WW2: What if Spain had joined the Axis side during the war?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Knight-Dragon

Unhidden Dragon
Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 25, 2001
Messages
19,961
Location
Singapore
Continuing with my a-thread-a-day campaign :p, what do you think would happen, had Spain entered the war on Germany's side?

Considering that the Axis had aided Franco during the Spanish civil war and that the govt was ideological kin to the Axis, this could have been possible...

Thoughts?
 
Well, Spain was far too weak to be any kind of help really, but the loss of Gibraltar would've been nasty for the Brits in the Mediteranean.
 
I think the British could have held Gibralter until the Americans entered the war.

Spain would be pretty ineffectual.
 
I htink it would have detracted from the possibilties fo a German victory actually- more area in which it needed to spred it troops to patrol and guard- but mostlyl because fo the fact it would have meant that its litterally a whole new country to which Hitlers already vastlly over extendended "atalntic wall" had to be built to guard
 
Absolutely agree with Corsair#01:
A double, simultaneous pression on Gibraltar and Malta, could have been VERY critical for British control of the Mediterranean (and consequencially, of east aAtlantic, and perhaps ot the sea-route to India, in case Suez was been blocked...)
I'd add even the potential Spanish pression on Vichy's NW Africa (having in mind an eventual Allies' desembark on those coasts...).
Just few things, many others could be bring out...
Always thinking in terms of "what if...?", of course ;)
 
Let me quote Truman's memories about it. It's the Postdam meeting of Churchill, Stalin and Truman, and they speak about Spain...

I [Truman] suggested that we move on the question of Spain. Churchill said that his goverment had a strong distate for General Franco and his goverment. But, he said, there was more to Spanish policy than drawing rude cartoons of Franco. He revealed that Franco had written him a letter proposing that they join each other to organize the Western states against "that terrible country Rusia." With the approval of the British Cabinet, Chuchill said he had sent Franco a chilly reply and that a copy of this reply had been sent to Molotov.
Stalin said he had received a copy of the British reply to Franco.
Churchill went on to say that he saw more difficulty in Stalin's proposal, particulary in regard to the breaking off of all relations with Franco Spain. He said that he was against interfiering in the affairs of a country which had not molested the Allies and believed it was a dangerous principe to break off relation because of Spain's internal conduct. He would deplore anything, he said, that might lead Spain back into civil war. He pointed out that the UN Charter had a provision against interference in the domestics affairs of a nation, and that it would be inconsistent, while preparing ro ratiy that Charter, to resort to action that would be prohibited under it.
I made it clear that I had no love for Franco and also that I had no desire to have any part in starting another civil war in Spain. There had been enough wars in Europe. I said that I would be happy to recognize another goverment in Spain but that I though Spain itself must settle that question.
Stalin said that this was no internal affair, because the Franco regime had been imposed on the Spanish people by Hitler and Mussolini. He said he believed that his colleagues had no love for Franco and that he did not propose to renew civil war in Spain either. If breaking relations was too sever a demostration, he asked if there were not some other more flexible means by which the Big Three [Rusia, USA y UK] could let the Spanish people know that the three goverments were in sypmathy with the people of Spain and not Franco. He said it was presumed that the Big Three could settle such questions and taht we could not pass by this cancer in Europe. If we remained silet, he warned, it might be considered that we sanctioned Franco.
Churcill reitared his opposition to breaking relaitons. He referred to the valuable trade relations which Britain maintained with Spain. Unless he were convinced, he said, that breaking relations would bring about the desired result, he did not want this old and well-established trade with Spain stopped. He fully understood the feeling of Marshal Stalin, he said, when Franco had had the audacity to send a Spanish Blue Division to Russia. Russia was in different position, he admitted, because she had been molested. He pointed out that Spaniards had refrained from taking actions against the British at a time when such intervention could have been disastrous. During the Toch operation, he said, merely opening fire on the ships in the area of Gribaltar would have done the British great harm. But the Spaniards would have been dome if they had dared to take such action against the Allies.
Stalin suggested that the foreing secretaries try to find some means of making it clear that the heads of the three goverment were not in favor of the Franco regime.
I agreed with this suggestion, but Churchill wanted the matter settled by the heads of goverment.
Stalin pointed out that it would be settled by the three of us. The foreign ministers would only give it preliminary study.
Chuchill said he did not think this was advisable.
The discussion ranged ahead in seesaw fashion, with both the Premier and the Prime Minister restating their earlier arguments. I saw that there was no chance for agreement on this issue at the moment and suggested that we pass on to something else upon which we could come to a decision and that we come back to the Spanish question at a later session.
Stalin again suggested taht it be referred to the foreign ministers for their consideration. Churchill again balked on this point and insisted that the heads of state simply the leave the question without decision. I pointed out that we could return to it at any time.
 
