Handwave: Bulgaria remains staunchly neutral in the Second World War?

[melanie]

There aren't many Bulgarian WI's, either here or at The Other Place so..

What if Bulgaria remains staunchly neutral in World War II, except for perhaps "doing a Turkey" and DOW'ing the Axis in February or March, 1945?

[raharris1973]

*Only* way Hitler would allow this to happen would be if Mussolini for some reason refrains from launching his war on Greece, or miraculously kicks ass and finishes off that war victoriously soon after starting it. If the Italo-Greek war festers long enough that there is a chance for Britain to meddle or for Hitler to perceive he needs to rescue the Italians, Bulgaria is an essential transit route for a German intervention, and Bulgaria either joins the German bandwagon or gets invaded by it.

If Bulgaria "does a Turkey" that would be only when the battlefronts are a couple hundred miles to the north and west, so Bulgaria would have lost any opportunity to gain southern Dobruja, which remains attached to a presumably Soviet-puppetized Romania in the postwar. However, declaring war against the Axis last minute would grant Bulgaria membership in the UN and access to UNRRA aid.

Postwar Bułgaria would remain a monarchy but open up its parliamentary politics to multi-party competition. As a noncommunist state, it would not be a reliable host of camps and safe haven for the Greek Communist insurgents, although smuggling through its border territories could still occur. The Greek Communists would rely more on Yugoslavia and Albania. It is not a slam-dunk guarantee at all the Bulgaria would take a western, Anglo-American, anti-Soviet, NATO alignment in the post-war simply because it is not Communist and not Soviet occupied. Russophilic public opinion may be wary of making such commitments, pulling Bulgaria in a more neutral, Finlandized direction, and the Communist Party will have a sizable constituency also pushing in parliament against a western commitment. A neutral Bulgaria might mean the Soviets don't bother to put as much of a pressure campaign on Turkey about the straits (since it is less likely to be effective) but they can still exert pressures for border revision in northeast Turkey. It is possible that reduced pressure on Turkey encourages Turkey to remain a non-aligned state. Or possibly Turkey still goes for the western-aligned path.

One pathway used more often for East Bloc refugees will be the Danube swim and the Black Sea swim, with Bulgaria as destination.

[TheRomanSlayer]

One good way for Italy to not launch his invasion of Greece would have been for his intervention in the Spanish Civil War to go wrong, or for his Ethiopian Campaign to be a bit more costly.

[raharris1973]

Aug 27, 2022 5:07:08 GMT TheRomanSlayer said:

One good way for Italy to not launch his invasion of Greece would have been for his intervention in the Spanish Civil War to go wrong, or for his Ethiopian Campaign to be a bit more costly.

That could certainly achieve the objective, although it might "overshoot" the mark if your intention was to have Italy still join WWII as Germany's ally.  An Italy too tired or cautious to attack Greece is probably too tired or cautious to declare war on France and Britain. If you don't mind having Italy just sit out WWII, this works. In that case, a lot of Southern Europe, Italy, Yugoslavia, Albania, Greece, Bulgaria, Turkey, gets to sit out WWII, or possibly just "pull a Turkey" when the outcome is not in any doubt in 1945.

If the reason for Italian caution is a bungled Italian intervention in Spain, and it goes to the point of the Spanish Republic surviving, ironically that might mean that southwest Europe, the Iberian peninsula, *does* get pulled in to the war.

[TheRomanSlayer]

Only thing is, Italy sitting out of the war would result in massive butterflies. Enough for the Germans to carry out a successful Operation: Barbarossa, which would mean Moscow falls in the autumn, and the Soviet Union collapses.

However, a bungled Italian intervention in the Spanish Civil War leading to a more costly Republican victory may lead to southwestern Europe being dragged into the war, which ironically speaking, could precipitate in a faster German defeat, as they would not only be fighting a two front war, but also stretch their logistical lines on both fronts a little too long in this case. 

The result: Republican Spain undergoes a more detailed reconstruction after the war while maintaining its semi-leftist stance, faster Spanish decolonization, and an extremely exhausted Italy would retain its fascist government. 

Although Bulgarian neutrality in the Second World War would also mean that it permanently loses its chance at regaining Western Thrace as a means of getting access to the Aegean Sea.

