Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles

Again I need to note there is a fine harbor on the Asian side of the City that the Greeks will not control but the Soviets will. Why would they use the European side port ? How would Greece block this without causing a major crisis. Atnd by causing I mean everybody blames them.
 
Again I need to note there is a fine harbor on the Asian side of the City that the Greeks will not control but the Soviets will. Why would they use the European side port ? How would Greece block this without causing a major crisis. Atnd by causing I mean everybody blames them.
it just depends on the circumstances behind it, and not letting items move through their own city in the european side is still acceptable.

Its not like the goods will go to the USSR by USSR trade routes, and Greek-controlled Constantinople is a good place to move Western goods into trade routes used by the USSR.
 
Again I need to note there is a fine harbor on the Asian side of the City that the Greeks will not control but the Soviets will. Why would they use the European side port ? How would Greece block this without causing a major crisis. Atnd by causing I mean everybody blames them.

Yeah I can’t see the Greeks interdicting any foreign nations trade barring a war or actual illegal goods on the ship. Even then I don’t think the Greeks would do a damn thing about illegal drugs or weapons on a Soviet ship in their waters without talking to the USSR and the US first.
 
Yeah I can’t see the Greeks interdicting any foreign nations trade barring a war or actual illegal goods on the ship. Even then I don’t think the Greeks would do a damn thing about illegal drugs or weapons on a Soviet ship in their waters without talking to the USSR and the US first.
Greece and more specifically the shipping magnates have a "slight" reputation of doing everything from mass smuggling of goods from states under embargo and even drug trafficking ( lets have an unnamed football team owner here , naming him is rather risky after all...) . No reason for that to stop . As they say , money is money at the end of the day , no matter where they come from...
 
Where are these additional Jews coming from?
There were many Jews who would have fled to Palestine, but their migration was obstructed by Britain, to avoid provoking the Arabs.
And why are they coming because of some Jewish divisions?
OTL, Britain did not allow the Zionists in Palestine to form military units to fight in the war until late 1944. The Zionists formed a brigade which fought in Italy in 1945. ITTL, Britain has allowed the Zionists to form a brigade in early 1943, which expands to a full division by mid-1944. ISTM that given Britain has accepted much greater and earlier support from the Zionists in the war, Britain would cease to obstruct Jewish immigration to Palestine.
I mean I’m hopeful that the war ends earlier and more Jews avoid death because of it, and they may very well head to Israel, but I don’t see how that has anything to do with more Jewish veterans post war.
There is a much larger Zionist-organized force in the British army for much longer. So there would be a much larger pool of veterans from this force later on.
 
Last edited:
I'd say the Kurds and Assyrians have some good reasons to hack things out peacefully and collaborate. After all, and for all the sympathy they are landlocked with many potential enemies nearby and few allies.
The Kurds though had been literally massacring the Assyrians within living memory in 1944. Which makes cooperation... difficult. Post that, there is the question how well you think for what passes as a Kurdish political class at the time...
 
On the Hagia Sophia minartes and Ottoman additions. Trying to take those out would be structurally unwise. Justinians hubris with the cupola resulted in a building where literally the weight of the cupola has been eroding the foundations for all these centuries. The Ottomans made serious architectural interventions to buttress them (archs, buttresses etc) and fooling around with them would have a catastrophic consequences. This includes trying to remove the minarets. More likely you will have crosses put on the minarets and the cupola and that is it.
Likely this depends quite a bit on how the city is liberated from Bulgarian occupation. Of course a "fun" question is how the Bulgarians will be treating the monuments during their occupation.
On the Blue Mosque. Considering that Greece in 1919-1922 did not make any of the Adrianople/Edirne imperial mosques into churches, I do not see why it would do that with the Blue Mosque (or the Fetihye, the Suleiman, the Yeni Cami etc, serioudly the Suleimaniye has much more of a commanding view of the city). You will see things like the Khora Church, the Hagia Irene, the Kucuk Aya Sofia (Sergius and Vakhus Church) restored to the Orthodox Church,
Sergius and Bacchus is going to be restored as a Greek church for certain on grounds of Karagatsis nameshake novel. :angel:

but I do not see much touching of the Imperial Mosques, or the Armenian build ones.
Any Greek administration direct or otherwise, is certain to be doing its level best to be on the good side of the Armenians. After all sans 1922 the Armenians are still the third largest community and their vote crucial to win any referendum. As for the Imperial mosques and palaces, I'd think again the Greeks have excellent political reason to treat them with respect. Perhaps turn one or more into museums but turn Fatih to... Holy Apostles? Wouldn't sell well to the international public. Now granted the Greek government could get a case of the stupids, but at the moment the leading Greek politicians are known quantities.
You are more likely to see land grabs in things like Muslim cemeteries (think Edirnekapi cemetary that covers a huge area). One area I am sure will be bulldozed and rebuilt Haussmann style will be the working class Muslim neighborhoods hugging the walls, as most budlings are structurally unsound and unhyegnic. Their population is likely to be removed anyway (it is the most islamist and conservative part of the City).
What would happen to the Muslim population depends on what happens to the Eurapean side in general. But the Greek and Armenian population of the Asiatic side is gone since 1940 and its very doubtful many would care to go back in 1945... assuming the Soviets allow them to return in the first place. So at least some degree of "voluntary" population exchange appears to me all too likely.

On the palaces, demolishing Top Kapi makes little sense. It will probably stay as a museum (it is not very useful as an administrative building). Dolmabahce on the other hand will either become an administrative building (especially as it is located close to Pera), or it may become a hotel (i.e The Ciragan Palace fate), or even a university.

On the Greek Chalif. I find that idea unlikely. OTL Greece managed its Muslim affairs like the Ottomans managed their Christiaan affairs, assigning control of religious sites and properties to a vakif/foindation. Now what form that Vakf takes, and whether it has the form of a international organization (including muslim states friendly to Greece) or NGO (perhaps embeded in an UNESCO affiliated organization) is a different story. ATL Greece will be presenting itself more as a "western" "civilized" country then OTL and the general expectation is that it will continue the policy it had in 1912-1923.
And a puppet caliph opens a whole load of cans of worms no sane government in Athens would want to deal with. Besides who would be said caliph? The caliphate since 1520 belongs to the house of Osman, The Greeks will find a puppet member of the dynasty while another member is ruling as king in Sivas?
Another thing. If Constantipole/Istanbul becomes an international zone after the war, it is likely going to become a dumping ground for "undesirable" populations in the area. For example, let us say Bulgarian authorities decide to ethnically cleanse their non-Pomak muslim population? It is not impossible that the decision is to move them to the International Zone.

Lastly, long term it is not to be expected that the European side of Constantinople when it become Greek will see the population increase it did OTL. Greece is bigger, has more attractive economically regions for internal migration, and no massive migration of Kurds and rural Anatolian Turks to Istanbul in the 1950s-1980s. You may very well end up with a modest city of 500k contained mostly in the Old City and the European coastline. Interestingly at the end of the timeline The City from once being the greatest Greek metropole might be just the fourth largest Greek city, a culturally important center without question, probably a very beautiful city (after a heavy Haussman style treatment), but not a center of political or economic power (instead the triangle Smyrna-Athens-Thessaloniki taking those roles)
Come 1945 the European's side non-Turkish population would be at a minimum in the region of half a million (340,000 Greeks, 175,000 Armenians). Some degree of population movement towards Constantinople is to be expected even if I find your arguments over Smyrna and Athens having higher population growth reasonable. If you are a Greek peasant in Thrace, the big city to go to is Constantinople after all. But arguably Constantinople/Istanbul having lower population overall is going to be a good thing for both sides of the straits as far as quality of life will be going. Which also arguably applies to Athens TTL.

