Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles

[Quinkana]

Aren't all of you interfering with God's Plan?
Better not to provoke the Almighty and let the Pact be signed in Rome..

Lol that is very true, Rome is the best place to sign such a pact...

 

[Lascaris]

As a nitpick, wasn't Algeria considered as French as the heartland by the French, and as such would be deemed part of the Metropole?

Technically yes. I short of doubt the rest of the world made the fine distinction. Algeria long term is a problem, shorta kinda so, given the butterflies thrown France's way. Do you hear me @jeandebueil ? 😇😛

Well, i am glad to see that I was right. In which sector are the Greek and French ships allocated?

For once I'll say no idea. Given the forces thrown in one more battleship and a quartet of heavy cruisers are nice but not crucial. If anything once the landings in Europe are done, you don't really need battleships and fleet carriers in Europe and not all that many cruisers either. After all all four German battleships have been sunk by now...

That makes sense, and the Turks going to help the Germans makes way too much sense.

I gave the Germans about the same rate of success they had recruiting Italians from among the million odd men they captured in 1943 ie roughly 20%. Sounds fair to me. And if someone dislikes the Germans naming an SS division Ataturk, why he can stand in the line with all the other historical figures so insulted by the Nazis.

Ooh so Salamis is fighting with the Allied command?

Well fighting against the Allies might had made an interesting ASB TL but we are not into that are we?

That is quite good for the Wallies. More ships available = better right?

Noone ever complained about the application of more artillery in a military problem...

btw where's the Italian navy ittl? Are they the ones partrolling the Med?

They are not patrolling on their own the Mediterranean but they have a slightly freer hand than OTL. Switching sides with somewhat less of a mess, Italian anti-fascists visibly taking overthe show faster and the Allies being forced by circumstances to bring the two Italian battleships to action for the liberation of Thessaloniki certainly helped. 5he latter also likely caused at least a bit of goodwill with the Greek public. And if you used Italia and Roma once, why not again?

I hope we see another push for Yugoslavia and Bulgaria. Dealing with the Balkans is needed, and with Germany probably having to focus on the western front I see them being left for dead soonish.

I5 is not needed per se but when you have over half a million Greeks, in addition to about 200,000 Serbs and Poles already around which you can't quite transfer to France, why not use them?

I’m curious, do the extra ships help the insufficient bombardment at Omaha at all? is everything basically the same? You don’t note any difference in the immediate aftermath, which makes sense as it isn’t that big of an impact. Not to much should have changed if Omaha was a bit less bloody.

Besides that it’s fun to see a lot of whom we assume TTL NATO’s founders will be together in a line up like that. It’s like in a heist movie when they’re assembling a crew.

Well yes. In the grand scheme of things we are in the "nice but not crucial" territory.

I think Ireland and Greece are obvious founding members ITTL, but then again if Greece is in from the get go will they call even wind up calling it NATO?

Leaving aside what happens post war, Ireland has entered the was on the promise of some short of deal for North Ireland. It is not a given the British government once the crisis is over will want to shove a deal Dublin likes down the throat of the Unionists.

Shouldn't it say September 1943 since TTL Corsica was taken over by the Allies in August 1943?

For Corsica sure. For the empire though not as at that time it had switched sides and was run by CFLN.

Indeed, also, Greece might probably be invited too, to the 'Brussels Pact' and be part of the Western European Union (WEU) that TTL may be acknowledging the inclusion of Greece,perhaps renamed as something like 'Pan/Inter European Union'...
Without mention that even if Spain will remain as it seems pro allied but non belligerent , may be possible that it may be invited shortly that the treaty will be signed.

Why not let it known, as traditionally are known most treaties, for the city in what it will be signed on?

Both start life as an anti-German pact and for that Greece makes a fair bit of sense... OTOH her inclusion means commitment to her security in the Balkans as well...

Probably? Or at least I don’t think the inclusion of Greece or Ireland will be directly related to any change in name or scope. Italy was a founding member OTL so the Mediterranean was obviously included in said concept of the “North Atlantic”. Luxembourg doesn’t even have a coast after all.

