Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles

Supreme Allied Command Mediterranean (Archibald Wavell)

Yugoslavia - Allied Armies of the Orient (Ptolemaios Sarigiannis)
  • 1st Greek Army (Alexandros Papagos)
    • III Airborne brigade
    • 3/40 Euzone Regiment
    • A Corps (Demetrios Psarros)
      • I Infantry Division (Petros Nikolopoulos)
      • XVI Infantry division (Pausanias Katsotas)
      • 1st Armoured Cavalry Division (Konstantinos Davakis)
    • C Corps (Sokratis Demaratos)
      • IX Infantry Division (Panagiotis Spiliotopoulos)
      • XIII Mountain Division (Thraymboulos Tsakalotos)
      • 2nd Armoured Cavalry Division (Christos Avramidis)
    • E Corps (Konstantinos Ventiris)
      • III Armoured Division (Andreas Kallinskis)
      • V Infantry division (Alkiviades Bourdaras)
      • Archipelago division (Christodoulos Tsigantes)
  • 10th British Army (William Slim)
    • 1st Free Polish Corps (Wladislaw Anders)
      • 1 Dywizja Grenadierów
      • 2 Dywizja Strzelców Pieszych
    • 2nd Free Polish Corps (Marian Kukiel)
      • 4 Dywizja Piechoty
      • 2 Dywizja Pancerna
    • New Zealand Corps (Bernard Freyberg)
      • 2nd New Zealand Division
      • 1st Palestine (Israeli) Division
      • 6th Armoured Division
  • 3rd Yugoslav Army group (Milorad Petrovic)
    • 3rd Army (Jovan Naumovic)
      • 5th Infantry Division Šumadijska
      • 20th Infantry Division Bregalnička
      • 3rd Cavalry Division
    • 5th Army (Vladimir Cukavac)
      • 3rd Infantry Division Dunavska
      • 34th Infantry Division Toplička
      • 2nd Cavalry Division
  • Adriatic Army Detachment (Charalambos Katsimitros)
    • B Corps (Efstathios Liosis)
      • IV Infantry Division (Emmanuel Mantakas)
      • VI Infantry Division (Leonidas Spaes)
      • VIII Infantry Division (Napoleon Zervas)
    • 1st Yugoslav Army (Draga Mihailovic)
      • 1st Infantry Division Cerska
      • 9th Infantry Division Timočka
Rear Areas

Kosovo
  • 31st Infantry Division Kosovska
Greek GHQ Reserve
  • X Armoured Division (Ignatios Kallergis)

Near East and Bulgaria - 18th Allied Army Group (Oliver Leese)
  • Army of Asia Minor (Georgios Dromazos)
    • Z Corps (Basileios Brachnos)
      • XII Infantry division (Sotirios Moutousis)
      • 11th Archipelago Infantry Regiment
      • 12th Archipelago Infantry Regiment
      • 16th Infantry Regiment
      • 18th Infantry Regiment
  • British 9th Army (William Holmes)
    • III Corps
      • 1st Infantry Division
      • 6th Indian Division
      • 1st Arab Division (Arab Legion)
      • 1st Assyrian Brigade Group
    • Peshmerga
      • 1st Kurdish Division
      • 2nd Kurdish Division
      • 3rd Kurdish Division
Italy - 15th Army Group (Mark Clark)

