The Allies' attitude towards a Beck-Goerdeler government at the end of 1943

[Juan G. C.]

Also, according to Zhukov Stalin said in June 8, 1944, that the British and Americans would make peace with "an obedient government", and even in 1945 his paranoia was aroused when he heard about the Dulles-Wolff negotiations.

[Takao]

Also, according to Zhukov Stalin said in June 8, 1944, that the British and Americans would make peace with "an obedient government", and even in 1945 his paranoia was aroused when he heard about the Dulles-Wolff negotiations.

First...you left out the bit be for that, about Stalin being confident of defeating Nazi Germany single handedly.

Second, it was not about FDR & Churchill making peace with an obedient government", but setting up an "obedient government"

[Takao]

Perhaps you are right, but then, why did the Soviets found the BDO on September 1943, after Kursk? A potencial Allied-German peace would have given Germany access to world commerce, removing the need of italian armaments production.

The BDO was useful for many things, not just propaganda. They operated with Soviet partisans behind German lines. They posed as German troops. They operated as Soviet spies. Etc. If the Soviets were going it alone the BDO would have been very useful.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Im referring to the party rank & file & the millions of other Germans who did not yet understand the war was lost, or the problem of nazi maladministration. It required another winter & spring of defeat before leaders from Rommel & Rundsteadt down to corporals understood things were going to get really bad as the war continued.

I do not think it would have been very difficult to make them understand, especially with the propaganda in the hands of the new government. And anyway, I think that the exposure of the many crimes of the previous government would have been enough to justify the coup and the new government in the eyes of most germans. When the Holocaust and the many other crimes are revealed, many non nazis and nazis would have started saying: "Hey, I have always been against the Nazi regime" or "I had no idea of that", just like they did when the Allies won the War.

This does not match what I have read of the thinking of the senior German leaders during 1943, nor at the lower levels. Hilter had eliminated long before the weaker supporters from the upper ranks and leaders like Rommel were true believers, even when not nazi party members. Even grumpy Rundsteadt was not going to run up a white flag just because some new group in Berlin said so. It was not until 1944 that commitment weakened at the top & that was a not consistent. Rommel was one of the exceptions rather than among the majority when the bomb went off in July 1944.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Also, according to Zhukov Stalin said in June 8, 1944, that the British and Americans would make peace with "an obedient government", and even in 1945 his paranoia was aroused when he heard about the Dulles-Wolff negotiations.

First...you left out the bit be for that, about Stalin being confident of defeating Nazi Germany single handedly.

Second, it was not about FDR & Churchill making peace with an obedient government", but setting up an "obedient government"

& how long did it take their successors to set up a obedient government? No one trusted the Germans in 1943, or 1945, or for some years after that. In the Donintz group they had a 'obedient government' & dissolved it as soon as convenient. Theres a canard developed from the 1970s as I recall, of the 'Good Germans' vs the evil nazis. I don't see much of that in the literature of the era nor in the view of the WWII veterans I grew up among. Nor do I recall it voiced in 1960s. The difference between the nazi party & Hitlers regime and Germans in general was pretty much invisible at the core of the Allies view during the war. Note the views of the July 1944 assassination effort. That became known quickly to the Allied leadership & any potential was dismissed as a meaningless internal squabble.

[Takao]

& how long did it take their successors to set up a obedient government? No one trusted the Germans in 1943, or 1945, or for some years after that. In the Donintz group they had a 'obedient government' & dissolved it as soon as convenient. Theres a canard developed from the 1970s as I recall, of the 'Good Germans' vs the evil nazis. I don't see much of that in the literature of the era nor in the view of the WWII veterans I grew up among. Nor do I recall it voiced in 1960s. The difference between the nazi party & Hitlers regime and Germans in general was pretty much invisible at the core of the Allies view during the war. Note the views of the July 1944 assassination effort. That became known quickly to the Allied leadership & any potential was dismissed as a meaningless internal squabble.

This was Stalin's concern/paranoia. As such, it was not necessarily based on reality, but what he perceived might happen.

[History Learner]

Also, according to Zhukov Stalin said in June 8, 1944, that the British and Americans would make peace with "an obedient government", and even in 1945 his paranoia was aroused when he heard about the Dulles-Wolff negotiations.

First...you left out the bit be for that, about Stalin being confident of defeating Nazi Germany single handedly.

