The Butterfly Effect: A British AAR

[El Pip]

Atlantic Friend - Indeed.

 

[unmerged(61296)]

Atlantic Friend - Indeed.

Too bad I can't do it to my bank.

 

[El Pip]

trekaddict - Shear luck of the draw. But does leave the question can I get the requite number of comments to allow me to post the complete update at the top of the page.

The race is on!

 

[unmerged(62857)]

trekaddict - Shear luck of the draw. But does leave the question can I get the requite number of comments to allow me to post the complete update at the top of the page.

The race is on!

Well, if I quote now, I come in 1st! YAY!

 

[El Pip]

Chapter LXXIX: A Way with Words Part II - A Surprise to all Involved.​

The general attitude to the Spanish Civil War was best summed up a junior diplomats pithy quote "A war everyone wanted to win, but no-one wanted to fight". With international tensions still high over the Rhineland Question Spain was recognised as an obvious flashpoint and not worth risking open warfare or fighting domestic opposition over. This did not mean the war was unimportant, as France's southern flank having a friendly/hostile government in place was a matter of keen interest for many powers, however it did mean that any involvement would fall short of actually sending troops or even official 'volunteers'. Thus Spain's fate became a bargaining chip, a valuable chip certainly, but a chip nevertheless; it's fate determined not by ideology or moral conviction but by the calculations of realpolitik and the demands of great power's domestic politics.

Off all those present it was the US diplomats who had, in relation to the Spanish Civil War at least, one of the most challenging jobs of any delegation at the conference. Merely by attending they had drawn the fire of many hard-core domestic isolationists, men who felt that even attending a conference was an un-necessary foreign involvement if not an out-right breach of neutrality. The US diplomats were therefore constrained by the need to strongly and repeatedly emphasise the their commitment to enforcing the Neutrality Acts and the lack of US interest in enforcing Versailles or even signing any replacement treaty. Worse the country was 'between Presidents' with Garner a lame duck until Landon entered office in late January, forcing the US delegation to expend considerable time convincing everyone these were Landon's policies, but without openly breaching the 'One President at a time' protocol and undermining Garner. With so many topics off limits, and so much verbal gymnastics required to express the little that was discussed, there was considerable interest as to why the US had even sent a delegation. The mystery was answered towards the end of the first week when the head of the US delegation, former Secretary of State Henry Stimson, began outlining what Landon's 'Moral Neutrality' actually meant and how it applied to Spain.

Henry Lewis Stimson, former Secretary of State and Secretary of War and head of the US delegation to the Amsterdam Conference. Ordinarily John Raskob, the sitting Secretary of State, would have been present to match up with his opposite numbers, however as Raskob was both a foreign policy novice and the choice of the outgoing administration he was not considered to have either the ability or gravitas for the role. As a favour to the new President the State's Righters party leadership therefore prevailed upon President Garner to send a more suitable representative and Garner, who had become thoroughly disillusioned with the entire political process, agreed. Therefore Landon was able to nominate Stimson who had both the experience of international diplomacy (from the London Naval Conference and the Geneva Disarmament Conference) and the Republican credentials to ensure the new doctrine of 'Moral Neutrality' would be skilfully explained and taken seriously.​

Quite simply it meant the US was taking sides, declaring their support for the 'legitimate democratically elected government of Spain' and backing the Republican government against the Monarchists. The headline change would be a total embargo of all goods against the Monarchists and any third party intermediaries once Landon entered office, a move of little practical impact given the Anglo-German grip on Monarchist spending but an important symbolic gesture. However Stimson soon moved on, outlining all the moves the US would not be taking; no military observers or 'volunteers', US firms would be advised against (but crucially not banned from) credit sales to the Republicans and US citizens would be strenuously advised not to enter Spain and, if they did go, would be considered on their own (in effect a land based version of the "Lusitania clause"). Despite these restrictions, which were only just enough to prevent total domestic uproar when reported in the US papers, the mere fact the US had picked a side prompted frantic efforts to induce more 'side picking' on everything from the Rhineland to the countless territorial disputes of Eastern and Central Europe. The sheer volume of request, petitions and indeed outright demands almost overwhelmed the US delegation, the diplomats only surviving by following the example of Stimson's implacable stonewalling. The fact was that even after the terrible and continuing ravages of the Depression continued access to US markets, or denial of the same to a rival, was a prize worth fighting over.

While the minor powers vainly attempted to interest the US in the 'moral' value of their own territorial disputes the Great Powers sat back to take stock. While practical differences to the war were expected to be few the political and strategic implications were considerable, not just for Spain but for the much plotted over post-Spain situation. Naturally France was delighted her fellow republic had chosen the same side and there were many who hoped this would be but a first step on America's return to the world stage. In deference to American sensibilities, and the actual priorities of France, the French government decided to base it's charm offensive not on politics or the international situation but on economics, inviting the US to a 'Gold Bloc' conference for nations still on the Gold Standard and applying pressure to Spain to ensure a few high profile cash orders went to US firms. Conversely their notional ally, the Soviet Union, was less than pleased with the announcement, correctly realising that their influence could only decline as the moderate Republicans gained support and the Spanish government tried to keep the US on-side. However the Politburo was attracted by the idea of getting victory on the cheap, using the resources of capitalist France and America to defeat the fascist while ensuring their men would rise to the top post-war. The Soviets therefore kept quiet, aiming to let others take the glory of winning the war while they devoted their efforts to building an organisation capable of seizing control of post-war Spain.

The M2A2 Light Tank. Objectively it was just another variant of the venerable and ubiquitous Vickers 6-ton tank. In the context of the Spanish Civil War it became one of the more prominent symbols of US involvement, the Republicans making as much propaganda use of them as on the battlefield. As the war progressed it would become common to see footage featuring M2A2s alongside French H35s as part of 'Republics Fighting Together' propaganda, the directors going to great lengths to exclude any inconvenient Soviet tanks from their footage. Despite this the M2A2s were not the most significant contribution from the United States, that honour went to the trucks, the fuel oil and above all the generous credit terms US firms continued to extend in defiance of the public wishes of the US government.​

For the Monarchist supporting British and Germans the news was a somewhat unpleasant surprise, but under the terms outlined by Stimson the governments were confident it would have little impact. Indeed the initial military reaction to the arrival of M2A2s in Spain was positive, the Republicans wasting hard currency on light machine gun armed tanks instead of the far more formidable French cruisers was considered a good thing. As an added bonus the imperial sized US tanks would be utterly incompatible with the metric based French and Soviet, increasing the maintenance workload for the Republicans. This attitude would change as it became apparent countless US firms, including such giants as Ford, General Motors and Texas Oil were ignoring the 'No credit sales' advice of the government and providing support to the Republicans. The British response would pose the first major foreign policy headache for the Landon administration as they grappled with the consequences of the Landon Doctrine.

If the announcement of US involvement was the most shocking event of the conference, a close second place must go to the success of a League of Nation's initiative. The year had started with the League continuing it's seemingly inevitable drift towards irrelevance, the condemnation of Italian aggression in Abyssinia having been as ineffective in stopping Italy as it had been in stopping the Japanese in Manchuria. The change in the League's standing began to turn when the British government closed the Suez Canal to Italian shipping and mentioned the League's sanctions and condemnation as one of the justifications. While this was stretching the truth almost to breaking point, the motivations were primarily domestic and driven by public revulsion over chemical weapons not the actual war itself, it served to give a veneer of international legitimacy to British actions and gave the League a considerable boost. However the resulting Abyssinian War both further reduced League membership, Italy departing in protest over 'The lack of League action against naked British aggression' and induced a minor crisis of confidence, many League insiders distraught than in seeking to stop a small war they had provoked a larger one. This in part explains the Leagues silence over the Rhineland Question as the secretariat feared to take any action in case it worsened the situation, though in truth the larger part of the explanation lay with with Joseph Avenol, the French Secretary-General of the League who saw his first priority as promoting French foreign policy with upholding the League's covenant coming a very distant second.

When war broke out in Spain the Republican government immediately appealed to the League to help 'Defend democracy and protect Spain's territorial integrity', a decidedly unwise choice of appeal given the questions over the honesty of the elections and the ongoing territorial argument with Britain (a permanent council member) over Gibraltar. However even if the delegate had been more skilful or chosen his arguments better he would not have succeeded, with France and Britain both permanent council members and both backing different sides the League Council could never have agreed on a decisive course of action. Despite this the League did manage, to the considerable surprise of the secretariat, to agree a initiative to stop international volunteers and to arrange a general non-intervention agreement. While the former was somewhat woolly and lacking any real teeth the latter was a serious affair, all sides realising that if they started sending contingents of troops in then it could easily end in general warfare on the continent, something no-one wanted or was ready for. Indeed in addition to the League's remaining membership the agreement soon acquired the signatures of the major non-League powers; the United States delegation signing to further underline their commitment to non-intervention, Italy agreeing as part of their efforts to improve Franco-Italian relations and even Germany agreed as a gesture to show her 'peaceful intent'. While the League was buoyed up by this success, their attempt at a follow up economic embargo was scuppered almost before it began, Secretary-General Avenol trying to suppress it internally while the great powers all indicated they had no intention of stopping their various shipments to Spain.

Before we leave Amsterdam it is worth noting the anger among many of the smaller European powers that their concerns had been so thoroughly swept under the carpet. The French promise of 'Re-negotiating Versailles' had re-opened old wounds and re-ignited territorial arguments, the realisation that the great powers had no intention of even discussing those matters, let alone dealing with them, had left many delegations facing domestic problems and somewhat disillusioned with diplomacy. This anger was matched in Turkey where nationalists seethed over not being invited and the international disinterest in their demands for a re-scheduled Montreux Conference. While they had no intention of actually discussing their intentions or waiting for international approval before fortifying the Bosphorus they could not tolerate being ignored or considered irrelevant. As the Great Turk's decline accelerated foreign policy became increasingly important among those jostling to replace him, Turkey status (or lack of it) in the world becoming a major issue.


---
Notes;
So the US is backing the Republicans but trying it's best to stay out of it, no-one ever said Moral Neutrality had to be that logical. Why the switch? Well TTL the Republicans are less obviously Communist (the French influence) and haven't nationalised any US firms, where as the other side are Monarchist and the US is traditionally anti-monarchy. I figure that's probably enough to shift the balance.

France is seriously making an effort to butter up the US now they know they're in play, expect much talk of 'France is America's oldest ally' along with 'Republics fighting together' and subtle bad mouthing of Britain. Will they reveal the Brits and Germans are backing the Monarchists? Probably not as that would allow the British to retaliate with revealing Soviet involvement. If that came out Landon is severely compromised and the cause of US interventionism is dead in the water, so I can see a conspiracy of silence by all involved. Of course the US could find out herself, but US intelligence is badly organised, under funded and focused on Japan so that's unlikely.

Joseph Avenol is a truly unpleasant chap, he did indeed see a big part of his job as implementing French foreign policy to begin with. Then later on he became a full on collaborator, publicly praising Italy and Germany and damning Britain and the US, enthusiastically supporting Petain and purging the League of anyone not a big fan of fascism.

Game effects;
A few trade deals between the US and the Republicans and a large amount of oil, supplies and a low strength light armour unit given to Rep Spain by event.

Up Next;

Your choices are
1. Tanks and Trucks- Army Reform update
2. Schisms and Scheming - UK domestic politics with added Indian action
3. Battle-cruisers and Dive Bombers - Naval porn including the FAA and Coastal Command.

 

[unmerged(51002)]

Hurray! The USA is pro-freedom!

Having read up Wendell Willkie, I think it would be extra-awesome if he became President in 1940. Or, in TBE terms, 2014

 

[trekaddict]

I say 3.

It would be ironic if the Republic was to go totally red now.

 

[unmerged(34050)]

So US firms have a green light to sell to Republican Spain. And there will be a British response to this--interesting. Cutting off Malayan tin and rubber supplies to US firms selling to Republican Spain or somesuch?

Turkey: IIRC Montreux was Turkey's response to Italian agression and militarization of the Aegean islands + Germany's repudiation of Versailles. Given Italy and Germany are both rather cowed at the moment, is it Soviet pressure (for a base or unlimited transit rights) that has Turkey riled up? Or just nationalist sentiment to retake what's theirs?

 

[unmerged(62857)]

Wow, Britain is further isolated. It does not look as if the Empire can count on anyone not already in the commonwealth for support, and the number of potential aggressors grows! does this make it a must win in Spain solely to ensure a place on the continent and an ally beholden to British interests???

I vote to be schooled in schisms and schemes...

 

[TheExecuter]

Wait...the US did something in an El Pip AAR?

Wow. Totally unexpected! Way to go Landon!

I see any disgruntlement being swept aside by the elected officials here in the States...at least until 6-12 months before the next election cycle...

TheExecuter

 

[Lord Strange]

*pants* Caught up again with this AAR. Still excellent. But I am worried by the removal of my cookie from your signature? Does it no longer hold any value?

 

[unmerged(87160)]

Very nice surprise, I wasn`t expecting an update for atleast two weaks. Anyway, its funny to see tho game is currently going the same way most of my UK games do: ally no one fight everyone. But that probably wouldn`t be that funny to TTL British politicians.

Back to serious matters - can relations between Britain and France deteriorate up to the point of open hostility? They have no real conflicting interest, neither of them is expansionist (atleast so far, but its hard to imagine France conquering Belgium or something similar), there is nothing that can realistically lead to war. They clash in Spain, but France can accept even Monarchist victory if British and not Germans remain in control. My question is - with current development in anglo-french relations, has Britain only lost a possible ally or gained a potential enemy? So far everything points to the first statement, something drastic has to happen to change things so dramatically in HOI timeframe.

P.S. I vote for 3).

 

[cdcdrr]

I will have 2, Schisms and Scheming. With a glass of Burgundian and Hussar salad on the side. Some espresso and a Dame Blanche as after meal desert.

 

[unmerged(78085)]

I add my Vote for 3

Nice update - quite the surprise!

I also second Carlstadt Boy's thinking re the UK finding itself seriously short of friends - I can only conclude that the Foreign Office is going to have a sweep-out, and discover that it is full of Commies, or something. :rofl:

Ooohh... Dive Bombers and those big floaty-target thingies!

 

[Sir Humphrey]

Sweet. Really cool. Certainly poses a great question for British policy thinkers.

 

[Davout]

Ford Motor Co extended credit and aid to the Republicans? Really? I must have missed the chapter where Henry died suddenly and the company passed to his less authoritarian heir, Edsel.

And I vote for Army porn, I mean, reform.

 

[Arilou]

I'm somewhat amused by the fact that my exapseration with the "boat-porn" has now passed into common usage

 

[trekaddict]

Someone should make a AARland dictionary.

 

[El Pip]

Alexus - I have strong views on the matter of Willkie, if he becomes president then the US will end up very dystopian. I would be forced to prove the campaign allegations that "Wilkie is the Nazi choice" were not only correct but something of an understatement.

trekaddict - Indeed, and I do love a nice bit of irony in my AARs.

DonnieBaseball - The British response is going to be interesting, while they don't want to actually dispute with the US (if nothing else they don't want the bother) coming into too strong will only provoke the US to be more determined to 'protect free trade' and so on. Cunning will be required.

Montreux is pretty much just national pride, mixed in with the ambition to be the next Turkish President. With everyone else casting off their treaty obligations Turkey wants to do the same, not to mention be treated as an important regional power. There's little actual military/diplomatic justification, however being seen as the strong man who will promote a respected Turkey is very alluring for the Presidential candidates.

Bafflegab - If anything there are some in London are thinking about losing in Spain to cut all ties with the continent. As it is I think the large economic interests in Spain and the national prestige committed mean they have to see it through, but of all the foreign backers they are probably most alienable to a negotiated solution. However France and Germany (and the Soviets) all think their side can win so that isn't on the cards.

TheExecuter - Hey! That's a tad unfair, it's hardly my fault the US was so isolationist in the mid/late 1930s.

However Landon certainly has the advantage of a good chunk of time till the mid-terms, I'm not sure he'd be taking this line if the war had erupted just prior to any important elections!

Lord Strange - The sig was getting too big, I've trimmed it down and transferred the cookie and other stuff to the inkwell instead.

Carlstadt Boy - The politician plan is leaning towards ally no-one, fight no-one. Not sure if they can pull it off though.

Anglo-French relations probably wont end up in warfare, as you say there's no territorial disputes or clashing expansionary plans to provoke a conflict. What I think is possible is divide and rule, if Germany plays it carefully she can ensure that when the inevitable war breaks out in Europe Britain isn't on France's side and isn't even an unofficial ally. That's probably a bad thing.

C&D - I had no idea what a Dame Blanche was, thanks to the internet I now do and it sounds a most excellent dessert.

RAFspeak - The FO has had a clear out, found an old file marked "Splendid Isolation" and gone - 'Yes, we like that. Let's do that instead of relying on the French, a plan which has never worked in the history of the world.'

Sir Humphrey - Indeed, it's quite a three pipe problem. Gentlemen to the club and on with our finest smoking jackets!

Davout - Well Ford did business pretty much anywhere up to and including the Soviet Union. With the French pushing a few cash orders towards the US as an incentive I figures someone would break and do a credit deal, at which point everyone else feels they have to pile in to keep up.

Of course when (if?) it emerges the Germans are backing the Monarchists and the Soviets the Republicans everything changes, quite aside from the political fall out GM and Ford probably instantly change sides. The US auto-mobile industry was amazingly fascist.

Arilou - It is quite common that mean spirited insults are embraced and become words of pride.

trekaddict - Such a dictionary would contain the word porn quite a lot.

So current voting;
Tanks and Trucks - I Votes
Schisms and Scheming - II Votes
Battle-cruisers and Dive Bombers - III Votes

That's some amazingly neat voting. As I'm nowhere near starting still plenty of time to vote.

 

[unmerged(51002)]

Alexus - I have strong views on the matter of Willkie, if he becomes president then the US will end up very dystopian. I would be forced to prove the campaign allegations that "Wilkie is the Nazi choice" were not only correct but something of an understatement.

Holy penis! Care to back that up with a brief argument?

I know you want to.

Don't you.

The HATE is swelling in you now...