Hubbry Logo
Axis powersAxis powersMain
Open search
Axis powers
Community hub
Axis powers
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Axis powers
Axis powers
from Wikipedia

Flags of Germany, Japan, and Italy draping the facade of the Embassy of Japan on the Tiergartenstraße in Berlin (September 1940)

Key Information

Germany's Führer Adolf Hitler (right) beside Italy's Duce Benito Mussolini (left)
Japan's Prime Minister Hideki Tojo (center) with fellow government representatives of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. To the left of Tojo, from left to right: Ba Maw from Burma, Zhang Jinghui, Wang Jingwei from China. To the right of Tojo, from left to right, Wan Waithayakon from Thailand, José P. Laurel from the Philippines, and Subhas Chandra Bose from India.
The signing of the Tripartite Pact by Germany, Japan, and Italy on 27 September 1940 in Berlin. Seated from left to right are the Japanese ambassador to Germany Saburō Kurusu, Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs Galeazzo Ciano, and Adolf Hitler.

The Axis powers,[nb 1] originally called the Rome–Berlin Axis[1] and also Rome–Berlin–Tokyo Axis, was the military coalition which initiated World War II and fought against the Allies. Its principal members were Nazi Germany, the Kingdom of Italy and the Empire of Japan. The Axis were united in their far-right positions and general opposition to the Allies, but otherwise lacked comparable coordination and ideological cohesion.

The Axis grew out of successive diplomatic efforts by Germany, Italy, and Japan to secure their own specific expansionist interests in the mid-1930s. The first step was the protocol signed by Germany and Italy in October 1936, after which Italian leader Benito Mussolini declared that all other European countries would thereafter rotate on the Rome–Berlin axis, thus creating the term "Axis".[2] The following November saw the ratification of the Anti-Comintern Pact, an anti-communist treaty between Germany and Japan; Italy joined the Pact in 1937, followed by Hungary and Spain in 1939. The "Rome–Berlin Axis" became a military alliance in 1939 under the so-called "Pact of Steel", with the Tripartite Pact of 1940 formally integrating the military aims of Germany, Italy, Japan, and later followed by other nations. The three pacts formed the foundation of the Axis alliance.[3]

At its zenith in 1942, the Axis presided over large parts of Europe, North Africa, and East Asia, either through occupation, annexation, or puppet states. In contrast to the Allies,[4] there were no three-way summit meetings, and cooperation and coordination were minimal; on occasion, the interests of the major Axis powers were even at variance with each other.[5] The Axis ultimately came to an end with its defeat in 1945.

Particularly within Europe, the use of the term "the Axis" sometimes refers solely to the alliance between Italy and Germany, though outside Europe it is normally understood as including Japan.[6]

Origins and creation

[edit]

The term "axis" was first applied to the Italo-German relationship by the Italian prime minister Benito Mussolini in September 1923, when he wrote in the preface to Roberto Suster's La Germania Repubblicana that "there is no doubt that in this moment the axis of European history passes through Berlin" (non v'ha dubbio che in questo momento l'asse della storia europea passa per Berlino).[7] At the time, he was seeking an alliance with the Weimar Republic against Yugoslavia and France in the dispute over the Free State of Fiume.[8]

The term was used by Hungary's prime minister Gyula Gömbös when advocating an alliance of Hungary with Germany and Italy in the early 1930s.[9] Gömbös' efforts did affect the Italo-Hungarian Rome Protocols, but his sudden death in 1936 while negotiating with Germany in Munich and the arrival of Kálmán Darányi, his successor, ended Hungary's involvement in pursuing a trilateral axis.[9] Contentious negotiations between the Italian foreign minister, Galeazzo Ciano, and the German ambassador, Ulrich von Hassell, resulted in a Nine-Point Protocol, signed by Ciano and his German counterpart, Konstantin von Neurath, in 1936. When Mussolini publicly announced the signing on 1 November, he proclaimed the creation of a Rome–Berlin axis.[8]

Initial proposals of a German–Italian alliance

[edit]

Italy under Duce Benito Mussolini had pursued a strategic alliance of Italy with Germany against France since the early 1920s.[10] Prior to becoming head of government in Italy as leader of the Italian Fascist movement, Mussolini had advocated alliance with defeated Germany after the Paris Peace Conference (1919–1920) settled World War I.[10] He believed that Italy could expand its influence in Europe by allying with Germany against France.[10] In early 1923, as a goodwill gesture to Germany, Italy secretly delivered weapons for the Reichswehr, which had faced major disarmament under the provisions of the Treaty of Versailles.[10]

Since the 1920s Italy had identified the year 1935 as a crucial date for preparing for a war against France, as 1935 was the year when Germany's obligations under the Treaty of Versailles were scheduled to expire.[11] Meetings took place in Berlin in 1924 between Italian General Luigi Capello and prominent figures in the German military, such as von Seeckt and Erich Ludendorff, over military collaboration between Germany and Italy. The discussions concluded that Germans still wanted a war of revenge against France but were short on weapons and hoped that Italy could assist Germany.[12]

However at this time Mussolini stressed one important condition that Italy must pursue in an alliance with Germany: that Italy "must ... tow them, not be towed by them".[10] Italian foreign minister Dino Grandi in the early 1930s stressed the importance of "decisive weight", involving Italy's relations between France and Germany, in which he recognized that Italy was not yet a major power, but perceived that Italy did have strong enough influence to alter the political situation in Europe by placing the weight of its support onto one side or another, and sought to balance relations between the three.[13][14]

Danube alliance, dispute over Austria

[edit]
Adolf Hitler, Führer and Reich Chancellor of the German People, 1933–1945

In 1933, Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party came to power in Germany. Hitler had advocated an alliance between Germany and Italy since the 1920s.[15] Shortly after being appointed Chancellor of Germany, Hitler sent a personal message to Mussolini, declaring "admiration and homage" and declaring his anticipation of the prospects of German–Italian friendship and even alliance.[16] Hitler was aware that Italy held concerns over potential German land claims on South Tyrol, and assured Mussolini that Germany was not interested in South Tyrol. Hitler in Mein Kampf had declared that South Tyrol was a non-issue considering the advantages that would be gained from a German–Italian alliance. After Hitler's rise to power, the Four Power Directorate proposal by Italy had been looked at with interest by Britain, but Hitler was not committed to it, resulting in Mussolini urging Hitler to consider the diplomatic advantages Germany would gain by breaking out of isolation by entering the Directorate and avoiding an immediate armed conflict.[17] The Four Power Directorate proposal stipulated that Germany would no longer be required to have limited arms and would be granted the right to re-armament under foreign supervision in stages.[18] Hitler completely rejected the idea of controlled rearmament under foreign supervision.[18]

Mussolini did not trust Hitler's intentions regarding Anschluss nor Hitler's promise of no territorial claims on South Tyrol.[19] Mussolini informed Hitler that he was satisfied with the presence of the anti-Marxist government of Engelbert Dollfuss in the First Austrian Republic, and warned Hitler that he was adamantly opposed to Anschluss.[19] Hitler responded in contempt to Mussolini that he intended "to throw Dollfuss into the sea".[19] With this disagreement over Austria, relations between Hitler and Mussolini steadily became more distant.[19]

Hitler attempted to break the impasse with Italy over Austria by sending Hermann Göring to negotiate with Mussolini in 1933 to convince Mussolini to press Austria to appoint Austrian Nazis to the government.[20] Göring claimed that Nazi domination of Austria was inevitable and that Italy should accept this, as well as repeating to Mussolini of Hitler's promise to "regard the question of the South Tyrol frontier as finally liquidated by the peace treaties".[20] In response to Göring's visit with Mussolini, Dollfuss immediately went to Italy to counter any German diplomatic headway.[20] Dollfuss claimed that his government was actively challenging Marxists in Austria and claimed that once the Marxists were defeated in Austria, that support for Austria's Nazis would decline.[20]

In June 1934, Hitler and Mussolini met for the first time, in Venice. The meeting did not proceed amicably. Hitler demanded that Mussolini compromise on Austria by pressuring Dollfuss to appoint Austrian Nazis to his cabinet, to which Mussolini flatly refused the demand. In response, Hitler promised that he would accept Austria's independence for the time being, saying that due to the internal tensions in Germany (referring to sections of the Nazi Sturmabteilung that Hitler would soon kill in the Night of the Long Knives) that Germany could not afford to provoke Italy.[21] Galeazzo Ciano told the press that the two leaders had made a "gentleman's agreement" to avoid interfering in Austria.[22]

Engelbert Dollfuss, Chancellor of Austria, 1932–1934

Several weeks after the Venice meeting, on 25 July 1934, Austrian Nazis assassinated Dollfuss.[21] Mussolini was outraged as he held Hitler directly responsible for the assassination that violated Hitler's promise made only weeks ago to respect Austrian independence.[23][22] Mussolini rapidly deployed several army divisions and air squadrons to the Brenner Pass, and warned that a German move against Austria would result in war between Germany and Italy.[24] Hitler responded by both denying Nazi responsibility for the assassination and issuing orders to dissolve all ties between the German Nazi Party and its Austrian branch, which Germany claimed was responsible for the political crisis.[25]

Italy effectively abandoned diplomatic relations with Germany while turning to France in order to challenge Germany's intransigence by signing a Franco–Italian accord to protect Austrian independence.[26] French and Italian military staff discussed possible military cooperation involving a war with Germany should Hitler dare to attack Austria.

Relations between Germany and Italy recovered due to Hitler's support of Italy's invasion of Ethiopia in 1935, while other countries condemned the invasion and advocated sanctions against Italy.

Development of German–Italian–Japanese alliance

[edit]
Hideo Kodama, a wartime cabinet minister in the Empire of Japan

Interest in Germany and Japan in forming an alliance began when Japanese diplomat Hiroshi Ōshima visited Joachim von Ribbentrop in Berlin in 1935.[27] Although at the time Japan was unwilling to make an alliance against the United Kingdom and France, Oshima informed von Ribbentrop of Japan's interest in forming a German–Japanese alliance against the Soviet Union.[28][27] Von Ribbentrop expanded on Oshima's proposal by advocating that the alliance be based in a political context of a pact to oppose the Comintern.[27] The proposed pact was met with mixed reviews in Japan, with a faction of ultra-nationalists within the government supporting the pact while the Imperial Japanese Navy and the Japanese Foreign Ministry were staunchly opposed to the pact.[29] There was great concern in the Japanese government that such a pact with Germany could disrupt Japan's relations with Britain, endangering years of a beneficial Anglo-Japanese accord, that had allowed Japan to ascend in the international community in the first place.[30] The response to the pact was met with similar division in Germany; while the proposed pact was popular amongst the upper echelons of the Nazi Party, it was opposed by many in the Foreign Ministry, the Army, and the business community who held financial interests in the Republic of China to which Japan was hostile.

Japanese writer Shūmei Ōkawa, a key exponent of Japanese nationalism

On learning of German–Japanese negotiations, Italy also began to take an interest in forming an alliance with Japan.[27] Italy had hoped that due to Japan's long-term close relations with Britain, that an Italo-Japanese alliance could pressure Britain into adopting a more accommodating stance towards Italy in the Mediterranean.[27] In the summer of 1936, Italian Foreign Minister Galeazzo Ciano informed Japanese Ambassador to Italy, Sugimura Yotaro, "I have heard that a Japanese–German agreement concerning the Soviet Union has been reached, and I think it would be natural for a similar agreement to be made between Italy and Japan."[27] Initially Japan's attitude towards Italy's proposal was generally dismissive, viewing a German–Japanese alliance against the Soviet Union as imperative while regarding an Italo-Japanese alliance as secondary, as Japan anticipated that an Italo-Japanese alliance would antagonize Britain that had condemned Italy's invasion of Ethiopia.[27] This attitude by Japan towards Italy altered in 1937 after the League of Nations condemned Japan for aggression in China and faced international isolation, while Italy remained favourable to Japan.[27] As a result of Italy's support for Japan against international condemnation, Japan took a more positive attitude towards Italy and offered proposals for a non-aggression or neutrality pact with Italy.[31]

Lt.Gen Hiroshi Ōshima, Japanese ambassador to Germany before and during World War II

The Tripartite Pact was signed by Germany, Italy, and Japan on 27 September 1940, in Berlin. The pact was subsequently joined by Hungary (20 November 1940), Romania (23 November 1940), Slovakia (24 November 1940), and Bulgaria (1 March 1941).[32]

Ideology

[edit]

The Axis powers' primary goal was territorial expansion at the expense of their neighbors.[33] In ideological terms, the Axis described their goals as breaking the hegemony of the plutocratic Western powers and defending civilization from communism.[citation needed] The Axis championed a number of variants on fascism, militarism, conservatism and autarky.[34] Creation of territorially contiguous autarkic empires was a common goal of all three major Axis powers.[6]

Economic resources

[edit]

The Axis population in 1938 was 258.9 million, while the Allied population (excluding the Soviet Union and the United States, which later joined the Allies) was 689.7 million.[35] Thus the Allied powers outnumbered the Axis powers by 2.7 to 1.[36] The leading Axis states had the following domestic populations: Germany 75.5 million (including 6.8 million from recently annexed Austria), Japan 71.9 million (excluding its colonies), and Italy 43.4 million (excluding its colonies). The United Kingdom (excluding its colonies) had a population of 47.5 million and France (excluding its colonies) 42 million.[35]

The wartime gross domestic product (GDP) of the Axis was $911 billion at its highest in 1941 in international dollars by 1990 prices.[37] The GDP of the Allied powers was $1,798 billion. The United States stood at $1,094 billion, more than the Axis combined.[38]

The burden of the war upon participating countries has been measured through the percentage of gross national product (GNP) devoted to military expenditures.[39] Nearly one-quarter of Germany's GNP was committed to the war effort in 1939, and this rose to three-quarters of GNP in 1944, prior to the collapse of the economy.[39] In 1939, Japan committed 22 percent of its GNP to its war effort in China; this rose to three-quarters of GNP in 1944.[39] Italy did not mobilize its economy; its GNP committed to the war effort remained at prewar levels.[39]

