What if Romania had remained in the Axis to the end?

[Hendryk]

In OTL, Romania's defection from the Axis was the result of a coup by King Michael in August 1944, which resulted in the overthrow of strongman Ion Antonescu, a harsh armistice with the USSR, and Romanian forces fighting alongside those of the Allies for the remainer of the war. Some Romanian historians claim that it may have shortened the war in Europe by as much as six months. Be that as it may, it definitely allowed the Red Army to advance deep into the Balkans much earlier than planned.

But what if either the coup had failed, or been preempted altogether by Antonescu turning the king into a powerless figurehead earlier on? How much of a difference to the war would a Romania that remained aligned on Nazi Germany to the bitter end--or in practical terms, complete occupation by the Red Army--have made?

 

[Charles EP M.]

The first thing is Romania's going to be heavily wrecked and more people dead, so that's one big change.

I'm assuming the Soviet forces coming through Poland are still going to rush to Berlin as fast as possible and they're not going to be directly held up by a longer fight in the Balkans, so the main difference I'd expect is the Red Army maybe hasn't got all the way through Czechoslovakia and into Austria yet when they surrender. But unless the Western Allies rush someone into Czechoslovakia (and would they?), that surely means the Red Army still comes in but without having to shoot anyone?

 

[Yokai Man]

It have been a harsher and more bloody defeat,resulting in a more tragic end.Hundreds of thousands of Jewish people would be deported to the death camps like it happened in Hungary when Germans took a more direct control and occupied it.Maniu and the others would still die,but at the hands of the Nazis instead of the Soviets.WW2 would probably last for six months longer than OTL.

The North of Transylvania might not be recuperated in this scenario,as well as the Soviets taking a chunk of Moldova along with Bukovina and Basarabia.The occupation is gonna be harsher and most likely longer,making it impossible for any real kind of independence for Romania til the Seventies at best.Hard to say if Ceaucescu still rises to the top in this scenario,but it’s most likely that Romania takes part in the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968(if that still happen,that’s hard to say as well).

It would be a worse timeline for Romania by far and I’m genuinely thankful it didn’t happen like that,since dear God in Heaven,it would make what happened to her in OTL look preferable to that.

And that says something.

 

[Hendryk]

I'm assuming the Soviet forces coming through Poland are still going to rush to Berlin as fast as possible and they're not going to be directly held up by a longer fight in the Balkans, so the main difference I'd expect is the Red Army maybe hasn't got all the way through Czechoslovakia and into Austria yet when they surrender. But unless the Western Allies rush someone into Czechoslovakia (and would they?), that surely means the Red Army still comes in but without having to shoot anyone?

Apparently the OTL coup was a factor in Churchill's unofficial suggestion to Stalin about the post-war Soviet sphere of influence, but depending on how long it takes the Red Army to defeat the Romanians, a different proposal might be made at Yalta--perhaps a neutral Czech Republic alongside a Soviet-aligned Slovakia?

 

[The Red]

The first thing is Romania's going to be heavily wrecked and more people dead, so that's one big change.

I don't know if this is necessarily the case, the majority of German forces in Romania had already been encircled and destroyed whilst the Romanian army itself was in disarray. Without the coup it will take longer for the Soviets to liberate Romania but at the same time I imagine the Axis focus would have been an orderly retreat to the Carpathians even without the line collapsing and Romania switching sides.

I'm assuming the Soviet forces coming through Poland are still going to rush to Berlin as fast as possible and they're not going to be directly held up by a longer fight in the Balkans, so the main difference I'd expect is the Red Army maybe hasn't got all the way through Czechoslovakia and into Austria yet when they surrender. But unless the Western Allies rush someone into Czechoslovakia (and would they?), that surely means the Red Army still comes in but without having to shoot anyone?

I could see the final push on Berlin being delayed if the Soviets haven't advanced through Hungary by Winter, it's possible IOTL's Vistula-Oder offensive would be more orientated towards the south to clear up any outstanding issues with 1st Belorussian's flanks. This causing the war to last six months longer sounds exaggerated but we could see Germany lasting into the Summer in such a scenario and the immediate post-war map would likely look different.

 

[Hendryk]

Does anyone know how important to the Allied side was the post-coup Romanian contribution?

This causing the war to last six months longer sounds exaggerated but we could see Germany lasting into the Summer in such a scenario and the immediate post-war map would likely look different.

Indeed. If the fighting in Europe is still going on by the time the *Potsdam summit begins (and it obviously would take place in a different location, possibly Brighton if we go with a seaside resort town like Yalta), it means Truman won't request Stalin for a Soviet declaration of war against Japan, nor would the Red Army be able to transfer enough forces for a massive operation in Manchuria before the end of the summer. This could have far-reaching consequences for East Asia: possibly a non-Communist China, definitely no Korean partition.

 

[Yokai Man]

Does anyone know how important to the Allied side was the post-coup Romanian contribution?


Indeed. If the fighting in Europe is still going on by the time the *Potsdam summit begins (and it obviously would take place in a different location, possibly Brighton if we go with a seaside resort town like Yalta), it means Truman won't request Stalin for a Soviet declaration of war against Japan, nor would the Red Army be able to transfer enough forces for a massive operation in Manchuria before the end of the summer. This could have far-reaching consequences for East Asia: possibly a non-Communist China, definitely no Korean partition.

