang were actually much closer than Stalin and Mao, so it could well be that China maintains good relations with the Soviets and Germans without either being displeased.

France had zero leverage in the East especially once Poland sided with Germany from 1934-1939 and the Czechs were out of the picture. Plus France had a serious trade deficit with Germany. Italy and Britain had a much more vigorous trade with the region. That is where Britain and Germany could fall out, as IOTL they had very serious trade competition in Eastern Europe:



Excellent book that covers the trade war I've not seen anywhere else.

The 'Jewish question' was basically impossible to solve via emigration given that all the countries that Jews wanted to emigrate to basically shut their doors to emigrants. Not entirely of course, but mostly, which is why there was still considered to be a problem as of 1939 in that regard. However without Hitler in charge that very well could go away as a problem. By 1936 the Nuremberg laws were already in effect and Goering or Hess is not going to repeal them any time soon. Palestine is closed permanently to Jewish immigration as long as Britain is in charge due to the Arab revolt in 1936:

1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

As to the USSR there is the theory that WW2 actually extended the life of the regime by given it much greater legitimacy. A lot of the historiography of the USSR during the period of Stalin is distorted due to lack of honest internal sources, so while there are claims that it was basically stable and improving in the 1930s there are views that it was actually very unstable and the purges and show trials were really removing all sorts of active elements that were a threat to the regime staying in power.

Soviets would still want war,and use alliance with germany for that/Only to stab them in back later/
So,if germans fall for that,nothing change.
If not - dunno what happen.

Without Germany actively trying to revise borders it would be hard for the Soviets to try to start a war without facing their nightmare scenario: Europe united against them. Goering didn't have the same gambler mentality of Hitler, so I highly doubt he'd try to revise borders the same way; after all he actively lobbied against war with Poland, the Soviets, and America.

Further events are IMO impossible to predict. Besides "WWII as we know it" not happening.
Without Hitler at the helm I cannot imagine the Anchluss or Munich happening. And nobody but a dictator is capable of pulling a Hitler-Stalin pact like in OTL.
No Soviet expansion, that's almost a given. The Colonial Powers +USA may dogpile Japan in the early 1940s.

Agreed about border revisions not really happening, but Goering or Hess as a puppet figure would still end up having the office of Fuehrer, which is still basically a dictator position even if not a total one like Stalin created. Assuming Goering is in charge he had a very friendly relationships with the British ruling class and could end up working out a deal with them to be their proxy on the continent especially if he listens to Fritz Hesse about British geo-strategy.

Probably no need for a M-R pact ITTL other than say a commercial agreement, which any leader should have been able to pull off.

Good point about Japan, but that might just see crippling sanctions at the very start of their invasion in 1937 if there isn't a concern about German revanchism in Europe even if Ethiopia and the Spanish CW are still on. So we very well might not see a significant war in Asia.

 

[WolfBear]

Certainly they'd be more likely to negotiate. However I've seen a pretty convincing argument that due to the Great Depression the regime in Warsaw was pretty unstable and for domestic reasons were too afraid to make concessions for fear of being overthrown; they also apparently convinced themselves that the Allies would have to come to their aid no matter what due to them being the only proxy in Central Europe regardless of Allied ability to actually offer any material help. So they might still risk war even without Allied support based on flawed assumptions. However if there is no Austria or Sudeten annexations Danzig probably won't become an issue, as it seems the Danzigers were creating pressure on Berlin to annex them based upon the previous border revisions and Memel successfully rising up and achieving annexation earlier in 1939.

If Goering thinks that he can get away with annexing Danzig without a war or perhaps only with a limited war with Poland, then he might decide to do it. But if the Anglo-French will decide to fight, then he won't risk it. And I don't know if the Memelland annexation still occurs in this TL since Goering was not as bold as Hitler was. Though if the Anglo-French give Goering a blank check, then maybe it still does. Ditto for Austria, but not for the Sudetenland since that territory won't be given up without the threat of war with the Anglo-French (Goering won't know that they will back down at the last minute).