What I think could change is the initial scope/size. We’ve seen the Australians and New Zealanders do a lot of heavy lifting in North Africa and the Middle East, Persia is an active ally, and that says nothing of the much more active and impressive performance by the groups in the Middle East that have volunteered on the Allied side. One could argue that those fall more into the wheel house of something like SEATO, but nothing says that organization even forms in TTL if it’s already NATO’s turf.

OTOH NATO in OTL explicitly limited its geographical area of application exactly because people did not want to end in a war because someone attacked Australia frex. How do you change that?

Ireland entered the war years ago ITTL due to closer relations with Britain and German U-boat attacks. I don't think their units have seen much action yet, but an Irish division on the western front would be cool.

My assumption was Collins would be treating things at least somewhat more deftly, while having both support within Ireland and a better working relationship with Churchill, who after all in his writings appeared quite fond of him.

 

[Quinkana]

They are not patrolling on their own the Mediterranean but they have a slightly freer hand than OTL. Switching sides with somewhat less of a mess, Italian anti-fascists visibly taking overthe show faster and the Allies being forced by circumstances to bring the two Italian battleships to action for the liberation of Thessaloniki certainly helped. 5he latter also likely caused at least a bit of goodwill with the Greek public. And if you used Italia and Roma once, why not again?

Yeah that makes sense, especially with how the Anti-Fascists in power definitely want to leave a good impression on the Greeks they were at war with only a few months ago.

I5 is not needed per se but when you have over half a million Greeks, in addition to about 200,000 Serbs and Poles already around which you can't quite transfer to France, why not use them?

I mean doing it just pushes the Germans more and would be good in general, especially as the Soviets would be pushing too, so the Germans would be attacked on all fronts and (hopefully) have to spread their forces more thinly (even if the Germans abandon the Balkans to their native allies and focus on the Soviets the third front threatens Austria, which is a bad thing in general).

Both start life as an anti-German pact and for that Greece makes a fair bit of sense... OTOH her inclusion means commitment to her security in the Balkans as well...

I think showing that it cares about the security in the Balkans would be very important, especially if we get a Civil war in Yugoslavia and instability in Albania. I'm still very interested in how the rest of the Balkans turns out. Would Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary be American aligned ittl due to America's much stronger starting position? Also would Czechoslovakia be under the Soviet Union? I hope we'd see most of Germany under the Allies and Bulgaria and Serbia being western aligned...

Spain being republican would be great for it, and would entrench American naval dominance, while I could see it affecting neighbouring nations like Portugal, which should be under the rule of Salazar, and Portugal's decolonisation probably would go differently as dissident groups has Spain to run to.

My assumption was Collins would be treating things at least somewhat more deftly, while having both support within Ireland and a better working relationship with Churchill, who after all in his writings appeared quite fond of him.

Hmm so could we get a united Ireland with Ulster being an autonomous region that has no army but votes for itself?

 

[Duke of Orlando]

Leaving aside what happens post war, Ireland has entered the was on the promise of some short of deal for North Ireland. It is not a given the British government once the crisis is over will want to shove a deal Dublin likes down the throat of the Unionists.

My assumption was Collins would be treating things at least somewhat more deftly, while having both support within Ireland and a better working relationship with Churchill, who after all in his writings appeared quite fond of him.

Hmm so could we get a united Ireland with Ulster being an autonomous region that has no army but votes for itself?

As far as Ireland goes, I’m honestly assuming some sort of compromise is reached with Ireland getting Fermanagh, Tyrone, and most of Derry while the UK keeps the rest except the southern parts of Down and Armagh. Maybe some type of Marshall plan subsidies to smooth over any anger on either side and to help relocate those who choose to move rather than stay where they are. Likely a result that leaves no one happy but that feels like the kind of agreement that’s likely fair. I wouldn’t be surprised if the US put her fingers on the scale for a compromise as ATL NATO starts to be planned to keep both happy and ready to join.

