Why? Until Atlanta falls the South thinks it has a prayer of a chance and it wouldn't send such a mission if they had a prayer of a chance. There was A REASON why it wasn't sent in 1864, namely the South wasn't going to give up slavery except under two conditions 1)Northern force of arms or 2)...
What incentives could outweigh giving up a good portion of the country? There are no realistic incentives that the Brits could give that would outweigh that.
I think Molotov would get the nod as Beria would be the one most blamed by the army for the purges of the military since Stalin is gone. I don't think the army would trust Beria enough and their support is needed.
Stalin dies in the shower by slipping on soap and cracking his head open. Of course the war doesn't change much, maybe the Germans lose 2 weeks later or so then OTL but not much else. How does it effect the post-war though? Who would replace Stalin? Molotov? Beria?
It would have to be REAL whacko aggressive to try and pull that stunt. Sending thousands of troops thousands of miles overseas and keeping them supplied is far from cheap.
Maybe not forever but for a long, long time. Also US support of Prussia earlier (If only to pay back the French) would make Germany that much stronger by the time WWI comes around.
The only one of the three mentioned that might have money to invest is the Netherlands. Brazil and Portugal together have squat and it matters little if they invest in the Confederacy or not. Without a rich nation like France or England the South is going to be chronically short of cash. As...