Bellow: a possible Third Vienna Award

Attachments:

[melanie]

What happens if *both* Spain and Portugal are dragged into the war by a more incompetent Benny the Moose?

[TheRomanSlayer]

Aug 27, 2022 20:58:06 GMT melanie said:

What happens if *both* Spain and Portugal are dragged into the war by a more incompetent Benny the Moose?

Which Spain? Republican or Nationalist? If Spain ends up with a victorious Republican government, then that's another front that the Germans would have to invade. If Nationalist, then that's another ally that Hitler would end up helping.

[raharris1973]

Aug 27, 2022 17:38:29 GMT TheRomanSlayer said:

Only thing is, Italy sitting out of the war would result in massive butterflies. Enough for the Germans to carry out a successful Operation: Barbarossa, which would mean Moscow falls in the autumn, and the Soviet Union collapses.

[lightly edited a day later to correct the errors introduced by the 'auto-correct' feature. This AI feature still needs to improve its mind-reading skills]

I don’t buy it. What is your rationale? People used to say if Italy is not in the war, Germany does not need to spend time on the April-May Balkans campaign, so it has time to start Barbarossa in May and with an extra month before winter it can get to Moscow. Is that it?

The problem that people have noted with that in recent decades is, even if you take away the need for the Balkan campaign, the Germans could not invade the USSR much earlier than OTL because spring rains kept the ground too muddy and messy through May and early June to permit the Germans to make the swift advances and encirclements they needed. The problem with attacking Russia when the ground is still soggy is you can’t do as well at first but the Russians are getting alerted the war is on.

The only way to really resolve this dispute one way or the other is to get our hands on Soviet weather reports (and Nazi ones) from May and June 1941.

The only thing that improves for the Germans in a no Italy scenario is the units are less worn out from the Balkan campaign.

This also feeds into into the larger “Italy was dragging the Axis down” narrative that I would dispute.

The Italians lost battles regularly and steadily, but they kept the British busy for years, mainly fighting them, with German augmentation, instead of fighting in Northern Europe or the Far East.

The Germans helped the Italians with air and armor units in Africa, but the Italians provided the naval escort and supply system. The Italians also sent more men to Russia than Germany sent to Africa or the Med until 1943.

So yeah, if Italy stays neutral, Germany gains a couple things- a leakier blockade (but not too much for too long -Britain will ration imports eventually), no African or Yugoslav or Greek deployments and less wear and tear on their units involved as they get ready for Barbarossa. And Britain, even with fuller concentration on Germany, still cannot D-Day in France in 1941.

However, Britain also gains a lot of advantages from a neutral Italy, they show up quickly, and multiply cumulatively over time.

Without war in the Med, shipping is much easier, and it is easier to fight the U Boat threat from late 1940 on.

With building UK forces more concentrated at home and not in the Middle East, the German garrison in France and Norway, even during Barbarossa 1941 will have to be a little bit bigger.

Germany will not be able to entirely ignore its southern borders- the problem will be small and manageable at first, but grow over time. Germany will need some troops in case Italy turns on her or Yugoslavia is persuaded to join the British side.

After Barbarossa, the advantages for Britain and the Allies only increase. Without Italy in the Axis and a strong consequent German presence in Greece, the Aegean, and southern Balkans, the British and Americans will be able to ship aid to Russia via the Turkish straits with merchant vessels and unload it at Soviet Black Sea ports, from where it can be distributed far more efficiently and quickly than via the Murmansk, Iran, or Pacific routes to Soviet front-line forces and industries.

Without being knocked on their heels in Egypt, or losing in Greece, the British could be able to reinforce Malaya and Burma and hold out against the Japanese.

These plusses all add up, even if Britain can’t start an actual land front for a long time.

Even if the Germans, through some better units,,a couple extra weeks, and luck, did seize Moscow city center before the end of 1941, that’s not necessarily game over for the USSR or even European Russia- there is still plenty of important territory before you reach the Volga. It could just turn into a 1941-42 version of Stalingrad, but in Moscow, with the German captors of the city besieged there and then defeated.

[melanie]

What happens to Austria in late '44/early '45 with a neutral Italy? Benny the Moose will make sure he gets into Austria before the Russians do.

[raharris1973]

Aug 30, 2022 21:21:34 GMT melanie said:

What happens to Austria in late '44/early '45 with a neutral Italy? Benny the Moose will make sure he gets into Austria before the Russians do.

