How Plausible is the "Disaster at Dunkirk = Nazi Victory" Tropes?

[Puzzle]

I think that while it's true that the leadership at the time wouldn't make peace, the morale effect of an entire army getting captured is quite significant.

This one disaster might not bring down the house, but it would, as another poster said, tremendously magnify the significance of later disasters in the public mind.

A more divided British public has some significance in and of itself.

That’s always where I fall on these discussions. Anyone who’s been on these forums for awhile knows that the industrial and technological edge was vastly in favor of the Allies, but I imagine it would be tricky to feel as confident right in the minute. At some point after repeated ‘impossible’ victories the people and the leaders might stop to think about it. Even the napoleonic wars had periods of detente, between the varied powers as the coalitions shifted. Taking a break to rearm with a de facto ceasefire might seem attractive after all the generals, admirals, and politicians who repeatedly talked about inevitable victory due to economic disparities repeatedly got bloody noses.
The English aren’t borg drones. They didn’t lose to Germany or get their morale broken by the blitz, but going all the way to ‘we’ll never accept a peace treaty no matter what’ seems too far. It’s a lot easier to talk about fighting on the beaches and landing grounds than to actually do it, even though the Germans could never get there.

 

[merlin]

What ifs are all about possibilities and how plausible it could be. Its irrelevant how unlikely it is, it is still possible.

In OTL Halifax & Butler were making unofficial enquiries - both through Sweden & Italy, - to see what the terms may be, Such overtures were shut down quite forcibly by Churchill. But it is not IMHO implausible to theorize that it would have been a 'whole different ball game' without Churchill - e.g. his plane is shot down over France.

Hitler was an admirer of the 'British Empire' so maybe despite Italy, UK keeps Gib., Malta & a mutual respect of borders in the ME i.e. North Africa.
In return for no occupation, Germany will require a reduction in British Defense spending, which will be monitored by German Military Attaches.

 

[thaddeus]

What ifs are all about possibilities and how plausible it could be. Its irrelevant how unlikely it is, it is still possible.

Hitler was an admirer of the 'British Empire' so maybe despite Italy, UK keeps Gib., Malta & a mutual respect of borders in the ME i.e. North Africa.
In return for no occupation, Germany will require a reduction in British Defense spending, which will be monitored by German Military Attaches.

leaving the British Empire intact seems no hurdle for the Nazi regime, the issue(s) IMO would be withdrawing from Belgium, Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark?

possibly Germany could withdraw from most of France with the other countries in some limbo status?

 

[HelloThere]

That’s always where I fall on these discussions. Anyone who’s been on these forums for awhile knows that the industrial and technological edge was vastly in favor of the Allies, but I imagine it would be tricky to feel as confident right in the minute. At some point after repeated ‘impossible’ victories the people and the leaders might stop to think about it. Even the napoleonic wars had periods of detente, between the varied powers as the coalitions shifted. Taking a break to rearm with a de facto ceasefire might seem attractive after all the generals, admirals, and politicians who repeatedly talked about inevitable victory due to economic disparities repeatedly got bloody noses.
The English aren’t borg drones. They didn’t lose to Germany or get their morale broken by the blitz, but going all the way to ‘we’ll never accept a peace treaty no matter what’ seems too far. It’s a lot easier to talk about fighting on the beaches and landing grounds than to actually do it, even though the Germans could never get there.

Agreed that the Brits aren't killing drones just waiting to die for the glorious Empire, but why should they feel that they have to conclude a formal ceasefire? Most of the public will remember that Hitler broke other treaties, so there's no need to pretend a ceasefire - the armed forces can rearm and regroup even without a formal end to armed hostilities.

 

[thaddeus]

Agreed that the Brits aren't killing drones just waiting to die for the glorious Empire, but why should they feel that they have to conclude a formal ceasefire? Most of the public will remember that Hitler broke other treaties, so there's no need to pretend a ceasefire - the armed forces can rearm and regroup even without a formal end to armed hostilities.

I've always maintained the British would never sign anything, unless they start losing colonies and capital ships. there could be a Phoney Peace as a counterpoint to the earlier Phoney War?

 

[Geon]

leaving the British Empire intact seems no hurdle for the Nazi regime, the issue(s) IMO would be withdrawing from Belgium, Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark?

possibly Germany could withdraw from most of France with the other countries in some limbo status?

Hitler would not have withdrawn from France. As long as there was a chance Britain could rebuild and invade he needed to keep the French coast. And given Hitler's psychological make up I really don't see him giving up any territory.