Italy and Japan lacked industrial capacity; their economies were small, dependent on international trade, external sources of fuel and other industrial resources.[39] As a result, Italian and Japanese mobilization remained low, even by 1943.[39]

Among the three major Axis powers, Japan had the lowest per capita income, while Germany and Italy had an income level comparable to the United Kingdom.[40]

Romania's oil gave the country a disproportionate importance in the global conflict. In 1940 and 1941, Romania supplied 94% and 75% of Germany's oil imports respectively. Italy – which lacked both natural and synthetic output – was even more reliant on Romanian oil than Germany. The loss of Romania's oil – following the country's defection from the Axis in August 1944 – resulted in Hitler's first admission that the war was lost.[41]

Major Axis powers

[edit]

Germany

[edit]
German Führer Adolf Hitler along with General Walther von Brauchitsch, during the victory parade in Warsaw after the defeat of Poland, October 1939
German Heinkel He 111 bomber aircraft during the Battle of Britain
German vehicles advancing during the Second Battle of El Alamein in the North African campaign
German soldiers during the Battle of Stalingrad in the Eastern Front campaign
German submarine U-118 under air attack in June 1943

War justifications

[edit]

Hitler in 1941 described the outbreak of World War II as the fault of the intervention of Western powers against Germany during its war with Poland, describing it as the result of "the European and American warmongers".[42] Hitler had designs for Germany to become the dominant and leading state in the world, such as his intention for Germany's capital of Berlin to become the Welthauptstadt ("World Capital"), renamed Germania.[43] The German government also justified its actions by claiming that Germany inevitably needed to territorially expand because it was facing an overpopulation crisis that Hitler described: "We are overpopulated and cannot feed ourselves from our own resources".[44] Thus expansion was justified as an inevitable necessity to provide lebensraum ("living space") for the German nation and end the country's overpopulation within existing confined territory, and provide resources necessary to its people's well-being.[44] Since the 1920s, the Nazi Party publicly promoted the expansion of Germany into territories held by the Soviet Union.[45]

Germany justified its war against Poland on the issues of German minority within Poland and Polish opposition to the incorporation of the ethnically German-majority Free City of Danzig into Germany. While Hitler and the Nazi party before taking power openly talked about destroying Poland and were hostile to Poles, after gaining power until February 1939 Hitler tried to conceal his true intentions towards Poland, and signed a 10-year Non-Aggression Pact in 1934, revealing his plans to only to his closest associates.[46] Relations between Germany and Poland altered from the early to the late 1930s, as Germany sought rapprochement with Poland to avoid the risk of Poland entering the Soviet sphere of influence, and appealed to anti-Soviet sentiment in Poland.[47] Hitler even tried to convince Poland to join the Anti-Comintern Pact.[48] The Soviet Union in turn at this time competed with Germany for influence in Poland.[47] At the same time Germany was preparing for a war with Poland and was secretly preparing the German minority in Poland for a war.[49]

A diplomatic crisis erupted following Hitler demanding that the Free City of Danzig be annexed to Germany, as it was led by a Nazi government seeking annexation to Germany. Germany used legal precedents to justify its intervention against Poland and annexation of the Free City of Danzig (led by a local Nazi government that sought incorporation into Germany) in 1939.[50] Poland rejected Germany's demands and Germany in response prepared a general mobilization on the morning of 30 August 1939.[51]

Germany justified its invasion of the Low Countries of Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands in May 1940 by claiming that it suspected that Britain and France were preparing to use the Low Countries to launch an invasion of the industrial Ruhr region of Germany.[52] When war between Germany versus Britain and France appeared likely in May 1939, Hitler declared that the Netherlands and Belgium would need to be occupied, saying: "Dutch and Belgian air bases must be occupied ... Declarations of neutrality must be ignored".[52] In a conference with Germany's military leaders on 23 November 1939, Hitler declared to the military leaders that "We have an Achilles heel, the Ruhr", and said that "If England and France push through Belgium and Holland into the Ruhr, we shall be in the greatest danger", and thus claimed that Belgium and the Netherlands had to be occupied by Germany to protect Germany from a British-French offensive against the Ruhr, irrespective of their claims to neutrality.[52]

Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 involved issues of lebensraum, anti-communism, and Soviet foreign policy. After Germany invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, the Nazi regime's stance towards an independent, territorially-reduced Russia was affected by pressure beginning in 1942 from the German Army on Hitler to endorse a "Russian Liberation Army" led by Andrey Vlasov.[53] Initially the proposal to support an anti-communist Russian army was met with outright rejection by Hitler, however by 1944 as Germany faced mounting losses on the Eastern Front, Vlasov's forces were recognized by Germany as an ally, particularly by Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler.[54]

After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the outbreak of war between Japan and the United States, Germany supported Japan by declaring war on the US. During the war Germany denounced the Atlantic Charter and the Lend-Lease Act that the US adopted to support the Allied powers prior to entry into the alliance, as imperialism directed at dominating and exploiting countries outside of the continental Americas.[55] Hitler denounced American President Franklin D. Roosevelt's invoking of the term "freedom" to describe US actions in the war, and accused the American meaning of "freedom" to be the freedom for democracy to exploit the world and the freedom for plutocrats within such democracy to exploit the masses.[55]

History

[edit]

At the end of World War I, German citizens felt that their country had been humiliated as a result of the Treaty of Versailles, which included a war guilt clause and forced Germany to pay enormous reparations payments and forfeit territories formerly controlled by the German Empire and all its colonies. The pressure of the reparations on the German economy led to hyperinflation during the early 1920s. In 1923 the French occupied the Ruhr region when Germany defaulted on its reparations payments. Although Germany began to improve economically in the mid-1920s, the Great Depression created more economic hardship and a rise in political forces that advocated radical solutions to Germany's woes. The Nazis, under Hitler, promoted the nationalist stab-in-the-back legend stating that Germany had been betrayed by Jews and Communists. The party promised to rebuild Germany as a major power and create a Greater Germany that would include Alsace-Lorraine, Austria, Sudetenland, and other German-populated territories in Europe. The Nazis also aimed to occupy and colonize non-German territories in Poland, the Baltic states, and the Soviet Union, as part of the Nazi policy of seeking Lebensraum ("living space") in Central and Eastern Europe.

Germany renounced the Versailles treaty and remilitarized the Rhineland in March 1936. Germany had already resumed conscription and announced the existence of a German air force, the Luftwaffe, and naval force, the Kriegsmarine in 1935. Germany annexed Austria in 1938, the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia, and the Memel territory from Lithuania in 1939. Germany then invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia in 1939, creating the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia and the country of Slovakia.

On 23 August 1939, Germany and the Soviet Union signed the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, which contained a secret protocol dividing eastern Europe into spheres of influence.[56] Germany's invasion of its part of Poland under the Pact eight days later[57] triggered the beginning of World War II. By the end of 1941, Germany occupied a large part of Europe and its military forces were fighting the Soviet Union, nearly capturing Moscow. However, crushing defeats at the Battle of Stalingrad and the Battle of Kursk devastated the German armed forces. This, combined with Western Allied landings in France and Italy, led to a three-front war that depleted Germany's armed forces and resulted in Germany's defeat in 1945.

Occupied territories

[edit]

The Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia was created from the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia. Shortly after Germany annexed the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia, the Slovak Republic declared its independence from the rump Second Czechoslovak Republic. The new Slovak State allied itself with Germany. The remainder of the country was occupied by German military forces and organized into the Protectorate. Czech civil institutions were preserved but the Protectorate was considered within the sovereign territory of Germany.

The General Government was the name given to the territories of occupied Poland that were not directly annexed into German provinces, but like Bohemia and Moravia was considered within the sovereign territory of Germany by the Nazi authorities.

Reichskommissariats were established in the Netherlands, Belgium, and Norway, designated as places the "Germanic" populations of which were to be incorporated into the planned Greater Germanic Reich. By contrast the Reichskommissariats established in the east (Reichskommissariat Ostland in the Baltics, Reichskommissariat Ukraine in Ukraine) were established as colonies for settlement by Germans.

In Norway, under Reichskommissariat Norwegen, the Quisling regime, headed by Vidkun Quisling, was installed by the Germans as a client regime during the occupation, while king Haakon VII and the legal government were in exile. Quisling encouraged Norwegians to serve as volunteers in the Waffen-SS, collaborated in the deportation of Jews, and was responsible for the executions of members of the Norwegian resistance movement. About 45,000 Norwegian collaborators joined the pro-Nazi party Nasjonal Samling (National Union), and some police units helped arrest many Jews. However, Norway was one of the first countries where resistance during World War II was widespread before the turning point of the war in 1943. After the war, Quisling and other collaborators were executed. Quisling's name has become an international eponym for traitor.

Italy

[edit]

War justifications

[edit]
The Duce Benito Mussolini in an official portrait

Duce Benito Mussolini described Italy's declaration of war against the Western Allies of Britain and France in June 1940 as the following: "We are going to war against the plutocratic and reactionary democracies of the West who have invariably hindered the progress and often threatened the very existence of the Italian people".[58] Italy condemned the Western powers for enacting sanctions on Italy in 1935 for its actions in the Second Italo-Ethiopian War that Italy claimed was a response to an act of Ethiopian aggression against tribesmen in Italian Eritrea in the Walwal incident of 1934.[59] Italy, like Germany, also justified its actions by claiming that Italy needed to territorially expand to provide spazio vitale ("vital space") for the Italian nation.[60]

In October 1938 in the aftermath of the Munich Agreement, Italy demanded concessions from France to yield to Italy in Africa.[61] Relations between Italy and France deteriorated with France's refusal to accept Italy's demands.[61] France responded to Italy's demands with threatening naval manoeuvres as a warning to Italy.[61] As tensions between Italy and France grew, Hitler made a major speech on 30 January 1939 in which he promised German military support in the case of an unprovoked war against Italy.[62]

Italy entered World War II on 10 June 1940. Italy justified its intervention against Greece in October 1940 on the allegation that the Kingdom of Greece was being used by Britain against Italy, Mussolini informed this to Hitler, saying: "Greece is one of the main points of English maritime strategy in the Mediterranean".[63]

Italian soldiers in the North African Campaign in 1941

Italy justified its intervention against Yugoslavia in April 1941 by appealing to both Italian irredentist claims and the fact of Albanian, Croatian, and Macedonian separatists not wishing to be part of Yugoslavia.[64] Croatian separatism soared after the assassination of Croatian political leaders in the National Assembly of Yugoslavia in 1928 including the death of Stjepan Radić, and Italy endorsed Croatian separatist Ante Pavelić and his fascist Ustaše movement that was based and trained in Italy with the Fascist regime's support prior to intervention against Yugoslavia.[64]

History

[edit]

The intention of the Fascist regime was to create a "New Roman Empire" in which Italy would dominate the Mediterranean. In 1935–1936 Italy invaded and annexed Ethiopia and the Fascist government proclaimed the creation of the "Italian Empire".[65] Protests by the League of Nations, especially the British, who had interests in that area, led to no serious action, although The League did try to enforce economic sanctions upon Italy, but to no avail. The incident highlighted French and British weakness, exemplified by their reluctance to alienate Italy and lose her as their ally. The limited actions taken by the Western powers pushed Mussolini's Italy towards alliance with Hitler's Germany anyway. In 1937 Italy left the League of Nations and joined the Anti-Comintern Pact, which had been signed by Germany and Japan the preceding year. In March/April 1939 Italian troops invaded and annexed Albania. Germany and Italy signed the Pact of Steel on May 22.

Italian Fiat M13/40 tanks in the North African Campaign in 1941

Italy was ill-prepared for war, in spite of the fact that it had continuously been involved in conflict since 1935, first with Ethiopia in 1935–1936 and then in the Spanish Civil War on the side of Francisco Franco's Nationalists.[66] Mussolini refused to heed warnings from his minister of exchange and currency, Felice Guarneri, who said that Italy's actions in Ethiopia and Spain meant that Italy was on the verge of bankruptcy.[67] By 1939 military expenditures by Britain and France far exceeded what Italy could afford.[67] As a result of Italy's economic difficulties its soldiers were poorly paid, often being poorly equipped and poorly supplied, and animosity arose between soldiers and class-conscious officers; these contributed to low morale amongst Italian soldiers.[68]

Italian battleships Vittorio Veneto and Littorio during the war
Italian Macchi C.200 fighter aircraft during the war

By early 1940, Italy was still a non-belligerent, and Mussolini communicated to Hitler that Italy was not prepared to intervene soon. By March 1940, Mussolini decided that Italy would intervene, but the date was not yet chosen. His senior military leadership unanimously opposed the action because Italy was unprepared. No raw materials had been stockpiled and the reserves it did have would soon be exhausted, Italy's industrial base was only one-tenth of Germany's, and even with supplies the Italian military was not organized to provide the equipment needed to fight a modern war of a long duration. An ambitious rearmament program was impossible because of Italy's limited reserves in gold and foreign currencies and lack of raw materials. Mussolini ignored the negative advice.[69]

By 1941, Italy's attempts to run an autonomous campaign from Germany's, collapsed as a result of military setbacks in Greece, North Africa, and Eastern Africa; and the country became dependent and effectively subordinate to Germany. After the German-led invasion and occupation of Yugoslavia and Greece, that had both been targets of Italy's war aims, Italy was forced to accept German dominance in the two occupied countries.[70] Furthermore, by 1941, German forces in North Africa under Erwin Rommel effectively took charge of the military effort ousting Allied forces from the Italian colony of Libya, and German forces were stationed in Sicily in that year.[71] Germany's insolence towards Italy as an ally was demonstrated that year when Italy was pressured to send 350,000 "guest workers" to Germany who were used as forced labour.[71] While Hitler was disappointed with the Italian military's performance, he maintained overall favorable relations with Italy because of his personal friendship with Mussolini.[72][73]

On 25 July 1943, following the Allied invasion of Sicily, King Victor Emmanuel III dismissed Mussolini, placed him under arrest, and began secret negotiations with the Western Allies. An armistice was signed on 8 September 1943, and four days later Mussolini was rescued by the Germans in Operation Oak and placed in charge of a puppet state called the Italian Social Republic (Repubblica Sociale Italiana/RSI, or Repubblica di Salò) in northern Italy. In order to liberate the country from the Germans and Fascists, Italy became a co-belligerent of the Allies; as result, the country descended in Civil War, with the Italian Co-Belligerent Army and the partisans, supported by the Allies, contended the Social Republic's forces and its German allies. Some areas in Northern Italy were liberated from the Germans as late as May, 1945. Mussolini was killed by Communist partisans on 28 April 1945 while trying to escape to Switzerland.[74]

Colonies and dependencies

[edit]
In Europe
[edit]
Every territory ever controlled by the Italian Empire at some point in time during World War II
  Kingdom of Italy
  Possessions/colonies of Italy
  Occupied territory and protectorates

The Dodecanese Islands were an Italian dependency known as the Italian Islands of the Aegean from 1912 to 1943.