Italy and Sicily

  • British 8th Army (Oliver Leese)
    • V British Corps
      • 4th Indian Division
      • 46th Infantry Division
      • 56th Infantry Division
      • 21st Armoured brigade
      • 25th Armoured Brigade
      • 13th Marine Infantry Regiment (Greek)
    • X Corps
      • 10th Indian Division
      • 5th Infantry Division
      • 1st Armoured Division
      • 7th Armoured Brigade
    • XIII Corps
      • 4th Infantry Division
      • 8th Indian Division
      • 8th Armoured Division
      • 9th Armoured brigade
    • I South African Corps
      • 78th Infantry Division
      • 1st South African Armoured Division
      • 6th South African Armoured Division
  • US 5th Army (Lucian Truscott)
    • II Corps
      • 34th Infantry Division
      • 88th Infantry Division
      • 91st Infantry Division
      • Força Expedicionária Brasileira
    • IV Corps
      • 85th Infantry Division
      • 92nd Infantry Division
      • 1st Irish Infantry Division
      • 2nd Irish Infantry Division
    • 1st Armored Division
    • 10th Mountain Division
    • Esercito Italiano di Liberazzione
      • Garibaldi combat group
      • Folgore combat group
      • Legnano combat group
      • Taurinense combat group
      • Friuli combat group
  • French 2nd Army (Antoine Bethouart)
    • 1ere Corps Armee Francaise Libre (Edgard de Larminat)
      • 3e Division d'Infanterie Algérienne
      • 7e Division d'Infanterie Algérienne
      • 1re Division Francaise Libre
      • 3e Division Blindee
    • Greek D Army Corps (Euripidis Bakirtzis)
      • II Greek Infantry Division (Georgios Grivas)
      • VII Infantry Division (Demetrios Kaslas)
      • XI Infantry Division (Demetrios Giantzis)
      • Crete Division (Christos Karassos)
Allied Frontline Strength Jannuary 1st 1945

Yugoslavia

Greek366,961
British Empire89,843
Polish94,373
Yugoslav253,206
NOVJ396,637

Italy

US187,563
British Empire588,270
French100,000
Italian90,863
Greek132,459
Irish41,000
Brazilian25,700
I 'll bring again an issue I 've put forward before. Lascaris seemed not to accept my point (obviously he had excellent arguments), but on the other hand, the reason for my point wasn't answered either.
So:
It seems that Greece's role in the post-world international political and security system is a challenge ITTL.
1.Greece has a HUGE ethical capital, being the only democracy in continental Europe to stop the Axis. And only the second country in the continent, together with the USSR.
2. Greece is one of the major contributors in the war effort, in terms of men and equipment. Much less than the Big Three, but quite on par with France, if not slightly more.
3. While Greece lacks a colonial empire and thus the ability to project power in worldwide scale, she has (or will soon have) the ability to project power in a very sensitive part of the world: the whole Eastern Mediterranean, the Balkans and Anatolia. And if the fate of Constantinople is what it seems, add partial control of the Straits. So, in a sense not very different than China in these terms.

So, yes, giving Greece a permanent seat in the UNSC seems maybe too much. But treating Greece as an ordinary state like Belgium or Egypt, seems not very OK with the 1945 situation.

So, maybe there's a second class members in the UN, or Greece gets some kind of special UN mandate?


*One could point out Australia and Canada of being in the same situation (especially the later). But by 1945 they are not yet exactly nominally independent if I am not mistaken.
 
Might want to check your commanders. Not sure there's 2 Oliver Leese's or that he's able to be in several places at once.
Forgot to alter 8th Army to Richard McCreery.
So Greece is contributing nearly half a million soldiers... An impressive contribution and I am sure it will enhance its status among the United Nations, with some benefits coming out of that. How is the Greek public feeling about this participation? Aren't there any complaints of the type "we have liberated our lands, what are we doing fighting and getting killed in Yuhoslavia and in Italy?"
How many are the total Greek dead and missing persons in military personnel since the start of the war?
Almost certainly there are some... that's what you have propaganda for. Greece spent the past 4 years fighting for its life, it shouldn't be all that difficult to sell to the public giving Germany its share of payback. Post this for the past four years you had a large Yugoslav army fighting side by side with the Greeks. At the very least I would expect strong support for returning the favor. And if you think Greek support of Serbia in the OTL 1990s was strong...

One more note although that's more for post-war. I still remember a usenet commentator back in the 1990s on the "what would happen if the Greeks had won in Asia Minor?" answering with a "today they would be even more insufferable". The comment might have been flippant but I think it holds a grain of truth... to put it mildly. What is the attitude of the average Greek in the aftermath of WW2, when the most serious external defeat the Greeks ever had since the Greek revolution has been... 1897? I short of suspect the attitudes of the average TTL Greek when it comes to foreign policy may look much closer to these of an American or an Australian... if not an Israeli than a German or Italian. Or for that matter an OTL Greek.