That’s my thoughts at least. Otherwise there’s likely to be a lot of unionists who leave for England. As I don’t see an autonomous zone that’s dedicated to union with a different nation lasting peacefully for long.

OTOH NATO in OTL explicitly limited its geographical area of application exactly because people did not want to end in a war because someone attacked Australia frex. How do you change that?

This is true, although I figured the better performance by various countries would balance that somewhat. It’s less worrying being dragged into a war when you’ve seen how much the other guy can help you or stand on their own if necessary. The chance of someone invading Australia or New Zealand is also relatively tiny. They feel like they’re at a similar risk level as Canada. That’s a much bigger issue for various auxiliary groups in the Middle East though. Persia is so large and economically rich though it feels like they could be worth the risk if it ties them to you.

think showing that it cares about the security in the Balkans would be very important, especially if we get a Civil war in Yugoslavia and instability in Albania. I'm still very interested in how the rest of the Balkans turns out. Would Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary be American aligned ittl due to America's much stronger starting position? Also would Czechoslovakia be under the Soviet Union? I hope we'd see most of Germany under the Allies and Bulgaria and Serbia being western aligned...

Central Europe and the Balkans are almost surely going to be divided along whatever the lines are where the Soviets and Allies meet whatever the Americans show of caring is. The percentages agreement we’ve TTL is likely to match that more closely than the OTL one I think. My personal guess is that we see some or all of Bulgaria and Serbia free of the Soviets, although I don’t know if that necessarily means they’ll be western aligned or neutral buffers. Romania, Hungary and Poland just seem to logistically improbable for anyone but the Soviets to get there first. I don’t think Slovakia is escaping the Iron Curtain either. I could see Patton moving to help the Prague Uprising in TTL though, due to possibly being in a better position. So the Czechs might escape. Croatia probably ends up communist. Austria is either Neutral or western aligned. And Slovenia, Albania, and Bosnia are question marks in my mind.

 

[Whiteshore]

Considering Balbo is still around, what would be interesting would be his impact on post-war Italian politics, especially the development of right-wing politics in the country and all that.

 

[Lascaris]

Considering Balbo is still around, what would be interesting would be his impact on post-war Italian politics, especially the development of right-wing politics in the country and all that.

I don't think that at least initially the fascists that made up the MSI will want to follow Balbo, he's a traitor to the cause after all. So he will be fishing in other waters. Probably the "Common Man's Front' and the "national block of freedom"

 

[Lascaris]

And for some fun the map below, from the Konstantinos Tsaldaris archives, is the border adjustments OTL Greece, or at least the Greek army, would had liked in 1946 to secure the northern border against invasion. It wasn't even proposed for the most part.

 

[Dunois]

And for some fun the map below, from the Konstantinos Tsaldaris archives, is the border adjustments OTL Greece, or at least the Greek army, would had liked in 1946 to secure the northern border against invasion. It wasn't even proposed for the most part.

Great find Lascaris. I can see the strategic logic behind these adjustments as they make the border far more defensible.

The territories concerned are however well populated so large scale population transfers would have been needed. I also don't think Bulgaria would be too pleased to see the border so close to Rila Monastery given its cultural importance.

 

[nickmn]

Great find Lascaris. I can see the strategic logic behind these adjustments as they make the border far more defensible.

The territories concerned are however well populated so large scale population transfers would have been needed. I also don't think Bulgaria would be too pleased to see the border so close to Rila Monastery given its cultural importance.

At this point , Bulgaria's satisfaction is rather unimportant when it comes down to it . They more than likely wont have any power to affect the talks , and i doubt that the WAllies in general and especially Greece will be feeling merciful . This is what , the third war Greece had to fight against Bulgaria in the last 30 years ?