Still Austria and Czechoslovakia were annexed IOTL due to more than simple ethnic reasons, Austria provided a direct border with Hungary and Yugoslavia for trade as well as created pressure on Czechoslovakia to bend to the will of Germany as well as offering economic enhancements to Germany (hence the 1931 customs union effort, which might be revived ITTL) which the Czechs were a trade competitor and French and Soviet proxy in the region, which was very anti-German. Annexing them would still have strong economic/strategic reasons even assuming the ethnic pressures aren't a factor.

Is there any way to pull Czechoslovak politics in a more pro-German direction by using ethnic German political power there to make deals?

As for Austria, Yeah, it's still likely to get annexed sooner or later, especially if Italy gives the go-ahead for this. I also wonder if Goering still does a population transfer agreement in regards to South Tyrol like Hitler did in real life (but with it not being fully implemented in real life due to WWII).

Question is whether the OTL Japanese invasion would still be allowed without major sanctions. With Goering in charge due to his good relations with the British the impression that Europe is more stable overall even with the SCW and Ethiopia running the US and British could well feel that they have a safety margin to act against Japan unlike OTL. If Japan is forced to withdraw then the German-Chinese relationship would continue to develop and probably piss off important American interests (the Rockefellers were arguably the major driving interest behind the FDR administration and they have very deep economic interests in China); Stalin and Chiang were actually much closer than Stalin and Mao, so it could well be that China maintains good relations with the Soviets and Germans without either being displeased.

That makes sense. That said, though, it is theoretically possible for Stalin to see Chiang as being more of a German tool if German aid to China will ever get too large.

France had zero leverage in the East especially once Poland sided with Germany from 1934-1939 and the Czechs were out of the picture. Plus France had a serious trade deficit with Germany. Italy and Britain had a much more vigorous trade with the region. That is where Britain and Germany could fall out, as IOTL they had very serious trade competition in Eastern Europe:



Excellent book that covers the trade war I've not seen anywhere else.

The 'Jewish question' was basically impossible to solve via emigration given that all the countries that Jews wanted to emigrate to basically shut their doors to emigrants. Not entirely of course, but mostly, which is why there was still considered to be a problem as of 1939 in that regard. However without Hitler in charge that very well could go away as a problem. By 1936 the Nuremberg laws were already in effect and Goering or Hess is not going to repeal them any time soon. Palestine is closed permanently to Jewish immigration as long as Britain is in charge due to the Arab revolt in 1936:

1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Well, as I said, new homes were able to be found for most German Jews by 1939, but the number of Polish Jews was astronomically larger, so it's either staging a successful Jewish rebellion in Palestine against British rule or if that fails and Britain holds onto Palestine, then as you said Jewish immigration to there will be permanently blocked and Jews in countries such as Poland will have nowhere to immigrate to, thus compelling them to stay in Poland en masse.

Theoretically the US could become more open to mass Jewish immigration again if it will ever switch to a merit-based immigration system, but that's very likely decades away from the 1930s.

As to the USSR there is the theory that WW2 actually extended the life of the regime by given it much greater legitimacy. A lot of the historiography of the USSR during the period of Stalin is distorted due to lack of honest internal sources, so while there are claims that it was basically stable and improving in the 1930s there are views that it was actually very unstable and the purges and show trials were really removing all sorts of active elements that were a threat to the regime staying in power.

Don't you think that any Soviet leader in the mid-20th century would try to use force to hold their empire together? Unlike with Gorbachev in real life.

Without Germany actively trying to revise borders it would be hard for the Soviets to try to start a war without facing their nightmare scenario: Europe united against them. Goering didn't have the same gambler mentality of Hitler, so I highly doubt he'd try to revise borders the same way; after all he actively lobbied against war with Poland, the Soviets, and America.

Agreed.

Agreed about border revisions not really happening, but Goering or Hess as a puppet figure would still end up having the office of Fuehrer, which is still basically a dictator position even if not a total one like Stalin created. Assuming Goering is in charge he had a very friendly relationships with the British ruling class and could end up working out a deal with them to be their proxy on the continent especially if he listens to Fritz Hesse about British geo-strategy.