Montenegro was an Italian dependency from 1941 to 1943 known as the Governorate of Montenegro that was under the control of an Italian military governor. Initially, the Italians intended that Montenegro would become an "independent" state closely allied with Italy, reinforced through the strong dynastic links between Italy and Montenegro, as Queen Elena of Italy was a daughter of the last Montenegrin king Nicholas I. The Italian-backed Montenegrin nationalist Sekula Drljević and his followers attempted to create a Montenegrin state. On 12 July 1941, they proclaimed the "Kingdom of Montenegro" under the protection of Italy. In less than 24 hours, that triggered a general uprising against the Italians. Within three weeks, the insurgents managed to capture almost all the territory of Montenegro. Over 70,000 Royal Italian Army troops and 20,000 of Albanian and Muslim irregulars were deployed to suppress the rebellion. Drljevic was expelled from Montenegro in October 1941. Montenegro then came under full direct Italian control. With the Italian capitulation of 1943, Montenegro came directly under the control of Germany.

Politically and economically dominated by Italy from its creation in 1913, Albania was occupied by Italian military forces in 1939 as the Albanian king Zog l fled the country with his family. The Albanian parliament voted to offer the Albanian throne to the King of Italy, resulting in a personal union between the two countries.[75][76]

In Africa
[edit]

Italian East Africa was an Italian colony existing from 1936 to 1943. Prior to the invasion and annexation of Ethiopia into this united colony in 1936, Italy had two colonies, Eritrea and Somalia since the 1880s.

Libya was an Italian colony existing from 1912 to 1943. The northern portion of Libya was incorporated directly into Italy in 1939; however the region remained united as a colony under a colonial governor.

Japan

[edit]

War justifications

[edit]
Italian propaganda poster by Gino Boccasile illustrating the strength of the Tripartite Pact, with samurai warrior sinking British and American ships, and the naval ensigns of the three powers flying behind him.

The Japanese government justified its actions by claiming that it was seeking to unite East Asia under Japanese leadership in a Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere that would free East Asians from domination and rule by clients of Western powers.[77] Japan invoked themes of Pan-Asianism and said that the Asian people needed to be free from Western influence.[78]

The United States opposed the Second Sino-Japanese War, and recognized Chiang Kai-Shek's Nationalist Government as the legitimate government of China. As a result, the United States sought to bring the Japanese war effort to a halt by imposing an embargo on all trade between the United States and Japan. Japan was dependent on the United States for 80 percent of its petroleum, and as a consequence the embargo resulted in an economic and military crisis for Japan, as Japan could not continue its war effort against China without access to petroleum.[79]

In order to maintain its military campaign in China with the major loss of petroleum trade with the United States, Japan saw the best means to secure an alternative source of petroleum in the petroleum-rich and natural-resources-rich Southeast Asia.[80] This threat of retaliation by Japan to the total trade embargo by the United States was known by the American government, including American Secretary of State Cordell Hull who was negotiating with the Japanese to avoid a war, fearing that the total embargo would pre-empt a Japanese attack on the Dutch East Indies.[81]

Japan identified the United States Pacific Fleet based in Pearl Harbor Naval Base as the principal threat to its designs to invade and capture Southeast Asia.[80] Thus Japan initiated the attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941 as a means to inhibit an American response to the invasion of Southeast Asia, and buy time to allow Japan to consolidate itself with these resources to engage in a total war against the United States, and force the United States to accept Japan's acquisitions.[80] On 7 December 1941 Japan declared war on the United States and the British Empire.

History

[edit]
IJN Special Naval Landing Forces armed with the Type 11 Light Machine Gun during the Battle of Shanghai
Mitsubishi A6M Zero fighter aircraft and other aircraft preparing for takeoff on the aircraft carrier Shōkaku on 7 December 1941, for the attack on Pearl Harbor
  Japanese puppet states
  Thailand (cooperated with Japan)
All are members of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.

The Empire of Japan, a constitutional monarchy with Hirohito as its Emperor, was the principal Axis power in Asia and the Pacific. Under the emperor were a political cabinet and the Imperial General Headquarters, with two chiefs of staff. By 1945 the Emperor of Japan was more than a symbolic leader; he played a major role in devising a strategy to keep himself on the throne.[82]

At its peak, Japan's Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere included Manchuria, Inner Mongolia, large parts of China, Malaysia, French Indochina, the Dutch East Indies, the Philippines, Burma, a small part of India, and various Pacific Islands in the central Pacific.

As a result of the internal discord and economic downturn of the 1920s, militaristic elements set Japan on a path of expansionism. As the Japanese home islands lacked natural resources needed for growth, Japan planned to establish hegemony in Asia and become self-sufficient by acquiring territories with abundant natural resources. Japan's expansionist policies alienated it from other countries in the League of Nations and by the mid-1930s brought it closer to Germany and Italy, who had both pursued similar expansionist policies. Cooperation between Japan and Germany began with the Anti-Comintern Pact, in which the two countries agreed to ally to challenge any attack by the Soviet Union.

Japan entered into conflict against the Chinese in 1937. The Japanese invasion and occupation of parts of China resulted in numerous atrocities against civilians, such as the Nanjing Massacre and the Three Alls Policy. The Japanese also fought skirmishes with Soviet–Mongolian forces in Manchukuo in 1938 and 1939. Japan sought to avoid war with the Soviet Union by signing a non-aggression pact with it in 1941.

IJA paratroopers are landing during the Battle of Palembang, February 13, 1942.
IJN Yamato-class Battleships Yamato and Musashi moored in Truk Lagoon, in 1943

Japan's military leaders were divided on diplomatic relationships with Germany and Italy and the attitude towards the United States. The Imperial Japanese Army was in favour of war with the United States, but the Imperial Japanese Navy was generally strongly opposed. When Prime Minister of Japan General Hideki Tojo refused American demands that Japan withdraw its military forces from China, a confrontation became more likely.[83] War with the United States was being discussed within the Japanese government by 1940.[84] Commander of the Combined Fleet Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto was outspoken in his opposition, especially after the signing of the Tripartite Pact, saying on 14 October 1940: "To fight the United States is like fighting the whole world. But it has been decided. So I will fight the best I can. Doubtless I shall die on board Nagato [his flagship]. Meanwhile, Tokyo will be burnt to the ground three times. Konoe and others will be torn to pieces by the revengeful people, I [shouldn't] wonder. "[84] In October and November 1940, Yamamoto communicated with Navy Minister Oikawa, and stated, "Unlike the pre-Tripartite days, great determination is required to make certain that we avoid the danger of going to war. "[84]

With the European powers focused on the war in Europe, Japan sought to acquire their colonies. In 1940 Japan responded to the German invasion of France by occupying northern French Indochina. The Vichy France regime, a de facto ally of Germany, accepted the takeover. The allied forces did not respond with war. However, the United States instituted an embargo against Japan in 1941 because of the continuing war in China. This cut off Japan's supply of scrap metal and oil needed for industry, trade, and the war effort.

Japanese Military Attaché, Makoto Onodera, visiting Fjell Fortress in Norway, 1943. Behind him is Lieutenant Colonel Eberhard Freiherr von Zedlitz und Neukrich (C-in-C Luftwaffe Feldregiment 502.), and to the right is Fregattenkapitän doktor Robert Morath (Seekommandant in Bergen). Behind Onoderas hand (raised in salute) is General Nikolaus von Falkenhorst (C-in-C German military forces in Norway).

To isolate the US forces stationed in the Philippines and to reduce US naval power, the Imperial General Headquarters ordered an attack on the US naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on 7 December 1941. They also invaded Malaya and Hong Kong. Initially achieving a series of victories, by 1943 the Japanese forces were driven back towards the home islands. The Pacific War lasted until the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The Soviets formally declared war in August 1945 and engaged Japanese forces in Manchuria and northeast China.

Colonies and dependencies

[edit]

Taiwan was a Japanese dependency established in 1895. Korea was a Japanese protectorate and dependency formally established by the Japan–Korea Treaty of 1910.

The South Seas Mandate were territories granted to Japan in 1919 in the peace agreements of World War I, that designated to Japan the German South Pacific islands. Japan received these as a reward by the Allies of World War I, when Japan was then allied against Germany.

Japanese officers training young Indonesian recruits, c. 1945

Japan occupied the Dutch East Indies during the war. Japan planned to transform these territories into a client state of Indonesia and sought alliance with Indonesian nationalists including future Indonesian President Sukarno, however these efforts did not deliver the creation of an Indonesian state until after Japan's surrender.[85]

Other Tripartite Pact signatories

[edit]

In addition to the three major Axis powers, six other countries signed the Tripartite Pact as its member states. Of the additional countries, Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria, the Independent State of Croatia, and Romania participated in various Axis military operations with their national armed forces, while the sixth, Yugoslavia, saw its Tripartite signatory government overthrown earlier in a coup merely days after it signed the Pact, and the membership was reversed.

Hungary

[edit]
Hungarian Toldi I tank as used during the 1941 Axis invasion of the Soviet Union

The Kingdom of Hungary, ruled by Regent Admiral Miklós Horthy, was the first country apart from Germany, Italy, and Japan to adhere to the Tripartite Pact, signing the agreement on 20 November 1940.[86]

Political instability plagued the country until Miklós Horthy, a Hungarian nobleman and Austro-Hungarian naval officer, became regent in 1920. The vast majority of the Hungarians desired to recover former territories of the Lands of the Crown of Saint Stephen lost through the Treaty of Trianon. During the government of Gyula Gömbös, Hungary drew closer to Germany and Italy largely because of a shared desire to revise the peace settlements made after World War I.[87] Many people sympathized with the anti-Semitic policy of the Nazi regime. Hungary refused to participate in Nazi Germany's planned invasion of Czechoslovakia during the Sudenten Crisis, but after the Munich Agreement carried out a diplomatic rapprochement in order to avoid Germany developing too close of an alliance with Hungary's rival Romania.[28] Due to its supportive stance towards Germany and the new efforts in the international policy, Hungary gained favourable territorial settlements by the First Vienna Award, after the breakup of Czechoslovakia occupied and annexed the remainder of Carpathian Ruthenia and in 1940 received Northern Transylvania from Romania via the Second Vienna Award. Hungarians permitted German troops to transit through their territory during the invasion of Yugoslavia, and Hungarian forces joined the military operations after the proclamation of the Independent State of Croatia. Parts of the former Yugoslavia were annexed to Hungary; the United Kingdom immediately broke off diplomatic relations in response.

Hungarian soldiers in the Carpathian mountains in 1944

Although Hungary did not initially participate in the German invasion of the Soviet Union, Hungary and the Soviet Union became belligerents on 27 June 1941. Over 500,000 soldiers served on the Eastern Front. All five of Hungary's field armies ultimately participated in the war against the Soviet Union; a significant contribution was made by the Hungarian Second Army.

On 25 November 1941, Hungary was one of thirteen signatories to the renewed Anti-Comintern Pact. Hungarian troops, like their Axis counterparts, were involved in numerous actions against the Soviets. By the end of 1943, the Soviets had gained the upper hand and the Germans were retreating. The Hungarian Second Army was destroyed in fighting on the Voronezh Front, on the banks of the Don River.

Prior to the German occupation within the area of Hungary around 63,000 Jews perished. Afterwards, in late 1944, 437,000 Jews were deported to Auschwitz-Birkenau, most of them to their deaths.[88] Overall, Hungarian Jews suffered close to 560,000 casualties.[89]

MÁVAG Héja fighter aircraft, derived from the Reggiane Re.2000, an Italian fighter design

Relations between Germany and the regency of Miklós Horthy collapsed in 1944 when Horthy attempted to negotiate a peace agreement with the Soviets and jump out of the war without German approval. Horthy was forced to abdicate after German commandos, led by Colonel Otto Skorzeny, held his son hostage as part of Operation Panzerfaust. Hungary was reorganized following Horthy's abdication in December 1944 into a totalitarian regime called the Government of National Unity, led by Ferenc Szálasi. He had been Prime Minister of Hungary since October 1944 and was leader of the Hungarist Arrow Cross Party. Its jurisdiction was effectively limited to an ever-narrowing band of territory in central Hungary, around Budapest since by the time they took power the Red Army was already far inside the country. Nonetheless, the Arrow Cross rule, short-lived as it was, was brutal. In fewer than three months, Arrow Cross death squads killed as many as 38,000 Hungarian Jews. Arrow Cross officers helped Adolf Eichmann re-activate the deportation proceedings from which the Jews of Budapest had thus far been spared, sending some 80,000 Jews out of the city on slave labour details and many more straight to death camps. Most of them died, including many who were murdered outright after the end of the fighting as they were returning home.[90][91] Days after the Szálasi government took power, the capital of Budapest was surrounded by the Soviet Red Army. German and Hungarian forces tried to hold off the Soviet advance but failed. After fierce fighting, Budapest was taken by the Soviets. A number of pro-German Hungarians retreated to Italy and Germany, where they fought until the end of the war.