 

[Quinkana]

At this point , Bulgaria's satisfaction is rather unimportant when it comes down to it . They more than likely wont have any power to affect the talks , and i doubt that the WAllies in general and especially Greece will be feeling merciful . This is what , the third war Greece had to fight against Bulgaria in the last 30 years ?

frankly, the main problem is that Greece would have to take a lot more from Albania, which may cause the Albanians to hate them. The stuff taken from Bulgaria isn't as brutal, and Albania wasn't really a belligerent.

But on the other hand Greece not having Constantinople and them not gaining more from the Marmara region may push Greece to propose these borders, and as the Soviets don't care as much Greece may be able to get these borders.

 

[Dunois]

frankly, the main problem is that Greece would have to take a lot more from Albania, which may cause the Albanians to hate them. The stuff taken from Bulgaria isn't as brutal, and Albania wasn't really a belligerent.

These borders mean Bulgaria losing the south bank of its second largest city Plovdiv and the tobacco producing regions in the South. The territories are populated by roughly three quarters of a million Bulgarians too. Has Greece got enough spare manpower to resettle these territories, alongside any gains in Ioania up to Usak? I am not too sure.

 

[Quinkana]

These borders mean Bulgaria losing the south bank of its second largest city Plovdiv and the tobacco producing regions in the South. The territories are populated by roughly three quarters of a million Bulgarians too. Has Greece got enough spare manpower to resettle these territories, alongside any gains in Ioania up to Usak? I am not too sure.

I think the Greeks not taking Plovdiv (making it a border city) and keeping most of the region shown here would still be good enough I think.

But tbf the main thing is that if Greece manages to have Bulgaria and Albania as allies I think Greece won't need to expand their borders in the Balkans: they could put their troops in Bulgaria and mainly focus on acting against the communists instead. So it depends on what our current PM thinks the Greeks could deal with post war. I could definitely see he just thinking that Greece should take more land in Anatolia to protect them against the Turks while being a lot less brutal to the Bulgarians and Albanians to hopefully keep them as allies. And if they go communist then Greece will attempt to expand the borders.

 

[Xenophonte]

And for some fun the map below, from the Konstantinos Tsaldaris archives, is the border adjustments OTL Greece, or at least the Greek army, would had liked in 1946 to secure the northern border against invasion. It wasn't even proposed for the most part.

View attachment 865766

But on the other hand Greece not having Constantinople and them not gaining more from the Marmara region may push Greece to propose these borders, and as the Soviets don't care as much Greece may be able to get these borders.

I think that the OTL 'wishlist' like map for a more defensive north border, ITTL, last stages of the war and postwar circumstances may be made it both lost at least a bit of its relevance. And, perhaps, at the same time done most of it more feasible due to the potential post war compensations.
The allies armies are battling and will be occupying these same regions ITTL, which, IMO, should be taken into account. Also, on the other hand, if Greece, as may appear, will keep its political and military links/be part from the Western Allies, the map may not reflect the post-war situation in ITTL.
So, as the newfound strategic worries that the Greek army may have regarding more defensives borders.
Due that ITTL, would seem probable that aside that Bulgaria would be occupied entirely that also, Albania, Montenegro and Bosnia would be freed by both the Free Yugoslavian Monarchist resistance along with the advancing Allies armies. Also, would be probably that in this scenario Greece would if not all of Thrace, at least would get most of it, and if so, particularly with the newfound Greek access to the Black Sea.

 

[Mechadogzilla]

I really can't imagine Greece getting all of that map. Plenty of Minor nations drew up wishlists of what they wanted to get in the aftermath of WWI and WWII, that doesn't mean their proposals were at all realistic. That map would simultaneously harm the already impoverished economies of Bulgaria / Albania and leave both Tirana and Sofia within short marching distance of the Greek army, severely neutering the independence of both countries and the balance of power in the Balkans. Border adjustments to secure defensibility seem plausible, but not to that extent.

Even if the WAllies want to reward Greece for her contributions, they don't want to do mass population transfers or replace Turkish imperialism with Greek imperialism. Doubly so if Bulgaria and Albania fall under Soviet occupation as well, which seems likely given that they know the Soviets are the great power most antagonistic to the Greeks.