It will be worth knowing the strength of the italian formations. It seems that co-belligerent Italy is more successful in TTL, so there is a good chance the italian formations are stronger.
The Italians have already nearly twice as many men as the field formations of the OTL Co-belligerent army. And their forces are growing, nearly all of Italy is free already, and likely they can even start resuming some arms production with their heavy industries liberated.
Then there is the matter of the force allocation in the Balkan Front. Considering the Allies are motorized and mechanized, I would be that they will get the Syrmian Front with the flat terrain, while the Partisans will get the more mountainous Bosnian Front. Certainly there will be supply constraints for the Allies but they have a pretty decent chance of breaking the german frontlines in Syrmia. The Heer will have to allocated more forces there compared to OTL and these forces can only be taken from the Italian Front. I would say that the Allies have a very decent chance of breaking through the Ljubljana Gap in April 1945. Considering the german resources there will be a strong but brittle line with limited reserves once the Gap is breached.
And considering the politics of the thing namely the Soviets in Hungary the reverse is likely happening though likely the entire NOVJ is not in one place. Also one must note the Yugoslav partisans are not so... light any more. The Soviets are delivering hundreds of artillery pieces, AT guns, thousands of mortars and over two hundred thousands small arms. In addition to tanks and aircraft albeit these in smaller quantities. And for good measure the Soviet military aid to Bulgaria is also likely going to Yugoslavia TTL.
 
So Greece is contributing nearly half a million soldiers... An impressive contribution and I am sure it will enhance its status among the United Nations, with some benefits coming out of that. How is the Greek public feeling about this participation? Aren't there any complaints of the type "we have liberated our lands, what are we doing fighting and getting killed in Yuhoslavia and in Italy?"
How many are the total Greek dead and missing persons in military personnel since the start of the war?

I could see the Greek Public seeing it as paying their allies back for the assistance. The allies dedicated a ton of men and equipment to the liberation of most of Greece. They saved countless Greek lives by preventing the fall of Smyrna. They want to kick the Germans back to Germany as much as anybody for their actions.
 
*One could point out Australia and Canada of being in the same situation (especially the later). But by 1945 they are not yet exactly nominally independent if I am not mistaken.
I'd argue that legally speaking Canada and Australia were independent from the State of Westminster from 1931 onward. I'd leave others to speak about Australia since I am not that knowledgeable about it but for Canada, I'd say we were defacto fully independent from 1926 at the latest.

Regarding the UNSC, I'll argue that whatever other rationale was publicly given the true criteria was whether the country not participating in at least somewhat good faith would make the UN's work impossible, or would at least massively complicate it. Greece will come out of the conflict wielding some pretty significant soft and hard power but not that much, similar to Canada and Australia both OTL and ITTL.

On a broader note, I do think we are getting to a point where German forces will start to think in terms of who will eventually capture them, although how fast that mindset will spread remains to be seen, and that is bound to affect combat between them and the WAllies.
 
I'd argue that legally speaking Canada and Australia were independent from the State of Westminster from 1931 onward. I'd leave others to speak about Australia since I am not that knowledgeable about it but for Canada, I'd say we were defacto fully independent from 1926 at the latest.
Arguably, the de facto independence, well before that, as the Chanak crisis (1922) helped to show...
 
Arguably yes, but IMO the King-Byng Affair work well as the point after which it isn't even in question any more, if that makes sense?
Indeed, but without the mentioned crisis generating a public debate and precipitating the ongoing political development, I believe that, even if it still would happen that, perhaps, with respect to OTL, it would be delayed...
 
Indeed, but without the mentioned crisis generating a public debate and precipitating the ongoing political development, I believe that, even if it still would happen that, perhaps, with respect to OTL, it would be delayed...
Maybe, but IMO Canada telling the UK hell no during the Chanak Crisis was a symptom rather than a cause. The factors that led to Mackenzie King, a staunch Canadian nationalist (in the ''lets cut ties from the UK and forge our destiny as a distinct political and cultural entity'' sense), being elected would still be their ITTL as these were down to Canada's internal politics and experience in World War I. Considering he was arguably the canniest political operative in Canadian history and the trend toward greater and greater autonomy for the Dominions I'd say he is likely to have Canada as a defacto independent long before WWII ITTL too.