In March 1945, Szálasi fled to Germany as the leader of a government in exile, until the surrender of Germany in May 1945.

Romania

[edit]
A formation of Romanian IAR 80 fighter aircraft

With the exception of Germany and Italy, Romania was the only country where a Fascist movement came to power without foreign assistance.[92] When war erupted in Europe, the economy of the Kingdom of Romania was already subordinated to the interests of Nazi Germany through a treaty signed in the spring of 1939. Nevertheless, the country had not totally abandoned pro-British sympathies. Romania had also been allied to the Poles for most of the interwar era. Following the invasion of Poland by Germany and the Soviet Union, and the German conquest of France and the Low Countries, Romania found itself increasingly isolated; meanwhile, pro-German and pro-Fascist elements began to grow.

The August 1939 Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact between Germany and the Soviet Union contained a secret protocol ceding Bessarabia, and Northern Bukovina to the Soviet Union.[56] On June 28, 1940, the Soviet Union occupied and annexed Bessarabia, as well as part of northern Romania and the Hertsa region.[93] On 30 August 1940, as a result of the GermanItalian arbitrated Second Vienna Award Romania had to cede Northern Transylvania to Hungary. Southern Dobruja was ceded to Bulgaria in September 1940. In an effort to appease the Fascist elements within the country and obtain German protection, King Carol II appointed the General Ion Antonescu as Prime Minister on September 6, 1940.

Ion Antonescu and Adolf Hitler at the Führerbau in Munich (June 1941)

Two days later, Antonescu forced the king to abdicate and installed the king's young son Michael (Mihai) on the throne, then declared himself Conducător ("Leader") with dictatorial powers. The National Legionary State was proclaimed on 14 September, with the Iron Guard ruling together with Antonescu as the sole legal political movement in Romania. Under King Michael I and the military government of Antonescu, Romania signed the Tripartite Pact on November 23, 1940. German troops entered the country on 10 October 1941, officially to train the Romanian Army. Hitler's directive to the troops on 10 October had stated that "it is necessary to avoid even the slightest semblance of military occupation of Romania".[94] The entrance of German troops in Romania determined Italian dictator Benito Mussolini to launch an invasion of Greece, starting the Greco-Italian War.[95] Having secured Hitler's approval in January 1941, Antonescu ousted the Iron Guard from power.

Romania was subsequently used as a platform for invasions of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. Despite not being involved militarily in the Invasion of Yugoslavia, Romania requested that Hungarian troops not operate in the Banat. Paulus thus modified the Hungarian plan and kept their troops west of the Tisza.[96]

Romania joined the German-led invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941. Antonescu was the only foreign leader Hitler consulted on military matters[97] and the two would meet no less than ten times throughout the war.[98] Romania re-captured Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina during Operation Munchen before conquering further Soviet territory and establishing the Transnistria Governorate. After the Siege of Odessa, the city became the capital of the Governorate. Romanian troops fought their way into the Crimea alongside German troops and contributed significantly to the Siege of Sevastopol. Later, Romanian mountain troops joined the German campaign in the Caucasus, reaching as far as Nalchik.[99] After suffering devastating losses at Stalingrad, Romanian officials began secretly negotiating peace conditions with the Allies.

The Romanian Mareșal tank destroyer's design was likely used by the Germans to develop the Hetzer.

Romania's military industry was small but versatile, able to copy and produce thousands of French, Soviet, German, British, and Czechoslovak weapons systems, as well as producing capable original products.[100] The Romanian Navy also built sizable warships, such as the minelayer NMS Amiral Murgescu and the submarines NMS Rechinul and NMS Marsuinul.[101] Hundreds of originally-designed Romanian Air Force aircraft were also produced, such as the fighter IAR-80 and the light bomber IAR-37.[102] The country had built armored fighting vehicles as well, most notably the Mareșal tank destroyer, that likely influenced the design of the German Hetzer.[103] Romania had also been a major power in the oil industry since the 1800s. It was one of the largest producers in Europe and the Ploiești oil refineries provided about 30% of all Axis oil production.[104] British historian Dennis Deletant has asserted that Romania's crucial contributions to the Axis war effort, including having the third largest Axis army in Europe and sustaining the German war effort through oil and other materiel, meant that it was "on a par with Italy as a principal ally of Germany and not in the category of a minor Axis satellite".[105] Another British historian, Mark Axworthy, believes that Romania could even be considered to have had the second most important Axis army of Europe, even more so than that of Italy.[106]

Under Antonescu Romania was a fascist dictatorship and a totalitarian state. Between 45,000 and 60,000 Jews were killed in Bukovina and Bessarabia by Romanian and German troops in 1941. According to Wilhelm Filderman at least 150,000 Jews of Bessarabia and Bukovina, died under the Antonescu regime (both those deported and those who remained). Overall, approximately 250,000 Jews under Romanian jurisdiction died.[107]

Romanian soldiers on the outskirts of Stalingrad during the Battle of Stalingrad in 1942

By 1943, the tide began to turn. The Soviets pushed further west, retaking Ukraine and eventually launching an unsuccessful invasion of eastern Romania in the spring of 1944. Romanian troops in the Crimea helped repulse initial Soviet landings, but eventually all of the peninsula was re-conquered by Soviet forces and the Romanian Navy evacuated over 100,000 German and Romanian troops, an achievement which earned Romanian Admiral Horia Macellariu the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross.[108] During the Jassy-Kishinev Offensive of August 1944, Romania switched sides on August 23, 1944. Romanian troops then fought alongside the Soviet Army until the end of the war, reaching as far as Czechoslovakia and Austria.

Germany's main European ally (September 1943 – August 1944)

[edit]

After the September 1943 Armistice of Cassibile with Italy, Romania became the second Axis power in Europe.[109] The Romanians shared in the spoils of Operation Achse, Regia Marina's 5 CB-class midget submarines in the Black Sea being transferred to the Romanian Navy.[110] Romania also captured 496 Italians, mostly naval personnel (2 of them later died). Before the month was out, Germany had agreed to systematically supply the Romanian Army with German military vehicles, via the Olivenbaum I-III and Quittenbaum I programs. Deliveries started in November 1943, and by August 1944, Germany had supplied Romania with 10 times more armored vehicles (Panzer III, Panzer IV and Sturmgeschütz III) than during the entire pre-Cassibile period. Having acquired the license to produce the Messerschmitt Bf 109, Romania planned to assemble 75 from German parts. Deliveries began in May 1944, but only 6 were completed before Romania left the Axis in August 1944. Eleven more were completed by the end of the war with the remaining 58 completed after the war. In 1944, Romania had also gained access to certain Wunderwaffen, such as the Werfer-Granate 21. The first Romanian-made Fiesler Storch was completed in October 1943, followed by 9 more by May 1944. From March 1944, Germany also contributed to the design and construction of the M-05 and M-06 prototypes of the Mareșal tank destroyer: Alkett contributed to the Romanian design team and Telefunken radios along with Böhler armor were provided. The 75 mm Reșița gun (production started at the end of 1943) used the projectile chamber of the German Pak 40. Technology transfers between the two countries were not necessarily one-way, however. On 6 January 1944, Antonescu showed Hitler the plans of the M-04 prototype of the Mareșal tank destroyer. In May 1944, Lieutenant-Colonel Ventz from the Waffenamt acknowledged that the Hetzer had followed the Romanian design. German-led Army Group South Ukraine could not take major operational decisions without securing Ion Antonescu's approval, even as late as 22 August 1944 (the day before he was dismissed).[111] An entire German army (the 6th) came under Romanian command in May 1944, when it became part of Romanian general Petre Dumitrescu's Armeegruppe. For the first time in the war, German commanders came under the actual (rather than nominal) command of their foreign allies. This Romanian-led army group had 24 divisions of which 17 were German.[112][113]

Slovakia

[edit]
Adolf Hitler greeting Jozef Tiso, president of the Slovak Republic, 1941

The Slovak Republic under President Josef Tiso signed the Tripartite Pact on 24 November 1940.

Slovakia had been closely aligned with Germany almost immediately from its declaration of independence from Czechoslovakia on 14 March 1939. Slovakia entered into a treaty of protection with Germany on 23 March 1939.

Slovak troops joined the German invasion of Poland, having interest in Spiš and Orava. Those two regions, along with Cieszyn Silesia, had been disputed between Poland and Czechoslovakia since 1918. The Poles fully annexed them following the Munich Agreement. After the invasion of Poland, Slovakia reclaimed control of those territories. Slovakia invaded Poland alongside German forces, contributing 50,000 men at this stage of the war.

Hiroshi Ōshima, Japanese envoy to Slovak Republic and Ambassador to Germany with Slovak president Jozef Tiso and Slovak prime minister Vojtech Tuka, 1941

Slovakia declared war on the Soviet Union in 1941 and signed the revived Anti-Comintern Pact in 1941. Slovak troops fought on Germany's Eastern Front, furnishing Germany with two divisions totaling 80,000 men. Slovakia declared war on the United Kingdom and the United States in 1942.

Slovakia was spared German military occupation until the Slovak National Uprising, which began on 29 August 1944, and was almost immediately crushed by the Waffen SS and Slovak troops loyal to Josef Tiso.

After the war, Tiso was executed and Slovakia once again became part of Czechoslovakia. The border with Poland was shifted back to the pre-war state.

Bulgaria

[edit]
Bulgarian soldiers in Vardar Macedonia during the Balkans campaign

The Tsardom of Bulgaria was ruled by Тsar Boris III when it signed the Tripartite Pact on 1 March 1941. Bulgaria had been on the losing side in the First World War and sought a return of what the Bulgarian leadership saw as lost ethnically and historically Bulgarian territories, specifically in Macedonia and Thrace (divided between the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, the Kingdom of Greece, and Turkey). During the 1930s, because of traditional right-wing elements, Bulgaria drew closer to Nazi Germany. In 1940 Germany pressured Romania to sign the Treaty of Craiova, returning to Bulgaria the region of Southern Dobrudja, which it had lost in 1913. The Germans also promised Bulgaria – if it joined the Axis – an enlargement of its territory to the borders specified in the Treaty of San Stefano.

Bulgaria participated in the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia and Greece by letting German troops attack from its territory and sent troops to Greece on April 20. As a reward, the Axis powers allowed Bulgaria to occupy parts of both countries – southern and south-eastern Yugoslavia (Vardar Banovina) and north-eastern Greece (parts of Greek Macedonia and Greek Thrace). The Bulgarian forces in these areas spent the following years fighting various nationalist groups and resistance movements. Despite German pressure, Bulgaria did not take part in the Axis invasion of the Soviet Union and actually never declared war on the Soviet Union. The Bulgarian Navy was nonetheless involved in a number of skirmishes with the Soviet Black Sea Fleet, which attacked Bulgarian shipping.

Following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, the Bulgarian government declared war on the Western Allies. This action remained largely symbolic (at least from the Bulgarian perspective), until August 1943, when Bulgarian air defense and air force attacked Allied bombers, returning (heavily damaged) from a mission over the Romanian oil refineries. This turned into a disaster for the citizens of Sofia and other major Bulgarian cities, which were heavily bombed by the Allies in the winter of 1943–1944.

On 2 September 1944, as the Red Army approached the Bulgarian border, a new Bulgarian government came to power and sought peace with the Allies, expelled the few remaining German troops, and declared neutrality. These measures however did not prevent the Soviet Union from declaring war on Bulgaria on 5 September, and on 8 September the Red Army marched into the country, meeting no resistance. This was followed by the coup d'état of 9 September 1944, which brought a government of the pro-Soviet Fatherland Front to power. After this, the Bulgarian army (as part of the Red Army's 3rd Ukrainian Front) fought the Germans in Yugoslavia and Hungary, sustaining numerous casualties. Despite this, the Paris Peace Treaty treated Bulgaria as one of the defeated countries. Bulgaria was allowed to keep Southern Dobruja, but had to give up all claims to Greek and Yugoslav territory.

Independent State of Croatia

[edit]
Adolf Hitler meeting with NDH leader Ante Pavelić

On 10 April 1941, the so-called Independent State of Croatia (Nezavisna Država Hrvatska, or NDH), an installed German–Italian puppet state, co-signed the Tripartite Pact. The NDH remained a member of the Axis until the end of Second World War, its forces fighting for Germany even after its territory had been overrun by Yugoslav Partisans. On 16 April 1941, Ante Pavelić, a Croatian nationalist and one of the founders of the Ustaše ("Croatian Liberation Movement"), was proclaimed Poglavnik (leader) of the new regime.

Initially the Ustaše had been heavily influenced by Italy. They were actively supported by Mussolini's National Fascist Party regime in Italy, which gave the movement training grounds to prepare for war against Yugoslavia, as well as accepting Pavelić as an exile and allowing him to reside in Rome. In 1941 during the Italian invasion of Greece, Mussolini requested that Germany invade Yugoslavia to save the Italian forces in Greece. Hitler reluctantly agreed; Yugoslavia was invaded and the NDH was created. Pavelić led a delegation to Rome and offered the crown of the NDH to an Italian prince of the House of Savoy, who was crowned Tomislav II. The next day, Pavelić signed the Contracts of Rome with Mussolini, ceding Dalmatia to Italy and fixing the permanent borders between the NDH and Italy. Italian armed forces were allowed to control all of the coastline of the NDH, effectively giving Italy total control of the Adriatic coastline. When the King of Italy ousted Mussolini from power and Italy capitulated, the NDH became completely under German influence.

The platform of the Ustaše movement proclaimed that Croatians had been oppressed by the Serb-dominated Kingdom of Yugoslavia, and that Croatians deserved to have an independent nation after years of domination by foreign empires. The Ustaše perceived Serbs to be racially inferior to Croats and saw them as infiltrators who were occupying Croatian lands. They saw the extermination and expulsion or deportation of Serbs as necessary to racially purify Croatia. While part of Yugoslavia, many Croatian nationalists violently opposed the Serb-dominated Yugoslav monarchy, and assassinated Alexander I of Yugoslavia, together with the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization. Ustashe forces fought against communist Yugoslav Partisan guerrilla throughout the war.