Excellent find though, I had no idea the Greek General Staff were so ambitious.

 

[Duke of Orlando]

At this point , Bulgaria's satisfaction is rather unimportant when it comes down to it . They more than likely wont have any power to affect the talks , and i doubt that the WAllies in general and especially Greece will be feeling merciful . This is what , the third war Greece had to fight against Bulgaria in the last 30 years ?

They may have some power, depending on who is in charge when the war is over. A western aligned Bulgaria U.S. likely to be treated more gently as to not alienate them. A Soviet one likely gets backing from the Soviets to try and have a stronger puppet.

These borders mean Bulgaria losing the south bank of its second largest city Plovdiv and the tobacco producing regions in the South. The territories are populated by roughly three quarters of a million Bulgarians too. Has Greece got enough spare manpower to resettle these territories, alongside any gains in Ioania up to Usak? I am not too sure.

A lot of the population in the mountains are Pomaks, who in the past showed a preference for the Greeks to the Bulgarians. The Greeks often treated them well as well. So I don’t think they need as many as you imply. That said I also don’t think they take that whole area on the map though, particularly any of Plovdiv. As Lascaris said it was taken very seriously OTL and I don’t see why TTL this extreme would be treated any differently than that. There’s likely going be some large adjustments though.

But tbf the main thing is that if Greece manages to have Bulgaria and Albania as allies I think Greece won't need to expand their borders in the Balkans

I will point out that we can make a safe assumption that NATO will last, the Greeks have no reason to. The Greeks have only slightly more reason to trust the Bulgarians than the Turks. That said I don’t think the border in Albania will be moving much besides possibly a few villages and the reassertion that Sazan island is Greek. And I don’t think I he border in Macedonia is going to change unless the Serbs are desperate for help again like they were earlier in the timeline.

 

[A_simple_pilgrim]

While the map is overly ambitious for what the Greeks could receive in this timeline, especially in Albania, it is a really great resource. There's another timeline everyone here probably knows of (Pride Goes Before A Fall), where this map could be a realistic modern border of Greece in the Balkans. Of course that story has a POD a full century before this one...

 

[Vaeius]

And for some fun the map below, from the Konstantinos Tsaldaris archives, is the border adjustments OTL Greece, or at least the Greek army, would had liked in 1946 to secure the northern border against invasion. It wasn't even proposed for the most part.

And somehow even my earliest and most land hungry maps look sane and restrained in comparison. I can see the military thinking there, and I can also see why it never really reached the proposal stage, that map would be a big ask even for ttl Greece to absorb let alone otl. Talk about defensive depth...

It is a very neat find though.

I will point out that we can make a safe assumption that NATO will last, the Greeks have no reason to. The Greeks have only slightly more reason to trust the Bulgarians than the Turks. That said I don’t think the border in Albania will be moving much besides possibly a few villages and the reassertion that Sazan island is Greek. And I don’t think I he border in Macedonia is going to change unless the Serbs are desperate for help again like they were earlier in the timeline.

I'm of a pretty similar mind really. I will say that it does seem like a good chunk of the Greco-Bulgarian border isn't actually terrible as-is from a defensive perspective, lots of mountains and mountain passes etc. The areas I think they're likeliest to push for are up to the Arda river, and maybe for part of Blagoevgrad around modern Sandanski just in case, though it likely wouldn't be called that in such a case... Both areas with sizable populations of Pomaks unless I'm mistaken.

Maybe something along these lines?

I've been tweaking the map a little, but I can't quite nail down decent borders for the middle east. Though I suppose that's nothing new...

 

[Quinkana]

A lot of the population in the mountains are Pomaks, who in the past showed a preference for the Greeks to the Bulgarians. The Greeks often treated them well as well. So I don’t think they need as many as you imply. That said I also don’t think they take that whole area on the map though, particularly any of Plovdiv. As Lascaris said it was taken very seriously OTL and I don’t see why TTL this extreme would be treated any differently than that. There’s likely going be some large adjustments though.

