Romania in WW2 - effects of stronger resistance/no August '44 coup

[mack8]

It's been done before of course, but i too wanna have a go and hear input. Some say a continuous romanian resistance in 1944 would have prolonged the Reich's existance by 3-4 months at best. A stronger romanian military could presumably slightly increase that, hell maybe even change a few things in the 1941 - 43 timespan.

One possible effect of stronger romanian military (which is something i'd like to expand on next time)/ resistance to the end is that the soviets end the war a bit more eastward than historically, maybe just entering Germany as opposed to being in Berlin, so maybe there will be no GDR? We also have the atomic bombs, which may or may not be used in August 1945 if the Reich is still standing.

On thought that hit me though is that, going a bit past WW2, if the soviets end the war further eastward compard to OTL, then presumbly they would not have captured a good portion of the tech and scientists they did historically. This will have significant effects in their postwar military development, would love to hear ideas on those possible effects.

 

[KACKO]

Wasn't Romanian army broken during Second Jassy offensive? They were under equipped with AT guns, their artillery was horse drawn. Romanina switch of sides came with defeat on their borders.

To change that you need to go far back. Maybe not have Romanian gold reserves be lost in Russia during revolution so they have more resources to modernize/ industrialize after WWII?

Maybe Germans paying them fair amount for their Oil/ supplying them better with equipment? But then Germans will be lacking what they pay Romanians with.

 

[Byzantion]

Wasn't Romanian army broken during Second Jassy offensive? They were under equipped with AT guns, their artillery was horse drawn. Romanina switch of sides came with defeat on their borders.

To change that you need to go far back. Maybe not have Romanian gold reserves be lost in Russia during revolution so they have more resources to modernize/ industrialize after WWII?

Maybe Germans paying them fair amount for their Oil/ supplying them better with equipment? But then Germans will be lacking what they pay Romanians with.

The Germans weren´t really interested in their Romanian ally. The alliance was mainly for pragmatic reasons, they could have been easely overrun by the Germans, if they followed another strategy. Not sure how much they valued their fellow fascist Antonescu and the iron guard, but much love they had not lost for them. Hitler would rather brutally surpress Romania than pay a fair amount of money.

 

[mack8]

My idea to have a stronger military in WW2 is have romanian become a kind of dictatorship lead by someone like Ceausescu in 1920 or so - someone aiming to industrialize and arm Romania as much as possible from internal production against the soviet threat, and for prestige and so on. Not a communist regime mind you.

This way to my mind, is not inconceivable that at least the romanian military of 1940 would be at least equal in technology and capability to what the poles and czechs could have been in 1940, maybe just slightly better. If they could have had say about 1500 aircraft (1000 first line)- like the czechs- and about 800-1000 tanks and tankettes- like the poles- in 1940 with an industrial capacity fairly closely comparable, that would be a significantly stronger position compared to OTL.

 

[KACKO]

The Germans weren´t really interested in their Romanian ally. The alliance was mainly for pragmatic reasons, they could have been easely overrun by the Germans, if they followed another strategy. Not sure how much they valued their fellow fascist Antonescu and the iron guard, but much love they had not lost for them. Hitler would rather brutally surpress Romania than pay a fair amount of money.

I believe Germans were indeed in 1939/1940 considering the options. However in 1942 and 1943 Germans were already 'begging" Romanians for increasing men power on Easter Front.

 

[KACKO]

My idea to have a stronger military in WW2 is have romanian become a kind of dictatorship lead by someone like Ceausescu in 1920 or so - someone aiming to industrialize and arm Romania as much as possible from internal production against the soviet threat, and for prestige and so on. Not a communist regime mind you.

This way to my mind, is not inconceivable that at least the romanian military of 1940 would be at least equal in technology and capability to what the poles and czechs could have been in 1940, maybe just slightly better. If they could have had say about 1500 aircraft (1000 first line)- like the czechs- and about 800-1000 tanks and tankettes- like the poles- in 1940 with an industrial capacity fairly closely comparable, that would be a significantly stronger position compared to OTL.

They needed money to industrialize. They accumulated pretty nice amount of gold reserves till 1941 though. Or have them stay neutral through WWI and jump in in last minute. Less damage, gold reserves not lost...

