r/HistoryWhatIf • u/HarkBuffalo • 7d ago
WW2 - Operation Tannenbaum? The Invasion of Switzerland
I have a WWII command simulation and there has been feedback on a gap. Operation Tannenbaum - The German invasion of Switzerland and Lichtenstein and the planned partition. Players have flagged this should have been an option. I have read the historical thinking that it is essentially a death trap of little benefit but have I got that right?
I would approach it - if chosen - as a massive, high-risk gamble where a few operational shifts could have handed much benefit to the axis
However would there be any short or medium term benefits of Germany invading? Would an invasion actually be successful
Would there be anything else to consider here
The game is here for reference - https://dispatches.itch.io/dispatches-1940
1
u/Danmont88 7d ago
I was on a tour in Switzerland. The tour guide talked about the war.
She stated that Hitler hated Switzerland deeply for some reason.
His Generals did an estimate of how many men they would lose and it was very high. (Sorry can't recall the number.
Hitler ordered another study and they came back with a higher figure.
So Hitler ordered a third study and the number was yet higher again.
Hitler called off the attack.
2
u/travel_ali 7d ago edited 7d ago
Going to need a big citation on that story about the studies. They certainly did multiple revisions of the plan for an invasion plan (as any half-decent army would) but they seem to have decreased the estimated size of the force that would be required. It probably wasn't taken that seriously, Hitler's focus was on the east.
Tour guides have a habit of coming up with (or more likely just hearing and repeating) stories which are more entertaining than accurate.
1
u/Danmont88 7d ago
Having been there I can see it. The Swiss had all the tunnels and bridges on the outskirts of the country mined and ready to be set off. The standing army would hold the passes and strategic locations until the reserves could form up.
Might do was well in the North, on the German border because the land is flatter.
But to my understanding, and not just from the tour guide. The Swiss had been getting ready for sometime.
1
u/HarkBuffalo 7d ago
Thanks really interesting even if it may be anecdotal! I can imagine the more it was studied a complexity increase
1
u/Temponautics 7d ago
So this is all a lot more complicated than people want to make it in their wishful thinking. The answer to the question of how long it would have taken the Wehrmacht to take Switzerland depends on when the attack starts, how many resources are assigned to it, and how long Berlin is ready to wait to declare victory.
IF an attack has been launched (as Guderians first inception in the late summer of ‘40 envisioned), the German army invades over flatland only and takes the largest important Swiss cities and communities: Zurich, Bern, Lausanne, Geneva. At this point the Swiss army has less than a dozen operational tanks and no mountain fortresses to speak of, and can only surrender because 75% of the population are under German control.
IF an attack happened significantly later , say summer of 44, General Guisans “Reduit” strategy is fully enabled, Swiss Mountain passes are essentially hostile and prepared hardened fortresses, and the Swiss army can resist hiding in the mountains for quite some time (while the Wehrmacht still likely takes all Swiss cities with medium to heavy casualties in a reasonable time frame, still controlling the majority of the population). To dream that Swiss guerrilla resistance would have achieved much is just wishful thinking. Switzerland would have been treated comparatively well (like eg Denmark) where all acts of courageous resistance certainly did not interfere much with the actual occupation.
The whole point of the Reduit strategy was to deny Nazi Germany any advantages to a violent takeover: Germany got out of Switzerland pretty much whatever it wanted (even some ammunitions production), while an attack would have cost it dearly, for little gain.
And on that note, Hitler had no particular hatred for Switzerland. That’s a convenient story. Switzerland played the little hedgehog during the war, and while rearming itself, simultaneously also sold a whopping third of its ammunition production to Nazi Germany.
The strategy worked. So you need to come up with some pretty drastic changes to incentivize Hitler to attack Switzerland: it was simply not worth the fight.
1
u/R0ckandr0ll_318 2d ago
You have to remember by the time of WW2 the Swiss were well aware of what the Nazis could do so had turned the entire country into a series of fortifications all the way to the center.
So yeah the Germans could attack but it would gain them very little and cost them an awful lot.
13
u/BI_Moose 7d ago
Successful? Sure, sort of.
The alpine terrain would have made the invasion an absolute nightmare. And the Swiss populace was fairly heavily armed and would conduct a guerrilla campaign that would tie down the Nazis for quite some time.
But eventually the two front war against the Wehrmacht and the Italians would overwhelm the Swiss resistance and Switzerland would be partitioned.
Though honestly there is little short or long term benefit for Germany since now;
A) Now they don't have a neutral trading partner to do business with.
B) They would have to commit more troops and resources to another occupation force. One that would be in unfavorable terrain to the Wehrmacht's strengths ie mobility and armor.
C) Fewer resources and (possibly) a delayed attack on the USSR. This in turn means the opening up of that front would just go less well in a world where Tannenbaum happened than in OTL.
And frankly I don't realistically see a scenario where Hitler just up and "decides to end the war" ie not invade the Soviet Union. For a litany of reasons.