There was no chance that Franco would let Spain become involved in the war. His contribution of the "Blue" Division to the Russian Front was the most war-ravished Spain could provide. But, for the sake of arguement, if Spain has joined the Axis at war, would Gib have gone the way of Singapore?? Or would Hitler have lost his "secret" refueling bases in Spanish ports.

IF Hitler had held Rommel in check and gone for Malta vs Egypt and pushed through Spain on Gib, the Med would, truly, have become an Italian lake. Malta certainly would have gone the way of Crete, but Gib is a Fortress blasted out of solid rock. Still, at the very least, it could have been neutralized as a naval base and with the Med closed to the British, Eqypt would have been a sitting duck for Rommel.

As to increasing the length of the Atlantic wall, its irrelavent. When your on the offensive, you don't need to worry about defense. And your basic question assumes Raeder's Med strategy was followed instead of the rush to attack Russia, and as long as Russia is neutral or allied to Germany, England is on the defensive and worried about an invasion.

I think if Spain had entered the war, and Hitler had followed the Med strategy, England could have been defeated before the Russian Campaign. It could have had far-reaching effects on the entire war. Japan may have opted for attacking Russia and not America. It is possible that the USA might have stayed out of the war and Russia would have gone under in 1942.
 
@ Ace- Good post :goodjob: . You brought up some very interesting
points and questions :confused: :scan: . Good things to think over ;) .
 
Spain was too weak to of any real significance to the axis, the loss of gibralter wouldn't have affected the British a bit.The annexing of spain would also mean enlarging the Atlantic wall which would divert troops and material from other fronts.

I think I remember Hitler investigating the invasion of Spain, but his advisors advised him not to or at least it was something like that.
 
Losing Gibraltar would have been (IMO) a big blow for the British, this would have meant there was almost no way to go into the Med directly (other then the way around afrika)
 
Ace said:
Japan may have opted for attacking Russia and not America. It is possible that the USA might have stayed out of the war and Russia would have gone under in 1942.

What did Japan have to gain from attacking Russia? A bloody nose is all I can think of. Japan wanted to dominate the Pacific and East Asia, and America was the one to beat if that was going to happen.

The only contribution Spain could make to the Axis cause would be to enhance Germany's strategic position as I don't think they would have had the money or will to fight a big war. would have won the Med for the Axis though.
 
shadowdude said:
Spain was too weak to of any real significance to the axis, the loss of gibralter wouldn't have affected the British a bit.The annexing of spain would also mean enlarging the Atlantic wall which would divert troops and material from other fronts.

I think I remember Hitler investigating the invasion of Spain, but his advisors advised him not to or at least it was something like that.
1: Spain's weakness is not the issue. 2. The loss of Gib would have meant the end for the British in the Med. 3. Hitler had no intention of annexing Spain. He wanted Spain to join the Axis, and the lenght of the Atlantic wall only matters IF North Africa, Stalingrad, and Krusk and go wrong. 4: Hitler's plan was to convince Franco to join the Axis and help the Germans attack Gib.
 
rilnator said:
What did Japan have to gain from attacking Russia? A bloody nose is all I can think of. Japan wanted to dominate the Pacific and East Asia, and America was the one to beat if that was going to happen.

The only contribution Spain could make to the Axis cause would be to enhance Germany's strategic position as I don't think they would have had the money or will to fight a big war. would have won the Med for the Axis though.

Japan and Germany, together could have beaten Russia. That would have given Japan a free hand in Asia and provided the resources she needed without having to fight the USA. Japan would also have settled the score with the Russians for the bloody nose she got at the only land engagement she had with the Russians in the late thirties.

The real contribution Spain could have made to the Axis was to provide the Germans with a direct land route to Gib. Spain's economic and military status was much worse that Italy's because of the civil war, but, as previously mentioned, it was the land bridge to Gib that was all important.