The Ustaše regime lacked general support among Croats and never accrued any significant support among the populace.[114][115] The Ustaše regime was backed by parts of the Croat population that during the interwar period had felt oppressed in the Serb-led Yugoslavia. Most of the support it had initially gained by creating a Croatian national state was lost because of the brutal practices it used.[116]

Upon coming to power, Pavelić formed the Croatian Home Guard (Hrvatsko domobranstvo) as the official military force of the NDH. Originally authorized at 16,000 men, it grew to a peak fighting force of 130,000. The Croatian Home Guard included an air force and navy, although its navy was restricted in size by the Contracts of Rome. In addition to the Croatian Home Guard, Pavelić was also the supreme commander of the Ustaše militia, although all NDH military units were generally under the command of the German or Italian formations in their area of operations.

The Ustaše government declared war on the Soviet Union, signed the Anti-Comintern Pact of 1941, and sent troops to Germany's Eastern Front. Ustaše militia were garrisoned in the Balkans, battling the communist partisans.

The Ustaše government applied racial laws on Serbs, Jews, and Romani people, as well as targeting those opposed to the fascist regime, and after June 1941 deported them to the Jasenovac concentration camp or to Nazi concentration camps in Poland. The racial laws were enforced by the Ustaše militia. The exact number of victims of the Ustaše regime is uncertain due to the destruction of documents and varying numbers given by historians. According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., between 320,000 and 340,000 Serbs were killed in the NDH.[117]

Yugoslavia (two-day membership)

[edit]

Yugoslavia was largely surrounded by members of the pact and now bordered the German Reich. From late 1940 Hitler sought a non-aggression pact with Yugoslavia. In February 1941, Hitler called for Yugoslavia's accession to the Tripartite Pact, but the Yugoslav government delayed. In March, divisions of the German army arrived at the Bulgarian-Yugoslav border and permission was sought for them to pass through to attack Greece. On 25 March 1941, fearing that Yugoslavia would be invaded otherwise, the Yugoslav government signed the Tripartite Pact with significant reservations. Unlike other Axis powers, Yugoslavia was not obliged to provide military assistance, nor to provide its territory for Axis to move military forces during the war. Less than two days later, after demonstrations in the streets of Belgrade, Prince Paul and the government were removed from office by a coup d'état. Seventeen-year-old King Peter was declared to be of age. The new Yugoslav government under General Dušan Simović, refused to ratify Yugoslavia's signing of the Tripartite Pact, and started negotiations with Great Britain and Soviet Union. Winston Churchill commented that "Yugoslavia has found its soul"; however, Hitler invaded and quickly took control.[citation needed]

Anti-Comintern Pact signatories

[edit]

Some countries signed the Anti-Comintern Pact but not the Tripartite Pact. As such their adherence to the Axis may have been less than that of Tripartite Pact signatories. Some of these states were officially at war with members of the Allied powers, others remained neutral in the war and sent only volunteers. Signing the Anti-Comintern Pact was seen as "a litmus test of loyalty" by the Nazi leadership.[118]

China (Reorganized National Government of China)

[edit]

During the Second Sino-Japanese War, Japan advanced from its bases in Manchuria to occupy much of East and Central China. Several Japanese puppet states were organized in areas occupied by the Imperial Japanese Armed Forces, including the Provisional Government of the Republic of China at Beijing, which was formed in 1937, and the Reformed Government of the Republic of China at Nanjing, which was formed in 1938. These governments were merged into the Reorganized National Government of China at Nanjing on 29 March 1940. Wang Jingwei became head of state. The government was to be run along the same lines as the Nationalist regime and adopted its symbols.

The Nanjing Government had no real power; its main role was to act as a propaganda tool for the Japanese. The Nanjing Government concluded agreements with Japan and Manchukuo, authorising Japanese occupation of China and recognising the independence of Manchukuo under Japanese protection. The Nanjing Government signed the Anti-Comintern Pact of 1941 and declared war on the United States and the United Kingdom on 9 January 1943.

The government had a strained relationship with the Japanese from the beginning. Wang's insistence on his regime being the true Nationalist government of China and in replicating all the symbols of the Kuomintang led to frequent conflicts with the Japanese, the most prominent being the issue of the regime's flag, which was identical to that of the Republic of China.

The worsening situation for Japan from 1943 onwards meant that the Nanjing Army was given a more substantial role in the defence of occupied China than the Japanese had initially envisaged. The army was almost continuously employed against the communist New Fourth Army. Wang Jingwei died on 10 November 1944, and was succeeded by his deputy, Chen Gongbo. Chen had little influence; the real power behind the regime was Zhou Fohai, the mayor of Shanghai. Wang's death dispelled what little legitimacy the regime had. On 9 September 1945, following the defeat of Japan, the area was surrendered to General He Yingqin, a nationalist general loyal to Chiang Kai-shek. Chen Gongbo was tried and executed in 1946.

Denmark

[edit]
Members of Free Corps Denmark leaving for the Eastern Front from Hellerup railway station in Copenhagen (1941).

Denmark was occupied by Germany after April 1940 and never joined the Axis. On 31 May 1939, Denmark and Germany signed a treaty of non-aggression, which did not contain any military obligations for either party.[119] On April 9, Germany attacked Scandinavia, and the speed of the German invasion of Denmark prevented King Christian X and the Danish government from going into exile. They had to accept "protection by the Reich" and the stationing of German forces in exchange for nominal independence. Denmark coordinated its foreign policy with Germany, extending diplomatic recognition to Axis collaborator and puppet regimes, and breaking diplomatic relations with the Allied governments-in-exile. Denmark broke diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union and signed the Anti-Comintern Pact in 1941.[120] However the United States and Britain ignored Denmark and worked with Henrik Kauffmann Denmark's ambassador in the US when it came to dealings about using Iceland, Greenland, and the Danish merchant fleet against Germany.[121][122]

In 1941 Danish Nazis set up the Frikorps Danmark. Thousands of volunteers fought and many died as part of the German Army on the Eastern Front. Denmark sold agricultural and industrial products to Germany and made loans for armaments and fortifications. The German presence in Denmark included the construction of part of the Atlantic Wall fortifications which Denmark paid for and was never reimbursed.

The Danish protectorate government lasted until 29 August 1943, when the cabinet resigned after the regularly scheduled and largely free election concluding the Folketing's current term. The Germans imposed martial law following Operation Safari, and Danish collaboration continued on an administrative level, with the Danish bureaucracy functioning under German command. The Royal Danish Navy scuttled 32 of its larger ships; Germany seized 64 ships and later raised and refitted 15 of the sunken vessels.[123][124] 13 warships escaped to Sweden and formed a Danish naval flotilla in exile. Sweden allowed formation of a Danish military brigade in exile; it did not see combat.[125] The Danish resistance movement was active in sabotage and issuing underground newspapers and blacklists of collaborators.[126]

Finland

[edit]
The visit of German, Italian, Japanese, Hungarian and Romanian military delegates in the Uhtua sector of the front on 5 April 1943

Although Finland never signed the Tripartite Pact, it fought against the Soviet Union alongside Germany in the 1941–44 Continuation War, during which the official position of the wartime Finnish government was that Finland was a co-belligerent of the Germans whom they described as "brothers-in-arms".[127] Finland did sign the revived Anti-Comintern Pact of November 1941.[128] Finland signed a peace treaty with the Allied powers in 1947 which described Finland as having been "an ally of Hitlerite Germany" during the continuation war.[129] As such, Finland was the only democracy to join the Axis.[130][131] Finland's relative independence from Germany put it in the most advantageous position of all the minor Axis powers.[132] Finland was unusual in the Axis in its relative lack of participation in the Holocaust, and its lack of a fascist regime.[133]

Whilst Finland's relationship with Nazi Germany during the Continuation War remains controversial within Finland,[134] in a 2008 Helsingin Sanomat survey of 28 Finnish historians, 16 agreed that Finland had been an ally of Nazi Germany, with only 6 disagreeing.[135]

The August 1939 Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact between Germany and the Soviet Union contained a secret protocol dividing much of eastern Europe and assigning Finland to the Soviet sphere of influence.[56][136] After unsuccessfully attempting to force territorial and other concessions on the Finns, the Soviet Union invaded Finland in November 1939, launching the Winter War, intending to establish a communist puppet government in Finland.[137][138] The conflict threatened Germany's iron-ore supplies and offered the prospect of Allied interference in the region.[139] Despite Finnish resistance, a peace treaty was signed in March 1940, wherein Finland ceded some key territory to the Soviet Union, including the Karelian Isthmus, containing Finland's second-largest city, Viipuri, and the critical defensive structure of the Mannerheim Line. After this war, Finland sought protection and support from the United Kingdom[140][141] and non-aligned Sweden,[142] but was thwarted by Soviet and German actions. This resulted in Finland being drawn closer to Germany, first with the intent of enlisting German support as a counterweight to thwart continuing Soviet pressure, and later to help regain lost territories.

In the opening days of Operation Barbarossa, Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union, Finland permitted German planes returning from mine dropping runs over Kronstadt and Neva River to refuel at Finnish airfields before returning to bases in East Prussia. In retaliation, the Soviet Union launched a major air offensive against Finnish Air Force bases and towns, which resulted in a Finnish declaration of war against the Soviet Union on 25 June 1941. The Finnish conflict with the Soviet Union is generally referred to as the Continuation War.

Mannerheim with Hitler

Finland's main objective was to regain territory lost to the Soviet Union in the Winter War. However, on 10 July 1941, Field Marshal Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim issued an Order of the Day that contained a formulation understood internationally as a Finnish territorial interest in Russian Karelia.

Diplomatic relations between the United Kingdom and Finland were severed on 1 August 1941, after the British Royal Air Force bombed German forces in the Finnish village and port of Petsamo. The United Kingdom repeatedly called on Finland to cease its offensive against the Soviet Union, and declared war on Finland on 6 December 1941, although no other military operations followed. War was never declared between Finland and the United States, though relations were severed between the two countries in 1944 as a result of the Ryti-Ribbentrop Agreement.

Finnish troops passing by the remains of a destroyed Soviet T-34 at the battle of Tali-Ihantala

Finland maintained command of its armed forces and pursued war objectives independently of Germany. Germans and Finns did work closely together during Operation Silver Fox, a joint offensive against Murmansk. Finland took part in the Siege of Leningrad. Finland was one of Germany's most important allies in its war with the USSR.[118]

The relationship between Finland and Germany was also affected by the Ryti-Ribbentrop Agreement, which was presented as a German condition for help with munitions and air support, as the Soviet offensive coordinated with D-Day threatened Finland with complete occupation. The agreement, signed by President Risto Ryti but never ratified by the Finnish Parliament, bound Finland not to seek a separate peace.

After Soviet offensives were fought to a standstill, Ryti's successor as president, Marshal Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim, dismissed the agreement and opened secret negotiations with the Soviets, which resulted in a ceasefire on 4 September and the Moscow Armistice on 19 September 1944. Under the terms of the armistice, Finland was obliged to expel German troops from Finnish territory, which resulted in the Lapland War.

Manchuria (Manchukuo)

[edit]
Manchurian soldiers training in a military exercise
Manchurian pilots of the Manchukuo Air Force

Manchukuo, in the northeast region of China, had been a Japanese puppet state in Manchuria since the 1930s. It was nominally ruled by Puyi, the last Chinese Emperor of the Qing Dynasty, but was in fact controlled by the Japanese military, in particular the Kwantung Army. While Manchukuo ostensibly was a state for ethnic Manchus, the region had a Han Chinese majority.

Following the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931, the independence of Manchukuo was proclaimed on 18 February 1932, with Puyi as head of state. He was proclaimed the Emperor of Manchukuo a year later. The new Manchu nation was recognized by 23 of the League of Nations' 80 members. Germany, Italy, and the Soviet Union were among the major powers who recognised Manchukuo. Other countries who recognized the State were the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, and El Salvador. Manchukuo was also recognised by the other Japanese allies and puppet states, including Mengjiang, the Burmese government of Ba Maw, Thailand, the Wang Jingwei regime, and the Indian government of Subhas Chandra Bose. The League of Nations later declared in 1934 that Manchuria lawfully remained a part of China. This precipitated Japanese withdrawal from the League. The Manchukuoan state ceased to exist after the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945.

Manchukuo signed the Anti-Comintern Pact in 1939, but never signed the Tripartite Pact.

Spain

[edit]
Front row in order from left to right: Karl Wolff, Heinrich Himmler, Francisco Franco and Spain's Foreign Minister Ramón Serrano Suñer in Madrid, October 1940
Francisco Franco (centre) and Ramón Serrano Suñer (left) meeting with Mussolini (right) in Bordighera, Italy in 1941. At Bordighera, Franco and Mussolini discussed the creation of a Latin Bloc.[73]

Francisco Franco's dictatorship gave moral, economic, and military assistance to the Axis powers while nominally maintaining neutrality. Franco described Spain as a member of the Axis and signed the Anti-Comintern Pact in 1941 with Hitler and Mussolini. Members of the ruling Falange party in Spain held irredentist designs on Gibraltar.[143] Falangists also supported Spanish colonial acquisition of the Tangier International Zone, French Morocco and northwestern French Algeria.[144] In addition, Spain held ambitions on former Spanish colonies in Latin America.[145] In June 1940 the Spanish government approached Germany to propose an alliance in exchange for Germany recognizing Spain's territorial aims: the annexation of the Oran Province of Algeria, the incorporation of all of Morocco, the extension of Spanish Sahara southward to the twentieth parallel, and the incorporation of French Cameroons into Spanish Guinea.[146] Spain invaded and occupied the Tangier International Zone, maintaining its occupation until 1945.[146] The occupation caused a dispute between Britain and Spain in November 1940; Spain conceded to protect British rights in the area and promised not to fortify the area.[146] The Spanish government secretly held expansionist plans towards Portugal that it made known to the German government. In a communiqué with Germany on 26 May 1942, Franco declared that Portugal should be annexed into Spain.[147]

Franco had previously won the Spanish Civil War with the help of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. Both were eager to establish another fascist state in Europe. Spain owed Germany over $212 million[148] for supplies of matériel during the Spanish Civil War, and Italian Corpo Truppe Volontarie combat troops had actually fought in Spain on the side of Franco's Nationalists.