Have them cut deals with Czechoslovak manufacturers to built some armament factories. Maybe Czechoslovakia achieve bigger degree of motorization and that's how they pay for oil. For example Skoda for guns and tanks. Romanians were considering to buy license for LT-35s and they were as well interested in Skoda T-21 Medium tank. Maybe have Romania gain license from their Little Entente ally for LMG vz. 26 as well as HMG vz.37. Both of them they bought in huge numbers but with size of their army they lacked.

If they manufactured LT-35, let them do some tricks with them much earlier then OTL. Something like late 1941:

TACAM R2. Romanian tank destroyer on chassis of Czechoslovak R2 (LT-35).

 

[mack8]

They needed money to industrialize. They accumulated pretty nice amount of gold reserves till 1941 though. Or have them stay neutral through WWI and jump in in last minute. Less damage, gold reserves not lost...

Have them cut deals with Czechoslovak manufacturers to built some armament factories. Maybe Czechoslovakia achieve bigger degree of motorization and that's how they pay for oil. For example Skoda for guns and tanks. Romanians were considering to buy license for LT-35s and they were as well interested in Skoda T-21 Medium tank. Maybe have Romania gain license from their Little Entente ally for LMG vz. 26 as well as HMG vz.37. Both of them they bought in huge numbers but with size of their army they lacked.

If they manufactured LT-35, let them do some tricks with them much earlier then OTL. Something like late 1941:

TACAM R2. Romanian tank destroyer on chassis of Czechoslovak R2 (LT-35).

Having the pre-WW1 gold would of course been nice, but then a totalitarian style industrialization and re-armament would just have to find money (and manpower) from somewhere else. As i understand oil and cereals were the main exports, thought increasing the amount of cereals to export is not really a good thing for the people if overdone.

Anyway speaking of the czechs, with the benefit of hindsight what Romania really should get is the LT-38 licence, the thing started being exported in 1936 already! This would mean when the war comes this good chasis, technological flux and knowledge from it is available, so you have a very competent and technically sound Maresal in 1943, maybe this time there will really be co-production with the germans for this Maresal/Hetzer. Plus of course there could still be several hundreds (as opposed to tens) of TACAM-type vehicles made from both existing but obsolete or captured tanks, fighting against the soviets.

Oh and going a bit before that, just like Poland build their 7TP tanks from a Vickers licence, so Romania could do the same starting in the early thirties, same with tankette and even armoured car production.

As for aircraft, again taking the example of Poland, more emphasis on rearming would result in a more advanced aircraft industry able to build competent own design in the early thirties as opposed to late thirties as in OTL, and you could have something like IAR-80 flying in 1937/1938 and in production in 1939, and a modern bomber too, like the PZL-37 (i always liked the idea of a PZL-37 with Jumo-211 engines, not to mention an 1500 HP IAR engine). In OTL IAR engineers apparently had plans for a 1500 HP radial engine already in 1939 (just like Poland had their Waran and Legwan projects), so after the start of WW2 the IAR-80-like fighter could first receive an interim 1200 HP engine developed from the IAR K-14 and then the 1500 HP one. That would make it at least about equal to La-5 and Yak-9, and would give it a fighting chance against the P-51, as opposed to being hopelessly outclassed. Of course the P-38s would be in even more trouble.

A more potent aircarft industry could also see Romania suplying engines or building trainers for Germany like other countries did, in exchange for other military goods, like a DB-605 licence and so on.

 

[pattersonautobody]

About time we had a good ol' fashioned how do we keep the Axis around a bit longer thread, there has been a serious famine the last few days in these!

 

[pattersonautobody]

Romania can be kept in if they withdraw when Bagratian happened to the Carpathian Mountains. Doesn't take in pre-war PODs.

With the PODs spoken about on this thread, Russia's 1940 war with Romania will be a lot bloodier.

 

[mack8]

There wasn't a romanian-soviet war in 1940 as when Stalin demanded Moldova the romanian leadership backed down (cowardly i might say) from fighting. In this ATL, with a more nationalistic Romania and a stronger military, yes, it's quite likely there will be a soviet-romanian war in 1940. I still can't see how can Romania "win", but the soviets will get a bloody nose. Which of course plays into the whole stronger romanian military in WW2 thing, because whatever losses the soviets will have they will be felt in 1941 one way or the other. The romanian military will be weakened too, but presumbly as it is considerably stronger than OTL, it's military in 1941 could still be somewhat stronger than OTL, more experienced, and with a stronger industrial potential to back it up.

One other aspect is preventing the Vienna diktat, which would remove a good part of the "incentive" for switching against the germans in 1944. Perhaps this could be avoided by cultivating closer relations with Germany from about 1936-37, give them oil, more preferential economic treatment together with clear hints that any military action by Germany and their bulgarian and hungarian "allies" against Romania's territorial integrity will be met by force and in case of defeat will switfly result in complete burning of the oil fields (they should really mean it this time), so no oil for Germany.

This of course leave the relations with France and UK, but then the romanian leadership can play a balancing game (if they're smart) to get the maximum benefits from all sides. They could also work to undermine the re-arming efforts of Hungary and Bulgaria, the poles, italians and germans sold them weapons, especially the poles and italians could be "convinced" to scale down or even forego weapon sales to those countries, in exchange for again economic benefits and advantageous trading agreement, and buying outright as much as possible from any weapons destined for Hungary and Bulgaria, so even if the germans might step in more to sell them weapons in order to maintain some kind of balance and pressure on Romania, they could be weaker than in OTL in 1940.

Still, a defeat against the soviets will likely still result in germans troops being "invited" in Romania to guarantee it's remaining territory, now how likely the germans are to still slice the country up for the benefit of Hungary and Bulgaria i'm not sure, but let's suppose they don't (though at leat i can see them threatening just that if Romania does not commit itself on the Eastern Front to Hitler's satisfaction).

 

[Magnum]

Some say a continuous romanian resistance in 1944 would have prolonged the Reich's existance by 3-4 months at best

...but they never actually care to explain how.

IMO, continuous resistance buys the Reich an extra 0 days. Let's say the Romanian fascists (may they rot in hell) pull off the perfect resistance - they defeat the second Iasi offensive right on the front line, they stop a hypothetical third on the lower Siret, and the eventually retreat behind the Carpathians. So what?

Allied strategic bombing has pretty much brought the oil industry to its knees by this point, and anything left was within range of the Soviet tactical air force. The Ruhr area, Berlin, Silezia - those are the places you want to take if you want to bring Germany to it's knees, and the road to them doesn't run through the Carpathians.

"Best-case" front line for the Nazis in May '45 with a perfect Romanian resistance:


OTOH, Budapest is spared destruction, so there's that.

 

[Slowpoke]

It wasn't just strategic bombing which did the oil industry in; field depletion played an oft-overlooked part.

Many of the Kingdom's primary fields dated back from the '90s, that is, the 1890s, when large-scale oil extraction started in earnest. True, many of them were re-developed (with American tech) after the British blew the infrastructure sky-high in late 1916 to prevent it from falling into German hands, but by 1944 the fields had been continuously under extraction (and with none of the modern-day advanced reclamation tech) for almost half a century. And even today prospecting for fresh fields is almost an artform. Back then it was closer to dowsing.

OTOH, having the treasury at hand, rather than fueling the proletary revolution, could have done wonders to post-war reconstruction efforts. Butterflies, butterflies...

 

[ObssesedNuker]

Romania can be kept in if they withdraw when Bagratian happened to the Carpathian Mountains. Doesn't take in pre-war PODs.

So in other words, Romania can be kept in by basically giving up it's country? Uh, what?

Reality is that the Soviets are going to steamroll the Romania in 1944. What the Romanian remnants can do is delay the fall of Hungary by something like a month, but Romania itself was doomed.

IMO, continuous resistance buys the Reich an extra 0 days. Let's say the Romanian fascists (may they rot in hell) pull off the perfect resistance - they defeat the second Iasi offensive right on the front line, they stop a hypothetical third on the lower Siret, and the eventually retreat behind the Carpathians. So what?

And stopping the second Iasi offensive basically requires magic. The Soviets have overwhelming mass and firepower on their side along with veteran troops, good commanders (not their best, but experienced and battle-tested), and the best operational art in the world against demoralized and under-equipped defenders.

 

[Magnum]

And stopping the second Iasi offensive basically requires magic. The Soviets have overwhelming mass and firepower on their side along with veteran troops, good commanders (not their best, but experienced and battle-tested), and the best operational art in the world against demoralized and under-equipped defenders.

Not magic, merely sacrificing some other part of the front.

In any case, holding the Carpathian passes should be doable for the Axis given adequate preparation - which is a big if, since committing to that course of action still guarantees that the oil fields and refineries get overrun...

 

[ObssesedNuker]

Not magic, merely sacrificing some other part of the front.

The Germans aren't going to do that for basic military reasons. Denuding the direct route to Germany of forces means the Soviets can advance straight into Germany much earlier, which would collapse German military resistance in the Balkans, which would then leave the Soviets free to roll through them. Ain't no way the Romanian and Hungarian armies can fend off the Soviets by themselves.

In any case, holding the Carpathian passes should be doable for the Axis given adequate preparation

For a time, yes. The Soviets will eventually force them during the autumn-winter though and then march on Budapest. Probably won't make it to Vienna IATL though.

which is a big if, since committing to that course of action still guarantees that the oil fields and refineries get overrun...

And the rest of Romania as well.

 

[mack8]

IMO, continuous resistance buys the Reich an extra 0 days. Let's say the Romanian fascists (may they rot in hell) pull off the perfect resistance - they defeat the second Iasi offensive right on the front line, they stop a hypothetical third on the lower Siret, and the eventually retreat behind the Carpathians. So what?

Not sure what you meant by "romanian fascists", whether refering to the leadership or something else. They of course were not fascists in the nazi sense, not even the leadership.

As for what has been said in the last replies, there is no doubt whatsoever that any soviet offensive against practically any sort of Romania in 1944 (even "beefed up") will quite quickly result in it being overrun. But as to keep to this ATL, a stronger Romania in WW2 might just slightly delay such an offensive because for example things like the romanian army having say twice as many tanks and AT guns at Stalingrad and more and better aircraft than in OTL, or indeed the same in the 1941 operations, would have altered the flow of events, all this possibly contributing to for instance the Iasi-Chisinau offensive happening in September-October or so, and Romania being fully overrun before the end of the year. I know that the oil output has been crippled, i was reading it dropped to 20% after the US bombings, but still any day Romania is still in the war it means the germans gets a bit more oil than in OTL (after all, anything is better than nothing), the front is kept away from Hungary until perhaps early 1945, which as i understand also produced a bit of oil, plus weaponry etc etc.

There is no doubt that the Reich falls almost the same time as in OTL, the interesting bit being of course what influence would have for the soviets not having occupied Austria (for instance, what kind, if any, of advanced weaponry and documentation they captured in OTL from Austria that they wouldn't have had access to in this ATL) and perhaps a bit less of Germany- though still they'll pobably gun with everything they have for Berlin- and indeed what all this would mean for Romania?

 

[Magnum]

Not sure what you meant by "romanian fascists", whether refering to the leadership or something else. They of course were not fascists in the nazi sense, not even the leadership.

They were fascists in the fascist sense:

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

Check

Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

200k-300k Jews murdered; check

Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

check

Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

check

Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

Decreeing how long a woman's skirt must be when riding a bicycle
check

Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

no free press
check

Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

jews, russian, freemasons, they're all out to get us
check

Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

check

Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

check

Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .

no independent labor unions
check

Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

Disdain - no
Lack of free expression - yes
semi-check

Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

see e.g. Transnistria
check

Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

inherent in Romanian society
check

Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

No elections, just two coups in a row

So 13,5 out of 14. Not too bad, right?

 

[Slowpoke]

To be fair, Antonescu was probably the first non-extremely corrupt leader the Kingdom had for over 20 years. The Liberals were a bunch of kleptocratic scrotes, and the National Peasants brought about Carol II's (unconstitutional) restauration.

His one true sin was his sycophancy towards the Germans, which led to hundreds of thousands of dead Jews and Roma and the Kingdom's embroilment in Operation Barbarossa (though it's debatable whether the Germans would've allowed the Romanian Army remain at readiness, since they never fully trusted the generals under Antonescu, several of which tended to have pro-WAllies sympathies).

At any rate, any 1944 PoD must start a lot further back, namely during the Great War.

 

[user23123]

His one true sin was his sycophancy towards the Germans, which led to hundreds of thousands of dead Jews and Roma and the Kingdom's embroilment in Operation Barbarossa (though it's debatable whether the Germans would've allowed the Romanian Army remain at readiness, since they never fully trusted the generals under Antonescu, several of which tended to have pro-WAllies sympathies).

I don't had much to do with sycophancy towards Germans,for on think was Antonescu, Francophile,how turn in to an Germanophile after the fall of France and then the roots of Romanian's are older and Hitler or the Nazis.

 

[Slowpoke]

He had been losing faith in France's ability to support Romania long before 1940. Even back in the early '30s many officers were quite unhappy with the level of commitment France put into maintaining the "cordon sanitaire".