Second, it was not about FDR & Churchill making peace with an obedient government", but setting up an "obedient government"

& how long did it take their successors to set up a obedient government? No one trusted the Germans in 1943, or 1945, or for some years after that. In the Donintz group they had a 'obedient government' & dissolved it as soon as convenient. Theres a canard developed from the 1970s as I recall, of the 'Good Germans' vs the evil nazis. I don't see much of that in the literature of the era nor in the view of the WWII veterans I grew up among. Nor do I recall it voiced in 1960s. The difference between the nazi party & Hitlers regime and Germans in general was pretty much invisible at the core of the Allies view during the war. Note the views of the July 1944 assassination effort. That became known quickly to the Allied leadership & any potential was dismissed as a meaningless internal squabble.

Allied leaders dismissed it, but in early 1944 around 40% of Americans voters were in favor of an armistice under these conditions; i.e. the Germany Army overthrew Hitler and proposed peace. It declined over the course of the year and then shot back up as the Bulge Offensive occurred in December.

[Juan G. C.]

Im referring to the party rank & file & the millions of other Germans who did not yet understand the war was lost, or the problem of nazi maladministration. It required another winter & spring of defeat before leaders from Rommel & Rundsteadt down to corporals understood things were going to get really bad as the war continued.

I do not think it would have been very difficult to make them understand, especially with the propaganda in the hands of the new government. And anyway, I think that the exposure of the many crimes of the previous government would have been enough to justify the coup and the new government in the eyes of most germans. When the Holocaust and the many other crimes are revealed, many non nazis and nazis would have started saying: "Hey, I have always been against the Nazi regime" or "I had no idea of that", just like they did when the Allies won the War.

This does not match what I have read of the thinking of the senior German leaders during 1943, nor at the lower levels. Hilter had eliminated long before the weaker supporters from the upper ranks and leaders like Rommel were true believers, even when not nazi party members. Even grumpy Rundsteadt was not going to run up a white flag just because some new group in Berlin said so. It was not until 1944 that commitment weakened at the top & that was a not consistent. Rommel was one of the exceptions rather than among the majority when the bomb went off in July 1944.

Many generals and field marshals knew during 1943 about the conspiracy and, although they did not join it, they did not report it either. When the plotters asked Manstein if, after a coup, he would accept the position of chief of the general staff of the Wehrmacht, he merely said: "I shall always be loyally at the disposal of the legitimate government". Kluge was half-heartedly commited to the conspiracy, and in October 1943 told Joachim Kuhn that if Hitler came to his headquarters he would arrest him. Rundstedt also knew of the conspiracy, through his aide Hans-Viktor von Salviati, who tried to convince him to join it, without success, because Rundstedt said that he was too old for those things. But neither did Rundstedt report the plotters. So I do not see them opposing the coup.

[Juan G. C.]

Allied leaders dismissed it, but in early 1944 around 40% of Americans voters were in favor of an armistice under these conditions; i.e. the Germany Army overthrew Hitler and proposed peace. It declined over the course of the year and then shot back up as the Bulge Offensive occurred in December.

I found this very interesting. What is the source of this information? Thanks.

[Carl Schwamberger]

& how long did it take their successors to set up a obedient government? No one trusted the Germans in 1943, or 1945, or for some years after that. In the Donintz group they had a 'obedient government' & dissolved it as soon as convenient. Theres a canard developed from the 1970s as I recall, of the 'Good Germans' vs the evil nazis. I don't see much of that in the literature of the era nor in the view of the WWII veterans I grew up among. Nor do I recall it voiced in 1960s. The difference between the nazi party & Hitlers regime and Germans in general was pretty much invisible at the core of the Allies view during the war. Note the views of the July 1944 assassination effort. That became known quickly to the Allied leadership & any potential was dismissed as a meaningless internal squabble.

Allied leaders dismissed it, but in early 1944 around 40% of Americans voters were in favor of an armistice under these conditions; i.e. the Germany Army overthrew Hitler and proposed peace. It declined over the course of the year and then shot back up as the Bulge Offensive occurred in December.

40% in US politics for that sort of issue is a weak group. Particularly where it is a peak and the group fluctuates downwards. The reverse is 60 favored nailing Germany to the wall and rendering it as a nation impotent. More to the point the US leaders at the top revisited the question informally several times and found no useful reason to digress, even if offered a cease fire with terms. Roosevelt had determined along the way to remake the world as far as possible to US advantage & a Germany capable of returning again as a threat to that was not in the playbook.