Hell, if anything I'd argue not having Chanak to deal with is likely to help his efforts in that direction rather than hinder. Canada tended to more or less naturally drift toward seeing itself as a more and more separate country as time went by during that period. The only time those nostalgic for the days when the country was more closely bound to London had any success was when something happened on the international scene to create a rally around the flag sentiment, as it where fanning the dying flame of attachment to the UK going beyond cultural ties and recognition of a common past. King's success with the Chanak crisis wasn't to use it to use the debate to make Canadians want independence more, it was to prevent the debate from being used to diminish the desire for independence that was already present. Not having Chanak just makes his job easier ITTL I'd say.
 
Part 164
Poland, January 17th, 1945

The Soviet 1st Byelorussian front pushed the Germans out of Warsaw. Or the ruins of Warsaw since the Germans in the months after the Polish uprising had systematically demolished large parts of the city. The next day the Soviet sponsored provisional government of Poland would move itself to the Polish capital. The Western allies would continue to recognize the Polish government in exile in London as the legitimate government of Poland. On the 19th with Lotz and Krakow liberated and the Germans almost entirely driven out of Poland the Polish Home Army would dissolve itself in an attempt to avoid conflict with the Soviet forces now in control of Poland...

East Prussia, January 20th, 1945


With East Prussia now cutoff from the rest of German controlled areas, the Germans start evacuating troops and civilians from the area. The evacuation carried by the Kriegsmarine for the most part would be hampered by Soviet and Swedish submarine and air attacks but still evacuate nearly 2 million people till it was over in March.

Burma, January 22nd, 1945


The Allied offensive kept gaining ground with the British IV Corps liberating Htilin and Indian troops taking Muinmu the next day. By January 27th British troops would link up with Chinese forces.

Berlin, January 24th, 1945


The new Army Group Vistula was organized in hopes of better defending against the continuing Soviet offensive of Poland. Conveniently for the Soviets Hitler would install as its commander Heinrich Himmler despite the latter's lack of any serious military experience...

Western Europe, January 25th, 1945


The German Ardennes offensive was officially over. The Germans had inflicted on the Allied Forces over 80,000 casualties in addition to over 800 tanks and about a thousand aircraft. But they had failed to achieve any of their strategic objectives and had suffered similar levels of casualties themselves. And while the Americans and British could replace their material losses with ease, and personnel losses with some more strain, the same was not true any more for Germany who had to virtually scrap the bottom of the barrel to find men and properly equip them...

Piraeus, February 1st, 1945

Prime Minister Stratos, waited in quay as the USS Quincy escorted by a quartet of Greek destroyers entered the harbor. The Mediterranean was clear of German submarines for some months but no chances were being taken, not when the American heavy cruiser had president Roosevelt, in the first official visit of a US president to Greece aboard. Roosevelt would fly out of Athens for the Soviet Union two days later.

Yugoslavia, February 3rd, 1945


Novi Sad was liberated by the British 10th Army. The Germans were still holding most of Bosnia and Croatia and the entirety of Slovenia but despute an energetic defense their position in Yugoslavia was slowly but surely eroding particularly since the Allies were starting to overcome their supply issues. American led engineering troops had fully repaired the Yugoslav railway network by now and were busy extending the double line railway north from Thessaloniki into Yugoslavia, reaching Stalac 187 km from Belgrade by the end of January.

Philippines, February 3rd, 1945


A week before the US 8th Army had landed in southern Luzon. Now US and Filippino forces attacked Manilla, which was defended mostly by Japanese navy men in addition to a smaller contingent of army soldiers. Thr battle despite initial American hopes would continue for weeks at massive civilian cost.