Probably no need for a M-R pact ITTL other than say a commercial agreement, which any leader should have been able to pull off.

Good point about Japan, but that might just see crippling sanctions at the very start of their invasion in 1937 if there isn't a concern about German revanchism in Europe even if Ethiopia and the Spanish CW are still on. So we very well might not see a significant war in Asia.

Agreed.

 

[ATP]

Certainly they'd be more likely to negotiate. However I've seen a pretty convincing argument that due to the Great Depression the regime in Warsaw was pretty unstable and for domestic reasons were too afraid to make concessions for fear of being overthrown; they also apparently convinced themselves that the Allies would have to come to their aid no matter what due to them being the only proxy in Central Europe regardless of Allied ability to actually offer any material help. So they might still risk war even without Allied support based on flawed assumptions. However if there is no Austria or Sudeten annexations Danzig probably won't become an issue, as it seems the Danzigers were creating pressure on Berlin to annex them based upon the previous border revisions and Memel successfully rising up and achieving annexation earlier in 1939.

Still Austria and Czechoslovakia were annexed IOTL due to more than simple ethnic reasons, Austria provided a direct border with Hungary and Yugoslavia for trade as well as created pressure on Czechoslovakia to bend to the will of Germany as well as offering economic enhancements to Germany (hence the 1931 customs union effort, which might be revived ITTL) which the Czechs were a trade competitor and French and Soviet proxy in the region, which was very anti-German. Annexing them would still have strong economic/strategic reasons even assuming the ethnic pressures aren't a factor.


Question is whether the OTL Japanese invasion would still be allowed without major sanctions. With Goering in charge due to his good relations with the British the impression that Europe is more stable overall even with the SCW and Ethiopia running the US and British could well feel that they have a safety margin to act against Japan unlike OTL. If Japan is forced to withdraw then the German-Chinese relationship would continue to develop and probably piss off important American interests (the Rockefellers were arguably the major driving interest behind the FDR administration and they have very deep economic interests in China); Stalin and Chiang were actually much closer than Stalin and Mao, so it could well be that China maintains good relations with the Soviets and Germans without either being displeased.

France had zero leverage in the East especially once Poland sided with Germany from 1934-1939 and the Czechs were out of the picture. Plus France had a serious trade deficit with Germany. Italy and Britain had a much more vigorous trade with the region. That is where Britain and Germany could fall out, as IOTL they had very serious trade competition in Eastern Europe:



Excellent book that covers the trade war I've not seen anywhere else.

The 'Jewish question' was basically impossible to solve via emigration given that all the countries that Jews wanted to emigrate to basically shut their doors to emigrants. Not entirely of course, but mostly, which is why there was still considered to be a problem as of 1939 in that regard. However without Hitler in charge that very well could go away as a problem. By 1936 the Nuremberg laws were already in effect and Goering or Hess is not going to repeal them any time soon. Palestine is closed permanently to Jewish immigration as long as Britain is in charge due to the Arab revolt in 1936:

1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

As to the USSR there is the theory that WW2 actually extended the life of the regime by given it much greater legitimacy. A lot of the historiography of the USSR during the period of Stalin is distorted due to lack of honest internal sources, so while there are claims that it was basically stable and improving in the 1930s there are views that it was actually very unstable and the purges and show trials were really removing all sorts of active elements that were a threat to the regime staying in power.


Without Germany actively trying to revise borders it would be hard for the Soviets to try to start a war without facing their nightmare scenario: Europe united against them. Goering didn't have the same gambler mentality of Hitler, so I highly doubt he'd try to revise borders the same way; after all he actively lobbied against war with Poland, the Soviets, and America.


Agreed about border revisions not really happening, but Goering or Hess as a puppet figure would still end up having the office of Fuehrer, which is still basically a dictator position even if not a total one like Stalin created. Assuming Goering is in charge he had a very friendly relationships with the British ruling class and could end up working out a deal with them to be their proxy on the continent especially if he listens to Fritz Hesse about British geo-strategy.