I will point out that we can make a safe assumption that NATO will last, the Greeks have no reason to. The Greeks have only slightly more reason to trust the Bulgarians than the Turks. That said I don’t think the border in Albania will be moving much besides possibly a few villages and the reassertion that Sazan island is Greek. And I don’t think I he border in Macedonia is going to change unless the Serbs are desperate for help again like they were earlier in the timeline.

Yeah I think any adjustments in Northern Thrace would benefit the Greeks and affect the Bulgarians negatively. As a result the Northern border for the Greeks could be easily adjusted for to the benefit of the Greeks.

I do think the Greeks will push the border northwards, but Plovdiv is non-negotiable, as other posters have said.

While the map is overly ambitious for what the Greeks could receive in this timeline, especially in Albania, it is a really great resource. There's another timeline everyone here probably knows of (Pride Goes Before A Fall), where this map could be a realistic modern border of Greece in the Balkans. Of course that story has a POD a full century before this one...

It is a great border for the Greeks I have to agree. Considering the POD makes the Greeks do slightly better and swaps out the Greek kings for Belgian ones I think the borders being a lot more advantageous to the Greeks makes sense.

I've been tweaking the map a little, but I can't quite nail down decent borders for the middle east. Though I suppose that's nothing new...

I really do wonder how would Asiatic Constantinople and the Hellespont end up, considering its the Soviets that hold it. If Asiatic Constantinople becomes a Kalinigrad-in-Anatolia, I could see the region being independent or being Greek-aligned as the USSR collapses, which would be very interesting. I don't see Russia holding on to such areas with Turkey potentially wanting to reunify with the region.

PS would some people just say that the USSR is imperialistic due to these annexations? Its very much not Prussia, and their annexations are nakedly geopolitical.

 

[danybhoy]

Maybe something along these lines?
View attachment 865893
I've been tweaking the map a little, but I can't quite nail down decent borders for the middle east. Though I suppose that's nothing new...

In addition to the map maybe Greece could get away with asking for parts of coastal Bulgaria which used to have a significant Greek population prior to Balkan war till say...Sozopol?

 

[Duke of Orlando]

And somehow even my earliest and most land hungry maps look sane and restrained in comparison. I can see the military thinking there, and I can also see why it never really reached the proposal stage, that map would be a big ask even for ttl Greece to absorb let alone otl. Talk about defensive depth...

It is a very neat find though.


I'm of a pretty similar mind really. I will say that it does seem like a good chunk of the Greco-Bulgarian border isn't actually terrible as-is from a defensive perspective, lots of mountains and mountain passes etc. The areas I think they're likeliest to push for are up to the Arda river, and maybe for part of Blagoevgrad around modern Sandanski just in case, though it likely wouldn't be called that in such a case... Both areas with sizable populations of Pomaks unless I'm mistaken.

Maybe something along these lines?
View attachment 865893
I've been tweaking the map a little, but I can't quite nail down decent borders for the middle east. Though I suppose that's nothing new...

I will say that I think that you left out two areas that should probably be added to Greece if they’re trying to play up the Pomak angle, which I think is likely. I might be wrong because it can be a little hard to tell what’s where in Bulgaria on the map. That’s just a criticism of the base map though, I appreciate your hard work as always. But I think that if the Greeks are trying to claim the Pomaks as their own they’d definitely take everything that was part of the Republic of Tamrash seeing as it was the only real Pomak “nation” that ever existed, no matter how small. I also think they’d probably take the area that was the Province of Khardzali in Eastern Rumelia due to having a lot of Pomaks and a history of separation from Bulgaria. The area also has a significant Turkish minority though, which make it less appealing.

There’s also various populations of both throughout the Western Rhodopes so that’s also an area that might see adjustment, but I’m not sure what that might exactly look like so I don’t have any actual suggestions. I do mostly agree with your map though.

Republic of Tamrash - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The link has two really great maps for Tamrash, and one that shows Khardzali as well for any who are curious.