I think so, if everybody else in Southern Europe has been neutral so far, he will. He will want to get ahead of the Russians. He may try to get into Hungary, or at least its west of the Danube if he can also.

The other other possible late entrant possibly competing with Italy and the Soviet Union for the liberation of Danubian countries like Hungary and Austria could be Yugoslavia. Heck, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria could consider a late entrance against Romania once the late war Soviet counteroffensive tears into it, in the case of the Bulgarians, with the intent of 'getting on the right side' and seeing if they can redeem their claim to north Dobruja for their 'service to the cause of the United Nations'.

[michelvan]

Hitler and neutrality, in Short: he does what he wants!

He ignored the neutrality of Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg as order the Detour to Paris
but respected neutrality of Switzerland, Sweden and Spain.

So real Question is has Bulgaria something Hitler need or is consider obstacle ?
There were force anti Communist in begin 1920s and 1930s here they join the Nazi efforts
i think that little screaming Austrian would Respect neutrality of Bulgaria
and for resource it will same way like Sweden during WW2
And if Mussolini respect a neutrality of Bulgaria could let to different outcome for Italian balkan campaign

but in end it complete trivial
remember anti Communist government in begin 1930s, ?
Surviving Bulgarian communist fled to Moscow
now 1944 they return with Red Army to Occupy Bulgaria and install a Communist regime...

[TheRomanSlayer]

Aug 30, 2022 16:08:10 GMT raharris1973 said:

People used to say if Italy is not in the war, Germany does not need to spend time on the April-May Balkans campaign, so it has time to start Barbarossa in May and with an extra month before winter it can get to Moscow. Is that it?

The problem that people have noted with that in recent decades is, even if you take away the need for the Balkan campaign, the Germans could not invade the USSR much earlier than OTL because spring rains kept the ground too muddy and messy through May and early June to permit the Germans to make the swift advances and encirclements they needed. The problem with attacking Russia when the ground is still soggy is you can’t do as well at first but the Russians are getting alerted the war is on.

Italy's abysmal performance in Greece was one of the main reasons for the German intervention, which I did point out that if the Greek campaign had never happened, the Germans wouldn't be distracted by the Balkans for Operation: Barbarossa. Yes, I also agree that the mud season would also be a main issue for any possible German invasion of the USSR to succeed.

One other thing that I should also point out is that the Yugoslav coup could have been prevented if one of the conspirators was captured, and was forced to leak the contents of the coup. The coup was also the main reason for the German invasion of Yugoslavia, which opened up a new can of worms that affected the region to this day.

Although a neutral Italy could also be a net gain for the Allies, as Germany would face faster collapse as well. Politically though, a surviving neutral fascist Italy might become the leader of a non-aligned faction in any potential Cold War. I would also agree that a neutral Italy might also have a negative consequence for Japan as well, since those extra Allied troops could be useful in blunting the Japanese offensive, and they'd also be in a position to increase military aid to China as well.

Going back to Bulgaria though, it might have to take a third round of the Vienna Awards for Bulgaria to acquire some of its lost territories in Yugoslavia and Greece. You might need a more rational leader than Mussolini to realize that attempting to recreate the Roman Empire would be more costly than it's worth.

[melanie]

Maybe the dice of chance happens differently and someone Moosie believes points out to the Moose that economic and trade conquest is far more efficient and useful to Italy than military conquest.

[stevep]

Sept 2, 2022 9:17:33 GMT melanie said:

Maybe the dice of chance happens differently and someone Moosie believes points out to the Moose that economic and trade conquest is far more efficient and useful to Italy than military conquest.

  Unfortunately that would need a much different Benny who wasn't fixated on conquests to 'restore Italian greatness'.  Its possible that he might be persuaded not to attack Greece until he's 'won' in Egypt - which of course is somewhat unlikely given the logistics and the state of the Italian forces in 1940-41.

[germanbread]

They would have gotten invaded. Bulgaria and Yugoslavia had the choice of either getting invaded and partioned, or joining the axis and have their borders intact. If Bulgaria said "no," they have gotten invaded, and split between members of the axis at that time. Who knows, maybe this causes Yugoslavia to join the axis willingly. What I'm saying is that Bulgaria could never just stay 'neutral,' because they had to either fight the axis or fight with the axis.