[History Learner]

Allied leaders dismissed it, but in early 1944 around 40% of Americans voters were in favor of an armistice under these conditions; i.e. the Germany Army overthrew Hitler and proposed peace. It declined over the course of the year and then shot back up as the Bulge Offensive occurred in December.

I found this very interesting. What is the source of this information? Thanks.

See American Popular Opinion and the War Against Germany: The Issue of Negotiated Peace, 1942 by Richard W. Steele,The Journal of American History, Dec., 1978, Vol. 65, No. 3 (Dec., 1978), pp. 704-723

[Futurist]

Given the objections of the nazi fanatics its difficult to see the Allies dealing with a orderly armistice. Decapitating the nazi regime in a coup does not waive away all the hardcore party members there are still several millions who were still thinking Germany was winning. Then there are the attitudes of the non nazis. While some Germans still capable of independent thought could see the war was lost circa October 1943 or earlier, most 'good' German leaders like Rommel or Kesselring were still drinking the Kool-aid.

That and relevation of numerous war crimes and other problems undercuts ideas of a orderly transition to peace on the Allied side. Unlike in 1918 the German Army is not going to pack it in and head home & the Allies are not going to find a sad and hungry German population. Between the horors discovered in the liberated territories and a even more disgruntled population than of 1918-1919 The Allied leaders have a choice of leaving a burning powder keg in their midst, or reneging on the previous conditions agreed to.

For what it's worth, it's possible that some German Nazis might be willing to cooperate with a new, post-Nazi German government that would be willing to include them as opposed to arresting them.

[Futurist]

Also, according to Zhukov Stalin said in June 8, 1944, that the British and Americans would make peace with "an obedient government", and even in 1945 his paranoia was aroused when he heard about the Dulles-Wolff negotiations.

First...you left out the bit be for that, about Stalin being confident of defeating Nazi Germany single handedly.

Second, it was not about FDR & Churchill making peace with an obedient government", but setting up an "obedient government"

& how long did it take their successors to set up a obedient government? No one trusted the Germans in 1943, or 1945, or for some years after that. In the Donintz group they had a 'obedient government' & dissolved it as soon as convenient. Theres a canard developed from the 1970s as I recall, of the 'Good Germans' vs the evil nazis. I don't see much of that in the literature of the era nor in the view of the WWII veterans I grew up among. Nor do I recall it voiced in 1960s. The difference between the nazi party & Hitlers regime and Germans in general was pretty much invisible at the core of the Allies view during the war. Note the views of the July 1944 assassination effort. That became known quickly to the Allied leadership & any potential was dismissed as a meaningless internal squabble.

Allied leaders dismissed it, but in early 1944 around 40% of Americans voters were in favor of an armistice under these conditions; i.e. the Germany Army overthrew Hitler and proposed peace. It declined over the course of the year and then shot back up as the Bulge Offensive occurred in December.

But with what kind of peace terms?

Also, did either prominent political party in the US actually advocate in favor of negotiating peace with a post-Nazi German government? Or did both US political parties believe that it was acceptable to ignore the views of 40% of Americans on this issue?

[Futurist]

If the March, 1943 attempt on Hitler (and Himmler) worked, I think very strongly the Germans could've pulled off a favorable diplomatic end to the war.

I think that for this to actually occur you're going to need MASSIVE US popular/public pressure on FDR, since FDR would be highly disinclined to voluntarily go down this route.

[Futurist]

Allied leaders dismissed it, but in early 1944 around 40% of Americans voters were in favor of an armistice under these conditions; i.e. the Germany Army overthrew Hitler and proposed peace. It declined over the course of the year and then shot back up as the Bulge Offensive occurred in December.

I found this very interesting. What is the source of this information? Thanks.

See American Popular Opinion and the War Against Germany: The Issue of Negotiated Peace, 1942 by Richard W. Steele,The Journal of American History, Dec., 1978, Vol. 65, No. 3 (Dec., 1978), pp. 704-723

For what it's worth, if anyone really wants a copy of this article, they could put forward a free request for this article here on Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ce_Request

Having a Wikipedia account might, of course, help with this but might not actually be a necessity for this.