It was slightly important,given it, along with the coup,made it possible for Romania to regain Bukovina and North of Transylvania after the war.

 

[The Red]

Does anyone know how important to the Allied side was the post-coup Romanian contribution?

It was very important in that the Axis were unable to use the Carpathian Mountains as a defensive position. The Romanians caused the Germans complete chaos within their own country and in their offensive against the Hungarians that the Soviets were able to advance through without effective opposition until they reached the Danube.

Indeed. If the fighting in Europe is still going on by the time the *Potsdam summit begins (and it obviously would take place in a different location, possibly Brighton if we go with a seaside resort town like Yalta), it means Truman won't request Stalin for a Soviet declaration of war against Japan, nor would the Red Army be able to transfer enough forces for a massive operation in Manchuria before the end of the summer. This could have far-reaching consequences for East Asia: possibly a non-Communist China, definitely no Korean partition.

Potsdam would still occur after the European war in all likelihood, if not in Potsdam itself then somewhere else in Soviet held territory. The decision for the Soviets joining the war against the Japanese was made at Yalta and there’s no real evidence to say that Truman was against that, IOTL he was worried when the Soviets wouldn’t divulge details of their build-up in the Far East and was glad when they attacked.

 

[Simon]

But unless the Western Allies rush someone into Czechoslovakia (and would they?)...

IIRC some of Patton's units from Third Army crossed the border into Czechoslovakia and got fairly near to Prague and he was lobbying to press on, but since it had been agreed earlier that the USS was going to take care of the country and no-one with any sense wanted him near the Soviets Eisenhower ordered them back into Germany.

 

[Charles EP M.]

That seems an interesting POD, the US liberates the country and it's part of the Western bloc (or at least half is) though I can see this being the hardest part to get past:

no-one with any sense wanted him near the Soviets

 

[Hendryk]

It was very important in that the Axis were unable to use the Carpathian Mountains as a defensive position. The Romanians caused the Germans complete chaos within their own country and in their offensive against the Hungarians that the Soviets were able to advance through without effective opposition until they reached the Danube.

All right, so in this hypothesis, would the Germans be able to set up a strong defensive line in the Carpathians? Perhaps an analog to the Gothic Line in Italy?

What do you think is a plausible estimate of how much longer it would take the Red Army to dislodge the Germans from Central Europe?

 

[The Red]

All right, so in this hypothesis, would the Germans be able to set up a strong defensive line in the Carpathians? Perhaps an analog to the Gothic Line in Italy?

What do you think is a plausible estimate of how much longer it would take the Red Army to dislodge the Germans from Central Europe?

I can't see the Germans having the time or resources to build something analogous to the Gothic Line but the territory is still great for defence. If the Soviets can't break through immediately you could be looking at more protracted attempts later on or diversions from Poland to liberate Hungary from the north. All in all I'd said it could have added another 2-3 months onto the European war although we need to acknowledge other factors as well;the WAllied advance, the state of the German economy, etc which probably means it's not actually going to be all that long.

 

[lordroel]

Does anyone know how important to the Allied side was the post-coup Romanian contribution?


Indeed. If the fighting in Europe is still going on by the time the *Potsdam summit begins (and it obviously would take place in a different location, possibly Brighton if we go with a seaside resort town like Yalta).

The Brighton Conference, i think Walmington-on-Sea is better, also i like the sound of Walmington-on-Sea Conference.

 

[CaliGuy]

Some thoughts:

1. There might be a siege of Bucharest rather than a siege of Budapest by the Red Army in this scenario.
2. The Red Army's entry into Hungary in this scenario might be sufficiently delayed for the Western Allies to get there first.
3. Ultimately, this won't make too much of a difference in the main battle front in Poland and Germany since Romania isn't actually in the way of this front. So, the Red Army probably wouldn't be delayed too much in liberating Poland as well as conquering eastern Germany and Berlin.
4. If Romania doesn't switch sides in August 1944, then to my knowledge the Jews of Budapest are likely going to be sent en masse to Auschwitz. AFAIK, the Hungarian government planned to resume deportations of Jews to Auschwitz on August 27, 1944 but Romania's defection from the Axis on August 23, 1944 put an end to these plans and delayed deportations up to October 1944, when Auschwitz was already in the process of being demolished and thus the Nazis and their Hungarian Arrow Cross collaborators had to "content" themselves with outright shooting Jews on the banks of the Danube as well as sending Jews onto death marches. Suffice to say, if the deportations of Jews resume in late August 1944, then there simply won't be enough time for people such as Raoul Wallenberg and Carl Lutz to save over 100,000 Budapest Jews by giving them fake passports, putting them in safe houses, and/or et cetera.
5. Whether Romania gets northern Transylvania back after the end of World War II in this scenario could go either way, but I am tempted to say that it would be more likely than not that it would still get it back. Why? Because Romania actually had a legitimate territorial grievance against the USSR when it declared war on the USSR in 1941 whereas Hungary didn't--something that I would think Stalin would keep in mind when he would decide who should get northern Transylvania after the end of World War II.