warspite1ORIGINAL: Orm
I am not sure I understand this discussion.
Are you claiming that if the Nazi party was removed from power and Germany sought peace with the Western Allies they would agree? Just abandoning Poland they just had gone to war for? [&:]
UK and France would not make any economic demands on Germany? No territorial demands? No disarmament?
Yes, given the right circumstances. But there is so much that could jeopardise such a possibility - first and foremost who the Germans appoint as successor, then there is the Soviets who were delighted to sign a non-aggression pact with Germany, while (in Stalin's view) Germany and the Western Allies then tore each other to pieces and left the Soviet Union alone.
But I believe peace could have been possible for the following reasons:
Circumstances:
Germany would need to appoint a successor - who ever it is, from the Party or the Military - who is able to confirm unequivocally that they want peace and that borders - once defined - are set in stone. If there is any doubt, if there is any uncertainty, the deal is off.
There would need to be give and take on all three sides and Poland would have to be restored to its pre-war borders (ish).
Reasons:
- Look at the length Britain and France went to to avoid war; they were prepared to make colonial concessions, economic concessions (to ensure Germany had access to markets denied or restricted) and most of all, they were prepared to oversee the sell out of Czechoslovakia.
- They did this for three reasons - genuine fear (particularly on the French side) of how strong Germany had become in just the few years since Hitler's rise to power, and also remembering the horror, the carnage of WWI. There was just no appetite for another war in the west.
- One man pushed and pushed for this war. Despite the concessions made, despite the concessions offered, Chamberlain, Daladier et al simply did not appreciate that Hitler was not in the slightest bit interested. He wanted Lebensraum; that is where his thinking started and that is where it ended. The western leaders thought they were dealing with someone that it was possible to do a deal with eventually, but of course Hitler's bottom line made a deal impossible.
- Well now that man is dead. The war - short and brutal for the Poles and not much fun either for the airmen and sailors (merchant and armed forces) that have borne the brunt of the fighting so far - is still in its infancy. What has actually happened? A few ships sunk, a few aircraft, a few French troops. Yes the Poles have had it tough but we know western politicians would look at the bigger picture - essentially sod the Poles - harsh? Yes - Fair? No. But I think realistic given the way diplomacy was conducted earlier in the decade.
- The unpalatable fact is that the Western Allies have done nothing to aid Poland and do not envisage an offensive against Germany as being possible until 1941 at the earliest!! So the comment about abandoning them does not ring true - in fact quite the reverse - of course any deal will rely upon a restoration of Poland as a sovereign nation.
- The war is going to very quickly bankrupt the British and French. There are no winners here. If Germany are willing to see reason - yes, I believe the British and French would grab the opportunity with both hands.
- Economic demands on Germany? It may take someone with vision, but you would like to think that someone somewhere in Britain and France would be able to do the maths. Long drawn out war with no guarantee of the outcome vs peace now, but no reparations from Germany; Poland would need to be compensated however.
- In negotiating a peace there would have to be an immediate cessation of hostilities and this only benefits the Western Allies. They are struggling to take the war to Germany in any case and are seeing the initial effects of the U-boat war. A ceasefire is not in any way a bad thing for them. If a deal cannot be made then the war continues and the west have bought more time.