Probably no need for a M-R pact ITTL other than say a commercial agreement, which any leader should have been able to pull off.

Good point about Japan, but that might just see crippling sanctions at the very start of their invasion in 1937 if there isn't a concern about German revanchism in Europe even if Ethiopia and the Spanish CW are still on. So we very well might not see a significant war in Asia.

You are probably right,Goering was to happy with his life to gamble anything.So - no war,economic expanse.
Soviets,if they start anything,get beaten.

China - in OTL germans trained elite chineese dyvisions,and delivered weapons for them.
Including some Pz1 tanks and Hs123 dive bombers.
They also trained chineese pilots,just like USA and Italy.

In OTL they stopped that becouse of Japan,but here? they could keep delivering help.

Another thing,Spain.Would germans help nationalists ? if not,only with italian help,we could have draw and two Spains.
Or,without Italy help,reds would win.And form soviet colony there.

 

[sillygoose]

BTW I also came across a German industrial group called the MWT which formed in 1931 and were plotting/agitating for economic expansion across Europe. Since industrialists would most likely have major pull via Schacht and Goering (or Hess) would likely require substantial institutional support to maintain their power by 1936 given the economic/financial situation and lack of substantial nazification of the economy that would have happened after 1936 and the creation of the 4 year program their demands would carry a lot of weight.

If Goering thinks that he can get away with annexing Danzig without a war or perhaps only with a limited war with Poland, then he might decide to do it. But if the Anglo-French will decide to fight, then he won't risk it. And I don't know if the Memelland annexation still occurs in this TL since Goering was not as bold as Hitler was. Though if the Anglo-French give Goering a blank check, then maybe it still does. Ditto for Austria, but not for the Sudetenland since that territory won't be given up without the threat of war with the Anglo-French (Goering won't know that they will back down at the last minute).

Highly doubtful he'd go for war given his policy of coordination with with British aristocrat buddies. Unlike Hitler Goering was directly communicating with these people in their own language and understood their geo-political needs, since he was basically another go-between of aristocratic heritage, something that mattered for diplomacy. Neurath would still still be foreign minister and it is unlikely Canaris would turn on Goering if he was pursuing a less confrontational foreign policy, so wouldn't sabotage the regime.

Memel depends on the situation with Austria and Czechoslovakia. If that plays out the same then I think it would still happen, but then Goering wouldn't likely have annexed Czech lands like what happened IOTL. Instead he'd go for economic strangulation after peeling off the Slovaks, much the same as he'd try for the Poles if push came to shove there.
Sudetenland might be given up without the threat of war, just not so quickly as the British really didn't think Czechoslovakia was viable and they hated Benes.

Is there any way to pull Czechoslovak politics in a more pro-German direction by using ethnic German political power there to make deals?

No. The Czechs and especially their leaders were extremely chauvanistic and were very anti-German, which is why the Allies supported them to weaken Germany in Central Europe. Not only that, but the French weaponized their investments to control the politics of countries and had dominant positions in Czechoslovakia (as well as Austria, which is what caused the collapse of Credit Anstalt when the French pulled their money out as punishment for the Austrians going forward with the customs union in 1931), so even if the Czechs wanted to the financial leverage prevented them from charting a new course.

As for Austria, Yeah, it's still likely to get annexed sooner or later, especially if Italy gives the go-ahead for this. I also wonder if Goering still does a population transfer agreement in regards to South Tyrol like Hitler did in real life (but with it not being fully implemented in real life due to WWII).

Goering seems more pragmatic than Hitler, so I don't see why not. Not sure Austria would for sure get annexed, but it is more likely than not.

That makes sense. That said, though, it is theoretically possible for Stalin to see Chiang as being more of a German tool if German aid to China will ever get too large.

It is doubtful they would extend their relationship beyond economic ties and military aid, so as long as they aren't formally allied I could see Stalin simply try to court them with more aid and non-aggression pacts.
Also there were lots more ties to Stalin than historians assumed:

Chiang Kai-shek’s “secret deal†at Xian and the start of the Sino-Japanese War - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications

Using newly available archives, particularly the diary and the presidential papers of Chiang Kai-shek, this article challenges the conventional interpretations of the Xian Incident (1936), in particular the widely held belief that the kidnapping of China’s leader Chiang by two rebellious...

www.nature.com

The relationship with the Germans was more about diversification of trade than anything else, as the Soviets were their number 1 arms supplier through the first 8 years of the war with Japan,

Well, as I said, new homes were able to be found for most German Jews by 1939, but the number of Polish Jews was astronomically larger, so it's either staging a successful Jewish rebellion in Palestine against British rule or if that fails and Britain holds onto Palestine, then as you said Jewish immigration to there will be permanently blocked and Jews in countries such as Poland will have nowhere to immigrate to, thus compelling them to stay in Poland en masse.

IIRC that included only the Jews that lived in Germany prior to Austria and Czechoslovakia. The Austrian and Czech Jews were mostly trapped.

Perhaps ITTL the Poles go ahead with their plan to use Lehi to start a rebellion in Palestine to export their Jews?

Avraham Stern - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Stern spent the rest of the 1930s traveling back and forth to Eastern Europe to organize revolutionary cells in Poland and promote immigration of Jews to Palestine in defiance of British restrictions (this was therefore known as "illegal immigration").

Stern developed a plan to train 40,000 young Jews to sail for Palestine and take over the country from the British colonial authorities. He succeeded in enlisting the Polish government in this effort. The Poles began training Irgun members and arms were set aside, but then Germany invaded Poland and began the Second World War. This ended the training, and immigration routes were cut off.[11] Stern was in Palestine at the time and was arrested the same night the war began. He was incarcerated together with the entire High Command of the Irgun in the Jerusalem Central Prison and Sarafand Detention Camp.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(militant_group)#Evolution,_tactics_and_organization

Many Lehi combatants had received military training. Some had attended the Military Engineers School in Civitavecchia, in Fascist Italy.[42] Others received military training from instructors of the Polish Armed Forces in 1938–1939. This training was conducted in Trochenbrod (Zofiówka) in Wołyń Voivodeship, Podębin near Łódź, and the forests around Andrychów. They were taught how to use explosives. One of them reported later: "Poles treated terrorism as a science. We have mastered mathematical principles of demolishing constructions made of concrete, iron, wood, bricks and dirt."[42]

Theoretically the US could become more open to mass Jewish immigration again if it will ever switch to a merit-based immigration system, but that's very likely decades away from the 1930s.

Don't you think that any Soviet leader in the mid-20th century would try to use force to hold their empire together? Unlike with Gorbachev in real life.

Sure, but the military could turn on them. Not liking the constant threat of purges is motivating.

You are probably right,Goering was to happy with his life to gamble anything.So - no war,economic expanse.
Soviets,if they start anything,get beaten.

I'm not 100% sure on that, but Goering would certainly be more cautious.

China - in OTL germans trained elite chineese dyvisions,and delivered weapons for them.
Including some Pz1 tanks and Hs123 dive bombers.
They also trained chineese pilots,just like USA and Italy.

In OTL they stopped that becouse of Japan,but here? they could keep delivering help.

Depends on the circumstances. They only quit IOTL because all the delivery routes were blocked due the Japanese seizing the ports and France not letting them use Haiphong. Plus the Chinese couldn't pay, as they were delivering rare minerals to the Germans that no longer could be exported.

Another thing,Spain.Would germans help nationalists ? if not,only with italian help,we could have draw and two Spains.
Or,without Italy help,reds would win.And form soviet colony there.

Yes, that was about economic expansion and blocking the Soviets from doing the same. See the book I referenced in the original post it covers the reasons and forms of German economic colonialism in Spain.

 

[ATP]

BTW I also came across a German industrial group called the MWT which formed in 1931 and were plotting/agitating for economic expansion across Europe. Since industrialists would most likely have major pull via Schacht and Goering (or Hess) would likely require substantial institutional support to maintain their power by 1936 given the economic/financial situation and lack of substantial nazification of the economy that would have happened after 1936 and the creation of the 4 year program their demands would carry a lot of weight.