 

[Puzzle]

Most of the public will remember that Hitler broke other treaties, so there's no need to pretend a ceasefire

The big pitfall in all of these things is of course that Hitler is a bit of a madman. It’s vaguely possible to imagine some peace built around the Germans withdrawing from a partially demilitarized western Europe in exchange for recognizing that the conquered Poland and were keeping it.
Churchill wouldn’t go for it, and in our world a lot of people who said they wouldn’t go for were vindicated by the ultimate victory, but my point is that if things had gone differently we’d be hearing from an entirely different set of more ‘pragmatic’ or cowardly people.
None of this is to say that the Germans could win even if they were suddenly fighting less competent opponents, the wealth of the Allies could compensate for a ton of stupidity.

 

[thaddeus]

leaving the British Empire intact seems no hurdle for the Nazi regime, the issue(s) IMO would be withdrawing from Belgium, Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark?

possibly Germany could withdraw from most of France with the other countries in some limbo status?

Hitler would not have withdrawn from France. As long as there was a chance Britain could rebuild and invade he needed to keep the French coast. And given Hitler's psychological make up I really don't see him giving up any territory.

we'll have to disagree (and we are talking about in the aftermath of a failed Dunkirk evacuation), there already were zones in the historical occupation that advertise a framework for withdrawal. that includes a narrow coastal zone and an area (Nord Pas-de-Calais) administered with Belgium, it appears they would keep that, something of a parallel to the Saar and Ruhr.

OTOH, I cannot imagine a withdrawal from Belgium and the Netherlands.

 

[Post]

Hitler was an admirer of the 'British Empire' so maybe despite Italy, UK keeps Gib., Malta & a mutual respect of borders in the ME i.e. North Africa.
In return for no occupation, Germany will require a reduction in British Defense spending, which will be monitored by German Military Attaches.

I don't see any British government agreeing to that last part without German boots in London, or at the very least Alexandria. Neither of which is going to happen.

 

[Garrison]

Hitler was an admirer of the 'British Empire' so maybe despite Italy, UK keeps Gib., Malta & a mutual respect of borders in the ME i.e. North Africa.
In return for no occupation, Germany will require a reduction in British Defense spending, which will be monitored by German Military Attaches.

He may have admired it, he didn't remotely understand British strategic necessities and at no point was Hitler able offer anything that resembled a coherent plan for a peace deal, just various vague promises and rambling speeches. If Halifax had been allowed to explore negotiations with Nazi Germany in 1940 it is hugely unlikely he would have come back with anything remotely acceptable, ignoring the fact that Hitler's promises were rightly seen as worthless. Britain wouldn't have fought on because of the zeal of Churchill's speeches but because there was no practical alternative.

 

[Look More Closely Later]

He may have admired it, he didn't remotely understand British strategic necessities and at no point was Hitler able offer anything that resembled a coherent plan for a peace deal, just various vague promises and rambling speeches. If Halifax had been allowed to explore negotiations with Nazi Germany in 1940 it is hugely unlikely he would have come back with anything remotely acceptable, ignoring the fact that Hitler's promises were rightly seen as worthless. Britain wouldn't have fought on because of the zeal of Churchill's speeches but because there was no practical alternative.

Except the geographical feature known as 'The Channel' is in the way in between the coast of Northwest Europe and of Southeast England. Hitler cannot say 'surprise attack, suckers!!!!' and simply drive his armies of tanks and march his armies of infantry from Calais to Dover in twelve hours with no warning, or not unless he has Alien Space Bat wizards working for him. At best, during a ceasefire, he can maybe build up for paratroop drops, but unless the UK lacks even a home-guard armed with elephant guns and pitchforks (or with the contents of weapons cannisters conveniently dropping out of the sky, separately from the German paratroops, which I gather from other threads was operating procedure of the German paratroops of the era for some reason) Hitler cannot use a ceasefire to try and conquer the UK by sneak attack. The moment he starts assembling the necessary shipping the UK will see it.
The practical alternative to fighting on for the UK in 1940 is: 'Ceasefire - and try and work out what the **** just went wrong, without German bombs falling on our cities or German submarines and surface-raiders massacring our merchant shipping. And without panic-rushing a tank as spectacularly awful for the era as the Covenanter into mass production. And maybe we'll come back in a couple of years time if we can cut some kind of a deal with Stalin, now that Chamberlain isn't in office.'

