Turkey joins the Axis in 1940-41

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Post Reply
User avatar
Christian W.
Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 10 Aug 2004, 19:26
Location: Vantaa, Finland

#91

Post by Christian W. » 04 Feb 2007, 18:18

I dare to say Turkey's joinal to Axis would have helped them the most if Turkey had joined the war in 1940 after the surrender of France. What could British possibly do agains't hundreds of thousands Turkish when the Italians would launch their historical offensive that year too? Where would British get enough troops for both Middle-east and Africa?

User avatar
Paul kyre
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: 23 May 2006, 08:30
Location: Philippines

#92

Post by Paul kyre » 11 Feb 2007, 14:27

Will Russia, thru armenia's claim, will also attack turkey if possible?


User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

#93

Post by Tim Smith » 11 Feb 2007, 14:57

Christian W. wrote:I dare to say Turkey's joinal to Axis would have helped them the most if Turkey had joined the war in 1940 after the surrender of France. What could British possibly do against hundreds of thousands Turkish when the Italians would launch their historical offensive that year too? Where would British get enough troops for both Middle-east and Africa?
The British would have to call upon the Indian Army to provide more troops to resist the Turks. India was (and is) a very populous country and capable of raising a large army - in 1944 the Indian Army reached a total of 2.5 million men, all of them volunteers. Granted, there weren't that many in 1940, but by stripping India and Burma of troops, I estimate that the Indian Army could have sent at least six more infantry divisions to the Middle East in 1940.

Also if Turkey had joined the Axis in 1940, the British would not have sent any forces to Greece or Crete, those forces (6th Australian Inf. Div, 2nd New Zealand Inf. Div, 1st British Armoured Brigade, various RAF fighter and bomber squadrons) would have to be deployed against the Turks instead.

Also the January 1941 British offensive against Italian East Africa would have to be postponed, the two Indian divisions that took part in that offensive would be needed against the Turks as well. The British would have to use mainly African troops (South African, Sudanese, Nigerian and Kenyan) against East Africa.

User avatar
Christian W.
Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 10 Aug 2004, 19:26
Location: Vantaa, Finland

#94

Post by Christian W. » 11 Feb 2007, 15:40

But COULD British possibly keep both Italians and Turkish at bay? The Turkish standing army in October 1940 was 220000 men, and 190000 reservists could be called for duty in three weeks notice time. The navy had two marine brigades with 3800 men in each. There were also 22000 men in fortresses in and around the Bosphorus. We would be talking about over 900000 Axis soldiers in total, including Italian forces in Libya and East Africa.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

#95

Post by Tim Smith » 11 Feb 2007, 16:07

The Turks can't send their full strength against the British, just as the British can't send their full strength against the Turks.

The Turks must maintain a strong force on the Soviet-Turkish border. Because the Nazi-Soviet Pact is a pact between Germany and Russia, not between Turkey and Russia.

The Turks can't trust Stalin not to take advantage of their distraction with the British and stab them in the back.

And Stalin has already overrun the Baltic States, taken Bessarabia from Rumania, and is massing troops on the Finnish border, proving that he can't be trusted.

Remember that it's October 1940. The Germans can't take decisive action against the USSR (for attacking Turkey) until summer 1941 - seven or eight months away. The USSR could quite possibly overrun Turkey in that time!

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003, 06:16
Location: Canada

#96

Post by Paul Lakowski » 12 Feb 2007, 00:06

But if there is no British troops in Greece, then the Germans could invade the country easily ; quickly and continue on to help the Turks. Are you considering UK operation against Turkey? When would this happen and what would it be focused on?

Germans had eyes on the Balkans since the early 1930s and OKW could view such an assault as preperation for Barbarossa? If Axis can use eastern Turkey to launch , say a Army with mountain korps reinforced with paratrooper divisions/airlanding division, could they reach out and over run the Baku oil fields , parrallel to Barbarossa in 1941????

If its Oct 1940 would the UK risk massive such a army/navy action when the dust has not settled over the skys of the Britain? I understand that UK intelligence had already detected Hitlers abandonment of Sealion, but would they make such a considerable strategic shift on such limited intell.

If Hitler's fevered mind has already desided to move east over west, he could also order several German korps to Turkeys aid, how would that tip the balance? He would not leave such a valuable alliance to UK.

I recall that later in the war the Germans were able to shift entire panzer korps from Eastern Front to Western Front in a matter of days, would they be capable of doing this in 1940? This action might have forced a resolution of the weak Balkans flank , early enough to allow Barbarossa to start at the end of Spring 1941.

User avatar
Baltasar
Member
Posts: 4614
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 16:56
Location: Germany

#97

Post by Baltasar » 12 Feb 2007, 08:37

Tim,
any suggestions how the British would supply an additional 4-6 divisions of Indian infantry in 1940? Propably the ships necessary for the other units in Africa and the Middle East would help a bit, but you're suggesting that they woul raise an additional 60,000 to 80,000 men at arms here.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

#98

Post by Tim Smith » 12 Feb 2007, 14:06

Paul Lakowski wrote:But if there is no British troops in Greece, then the Germans could invade the country easily ; quickly and continue on to help the Turks. Are you considering UK operation against Turkey? When would this happen and what would it be focused on?
If there are no British troops in Greece, then there is a chance that the Germans might not get involved in the Balkans at all - they did that only to prevent Italian defeat. With Turkey in the war, the Greeks have to cover the Turkish front as well. Italy, Bulgaria and Turkey might be able to defeat Greece without German help.