Now speaking of population projections I am in a bit uncertain at the numbers of foreign citizens within the total population. The Ottoman statistics I have at hand (from Staford Shaw) give 129,243 foreigners in 1885, 129,251 in 1906 and... zero in 1914. Sotiriadis was giving 149,805 foreigners for 1912 whch fits reasonably . The Turkish 1927 census counts 38,144. But the large number of foreigners in Shaw I'm inclined to believe includes the tens of thousands of Greeks and Armenians in Constantinople that held foreign passports and which accounts at least for some of the, lets put it politely undercounting of Greeks and Armenians in Shaw. (he gives 149,600 Armenians for 1885 but only 72,962 in 1914 as opposed to 163,670 in Kevorkian for 1913 and 205,375 Greeks as opposed to 242,172 in Karpat and 318,605 in Alexandris) I'm very inclined to go with the Turkish 1927 census but this would miss emigration of Levantines up to 1927.
 
There is a much larger Zionist-organized force in the British army for much longer. So there would be a much larger pool of veterans from this force later on.
hmm would Israel just be stronger right from the start? I think Israel would still take over all of Palestine unless the Arabs agreed to the partition.
Any Greek administration direct or otherwise, is certain to be doing its level best to be on the good side of the Armenians. After all sans 1922 the Armenians are still the third largest community and their vote crucial to win any referendum. As for the Imperial mosques and palaces, I'd think again the Greeks have excellent political reason to treat them with respect. Perhaps turn one or more into museums but turn Fatih to... Holy Apostles? Wouldn't sell well to the international public. Now granted the Greek government could get a case of the stupids, but at the moment the leading Greek politicians are known quantities.
hmm aww so we don't see the British steal another building for the British museum! How sad!

but tbf imagine the british museum ittl talking about the greek temples taken and ppl just blanking on the ottoman empire and turkey bc a lot of the cities the statues were taken from would now be under Greek control instead.
What would happen to the Muslim population depends on what happens to the Eurapean side in general. But the Greek and Armenian population of the Asiatic side is gone since 1940 and its very doubtful many would care to go back in 1945... assuming the Soviets allow them to return in the first place. So at least some degree of "voluntary" population exchange appears to me all too likely.
I wonder would we get a lot of Russian immigration to those areas instead post war? I think it'd be something the Russians leverage to make part of the City Russian instead of being Turkish. Russian occupation and colonisation of their occupied regions would be something that would be very interesting.
Now speaking of population projections I am in a bit uncertain at the numbers of foreign citizens within the total population. The Ottoman statistics I have at hand (from Staford Shaw) give 129,243 foreigners in 1885, 129,251 in 1906 and... zero in 1914. Sotiriadis was giving 149,805 foreigners for 1912 whch fits reasonably . The Turkish 1927 census counts 38,144. But the large number of foreigners in Shaw I'm inclined to believe includes the tens of thousands of Greeks and Armenians in Constantinople that held foreign passports and which accounts at least for some of the, lets put it politely undercounting of Greeks and Armenians in Shaw. (he gives 149,600 Armenians for 1885 but only 72,962 in 1914 as opposed to 163,670 in Kevorkian for 1913 and 205,375 Greeks as opposed to 242,172 in Karpat and 318,605 in Alexandris) I'm very inclined to go with the Turkish 1927 census but this would miss emigration of Levantines up to 1927.
I think there is a possibility that we would get Constantinople as a very important city in terms of economic influence and the such. Fact is trade to the USSR wouldn't be that powerful. I do think expelled Greeks from the ME and general immigration from the region would do well tho.

I think there is a possibility that a city in Caria or Cyprus and Smyrna form a 'New Greece' bloc while Thessaloniki and Athens form the 'Old Greece' bloc with the two blocs trying to get Constantinople on board.
 
The Kurds though had been literally massacring the Assyrians within living memory in 1944. Which makes cooperation... difficult. Post that, there is the question how well you think for what passes as a Kurdish political class at the time...
Difficult, but not impossible.
Out of necessity and in spite of their role in the genocide and the pre war massacres, Armenians did actually seek to rally support from the Kurds in 1918/1919, though that obviously failed. And they did conclude some sort of alliance in Lebanon in the 1920s.
So I guess that will be about who needs whom; "misery acquaints a man with strange bed-fellows", does it not ?
 
hmm would Israel just be stronger right from the start? I think Israel would still take over all of Palestine unless the Arabs agreed to the partition.