Constantinople, February 4th, 1945


Stalin had refused to hold the second conference between allied leaders in either Malta or Athens as proposed by his western allies proposing instead Yalta. Churchill who had already agreed to come to go to Moscow the previous years and was starting to get increasingly apprehensive at continuing Soviet demands had indicated he was willing to agree but due to health reasons he could not come by air and instead he was taking HMS Lion, the latest and heaviest Royal Navy battleship to Yalta. That had been enough to awaken Soviet paranoia as it would be creating a precedent of Western capital ships entering the Black Sea and thus compromise had been reached at the conference taking place in Constantinople instead. Over the next week the big three, Stalin had adamantly refused French participation and had been backed by the Americans, would hash out once more the fate of post war Europe. Agreement would be reach about the broad outlines of the fate of Germany and its post war occupation by Soviet, American and French troops, the French occupation zone to be carved out of the American and British ones the Polish eastern border being moved to the Curzon line, with Stalin promising free elections would be held in Poland. The exact whereabouts of the border and whether they would follow to Curzon line B or not were left open with Churchill trying to tie them up with the final status of the straits and Constantinople where Stalin was insisting on direct Soviet annexation of the Channak area, already occupied by the Soviet army, though not Constantinople itself and Churchill openly claiming that the Western Allies should have the right to dispose of their occupation zones in Constantinople as they saw fit, in other words giving it to Greece...

Germany, February 5th, 1945


Soviet forces crossed the Oder. Is the West continuing Allied offensives were reaching the Rhine at places but had failed to cross it yet.

Hungary, February 13th, 1945


Budapest was captured by Soviet and Romanian forces. The seven week siege had cost the Soviets over 100,000 casualties. German ans Hungarian casualties were even higher reaching 137,000 men while large sections of the city had been destroyed with thousands of civilians killed.

Dresden, February 13th, 1945


Hundreds of RAF heavy bombers hit the city in nighttime. They were followed by the USAAF in the morning of February 14th and a further raid the next day. By the time the bombing was over much of the city lay in ruins and 25,000 civilians had been killed. German propaganda would exaggerate the figure of dead to 200,000 and the necessity of the bombing would remain controversial over the next several decades.
 
A good update! Seems as if all the (somewhat overheated) speculation about a divided Poland TTL came to naught.
Constantinople, February 4th, 1945

Stalin had refused to hold the second conference between allied leaders in either Malta or Athens as proposed by his western allies proposing instead Yalta. Churchill who had already agreed to come to go to Moscow the previous years and was starting to get increasingly apprehensive at continuing Soviet demands had indicated he was willing to agree but due to health reasons he could not come by air and instead he was taking HMS Lion, the latest and heaviest Royal Navy battleship to Yalta. That had been enough to awaken Soviet paranoia as it would be creating a precedent of Western capital ships entering the Black Sea and thus compromise had been reached at the conference taking place in Constantinople instead. Over the next week the big three, Stalin had adamantly refused French participation and had been backed by the Americans, would hash out once more the fate of post war Europe. Agreement would be reach about the broad outlines of the fate of Germany and its post war occupation by Soviet, American and French troops, the French occupation zone to be carved out of the American and British ones the Polish eastern border being moved to the Curzon line, with Stalin promising free elections would be held in Poland. The exact whereabouts of the border and whether they would follow to Curzon line B or not were left open with Churchill trying to tie them up with the final status of the straits and Constantinople where Stalin was insisting on direct Soviet annexation of the Channak area, already occupied by the Soviet army, though not Constantinople itself and Churchill openly claiming that the Western Allies should have the right to dispose of their occupation zones in Constantinople as they saw fit, in other words giving it to Greece...
If Stalin is talking about directly annexing Cannakale, that would seem to run counter to the idea of the Soviets being relatively soft on Turkey, and seeking to bring Sivas under their wings in exchange for protection against the Western Allies. Unless that suggestion was simply meant as a spoiling tactic and was never meant to leave this conference room?
 
Last edited:
If Stalin really wants to annex Cannakale, there is little Britain and USA can do. But they can extract a significant amount of concessions elsewhere.
 
A good update! Seems as if all the (somewhat overheated) speculation about a divided Poland TTL came to naught.