 

[marathag]

Except the geographical feature known as 'The Channel' is in the way in between the coast of Northwest Europe and of Southeast England. Hitler cannot say 'surprise attack, suckers!!!!' and simply drive his armies of tanks and march his armies of infantry from Calais to Dover in twelve hours with no warning, or not unless he has Alien Space Bat wizards working for him.

But honestly, their attack on Norway really should have been an embarrassing defeat, not a win.
So the Nazis, as well the British, had an inflated vision on what the German troops and KM could do.
Without Norway, even a total defeat of the BEF, wouldn't lead to the OTL invasion panic that happened.
With both events, the UK still wouldn't give up, but the Germans more likely to try SeaLion

 

[Nivek]

All my gut say... maybe?

 

[Garrison]

The practical alternative to fighting on for the UK in 1940 is: 'Ceasefire - and try and work out what the **** just went wrong, without German bombs falling on our cities or German submarines and surface-raiders massacring our merchant shipping. And without panic-rushing a tank as spectacularly awful for the era as the Covenanter into mass production. And maybe we'll come back in a couple of years time if we can cut some kind of a deal with Stalin, now that Chamberlain isn't in office.'

That's a strange definition of practical alternative. In the same way that the British aren't stupid enough to make peace with the Germans Hitler isn't going to accept some vague ceasefire at his moment of triumph.

 

[Look More Closely Later]

That's a strange definition of practical alternative. In the same way that the British aren't stupid enough to make peace with the Germans Hitler isn't going to accept some vague ceasefire at his moment of triumph.

<shrug> Hitler would presumably get an end to any UK naval blockade out of it, giving him the freedom to trade with those sympathetic to the Nazis overseas. And he was more than happy to sign an alliance with his greatest ideological enemy, Stalin, if it was to Hitler's advantage. A ceasefire with the British shouldn't be too much of a stretch as compared to that...

 

[Garrison]

<shrug> Hitler would presumably get an end to any UK naval blockade out of it, giving him the freedom to trade with those sympathetic to the Nazis overseas. And he was more than happy to sign an alliance with his greatest ideological enemy, Stalin, if it was to Hitler's advantage. A ceasefire with the British shouldn't be too much of a stretch as compared to that...

The M-R Pact was a treaty, full of details about trade and secret clauses that benefitted both sides, which of course Hitler also broke in the end. Hitler is going to have a whole raft of demands to ensure that the British don't just decide to take up the fight later, he is after all thoroughly familiar with the 1918 Armistice. This is the reason why making peace is hard, unless one side can impose terms or both sides are utterly exhausted the party that is in the ascendant is going to want to exploit that to the fullest, the idea that Hitler admired the British Empire so he is going to go easy on them is every bit as absurd as the myth that he went easy on the BEF at Dunkirk.

 

[Insane Ranter]

Essentially, Yes

The UK accepting the fall of France, Benelux and total Nazi domination of Western Europe is not a "white peace". White peace is returning to the status quo that existed pre-war. Unless Britain removes Churchhill this isn't going to happen. After the King throws in with Winston they are not removing him until the War is over.

The only way is for the beloved sea-mammal to let German take Britian by force.

 

[RedSword12]

While I do not believe the British would negotiate a ceasefire over the Dunkirk disaster, the discussions about peace negotiations in the British cabinet are misunderstood. The argument and reason why no peace happened was not Hitler being untrustworthy, God knows the British had a long and storied history of being shifty about such things themselves, but rather that they concluded they would not get better terms if they threw in the towel now than if they were forced to later.

 

[merlin]

If Halifax had been allowed to explore negotiations with Nazi Germany in 1940 it is hugely unlikely he would have come back with anything remotely acceptable, i

"hugely unlikely" - i agree - but, the point I'm trying to make - with the political confusion where Churchill is dead - not impossible.

I could imagine some RN captains while in the Atlantic rather than return home when 'peace' is in the offering taking a 'short break' in a Canadian port!
One of FDR's worse fears was a combined German/RN/French Fleet across the ocean. Hence wouldn't be surprised if RN Captains were given tacit instructions to seek sanctuary in the West.

 

[Monk78]

Even if British agree to a temporary truce ( not likely at all ) nothing is stopping them from breaking it later when they are strong enough
No matter how you approach it , nazi germany is a weak continental power which had some beginners luck but was in no shape to compete with British empire alone ( not to mention the strong possibility of US intervention which I’m sure strengthened British resolve)
Such timelines of imaginary nazi victories are s byproduct of allied wartime and postwar exaggeration of nazi military prowess.