When Germany invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, Franco immediately offered to form a unit of military volunteers to join the invasion. This was accepted by Hitler and within two weeks there were more than enough volunteers to form the Blue Division (División Azul) under General Agustín Muñoz Grandes.

The possibility of Spanish intervention in World War II was of concern to the United States, which investigated the activities of Spain's ruling Falange Espanola Tradicionalista y de las JONS in Latin America, especially Puerto Rico, where pro-Falange and pro-Franco sentiment was high, even amongst the ruling upper classes.[149] The Falangists promoted the idea of supporting Spain's former colonies in fighting against American domination.[145] Prior to the outbreak of war, support for Franco and the Falange was high in the Philippines.[150] The Falange Exterior, the international department of the Falange, collaborated with Japanese forces against the United States Armed Forces and the Philippine Commonwealth Army in the Philippines through the Philippine Falange.[151]

Bilateral pacts with the Axis powers

[edit]

Some countries colluded with Germany, Italy, and Japan without signing either the Anti-Comintern Pact, or the Tripartite Pact. In some cases these bilateral agreements were formalised, in other cases it was less formal. Some of these countries were puppet states established by the Axis powers themselves.

Burma (Ba Maw government)

[edit]

The Japanese Army and Burma nationalists, led by Aung San, seized control of Burma from the United Kingdom during 1942. A State of Burma was formed on 1 August 1943 under the Burmese nationalist leader Ba Maw. A treaty of alliance was concluded between the Ba Maw regime and Japan was signed by Ba Maw for Burma and Sawada Renzo for Japan on the same day in which the Ba Maw government pledged itself to provide the Japanese "with every necessary assistance in order to execute a successful military operation in Burma". The Ba Maw government mobilised Burmese society during the war to support the Axis war-effort.[152]

The Ba Maw regime established the Burma Defence Army (later renamed the Burma National Army), which was commanded by Aung San which fought alongside the Japanese in the Burma campaign. The Ba Maw has been described as a state having "independence without sovereignty" and as being effectively a Japanese puppet state.[153] On 27 March 1945 the Burma National Army revolted against the Japanese.

Thailand

[edit]
Phraya Phahon (far left), Thawan Thamrong (left) and Direk Jayanama (right) with Hideki Tōjō (center) in Tokyo 1942

As an ally of Japan during the war that deployed troops to fight on the Japanese side against Allied forces, Thailand is considered to have been part of the Axis alliance,[154][155][156] or at least "aligned with the Axis powers".[157] For example, writing in 1945, the American politician Clare Boothe Luce described Thailand as "undeniably an Axis country" during the war.[158]

Thailand waged the Franco-Thai War in October 1940 to May 1941 to reclaim territory from French Indochina. Japanese forces invaded Thailand an hour and a half before the attack on Pearl Harbor (because of the International Dateline, the local time was on the morning of 8 December 1941). Only hours after the invasion, Prime Minister Field Marshal Phibunsongkhram ordered the cessation of resistance against the Japanese. An outline plan of Japan-Thailand joint military operations, whereby Thai forces would invade Burma to defend the right flank of Japanese forces, was agreed on 14 December 1941.[159] On 21 December 1941, a military alliance with Japan was signed and on 25 January 1942, Sang Phathanothai read over the radio Thailand's formal declaration of war on the United Kingdom and the United States. The Thai ambassador to the United States, Mom Rajawongse Seni Pramoj, did not deliver his copy of the declaration of war. Therefore, although the British reciprocated by declaring war on Thailand and considered it a hostile country, the United States did not.

The Thais and Japanese agreed that the Burmese Shan State and Karenni State were to be under Thai control. The rest of Burma was to be under Japanese control. On 10 May 1942, the Thai Phayap Army entered Burma's eastern Shan State, which had been claimed by Siamese kingdoms. Three Thai infantry and one cavalry division, spearheaded by armoured reconnaissance groups and supported by the air force, engaged the retreating Chinese 93rd Division. Kengtung, the main objective, was captured on 27 May. Renewed offensives in June and November saw the Chinese retreat into Yunnan.[160]

In November 1943 Thailand signed the Greater East Asia Joint Declaration, formally aligning itself with the Axis powers. The area containing the Shan States and Kayah State was annexed by Thailand in 1942, and four northern states of Malaya were also transferred to Thailand by Japan as a reward for Thai co-operation. These areas were ceded back to Burma and Malaya in 1945.[161] Thai military losses totalled 5,559 men during the war, of whom about 180 died resisting the Japanese invasion of 8 December 1941, roughly 150 died in action during the fighting in the Shan States, and the rest died of malaria and other diseases.[159] The Free Thai Movement ("Seri Thai") was established during these first few months. Parallel Free Thai organizations were also established in the United Kingdom. The king's aunt, Queen Rambai Barni, was the nominal head of the British-based organization, and Pridi Banomyong, the regent, headed its largest contingent, which was operating within Thailand. Aided by elements of the military, secret airfields and training camps were established, while American Office of Strategic Services and British Force 136 agents slipped in and out of the country.

As the war dragged on, the Thai population came to resent the Japanese presence. In June 1944, Phibun was overthrown in a coup d'état. The new civilian government under Khuang Aphaiwong attempted to aid the resistance while maintaining cordial relations with the Japanese. After the war, U.S. influence prevented Thailand from being treated as an Axis country, but the British demanded three million tons of rice as reparations and the return of areas annexed from Malaya during the war. Thailand also returned the portions of British Burma and French Indochina that had been annexed. Phibun and a number of his associates were put on trial on charges of having committed war crimes and of collaborating with the Axis powers. However, the charges were dropped due to intense public pressure. Public opinion was favourable to Phibun, as he was thought to have done his best to protect Thai interests.

Soviet Union

[edit]
German and Soviet soldiers during the official transfer of Brest to Soviet control in front of picture of Stalin, in the aftermath of the invasion and partition of Poland by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in 1939

In 1939 the Soviet Union considered forming an alliance with either Britain and France or with Germany.[162][163] When negotiations with Britain and France failed, they turned to Germany and signed the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact in August 1939. Germany was now freed from the risk of war with the Soviets, and was assured a supply of oil. This included a secret protocol whereby territories controlled by Poland, Finland, Estonia, Romania, Latvia and Lithuania were divided into spheres of interest of the parties.[164] The Soviet Union sought to re-annex some of territories that were under control of those states, formerly acquired by the Russian Empire in the centuries prior and lost to Russia in the aftermath of World War I; that included land such as the Kresy (Western Belarus and Western Ukraine) region ceded to Poland after losing the Soviet-Polish War of 1919–1921.[165]

On 1 September, barely a week after the pact had been signed, Germany invaded Poland. The Soviet Union invaded Poland from the east on 17 September and on 28 September signed a secret treaty with Nazi Germany to coordinate fighting against the Polish resistance. The Soviets targeted intelligence, entrepreneurs and officers with mass arrests, with many victims sent to the Gulag in Siberia, committing a string of atrocities that culminated in the Katyn massacre.[166] Soon after the invasion of Poland, the Soviet Union occupied the Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania,[93][167] and annexed Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina from Romania. The Soviet Union attacked Finland on 30 November 1939, which started the Winter War.[138] Finnish defenses prevented an all-out invasion, resulting in an interim peace, but Finland was forced to cede strategically important border areas near Leningrad.

The Soviet Union provided material support to Germany in the war effort against Western Europe through a pair of commercial agreements, the first in 1939 and the second in 1940, which involved exports of raw materials (phosphates, chromium and iron ore, mineral oil, grain, cotton, and rubber). These and other export goods transported through Soviet and occupied Polish territories allowed Germany to circumvent the British naval blockade. In October and November 1940, German–Soviet talks about the potential of joining the Axis took place in Berlin.[168][169] Joseph Stalin later personally countered with a separate proposal in a letter on 25 November that contained several secret protocols, including that "the area south of Batum and Baku in the general direction of the Persian Gulf is recognized as the center of aspirations of the Soviet Union", referring to an area approximating present day Iraq and Iran, and a Soviet claim to Bulgaria.[169][170] Hitler never responded to Stalin's letter.[171][172] Shortly thereafter, Hitler issued a secret directive on the invasion of the Soviet Union.[170][173] Reasons included the Nazi ideologies of Lebensraum and Heim ins Reich[174]

Vichy France

[edit]

The German army entered Paris on 14 June 1940, following the battle of France. Pétain became the last Prime Minister of the French Third Republic on 16 June 1940. He sued for peace with Germany and on 22 June 1940, the French government concluded an armistice with Hitler and Mussolini, which came into effect at midnight on 25 June. Under the terms of the agreement, Germany occupied two-thirds of France, including Paris. Pétain was permitted to keep an "armistice army" of 100,000 men within the unoccupied southern zone. This number included neither the army based in the French colonial empire nor the French Navy. In Africa the Vichy regime was permitted to maintain 127,000.[175] The French also maintained substantial garrisons at the French-mandate territory of Syria and Greater Lebanon, the French colony of Madagascar, and in French Somaliland. Some members of the Vichy government pushed for closer cooperation, but they were rebuffed by Pétain. Neither did Hitler accept that France could ever become a full military partner,[176] and constantly prevented the buildup of Vichy's military strength.

After the armistice, relations between the Vichy French and the British quickly worsened. Although the French had told Churchill they would not allow their fleet to be taken by the Germans, the British launched naval attacks intended to prevent the French navy being used, the most notable of which was the attack on the Algerian harbour of Mers el-Kebir on 3 July 1940. Though Churchill defended his controversial decision to attack the French fleet, the action deteriorated greatly the relations between France and Britain. German propaganda trumpeted these attacks as an absolute betrayal of the French people by their former allies.

France during the war; Occupied and annexed zones by Germany in shades of red, Italian occupation zones in shades of yellow and striped blue, "Free zone" in blue.
Philippe Pétain (left) meeting with Hitler in October 1940
Personal flag of Philippe Pétain, Chief of State of Vichy France

On 10 July 1940, Pétain was given emergency "full powers" by a majority vote of the French National Assembly. The following day approval of the new constitution by the Assembly effectively created the French State (l'État Français), replacing the French Republic with the government unofficially called "Vichy France," after the resort town of Vichy, where Pétain maintained his seat of government. This continued to be recognised as the lawful government of France by the neutral United States until 1942, while the United Kingdom had recognised de Gaulle's government-in-exile in London. Racial laws were introduced in France and its colonies and many foreign Jews in France were deported to Germany. Albert Lebrun, last President of the Republic, did not resign from the presidential office when he moved to Vizille on 10 July 1940. By 25 April 1945, during Pétain's trial, Lebrun argued that he thought he would be able to return to power after the fall of Germany, since he had not resigned.[177]

In September 1940, Vichy France was forced to allow Japan to occupy French Indochina, a federation of French colonial possessions and protectorates encompassing modern day Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. The Vichy regime continued to administer them under Japanese military occupation. French Indochina was the base for the Japanese invasions of Thailand, Malaya, and the Dutch East Indies. On 26 September 1940, de Gaulle led an attack by Allied forces on the Vichy port of Dakar in French West Africa. Forces loyal to Pétain fired on de Gaulle and repulsed the attack after two days of heavy fighting, drawing Vichy France closer to Germany.

During the Anglo-Iraqi War of May 1941, Vichy France allowed Germany and Italy to use air bases in the French mandate of Syria to support the Iraqi revolt. British and Free French forces attacked later Syria and Lebanon in June–July 1941, and in 1942 Allied forces took over French Madagascar. More and more colonies abandoned Vichy, joining the Free French territories of French Equatorial Africa, Polynesia, New Caledonia and others who had sided with de Gaulle from the start.

In November 1942 Vichy French troops briefly resisted the landing of Allied troops in French North Africa for two days, until Admiral François Darlan negotiated a local ceasefire with the Allies. In response to the landings, German and Italian forces invaded the non-occupied zone in southern France and ended Vichy France as an entity with any kind of autonomy; it then became a puppet government for the occupied territories. In June 1943, the formerly Vichy-loyal colonial authorities in French North Africa led by Henri Giraud came to an agreement with the Free French to merge with their own interim regime with the French National Committee (Comité Français National, CFN) to form a provisional government in Algiers, known as the French Committee of National Liberation (Comité Français de Libération Nationale, CFLN) initially led by Darlan.

In 1943 the Milice, a paramilitary force which had been founded by Vichy, was subordinated to the Germans and assisted them in rounding up opponents and Jews, as well as fighting the French Resistance. The Germans recruited volunteers in units independent of Vichy. Partly as a result of the great animosity of many right-wingers against the pre-war Front Populaire, volunteers joined the German forces in their anti-communist crusade against the USSR. Almost 7,000 joined Légion des Volontaires Français (LVF) from 1941 to 1944. The LVF then formed the cadre of the Waffen-SS Division Charlemagne in 1944–1945, with a maximum strength of some 7,500. Both the LVF and the Division Charlemagne fought on the eastern front.

Deprived of any military assets, territory or resources, the members of the Vichy government continued to fulfil their role as German puppets, being quasi-prisoners in the so-called "Sigmaringen enclave" in a castle in Baden-Württemberg at the end of the war in May 1945.

Iraq

[edit]
An RAF officer investigates wrecked Iraqi artillery near Habbaniya.

In April 1941 the Arab nationalist Rashīd ʿAlī al-Gaylānī, who was pro-Axis, seized power in Iraq. British forces responded by deploying to Iraq and in turn removing Rashi Ali from power. During fighting between Iraqi and British forces, Axis forces were deployed to Iraq to support the Iraqis.[178] However, Rashid Ali was never able to conclude a formal alliance with the Axis.[179]

Anti-British sentiments were widespread in Iraq prior to 1941. Rashid Ali al-Gaylani was appointed Prime Minister of Iraq in 1940. When Italy declared war on Britain, Rashid Ali had maintained ties with the Italians. This angered the British government. In December 1940, as relations with the British worsened, Rashid Ali formally requested weapons and military supplies from Germany.[180] In January 1941 Rashid Ali was forced to resign as a result of British pressure.[178]

In April 1941 Rashid Ali, on seizing power in a coup, repudiated the Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of 1930 and demanded that the British abandon their military bases and withdraw from the country.

