What if Spain had entered WW2 on the Axis side?

[RF]

RF,

Franco outlived Hitler by decades. He only went when he died. I don't think that defeating the Spaniards would have been that easy, I think they should have been toughter than the Italians by far. Look at the grim violence of the civil war. Nope, I think that it would have been possible that a more dangerous enviroment should have existed.

Why should they be tougher than the Italians?

The record is that the Italians fought harder against the Germans than they did against the British. I don't see why the Spanish would be any different, plus the fact that there were many Spaniards exiled from their homeland who would have fought on against Franco. Who would the Spanish (and Italians) rather fight against - the British or the Germans?

Look at it another way. If the USSR had in 1940 joined the Axis and declared war on Britain, would the Russians have fought as hard against the British as they did in reality against the Germans?

Franco outlived Hitler because he was far more savvy - and didn't start wars he couldn't finish.

[Karl Heidenreich]

I am starting to research on the Spanish Civil War, using Beevor as the pivotal point. I think that in a while I can discuss on this a bit better.

[lwd]

There are a couple of frequent posters over on the axis history forum that seem quite knowligable in this area. Might be worth bouncing some thought off of them if you have specfic questions.

[Karl Heidenreich]

I will... as soon I have the specific questions... now I am living in the world of general questions.

[lwd]

It's an area where I don't have much knowledge. Can't even recommend good books. Not a very simple conflict either.

[dunmunro]

Franco opted to stay out of the war, but he did despatch a division of volunteers to fight against the USSR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Division

This had the additional advantage of removing from Spain, the most radical fascist elements within the Nationalist movement.

A Spanish war against the west would certainly have complicated the UK's position in the western Med, OTOH, Spain itself was still badly torn between left and right, and Allied aid to leftist guerilla movements would have been forthcoming. Additionally, Spain was heavily dependent upon imported food and fuel supplies which would have been cut off immediately by an RN blockade, who would have also occupied the Canary and Azores islands which would have offset, to some extent, the potential loss of Gibraltar.

[Karl Heidenreich]

Lee:

It's an area where I don't have much knowledge. Can't even recommend good books. Not a very simple conflict either.

It was very complex indeed, it doens't "just happened" in 1936. It has very ancient causes as with the power of the Church on one hand and that of the aristocrats vs the growing discontent of popular sectors against the status quo. But it seems that the development of the First Republic was cut off by dictatorship and then the Second Republic was not absent of all kinds of influences... and when I say "all kinds: that means all: fascists, comunists, anarchists (a very strong movement, the storngest of that kind ever, social democrats, monarchist, "carlists", hiper catoclics, etc"
The protestant anglo saxon public opinion is severely favourable to the "republicans", specially because many intelectuals such as George Orwell or Hemingway participated on the Republican side and because Hitler supported the Nationalists. However things get more complicated here. By 1933 the right wing CEDA won popular elections and the leftist president then, Alcala Zamora, avoided to call to form a goverment and instead came with an institutional trick. By 1934 there was violence and the left started targeting eclesiastical personnel. The 1936 elections were the culmination of a whole situation, very complex. The right wing was also divided in rival factions: it seems that the natural leader could have been a very inteligent and strong guy called Primo de Rivera, which was feared by both, the left and Franco's nationalists. Rivera was the founder of the Spanish Phalanx and was executed at the very begining of the civil war while being in prison, where (like the Che in Cuba later) he became a martir of the cause. It seems that even Franco wasn't that prone to start the civil war until conditions presented themselves.
I still need to start reading Beevor which I know will be enlightining as with his book on Stalingrad. But it seems that he also mades an analysis on why the Republicans failed to win. This analysis avoids the western common knowledge that claims that Hitler won it for Franco, but goes in deep in the military problems the Republicans had, how they were unable to adapt themselves to the kind of warfare that developed in that conflict. At the end the Republicans bleed themselves to death at the Ebro, but like many battles, the Ebro was the physical evidence that the Republicans already lose the war.
Anyway the Spanish Civil War was the "appropiate" introduction to WWII. It foretold the violence and cruelty that Europe and Asia would witness later the following decade.

[lwd]

I do think I remember reading that there were significant internal conflicts in the two sides as well. It sticks in my mind that the communist were purging the non communist at one point but that may be because few had much positive to say about communist was I was growing up. I'll be interested in hearing what you think of the book.

As for Spain joining the axis. It does complicate the situation for the British but also for the Germans. It's not clear Spain can easily defend her coasts without significant help from Germany so may end up becoming a net drain.

[Karl Heidenreich]

I will be commenting it, no sweat.

However it is true that in both sides there were internal conflicts. But it was more significant in the Republican side in which there were many agendas, specially the one from Stalin that was using the conflict in order to get rid of the Trotskites that were in that movement. The comunists took over the socialists in a lot if not all the areas and got into conflict with the anarchists that seemed to be the more honest and purposed filled combatants of the Republican side.
The Nationalists presented more cohesive stand and were military more proficient, which is expected because their ranks had a greater percentage of Spain's military.

On the posibility of Spain joining the Axis I think History is clear: if Franco would have seen a chance to fight comunism he would have do it, but Spain was in ruins and the overall stability was not that solid. Of all the fascists he played the wiser hand not getting into the war directly, which is why he died an old man and not hanging in front of the Milan main plaza or hiding in a bunker.

[RF]

by an RN blockade, who would have also occupied the .... and Azores islands which would have offset, to some extent, the potential loss of Gibraltar.

The Azores are Portuguese, not Spanish. They cannot be occupied unless Britain is at war with Portugal as well as Spain.

Given the size and strategic wealth of Portugals' African coloial empire that would open a whole host of opportunites if Germany were able to send substantial forces there.

[lwd]

I think he probably meant the Canaries.
The Azores were "occupied" or if you prefer "leased" to the allies in 1943.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of ... World_Wars
http://www.lajes.af.mil/library/factshe ... sp?id=3999

[RF]

As the article says, Portuguese ''Caudillo'' Salazar gave leases for bases in the Azores to the British in 1943. Salazar did see more quickly than Franco the way WW2 was going by 1943 and did a far better job of getting advantage out of the Allies in providing bases. He also had the precedence of Portugal's ancient treaty of friendship with Britain and the fact that Portugal was a WW1 ally of Britain, with 2 divisions on the Western Front and also the heavy fighting that took place in Mozambique.