Assuming a peaceful partition isn’t reached, what happens in the area almost surely comes down to what Abdullah decides to do. If he stays out of it I think the Israelis likely take the entire mandate, maybe even chasing the Egyptians to the Suez a decade early, and decide what the peace deal looks like. And it’s likely to be ugly for the Palestinians and possibly Egypt as well. If Abdullah gets involved things probably get interesting because if I remember correctly the Arab Legion is also larger and more experienced in TTL. So I could see him holding the West Bank plus the other parts of that area in the UN agreement, but the Israelis also kicking the Egyptians out of Gaza since they’re better trained this time.

I wonder would we get a lot of Russian immigration to those areas instead post war? I think it'd be something the Russians leverage to make part of the City Russian instead of being Turkish. Russian occupation and colonisation of their occupied regions would be something that would be very interesting.

If the Russians did that they’d alienate the Turks. Not that that would necessarily stop them obviously, but deciding to try and colonize the Anatolian half of the city does have significant downsides for them. Yes they lock down the straits more or less permanently, but at the cost of sending Turkey into the arms of NATO/the West for the foreseeable future. If it’s Turkish it’s still locked down as long as they’re friendly with the Soviets. I think the big factor in this is how much Stalin, or his successor, trusts Turkey.
 
Out of necessity and in spite of their role in the genocide and the pre war massacres, Armenians did actually seek to rally support from the Kurds in 1918/1919, though that obviously failed. And they did conclude some sort of alliance in Lebanon in the 1920s.
So I guess that will be about who needs whom; "misery acquaints a man with strange bed-fellows", does it not ?
I just think its more likely we'd see the Assyrians become an ally to Iran since they have similar interests while Kurdistan and Assyria could have opposing interests unless they move to solve them. Kurdistan not wanting to take over Assyria would be one of the most important things to resolve, since we don't know how important the Assyrian triangle is to Kurdistan ittl.
Assuming a peaceful partition isn’t reached, what happens in the area almost surely comes down to what Abdullah decides to do. If he stays out of it I think the Israelis likely take the entire mandate, maybe even chasing the Egyptians to the Suez a decade early, and decide what the peace deal looks like. And it’s likely to be ugly for the Palestinians and possibly Egypt as well. If Abdullah gets involved things probably get interesting because if I remember correctly the Arab Legion is also larger and more experienced in TTL. So I could see him holding the West Bank plus the other parts of that area in the UN agreement, but the Israelis also kicking the Egyptians out of Gaza since they’re better trained this time.
Considering that other than the Israeli and Arabian armies being larger than otl I don't think we'd see any differences. I don't think the changes ittl would change the Zionists and the Arabs this much, maybe except the Arabs being more paranoid about losing Palestine like how Turkey lost Ionia to Greece.

I think the Alawite struggle for independence is something that would change things too, the Syrians probably would hate the fact that the Alawites won't want to join any arab superstate and would want independence instead.
If the Russians did that they’d alienate the Turks. Not that that would necessarily stop them obviously, but deciding to try and colonize the Anatolian half of the city does have significant downsides for them. Yes they lock down the straits more or less permanently, but at the cost of sending Turkey into the arms of NATO/the West for the foreseeable future. If it’s Turkish it’s still locked down as long as they’re friendly with the Soviets. I think the big factor in this is how much Stalin, or his successor, trusts Turkey.
Frankly I think it could go either way, the Russians would still want more control than not, considering what they did with Prussia, and Stalin knows turkey would be weak anyways (and would need their help if they want future expansion).
 
If the Russians did that they’d alienate the Turks. Not that that would necessarily stop them obviously, but deciding to try and colonize the Anatolian half of the city does have significant downsides for them. Yes they lock down the straits more or less permanently, but at the cost of sending Turkey into the arms of NATO/the West for the foreseeable future. If it’s Turkish it’s still locked down as long as they’re friendly with the Soviets. I think the big factor in this is how much Stalin, or his successor, trusts Turkey.
Frankly I think it could go either way, the Russians would still want more control than not, considering what they did with Prussia, and Stalin knows turkey would be weak anyways (and would need their help if they want future expansion).
The cold-war will likely last for quite a while ttl as well, it's entirely possible Russo-Turkish relation flip more than once throughout, they could start out friendly with Moscow but that could then change for x or y reason and then in go the Russians... Just like how Ethiopia flipped.

That does make me wonder if there will be much difference in how they'll turn out, don't think we've heard anything about them since the Italians got chased out?
 
The cold-war will likely last for quite a while ttl as well, it's entirely possible Russo-Turkish relation flip more than once throughout, they could start out friendly with Moscow but that could then change for x or y reason and then in go the Russians... Just like how Ethiopia flipped.

That does make me wonder if there will be much difference in how they'll turn out, don't think we've heard anything about them since the Italians got chased out?
Tbf it's that I don't think the Turks would flip towards the west, just become more and more insane as they fail to reconquer the borders of misak I milli to the point where they'd be a hard to deal with ally instead.
 
The cold-war will likely last for quite a while ttl as well, it's entirely possible Russo-Turkish relation flip more than once throughout, they could start out friendly with Moscow but that could then change for x or y reason and then in go the Russians... Just like how Ethiopia flipped.

That does make me wonder if there will be much difference in how they'll turn out, don't think we've heard anything about them since the Italians got chased out?
Tbf it's that I don't think the Turks would flip towards the west, just become more and more insane as they fail to reconquer the borders of misak I milli to the point where they'd be a hard to deal with ally instead.
If the PRC and the Sino-Soviet Split is still a thing ITTL, I could see the Turks filling Albania's role as "Mao's best friend abroad", with that in mind.
 
Honestly, I do think its important not to underestimate the West's assets to get Turkey to be at least friendly, as they are still significant:

-Turkey will need a serious amount of money to rebuild and resettle the refugees who would come to its remaining territory. The USSR isn't in a great position to give that money but the US is.
-Nobody in the Western Bloc is in a position to genuinely threaten to turn Sivas into a puppet while it's a VERY credible threat when it comes to the Kremlin.
-Both word of god and Stalin being Stalin all but guarantee that there will be some large-scale ethnic cleansing taking place, with its victim likely to become a fervently anti-communist element of post-war Turkey's population which would be difficult to ignore for Sivas.
-Both because Kemal wasn't able to push his reforms nearly as much as in OTL and because of the trauma of several defeats traditionalism is probably in a rather healthy state in Turkey ITTL, and at the end of the day I'd argue that the West is more palpable to its adherents than the dogmatic communist state next door for its adherents.
 
Tbf it's that I don't think the Turks would flip towards the west, just become more and more insane as they fail to reconquer the borders of misak I milli to the point where they'd be a hard to deal with ally instead.

I feel this is doing a disservice to the Turks. They aren’t Western hating fanatics, they’re just as level headed as any other group of people. They’re going to align with whoever will help them the most. In the immediate aftermath of the war that’s likely going to be the Soviets. But by 1950-1960 we could see a Turkey that’s upset at the Soviets for ethnically cleansing Uskudar and/or trying to play an increasingly large role in their domestic affairs decide to flip sides. And that’s ignoring all of the carrots the West can and will offer.

The cold-war will likely last for quite a while ttl as well, it's entirely possible Russo-Turkish relation flip more than once throughout, they could start out friendly with Moscow but that could then change for x or y reason and then in go the Russians... Just like how Ethiopia flipped.

That does make me wonder if there will be much difference in how they'll turn out, don't think we've heard anything about them since the Italians got chased out?

I’m assuming not much has changed with the Ethiopians at this point as the extra equipment they got was likely used up in the war or got sent to a lesser axis member after. Maybe the resistance was a little stronger but I don’t think that would change much in the end agreement.

That being said it might actually be better long term for Ethiopia if she was less successful in negotiating for territory ITTL. If she could avoid some of her wars Ethiopia would have a much better chance at thriving. Maybe the US throws the UK a bone and allows them their “Greater Somalia” to keep them happy after forcing them to play nice with the Soviets over the straits. Besides that the Anglo-Ethiopian agreement is essentially the same, but with the Eritreans getting fully annexed or divided along religious lines as compensation for losing the area. Anything would be better than the half baked federation plan the UN eventually came up with. Maybe some extra cash as well to make up for losing the Ogadon region. That would definitely stop the Ogaden war and maybe makes the Eritrean issue easier to handle

Honestly, I do think its important not to underestimate the West's assets to get Turkey to be at least friendly, as they are still significant:

-Turkey will need a serious amount of money to rebuild and resettle the refugees who would come to its remaining territory. The USSR isn't in a great position to give that money but the US is.
-Nobody in the Western Bloc is in a position to genuinely threaten to turn Sivas into a puppet while it's a VERY credible threat when it comes to the Kremlin.
-Both word of god and Stalin being Stalin all but guarantee that there will be some large-scale ethnic cleansing taking place, with its victim likely to become a fervently anti-communist element of post-war Turkey's population which would be difficult to ignore for Sivas.
-Both because Kemal wasn't able to push his reforms nearly as much as in OTL and because of the trauma of several defeats traditionalism is probably in a rather healthy state in Turkey ITTL, and at the end of the day I'd argue that the West is more palpable to its adherents than the dogmatic communist state next door for its adherents.

“Traditionalist/military strongman in need of cash and looking to avoid Soviet domination” sounds almost exactly like a few Turkish government and several other middle eastern Cold War Allies from OTL lol. Which Is why I think Turkey will eventually land in the Western Camp again ITTL for all the reasons you noted.
 
Last edited:
Part 149
Karelia, July 1st, 1944

Viipuri fell to the Soviet army. Finnish casualties in a week of fighting were exceeding 33,000 men. Soviet casualties, at 22,000 were not much lower but the Soviets had begun their offensive in Karelia with more than 260,000 men as opposed to merely 75,000 Finnish soldiers. The Finns were rushing every unit they could in Karelia but the Soviets had caught them off guard and it was showing...

Belarus, July 3rd, 1944

Minsk, was liberated by the Soviets. The Soviet offensive was turning into a major success with tens of thousands of German soldiers lost and the Soviets pushing deep into the German lines.

Finland, July 5th, 1944

Marshal Triandafillov looked at the shores of Lake Saimaa. His men had seized a strip of land from Lappeenranta to Imatra, cutting off the road connection between the Finnish forces to the east of Lake Ladoga from these on the Karelian isthmus. Of course roads further to the interior existed but they were adding hundreds of kilometers of additional distance over which reinforcements and supplies would have to be moved. Not that Triandafillov intended to let the Finns move any reinforcements. He had already thrown a fresh mechanized corps brought forward from Stavka reserves to spearhead a push east threatening the rear of the Finnish forces fighting on the Svir river.

Buchenwald, July 7th, 1944

One more day passed for Georges Mandel and the other French politicians incarcerated by the Germans in the special section of the concentration camp for important prisoners.

Normandy, July 9th, 1944

British and Canadian troops secured Caen advancing to the Odon river. Determined German resistance had delayed the fall for the town for nearly a month albeit at heavy cost. Even now German defenses were holding fast preventing the Allies from crossing the river.

Saipan, July 9th, 1944

The island was declared secure. Out of the nearly 32,000 Japanese defenders only about 1,800 had been taken prisoner with several thousands, apparently preferring to commit suicide in order to avoid captivity.

Macedonia, July 9th, 1944

Kilkis was liberated by the Greek X Infantry Division. A week into the fighting the defending German and Bulgarian forces were still holding fast, having given up little ground. But they were bleeding profusely to do so and there was not the slightest sign the Allies were going to ease up on the pressure. If anything Allied attacks kept intensifying.