If Stalin is talking about directly annexing Cannakale, that would seem to run counter to the idea of the Soviets being relatively soft on Turkey, and seeking to bring Konya under their wings in exchange for protection against the Western Allies. Unless that suggestion was simply meant as a spoiling tactic and was never meant to leave this conference room?
If Stalin really wants to annex Cannakale, there is little Britain and USA can do. But they can extract a significant amount of concessions elsewhere.
Basically Stalin going for a full annexation of Cannakale means he is most likely implicitly accepting that his gamble in the Straits has mostly failed and he is trying to save what he can out of it by getting full control of the spots where he has the most boots on the ground, and that means implicitly agreeing to let the Greeks do their thing elsewhere. The sense I, and if I read them well others too, got was that Staline playing comparatively nice with Sivas was mostly motivated by the need for their collaboration for the Straits gamble to have a shot. With that having mostly failed and he is likely to revise his annexations plans in Eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus upward so as to realise as much direct gains as he can where he can get them...

Apart from that, there is two big developments:

I. The Wallies success in Yugoslavia will continue to build up the chances of success of the Chetniks.
II. Monty seem somewhat ahead of the OTL schedule in Burma. Combine the long-term impacts of that with the Burma road seemingly not being closed and the KMT not being nearly as battered as in OTL and I'd say Chiang sticking around is quite possible, if not through an outright victory against Mao then at least by not losing the war either...
 
Last edited:
If Stalin really wants to annex Cannakale, there is little Britain and USA can do. But they can extract a significant amount of concessions elsewhere.

Insisting on annexing Cannakale is likely to backfire on Stalin; such an outrageous demand might end up with Roosevelt having a change of heart about Stalin's intentions.
 
I’m glad I’m not the only one somewhat surprised by the Soviet demand for Cannakale. That’s a major shift in Soviet policy, and it feels like they’d be more or just as interested in taking Uskudar along with whatever they might decide to do out east. If it’s not just a negotiating tactic. It’s not 100% clear in the update if it’s just Stalins way of telling Churchill to back off the whole Curzon line B thing or an actual new goal of his. Which is probably deliberate on the authors part. Personally I see the fate of Constantinople and Cannakale being decided in the old league mandated plebiscite due to it being the solution that requires the least actual action.
 
Stalin is an opportunist, if he asks for Cannakale and gets it that's great. If he asks for it and the Allies say no he hasn't lost anything but maybe he says no to something they want in return. Or accepts it without a quid pro quo to make himself look reasonable.

His objective is to get as much as he can from the peace deal. That means demanding stuff and seeing if the Allies push back.
 
Could someone with a decent map of Cannakale post it so the uneducated of us here can see where its at relative to everything else in the Dardanelles? >.>
 
Could someone with a decent map of Cannakale post it so the uneducated of us here can see where its at relative to everything else in the Dardanelles? >.>

1711978043518.png

Current OTL Map of Çanakkale Province with Districts (including the centre district that is the town of Çanakkale proper).

Yenice might be within Greek control rather than being a part of the Biga/Çanakkale area that was left to Turkey ITTL as an exclave that is now occupied by Soviets if I am not misremembering.

The islands (Gökçeada and Bozcaada being Imbros and Tenedos respectively) are definitely Greek while I think Gallipoli peninsula is under WAllied control but I might be misremembering it's status ITTL.
 
Its unclear whether Cannakale meant the city or the whole area, which part of is indeed under Greek control (Gallipoli and the islands at least). My money is on the former since asking for the whole area would indeed be a lot from the soviets, and of somewhat limited benefit for the political cost it would have with the Greeks back in Gallipoli.

Moreover, the sequence of events and how the update where the Soviets took it was written does point toward a smaller zone of actual Soviet control they could annex IMO... Basically, you had a comparatively small Soviet airborne showing up and meeting the trust of the Greek forces northward so both the immediate action of the Greeks and the limited forces at hand for the Soviets make the latter getting too far inland fairly unlikely IMO. Moreover, when the Soviets met the Greeks they announced they occupied Cannakale and Lapseki, which wouldn't make sense if they had the whole, or most, of the old Sanjak under control as why would they mention the smaller constituent town then? At most that meant that the Soviets were controlling the two direct districts of these names and it is quite probably they literally meant they were only controlling both settlements and their surroundings.
 
Last edited:
Top