On 9 May 1941, Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem who was an associate of Rashid Ali and in asylum in Iraq, declared Jihad[181] against the British and called on Arabs throughout the Middle East to rise up against British rule. On 25 May 1941, the Germans stepped up offensive operations in the Middle East.

Hitler issued Order 30: "The Arab Freedom Movement in the Middle East is our natural ally against England. In this connection special importance is attached to the liberation of Iraq ... I have therefore decided to move forward in the Middle East by supporting Iraq."[182][183]

Hostilities between the Iraqi and British forces began on 2 May 1941, with heavy fighting at the RAF air base in Habbaniyah. The Germans and Italians dispatched aircraft and aircrew to Iraq utilizing Vichy French bases in Syria; this led to Australian, British, Indian and Free French forces entering and conquering Syria in June and July. With the advance of British and Indian forces on Baghdad, Iraqi military resistance ended by 31 May 1941. Rashid Ali and al-Husayn, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, fled to Iran, then Turkey, Italy, and finally Germany, where both were welcomed by Hitler and remained throughout the years of the war; Hitler considered Ali to be head of the Iraqi government-in-exile in Berlin.

Puppet states

[edit]

Various nominally-independent governments formed out of local sympathisers under varying degrees of German, Italian, and Japanese control were established within the territories that they occupied during the war. Some of these governments declared themselves to be neutral in the conflict with the allies, or never concluded any formal alliance with the Axis powers, but their effective control by the Axis powers rendered them in reality an extension of it and hence part of it. These differed from military authorities and civilian commissioners provided by the occupying power in that they were formed from nationals of the occupied country, and that the supposed legitimacy of the puppet state was recognised by the occupier de jure if not de facto.[184]

German

[edit]

The collaborationist administrations of German-occupied countries in Europe had varying degrees of autonomy, and not all of them qualified as fully recognized sovereign states. The General Government in occupied Poland was a fully German administration. In occupied Norway, the National Government headed by Vidkun Quisling – whose name came to symbolize pro-Axis collaboration in several languages – was subordinate to the Reichskommissariat Norwegen. It was never allowed to have any armed forces, be a recognized military partner, or have autonomy of any kind. In the occupied Netherlands, Anton Mussert was given the symbolic title of "Führer of the Netherlands' people". His National Socialist Movement formed a cabinet assisting the German administration, but was never recognized as a real Dutch government.

Albania (Albanian Kingdom)

[edit]

After the Italian armistice, a vacuum of power opened up in Albania. The Italian occupying forces were rendered largely powerless, as the National Liberation Movement took control of the south and the National Front (Balli Kombëtar) took control of the north. Albanians in the Italian army joined the guerrilla forces. In September 1943 the guerrillas moved to take the capital of Tirana, but German paratroopers dropped into the city. Soon after the battle, the German High Command announced that they would recognize the independence of a greater Albania. They organized an Albanian government, police, and military in collaboration with the Balli Kombëtar. The Germans did not exert heavy control over Albania's administration, but instead attempted to gain popular appeal by giving their political partners what they wanted. Several Balli Kombëtar leaders held positions in the regime. The joint forces incorporated Kosovo, western Macedonia, southern Montenegro, and Presevo into the Albanian state. A High Council of Regency was created to carry out the functions of a head of state, while the government was headed mainly by Albanian conservative politicians. Albania was the only European country occupied by the Axis powers that ended World War II with a larger Jewish population than before the war.[185] The Albanian government had refused to hand over their Jewish population. They provided Jewish families with forged documents and helped them disperse in the Albanian population.[186] Albania was completely liberated on November 29, 1944.

Territory of the Military Commander in Serbia

[edit]

The Government of National Salvation, also referred to as the Nedić regime, was the second Serbian puppet government, after the Commissioner Government, established on the Territory of the (German) Military Commander in Serbia[nb 2] during World War II. It was appointed by the German Military Commander in Serbia and operated from 29 August 1941 to October 1944. Although the Serbian puppet regime had some support,[188] it was unpopular with a majority of Serbs who either joined the Yugoslav Partisans or Draža Mihailović's Chetniks.[189] The Prime Minister throughout was General Milan Nedić. The Government of National Salvation was evacuated from Belgrade to Kitzbühel, Germany in the first week of October 1944 before the German withdrawal from Serbia was complete.

Racial laws were introduced in all occupied territories with immediate effects on Jews and Roma people, as well as causing the imprisonment of those opposed to Nazism. Several concentration camps were formed in Serbia and at the 1942 Anti-Freemason Exhibition in Belgrade the city was pronounced to be free of Jews (Judenfrei). On 1 April 1942, a Serbian Gestapo was formed. An estimated 120,000 people were interned in German-run concentration camps in Nedić's Serbia between 1941 and 1944. However the Banjica Concentration Camp was jointly run by the German Army and Nedic's regime.[190] 50,000 to 80,000 were killed during this period. Serbia became the second country in Europe, following Estonia, to be proclaimed Judenfrei (free of Jews). Approximately 14,500 Serbian Jews – 90 percent of Serbia's Jewish population of 16,000 – were murdered in World War II.

Nedić was captured by the Americans when they occupied the former territory of Austria, and was subsequently handed over to the Yugoslav communist authorities to act as a witness against war criminals, on the understanding he would be returned to American custody to face trial by the Allies. The Yugoslav authorities refused to return Nedić to United States custody. He died on 4 February 1946 after either jumping or falling out of the window of a Belgrade hospital, under circumstances which remain unclear.

Italy (Italian Social Republic)

[edit]
  Italian Social Republic (RSI) as of 1943
  German military operational zones (OZAV/OZAK) under direct German administration
RSI (Repubblica Sociale Italiana) soldiers, March 1944

Italian Fascist leader Benito Mussolini formed the Italian Social Republic (Repubblica Sociale Italiana in Italian) on 23 September 1943, succeeding the Kingdom of Italy as a member of the Axis.

Mussolini had been removed from office and arrested by King Victor Emmanuel III on 25 July 1943. After the Italian armistice, in a raid led by German paratrooper Otto Skorzeny, Mussolini was rescued from arrest.

Once restored to power, Mussolini declared that Italy was a republic and that he was the new head of state. He was subject to German control for the duration of the war.

Joint German–Italian client states

[edit]

Greece (Hellenic State)

[edit]
Greece, 1941–1944

Following the German invasion of Greece and the flight of the Greek government to Crete and then Egypt, the Hellenic State was formed in May 1941 as a puppet state of both Italy and Germany. Initially, Italy had wished to annex Greece, but was pressured by Germany to avoid civil unrest such as had occurred in Bulgarian-annexed areas. The result was Italy accepting the creation of a puppet regime with the support of Germany. Italy had been assured by Hitler of a primary role in Greece. Most of the country was held by Italian forces, but strategic locations (Central Macedonia, the islands of the northeastern Aegean, most of Crete, and parts of Attica) were held by the Germans, who seized most of the country's economic assets and effectively controlled the collaborationist government. The puppet regime never commanded any real authority, and did not gain the allegiance of the people. It was somewhat successful in preventing secessionist movements like the Aromanian Roman Legion from establishing themselves. By mid-1943, the Greek Resistance had liberated large parts of the mountainous interior ("Free Greece"), setting up a separate administration there. After the Italian armistice, the Italian occupation zone was taken over by the German armed forces, who remained in charge of the country until their withdrawal in autumn 1944. In some Aegean islands, German garrisons were left behind, and surrendered only after the end of the war.

Japanese

[edit]

The Empire of Japan created a number of client states in the areas occupied by its military, beginning with the creation of Manchukuo in 1932. These puppet states achieved varying degrees of international recognition.

Cambodia

[edit]

The Kingdom of Kampuchea was a short-lived Japanese puppet state that lasted from 9 March 1945 to 15 August 1945. The Japanese entered the French protectorate of Cambodia in mid-1941, but allowed Vichy French officials to remain in administrative posts while Japanese calls for an "Asia for the Asiatics" won over many Cambodian nationalists.

In March 1945, in order to gain local support, the Japanese dissolved French colonial rule and pressured Cambodia to declare independence within the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.[191] King Sihanouk declared the Kingdom of Kampuchea (replacing the French name) independent. Son Ngoc Thanh who had fled to Japan in 1942 returned in May and was appointed foreign minister.[192] On the date of Japanese surrender, a new government was proclaimed with Son Ngoc Thanh as prime minister. When the Allies occupied Phnom Penh in October, Son Ngoc Thanh was arrested for collaborating with the Japanese and was exiled to France.[192]

Azad Hind

[edit]

The Arzi Hukumat-e-Azad Hind, the "Provisional Government of Free India" was a state that was recognized by nine Axis governments, and accepted as part of the axis by the Japanese.[193]

It was led by Subhas Chandra Bose, an Indian nationalist who rejected Mahatma Gandhi's nonviolent methods for achieving independence. The First Indian National Army faltered after its leadership objected to being a propaganda tool for Japanese war aims, and the role of Japanese liaison office. It was revived by the Indian Independence League with Japanese support in 1942 after the ex-PoWs and Indian civilians in South-east Asia agreed to participate in the INA venture on the condition it was led by Bose. From occupied Singapore Bose declared India's independence on October 21, 1943 . The Indian National Army was committed as a part of the U Go Offensive. It played a largely marginal role in the battle, and suffered serious casualties and had to withdraw with the rest of Japanese forces after the siege of Imphal was broken. It was later committed to the defence of Burma against the Allied offensive. It suffered a large number of desertions in this latter part. The remaining troops of the INA maintained order in Rangoon after the withdrawal of Ba Maw's government. The provisional government was given nominal control of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands from November 1943 to August 1945.

Inner Mongolia (Mengjiang)

[edit]

Mengjiang was a Japanese puppet state in Inner Mongolia. It was nominally ruled by Prince Demchugdongrub, a Mongol nobleman descended from Genghis Khan, but was in fact controlled by the Japanese military. Mengjiang's independence was proclaimed on 18 February 1936, following the Japanese occupation of the region.

The Inner Mongolians had several grievances against the central Chinese government in Nanjing, including their policy of allowing unlimited migration of Han Chinese to the region. Several of the young princes of Inner Mongolia began to agitate for greater freedom from the central government, and it was through these men that Japanese saw their best chance of exploiting Pan-Mongol nationalism and eventually seizing control of Outer Mongolia from the Soviet Union.

Japan created Mengjiang to exploit tensions between ethnic Mongolians and the central government of China, which in theory ruled Inner Mongolia. When the various puppet governments of China were unified under the Wang Jingwei government in March 1940, Mengjiang retained its separate identity as an autonomous federation. Although under the firm control of the Japanese Imperial Army, which occupied its territory, Prince Demchugdongrub had his own independent army. Mengjiang vanished in 1945 following Japan's defeat in World War II.

Laos

[edit]

French Indochina, including Laos, had been occupied by the Japanese in 1941, though government by the Vichy French colonial officials had continued. The liberation of France in 1944, bringing Charles de Gaulle to power, meant the end of the alliance between Japan and the Vichy French administration in Indochina. On 9 March 1945 the Japanese staged a military coup in Hanoi, and on 8 April they reached Luang Phrabang. King Sīsavāngvong was detained by the Japanese, and forced to issue a declaration of independence, albeit one that does not appear to have ever been formalised. French control over Laos was re-asserted in 1946.[194]

Philippines (Second Republic)

[edit]

After the surrender of the Filipino and American forces in Bataan Peninsula and Corregidor Island, the Japanese established a puppet state in the Philippines in 1942.[195] The following year, the Philippine National Assembly declared the Philippines an independent Republic and elected José Laurel as its President.[196] There was never widespread civilian support for the state, largely because of the general anti-Japanese sentiment stemming from atrocities committed by the Imperial Japanese Army.[197] The Second Philippine Republic ended with Japanese surrender in 1945, and Laurel was arrested and charged with treason by the US government. He was granted amnesty by President Manuel Roxas, and remained active in politics, ultimately winning a seat in the post-war Senate.

Vietnam (Empire of Vietnam)

[edit]

The Empire of Vietnam was a short-lived Japanese puppet state that lasted from 11 March to 23 August 1945. When the Japanese seized control of French Indochina, they allowed Vichy French administrators to remain in nominal control. This French rule ended on 9 March 1945, when the Japanese officially took control of the government. Soon after, Emperor Bảo Đại voided the 1884 treaty with France and Trần Trọng Kim, a historian, became prime minister.

German, Italian and Japanese cooperation

[edit]

German–Japanese Axis-cooperation

[edit]

On 7 December 1941, Japan attacked the US naval bases in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. According to the stipulation of the Tripartite Pact, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were required to come to the defense of their allies only if they were attacked. Since Japan had made the first move, Germany and Italy were not obliged to aid her until the United States counterattacked. Nevertheless, expecting the US to declare war on Germany in any event,[198] Hitler ordered the Reichstag to formally declare war on the United States.[199] Hitler had agreed that Germany would almost certainly declare war when the Japanese first informed him of their intention to go to war with the United States on 17 November 1941.[200] Italy also declared war on the US.