New York, July 10th, 1944

USS Saipan, the first of a new improved class of aircraft carriers based on the hull of Baltimore class heavy cruisers and built from the keel up as aircraft carriers was laid down. Two more ships would be laid down in the coming weeks to provide a replacements for USS Monterey, sunk at Tarawa the previous November, and cover projected losses of aircraft carriers.

Albania, July 11th, 1944

Elbasan was liberated by the Greek VIII Infantry Division under Napoleon Zervas. The fighting in Albania was proceeding slowly the Greek Epirus Army Detachment had by now clear numerical superiority with about 94,000 men facing about 44,000 Germans but its commander, George Dromazos, had to deal with bad terrain, few roads and attacks in his rear from bands of Balli Kombetar men that had failed to follow the Germans in their retreat. Administration of the liberated territory was a further headache. The strongest resistance group in Albania by a large margin was the communist Lëvizja Nacional-Çlirimtare under Enver Hoxha something neither the Greeks nor the British cound ignore. The Greeks and British had fostered a non communist "Albanian National Army" commanded Spiro Moisiu. Moisiu an officer of the pre-war Albanian army, was Greek Orthodox with some ties to the Greek community, who had not fought against the Greek army in 1940, all attributes to commend him to Theodore Pangalos who was Arvanite himself. Another Greek Orthodox Zog's former prime minister Pandeli Evangjeli who had had the good sense to avoid open collaboration with the Italians even though he had been considered pro-Italian before 1939 had been dragged to lead the movement politicaly. Hoxha was, grudgingly, working together with Evangjeli and Moisiu for the time being, LNC attacking the ANA was all too likely to bring it in direct conflict with the Greek army, but tensions abounded...

Western Ukraine, July 13th, 1944

One million men and two thousand tanks of the 1st Ukrainian Front under marshal Ivan Koniev attacked. Within five days the Soviets would encircle 45,000 men of the XIII German Corps at Brody and open a 200km gap in German lines. Coupled with the disaster underway in Belarus, the German situation was becoming increasingly desperate.

Karelia, July 14th, 1944

Sortavala fell to the Soviets. The 130,000 Finnish soldiers fighting to the east of Lake Ladoga, had not been completely encircled yet but had to fight on two fronts. In the west Soviet forces had temporarily paused their advance to regroup in preparation for an assault against the Salpa line fortifications. Finnish attempts to open negotiations with the Soviets for an armistice had been met by Soviet demands for a Finnish surrender which the Finns had rejected. The fighting would go on.

Wolfsschanze, East Prussia, July 15th, 1944

The old frontswein reflexes took over and Adolf Hitler fell flat on the ground as the the bomb, hidden on the other side of the room, exploded, excaping with relatively minor wounds. Hermann Göring, closer to the explosion, was not as lucky, fragments from the explosion tearing through him and killing him instantly. Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, a veteran of the fighting in Greece, had tried to take advantage of the rare occasion of Hitler, Himmler and Göring being all together in the same place to take out all three. He had managed to get only Göring.

Berlin, July 16th, 1944

Claus von Stauffenberg was put against a wall and shot. The coup attempt against the Nazis had collapsed in failure as soon as the news of Hitler's survival had become known and he had been heard on the radio. Even had it succeeded it would had been most unlikely to bring an end to the war, since the conspirators still had notions of a negotiated peace that would had left Germany with her 1914 borders, Austria, Sudetenland and South Tyrol when the Allies would had accepted nothing less than unconditional surreder and held Germany as a whole responsible for the war. General Fromm, who had initially vacilated over supporting the coup, only to have Stauffenberg and several of his fellow plotters killed to secure remaining on Hitler's good graces, would not avoid execution himself.

Macedonia, July 17th, 1944

Doiran was liberated by the Greek army. The Germans and Bulgarians would immediately launch a counterattack spearheaded by the 10th Panzer Division and the Bulgarian Armored Brigade, to retake it, but fail to dislodge the Greeks who would continue pushing towards Strumica and Petrich threatening to seperate the German forces i the west of the front from the Bulgarians in the east.
 
Last edited:
Top