The overriding thing to keep in mind is that the USA could not enter the war unless attacked. The political climate in the country would not support it. In 1940, most Americans considered the war in Europe just a continuation of world war I and a Eupopean conflict to be avoided. And if the American production is denied the British and Russians, the Axis will win the war.
 
It's not like Hitler and Franco were good friends. Hitler once said he'd rather have teeth pulled that speak to Franco. They were not on excellent terms.
 
nonconformist said:
It's not like Hitler and Franco were good friends. Hitler once said he'd rather have teeth pulled that speak to Franco. They were not on excellent terms.
Just to clarify a bit, Hitler was refering to Dealing with Franco as opposed to just buddy stuff. Franco was willing to join the attack on Gib, he just wanted all of Germany to do it and the rights to the movie afterwards.
 
Ace said:
Just to clarify a bit, Hitler was refering to Dealing with Franco as opposed to just buddy stuff. Franco was willing to join the attack on Gib, he just wanted all of Germany to do it and the rights to the movie afterwards.
Why didn´t they like each other?
 
So this is another What if question: Okay, IF Spain declared war on the allies in 1940 together with Italy: Gibraltar might be a big fortress but also Eben Emael was a big fortress. No, there was NO chance for the Brits to keep Gibraltar in that case. That means the western med would have been lost to the British. Malta would have been invaded at all costs. Since the supply route was so long, Malta was lost. And what remains? Egypt. But also here: The supply routes. Although the way was open around Africa, Rommel now would have no big difficulties to gain access to the Suez Channel. And then? Into the Middle East. Iran would have joined Germany. And now there was enough oil for Germany and much less for the allies. Now the Operation Barbarossa would have been delayed, but then? Without big problems The Germans could have attacked the Oilfields of Baku and the Cauacasus area. This at the very first months in 1942 would have lead to a desaster for Stalin. In the meantime the Japanese would attack America and Burma. And this would be the situation in 1943: the Axis would control North Africa and big parts of Russian and the Middle East. The Allies would have now much worse chances to win. However it was not impossible, but the war could now last for years. The Spanish effort to the war might be little, but the point, Gibraltar would have been crucial and decisive. The only good thing this situation would have that the Brits would now cook REAL meals. Although a big point I don´t want to live in that world.

Adler
 
It depends on the timeline, as it's already been considered....

Still, it's true that Gibraltar could have been overrun and it's also likely that the Axis' position on the Mediterranean could have certainly been improved, but not significantly, UNLESS Hitler and his staff chose to seriously follow that route, which is something I doubt, IMHO.

Unless Germany poured all the necessary resources towards that theatre and left Barbarossa for later (again, something I doubt), it would merely be a sideshow once again, just a slightly larger/longer lasting one....in any case, Britain and the Royal Navy would certainly put up a fight and the Germans would still committ mistakes (very unlikely that they wouldn't), thus I don't see a successful Axis drive throughout the Middle East and into Russia from the south as a real logistical (the lines would become very long and stressed) and geographic (the harsh mountain terrain would be absolutely horrible to overcome) possibility (not to mention that Stalin may not always "stay put" after enough obvious movements have been made).

Thus I really doubt that Franco and his regime could have outlasted Hitler's, which would have eventually fallen to the Russians in any case, sooner or later....Perhaps an Anglo-American landing would have taken place in Spain instead of Italy (or instead of the one in southern France, if your prefer) and it'd be the end of it all.

Good Day.
 
Ace said:
Japan and Germany, together could have beaten Russia. That would have given Japan a free hand in Asia and provided the resources she needed without having to fight the USA. Japan would also have settled the score with the Russians for the bloody nose she got at the only land engagement she had with the Russians in the late thirties.
QUOTE]

Japan thought Hitler was going to beat the Russians on his own and this gave them the courage to go toe to toe with the USA. Attacking Russia would have been hard for them as it would mostly be via Siberia. Apart for having unfriendly weather it is also very large and the Soviets could withdraw, withdraw, withdraw.....
If they had of timed there attack so as to divert those Siberian troops that arrived out the front of Moscow there may have been a different result. But Hitler didn't trust any of his allies with the timings and direction of his attacks. Mussolini was left clueless until after all of Hitler's big moves.
 
History of Spain would have changed much. Franco ruled until 1975 and formed Spain for really many years. Juan Carlos wouldn't be king and Spain probably not a monarchy at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom