Continuation?:
From the Peace deal its pretty clear OTL conditions have changed a lot. I would recommend "wiking's" three fish as a possibility.
I do think Wiking removed Hitler early to make it easier to apply logic, but it is certainly valid. I do not intend to construct a TL beyond this (sorry), but there is a few discussion points I'd like to take away and they are fully for dismisal, critique or use by other is so desired.
In my optics, Britain is out for at least 3-5 years. Realistically, unless an intolerable excuse is offered, planning for continuation means the demolition of the empire for no prospect of a return. There is no purpose to just sit on an Island and be at war. It would require considerable axis provocation. Britains main priority would be self-defence for the next year and buillding a very clear naval superiority. Fighters and ships.
France is gone as an independent power. It is in an economic block with Germany that has no reservation against punitive measures. For the next few years, France is however going to prosper economically as they have access to open markets and are selling military equipment to Germany. Same for Benelux, Norway and Denmark, although the grip is tighter and the German bases are not particular welcome. However, by not directly occupying this countries, there is few Places to effectively channel resistance at. The bases are strong enough that they can overwhelm local defenses, local defenses are weak enough that this doesnt need to be too much.
Balkans is tricky. Mussolini is going for Greece and no-one is helping them ITTL. Its a replay of the Winter war, but with the Allied bound by contract not to interfere, its a losing game. Surrender/defeated party negotiations probably happens as Luftwaffe interferes in favor of the Italians.
Yugoslavia? I imagine that something like the OTL alliances becomes cemented rather quickly after the Soviet Union takes it entitled piece of Romania. They would not enter Northern Bukovina and Hertza ITTL. Stalin is much more scared than OTL.
Would there be a military coup in Yugoslavia after Yugoslavia joins the axis course in autumn of 1940? It would indeed be utterly suicidal and the Yugoslav war in such a case would happen in 1940.
We certainly will have a Barbarossa in 1941, but with the following suggested butterflies:
1: Most importantly. No need for urgency... What was need to believe and what was arrogance IOTL planning for Barbarossa? Quite tricky. I Refer to Galveston Bays "Görings Reich" for a suggestion that at least Göring, without the OTL timepressure, would plan for a 2 year campaign.
2: No diversion before the attack. Attack goes ahead directly after the mud.
The diversions hurt AGS the South the most IOTL and ITTL they would have much more panzer forces available
3: Luftwaffe is much stronger. No BoB, no Crete, no, african campaign, no loss of the airborne assault doctrines.
4: Somewhat fewer occupying forces in western europe. This would enable larger reserves and replacement of losses than OTL.
5: No interruption of research as happened during 1940, much less demand for synthetic fossil fuels and generally a continent mobilzed for German armaments.
IOTL, they did get all the French gear, but the french industry more or less collapsed with Little access to necessary coal and transportation as well as looting of french factories. Doesnt hapen hear to nearly the same extent. I think the net result would be more vehichle support for the German army in 1941 and a considerably improved replacement capacity. Likely, the french would not supply many ground troops, but french equipment nor used by the Germans could help equip Allied armies.
6: Free access to global trade and at leas a few billion gold marchs to shop for
7: Support for SU? The German spends 1940-41 constructing bases in Norway and would declare the Waters to the North for an unrestricted war zone. As the British cannot guard the convoys without reentering the war which does not happen with Gibraltar, Dakar and the POW's in German hands, this route is off.
8: this leaves Vladivostok and the Persian route, however preconditions have changed dramatically. We must assume dramatic Italian armament in Palestine and Iraq and Iran are de facto economically supporting the axis by the Peace agreement. Its hard to see British invasion in Iraq or Iran in 1940-41 ITTL. It would have to be a unilateral Soviet decision where the Persian would be supported with shipments through the Suez cannal. A very dangerous gamble by the Soviets.
9: What does Japan do? The OTL invasion of Indo-China is not going to sit well with either the US/British or the Germans as ITTL Germany dont need the distraction of the British. ITTL, the only good Japan can do for Germany is striking the SU and Germany.
Further, with a Peace agreement reached between the Netherlands and Germany, the netherlands would be selling to Japan.
A big question therefore is if the army simply focuses on China via land, or if Japan takes a longer term perspective ITTL and strikes at the SU. I would guess focuses on China which would unbelievably be even harsher than OTL, while having contingency plans for SU. If Things goes well in Barbarossa, Japan would strike and sewer the Vladivostok lifeline.
From my analysis this most likely ends somehow as a German Victory over the SU with horrible consequences. The requirement for SU Victory is that they basically defeat the stronger axis by themselves.
What speaks for this is the potential that Stalin this time sees it coming.Would that help? I think it would place more SU troops within range of early encirclements, but that has been a debate on many other threads.