Highly doubtful he'd go for war given his policy of coordination with with British aristocrat buddies. Unlike Hitler Goering was directly communicating with these people in their own language and understood their geo-political needs, since he was basically another go-between of aristocratic heritage, something that mattered for diplomacy. Neurath would still still be foreign minister and it is unlikely Canaris would turn on Goering if he was pursuing a less confrontational foreign policy, so wouldn't sabotage the regime.

Memel depends on the situation with Austria and Czechoslovakia. If that plays out the same then I think it would still happen, but then Goering wouldn't likely have annexed Czech lands like what happened IOTL. Instead he'd go for economic strangulation after peeling off the Slovaks, much the same as he'd try for the Poles if push came to shove there.
Sudetenland might be given up without the threat of war, just not so quickly as the British really didn't think Czechoslovakia was viable and they hated Benes.


No. The Czechs and especially their leaders were extremely chauvanistic and were very anti-German, which is why the Allies supported them to weaken Germany in Central Europe. Not only that, but the French weaponized their investments to control the politics of countries and had dominant positions in Czechoslovakia (as well as Austria, which is what caused the collapse of Credit Anstalt when the French pulled their money out as punishment for the Austrians going forward with the customs union in 1931), so even if the Czechs wanted to the financial leverage prevented them from charting a new course.


Goering seems more pragmatic than Hitler, so I don't see why not. Not sure Austria would for sure get annexed, but it is more likely than not.


It is doubtful they would extend their relationship beyond economic ties and military aid, so as long as they aren't formally allied I could see Stalin simply try to court them with more aid and non-aggression pacts.
Also there were lots more ties to Stalin than historians assumed:

Chiang Kai-shek’s “secret deal†at Xian and the start of the Sino-Japanese War - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications

Using newly available archives, particularly the diary and the presidential papers of Chiang Kai-shek, this article challenges the conventional interpretations of the Xian Incident (1936), in particular the widely held belief that the kidnapping of China’s leader Chiang by two rebellious...

www.nature.com

The relationship with the Germans was more about diversification of trade than anything else, as the Soviets were their number 1 arms supplier through the first 8 years of the war with Japan,


IIRC that included only the Jews that lived in Germany prior to Austria and Czechoslovakia. The Austrian and Czech Jews were mostly trapped.

Perhaps ITTL the Poles go ahead with their plan to use Lehi to start a rebellion in Palestine to export their Jews?

Avraham Stern - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(militant_group)#Evolution,_tactics_and_organization

Sure, but the military could turn on them. Not liking the constant threat of purges is motivating.


I'm not 100% sure on that, but Goering would certainly be more cautious.


Depends on the circumstances. They only quit IOTL because all the delivery routes were blocked due the Japanese seizing the ports and France not letting them use Haiphong. Plus the Chinese couldn't pay, as they were delivering rare minerals to the Germans that no longer could be exported.


Yes, that was about economic expansion and blocking the Soviets from doing the same. See the book I referenced in the original post it covers the reasons and forms of German economic colonialism in Spain.

So,No war in Europe/unless soviets start it/,no supporting China unless somebody pay germans,and still supporting Spain?
Then,we would have safe Europe,free Spain,and China as fucked as in OTL - but,since Czang was soviets buddy,they would help him and start war there.
Czang party was even member of communist party international!
We would still have beaten Japan,and red China - but under Czang.
Probably less bad then OTL,Mao was monster worst then sralin after all.

 

[raharris1973]

@ATP is Czang your spelling for Chiang Kai-shek (aka Jiang Jieshi) of the Chinese Nationalist (Kuomintang KMT) party?

 

[WolfBear]

@ATP is Czang your spelling for Chiang Kai-shek (aka Jiang Jieshi) of the Chinese Nationalist (Kuomintang KMT) party?

And does Cz make a Ch sound in Polish at least sometimes?

 

[Buba]

You're on the money!
It is Czang Kaj-szek in Polish