Hitler never wanted a war in the Balkans and was annoyed when Mussolini attacked Greece.

The UK would not undertake offensive action against Turkey - they would be on the defensive. They are fighting a three-front war in the Middle Eastern Theatre - against the Italians in North Africa, the Italians in East Africa, and now the Turks in Palestine and Iraq. Only limited offensive action would be possible in this scenario - the British might not even be able to destroy the Italian 10th Army in Libya.

Probably the Turks would be regarded as the most serious threat in the region as they are closest to the Middle Eastern oilfields, so the 7th Armoured Division under the superb General O'Connor would be used against them rather than the Italians.

The British can't conquer Turkey until after the USSR is in the war. But I think they could throw back a Turkish offensive. Like the Italians the Turks are very short of armour in 1940, the 7th Armoured Div. would soon carve up their WW1-style infantry divisions.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

#99

Post by Tim Smith » 12 Feb 2007, 14:10

Baltasar wrote:Tim,
any suggestions how the British would supply an additional 4-6 divisions of Indian infantry in 1940? Propably the ships necessary for the other units in Africa and the Middle East would help a bit, but you're suggesting that they woul raise an additional 60,000 to 80,000 men at arms here.
Why do you think the British would have a problem with supply in Palestine? They have near total control over the Indian Ocean and Red Sea, Italian naval forces in the region (based in East Africa) were pathetically ineffective. Also they have the Middle East oilfields as a nearby source of fuel.

christopher nelson
Member
Posts: 284
Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 16:37
Location: mystic,ct USA

#100

Post by christopher nelson » 12 Feb 2007, 16:39

In 1940 and 1941 there was a shortage of equipment to arm the British army thus while the manpower pool might have existed in India there was a lack of equipment to arm them. Indian Army units that were dispatched to Malaya in 1940 and 1941 tend to be poorly armed and lacked the proper training. The same story for Burma. Thus the dispatch of large number of Indian army troops to fight Turkey would probably result in heavy loses to the Commonwealth forces.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

#101

Post by Tim Smith » 12 Feb 2007, 18:11

christopher nelson wrote:In 1940 and 1941 there was a shortage of equipment to arm the British army thus while the manpower pool might have existed in India there was a lack of equipment to arm them. Indian Army units that were dispatched to Malaya in 1940 and 1941 tend to be poorly armed and lacked the proper training. The same story for Burma. Thus the dispatch of large number of Indian army troops to fight Turkey would probably result in heavy loses to the Commonwealth forces.
True, some of the Indian Army was poorly equipped. They were only poorly trained in respect to jungle fighting, which doesn't apply in the Middle East.

However, much of the Turkish Army would be poorly equipped as well, so the odds would be even on that score.

User avatar
Christian W.
Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 10 Aug 2004, 19:26
Location: Vantaa, Finland

#102

Post by Christian W. » 12 Feb 2007, 22:49

much of the Turkish Army would be poorly equipped as well
I beg to differ.

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003, 06:16
Location: Canada

#103

Post by Paul Lakowski » 13 Feb 2007, 05:56

If the british do mount an amphibious operation landing a korps with an armored division that would surely trigger a german offer of help.Once the Germans are their they could deal with the british division and in return use eastern Turkey as a launch point for invasion of caucasus in 1941 siezing the Baku oil fields.

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:51
Location: UK and USA

#104

Post by Andy H » 13 Feb 2007, 07:11

Are we suggesting that the Turkish forces advance through Iraq or Syria?

If the former, the there logistical tail will be very long and very basic. I would presume that any British/Empire troops would withdraw to the middle/southern areas, thus extending there supply lines.

If the latter then it could have serious consequences for the Vichy in relation to its relations with the US in particular and its naval equipment/personnel under British control in accordance with the armistace. Also would Vichy controlled Syria allow such an action, given that any action or therefore damage will fall upon its land & people?

Regards

Andy H

User avatar
Baltasar
Member
Posts: 4614
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 16:56
Location: Germany

#105

Post by Baltasar » 15 Feb 2007, 16:36

Tim Smith wrote:
Baltasar wrote:Tim,
any suggestions how the British would supply an additional 4-6 divisions of Indian infantry in 1940? Propably the ships necessary for the other units in Africa and the Middle East would help a bit, but you're suggesting that they woul raise an additional 60,000 to 80,000 men at arms here.
Why do you think the British would have a problem with supply in Palestine? They have near total control over the Indian Ocean and Red Sea, Italian naval forces in the region (based in East Africa) were pathetically ineffective. Also they have the Middle East oilfields as a nearby source of fuel.
I don't have sources on British logistical setups in the Indian theatre, but I would imagine that most of the supplies regarding equipment, ammunition and all the normal daily stuff used by troops in combat, minus propably food and/or fuel, would have to be shipped around africa, adding additional pressure to the British troops as they would have more troops in the med region, but would also have to supply those in addition to the troops in place in OTL.

Also, being infantry divisions in the most concrete meaning of the term, I don't see too much use for fuel in those units, which would add ease the supply problem a bit, but would make them much slower. Any action with two armies using such sorts of units on a larger scale would propably end up in a WWI-like-combat.

Post Reply

Return to “What if”