Anglo German settlement January 1941.

I was thinking earlier after reading the no lend lease thread. Without US support (I'm assuming Roosevelt couldn't get the bases for ships deal past Congress so there's no prospect of any assistance once the money runs out) Britain's prospects in the war are dire and they know it. Germany is planning to invade the Soviet Union in 1941 so doesn't need the complication of the on going war with Britain. They are also tied to Italy which is showing itself to be a liability. So I was wondering if in order to reach some sort of settlement with Britain might Germany be willing to throw Italy under the bus and allow Britain a free hand to deal with them, and save face after the defeat of France?
 
Last edited:
I was thinking earlier after reading the no lend lease thread. Without US support (I'm assuming Roosevelt couldn't get the bases for ships deal past Congress so there's no prospect of any assistance once the money runs out) Britain's prospects in the war are dire and they know it. Germany is planning to invade the Soviet Union in 1941 so doesn't need the complication of the on going war with Britain. They are also tied to Italy which is showing itself to be a liability. So I was wondering if in order to reach some sort of settlement with Britain might Germany be willing to throw Italy under the bus and allow Britain a free hand to deal with them, and save face after the defeat of France?
I wonder the same. Although Italy could at least get Tripolitania back in such a settlement and might be thrown a bone or two in Greece and British Somalia. ( Although I'd expect Britain to hold on to Aden and its immediate hinterland. ) Plus Italy could be given a chunk of France and French Tunisia. What would be the minimum demands Britain could expect for its security? Complete German withdrawal from France, Benelux, Denmark and Norway is unlikely but perhaps the Occupation could be replaced by "Finlandised" governments and limited German bases. Germany will want to concentrate resources on Barbarossa so that type of deal could suit it.

Of course, such a settlement will cause political turmoil in the UK. And reduce support for the government and rearmanent. OTOH, it saves the UK from the consequences of running out of USD and enables it to rebuild the armed forces more systematically. No Mediterranean conflict nor Battle of the Atlantic means normal trade with the Sterling Zone and a restoration of trade with Europe. Albeit no doubt on less favourable terms as pre-War, the Nazis would impose trade deals on the subservient states that give Germany first call on their output.

On The Gripping Hand, the geopolitical consequences are probably worse for the US and USSR.

Which is why a total lack of US support for the British Commonwealth and Empire is improbable. It might be slower and on harsher terms. It might prove inadequate to prevent Germany forcing the UK to surrender. But it is on interests of the US for the UK to fight on. And only a complete fool or naive idealist being elected as President would stop it.

Neither scenario can be ruled out but they're improbable.
 
Top