Historian Ian Kershaw suggests that this declaration of war against the United States was a serious blunder made by Germany and Italy, as it allowed the United States to join the war in Europe and North Africa without any limitation.[201] On the other hand, American destroyers escorting convoys had been effectively intervening in the Battle of the Atlantic with German and Italian ships and submarines, and the immediate war declaration made the Second Happy Time possible for U-boats.[202] Franklin D. Roosevelt had said in his Fireside Chat on 9 December 1941, 2 days before the European Axis powers formally declared war on America, that Germany and Italy already considered themselves to be in a state of war with the United States.[203] Plans for Rainbow Five had been published by the press early in December 1941,[204] and Hitler could no longer ignore the amount of economic and military aid the US was giving Britain and the USSR.[205]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^ Goldberg, Maren; Lotha, Gloria; Sinha, Surabhi (24 March 2009). "Rome-Berlin Axis". Britannica.Com. Britannica Group, inc. Retrieved 11 February 2021.
  2. ^ Cornelia Schmitz-Berning (2007). Vokabular des Nationalsozialismus. Berlin: De Gruyter. p. 745. ISBN 978-3-11-019549-1.
  3. ^ Cooke, Tim (2005). History of World War II. Vol. 1 – Origins and Outbreak. Marshall Cavendish. p. 154. ISBN 0761474838. Retrieved 28 October 2020.
  4. ^ Tucker, Spencer; Roberts, Priscilla Mary (2005). Encyclopedia of World War II A Political, Social and Military History. ABC-Clio. p. 102. ISBN 9781576079997. Retrieved 13 February 2021.
  5. ^ Momah, Sam (1994). Global strategy : from its genesis to the post-cold war era. Vista Books. p. 71. ISBN 9789781341069. Retrieved 13 February 2021.
  6. ^ a b Hedinger, Daniel (8 June 2017). "The imperial nexus: the Second World War and the Axis in global perspective". Journal of Global History. 12 (2): 184–205. doi:10.1017/S1740022817000043. ISSN 1740-0228.
  7. ^ Martin-Dietrich Glessgen and Günter Holtus, eds., Genesi e dimensioni di un vocabolario etimologico, Lessico Etimologico Italiano: Etymologie und Wortgeschichte des Italienischen (Ludwig Reichert, 1992), p. 63.
  8. ^ a b D. C. Watt, "The Rome–Berlin Axis, 1936–1940: Myth and Reality", The Review of Politics, 22: 4 (1960), pp. 530–531.
  9. ^ a b Sinor 1959, p. 291.
  10. ^ a b c d e Knox 2000, p. 124.
  11. ^ Knox 2000, p. 125.
  12. ^ John Gooch. Mussolini and His Generals: The Armed Forces and Fascist Foreign Policy, 1922–1940. Cambridge University Press, 2007. p. 11.
  13. ^ Gerhard Schreiber, Bern Stegemann, Detlef Vogel. Germany and the Second World War. Oxford University Press, 1995. p. 113.
  14. ^ Burgwyn 1997, p. 68.
  15. ^ Christian Leitz. Nazi Foreign Policy, 1933–1941: The Road to Global War. p. 10.
  16. ^ Burgwyn 1997, p. 75.
  17. ^ Burgwyn 1997, p. 81.
  18. ^ a b Burgwyn 1997, p. 82.
  19. ^ a b c d Burgwyn 1997, p. 76.
  20. ^ a b c d Burgwyn 1997, p. 78.
  21. ^ a b Neville 2004, p. 123.
  22. ^ a b Knickerbocker, H.R. (1941). Is Tomorrow Hitler's? 200 Questions On the Battle of Mankind. Reynal & Hitchcock. pp. 7–8.
  23. ^ Neville 2004, pp. 123–125.
  24. ^ Gordon Martel. Origins of Second World War Reconsidered: A. J. P. Taylor and Historians. Digital Printing edition. Routledge, 2003. p. 179.
  25. ^ Gordon Martel. Austrian Foreign Policy in Historical Context. New Brunswick, New Jersey, US: Transaction Publishers, 2006. p. 179.
  26. ^ Neville 2004, p. 125.
  27. ^ a b c d e f g h Boscaro, Gatti & Raveri 1990, pp. 32–39.
  28. ^ a b Weinberg (2005), p. 30–31
  29. ^ Boscaro, Gatti & Raveri 1990, p. 33.
  30. ^ Boscaro, Gatti & Raveri 1990, p. 38.
  31. ^ Boscaro, Gatti & Raveri 1990, pp. 39–40.
  32. ^ Hill 2003, p. 91.
  33. ^ Shelley Baranowski. Axis Imperialism in the Second World War. Oxford University Press, 2014.
  34. ^ Stanley G. Payne. A History of Fascism, 1914–1945. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1995. p. 379.
  35. ^ a b Harrison 2000, p. 3.
  36. ^ Harrison 2000, p. 4.
  37. ^ Harrison 2000, p. 10.
  38. ^ Harrison 2000, pp. 10, 25.
  39. ^ a b c d e f Harrison 2000, p. 20.
  40. ^ Harrison 2000, p. 19.
  41. ^ Axworthy 1995, pp. 17–20.
  42. ^ Lewis Copeland, Lawrence W. Lamm, Stephen J. McKenna. The World's Great Speeches: Fourth Enlarged (1999) Edition. p. 485.
  43. ^ Hitler's Germany: Origins, Interpretations, Legacies. London, England: Routledge, 1939. p. 134.
  44. ^ a b Stephen J. Lee. Europe, 1890–1945. p. 237.
  45. ^ Peter D. Stachura. The Shaping of the Nazi State. p. 31.
  46. ^ Stutthof. Zeszyty Muzeum, 3. PL ISSN 0137-5377. Mirosław Gliński Geneza obozu koncentracyjnego Stutthof na tle hitlerowskich przygotowan w Gdansku do wojny z Polska
  47. ^ a b Jan Karski. The Great Powers and Poland: From Versailles to Yalta. Rowman & Littlefield, 2014. p. 197.
  48. ^ Weinberg 2005, p. 32.
  49. ^ Maria Wardzyńska, "Był rok 1939. Operacja niemieckiej policji bezpieczeństwa w Polsce Intelligenzaktion Instytut Pamięci Narodowej, IPN 2009
  50. ^ A. C. Kiss. Hague Yearbook of International Law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1989.
  51. ^ William Young. German Diplomatic Relations 1871–1945: The Wilhelmstrasse and the Formulation of Foreign Policy. iUniverse, 2006. p. 271.
  52. ^ a b c Gabrielle Kirk McDonald. Documents and Cases, Volumes 1–2. The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2000. p. 649.
  53. ^ Geoffrey A. Hosking. Rulers And Victims: The Russians in the Soviet Union. Harvard University Press, 2006 p. 213.
  54. ^ Catherine Andreyev. Vlasov and the Russian Liberation Movement: Soviet Reality and Emigré Theories. First paperback edition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1989. pp. 53, 61.
  55. ^ a b Randall Bennett Woods. A Changing of the Guard: Anglo-American Relations, 1941–1946. University of North Carolina Press, 1990. p. 200.
  56. ^ a b c Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact 1939.
  57. ^ Roberts 2006, p. 82.
  58. ^ John Whittam. Fascist Italy. Manchester, England; New York: Manchester University Press. p. 165. [ISBN missing]
  59. ^ Michael Brecher, Jonathan Wilkenfeld. Study of Crisis. University of Michigan Press, 1997. p. 109. [ISBN missing]
  60. ^ Rodogno, Davide (2006). Fascism's European Empire: Italian Occupation During the Second World War. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. pp. 46–48. ISBN 978-0-521-84515-1.
  61. ^ a b c Burgwyn 1997, pp. 182–183.
  62. ^ Burgwyn 1997, p. 185.
  63. ^ John Lukacs. The Last European War: September 1939 – December 1941. p. 116.
  64. ^ a b Jozo Tomasevich. War and Revolution in Yugoslavia, 1941–1945: Occupation and Collaboration. pp. 30–31.
  65. ^ Lowe & Marzari 2002, p. 289.
  66. ^ McKercher & Legault 2001, pp. 40–41.
  67. ^ a b McKercher & Legault 2001, p. 41.
  68. ^ Samuel W. Mitcham: Rommel's Desert War: The Life and Death of the Afrika Korps. Stackpole Books, 2007. p. 16.
  69. ^ Stephen L. W. Kavanaugh. Hitler's Malta Option: A Comparison of the Invasion of Crete (Operation Merkur) and the Proposed Invasion of Malta (Nimble Books LLC, 2010). p. 20.
  70. ^ Mussolini Unleashed, 1939–1941: Politics and Strategy in Fascist Italy's Last War. pp. 284–285.
  71. ^ a b Patricia Knight. Mussolini and Fascism. Routledge, 2003. p. 103.
  72. ^ Davide Rodogno. Fascism's European Empire: Italian Occupation during the Second World War. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2006. p. 30.
  73. ^ a b John Lukacs. The Last European War: September 1939 – December 1941. Yale University Press, 2001. p. 364.
  74. ^ Shirer 1960, p. 1131.
  75. ^ Albania: A Country Study: Italian Occupation, Library of Congress. Last accessed 14 February 2015.
  76. ^ "Albania – Italian Penetration". countrystudies.us.
  77. ^ Barak Kushner. The Thought War: Japanese Imperial Propaganda. University of Hawaii Press, p. 119.
  78. ^ Hilary Conroy, Harry Wray. Pearl Harbor Reexamined: Prologue to the Pacific War. University of Hawaii Press, 1990. p. 21.
  79. ^ Euan Graham. Japan's sea lane security, 1940–2004: a matter of life and death? Oxon, England; New York: Routledge, 2006. p. 77.
  80. ^ a b c Daniel Marston. The Pacific War: From Pearl Harbor to Hiroshima. Osprey Publishing, 2011.
  81. ^ Hilary Conroy, Harry Wray. Pearl Harbor Reexamined: Prologue to the Pacific War. University of Hawaii Press, 1990. p. 60.
  82. ^ Herbert P. Bix, Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan (2001) ch. 13
  83. ^ Dull 2007, p. 5.
  84. ^ a b c Asada 2006, pp. 275–276.
  85. ^ Li Narangoa, R. B. Cribb. Imperial Japan and National Identities in Asia, 1895–1945. Psychology Press, 2003. pp. 15–16.
  86. ^ Seamus Dunn, T.G. Fraser. Europe and Ethnicity: The First World War and Contemporary Ethnic Conflict. Routledge, 1996. p. 97.
  87. ^ Montgomery 2002, p. [page needed].
  88. ^ Hungary and the Holocaust Confrontation with the Past (2001) (Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies United States Holocaust Memorial Museum); Tim Cole; Hungary, the Holocaust, and Hungarians: Remembering Whose History? pp. 3–5; [1]
  89. ^ Randolph L. Braham; (2010) Hungarian, German, and Jewish calculations and miscalculations in the last chapter of the Holocaust pp. 9–10; Washington, D.C. : Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, [2]
  90. ^ "Szita Szabolcs: A budapesti csillagos házak (1944–45) | Remény". Remeny.org. 15 February 2006. Retrieved 2017-06-17.
  91. ^ "Section2". Archived from the original on 2009-02-02. Retrieved 2013-05-18.
  92. ^ Gallagher, Tom (July 30, 2005). Theft of a Nation: Romania Since Communism. Hurst. ISBN 9781850657163 – via Google Books.
  93. ^ a b Senn 2007, p. [page needed].
  94. ^ Dinu C. Giurescu, Romania in the Second World War (1939–1945)
  95. ^ Craig Stockings, Eleanor Hancock, Swastika over the Acropolis: Re-interpreting the Nazi Invasion of Greece in World War II, p. 37
  96. ^ Carlile Aylmer Macartney, October Fifteenth: A History of Modern Hungary, 1929–1945, Vol. 1, p. 481
  97. ^ Dennis Deletant, Final report, p. 498
  98. ^ Robert D. Kaplan, In Europe's Shadow: Two Cold Wars and a Thirty-Year Journey Through Romania and Beyond, p. 134
  99. ^ David T. Zabecki, World War II in Europe: An Encyclopedia, p. 1421
  100. ^ Zaloga 2013, p. 31.
  101. ^ Axworthy 1995, pp. 350–351.
  102. ^ Axworthy 1995, pp. 239, 243.
  103. ^ Axworthy 1995, p. 229.
  104. ^ Atkinson, Rick (2013). The Guns at Last Light (1st ed.). New York: Henry Holt. p. 354. ISBN 978-0-8050-6290-8.
  105. ^ Dennis Deletant, "Romania", in David Stahel, Joining Hitler's Crusade (Cambridge University Press, 2017), p. 78
  106. ^ Axworthy 1995, p. 9.
  107. ^ Radu Ioanid; (2008) The Holocaust in Romania: The Destruction of Jews and Gypsies Under the Antonescu Regime 1940–1944 pp. 289–297; Ivan R. Dee, ISBN 1461694906
  108. ^ Spencer C. Tucker, World War II at Sea: An Encyclopedia, p. 633
  109. ^ Stahel, David (2018). Joining Hitler's Crusade. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781316510346 – via Google Books.
  110. ^ Brescia, Maurizio (2012). Mussolini's Navy: A Reference Guide to the Regia Marina 1930–1945. Seaforth Publishing. ISBN 9781848321151 – via Google Books.
  111. ^ Axworthy 1995, pp. 152–153, 158, 174, 217, 219, 229–232, 236, 249 and 265–266.
  112. ^ Mitcham, Samuel W. (2007). The German Defeat in the East 1944–45. Stackpole Books. ISBN 9780811733717 – via Google Books.
  113. ^ "Professional Journal of the United States Army". Command and General Staff School. July 30, 1985 – via Google Books.
  114. ^ Shepherd 2012, p. 78.
  115. ^ Israeli, Raphael (2017). The Death Camps of Croatia: Visions and Revisions, 1941–1945. Routledge. p. 45. ISBN 978-1-35148-403-9.
  116. ^ Sindbaek, Tina (2002). Usable History?: Representations of Yugoslavia's Difficult Past from 1945 to 2002. Aarhus University Press. p. 27.
  117. ^ Jasenovac United States Holocaust Memorial Museum web site
  118. ^ a b Goda, Norman J. W. (2015). "The diplomacy of the Axis, 1940–1945". The Cambridge History of the Second World War: 276–300. doi:10.1017/CHO9781139524377.015. ISBN 9781139524377. Retrieved 25 October 2020.
  119. ^ "Den Dansk-Tyske Ikke-Angrebstraktat af 1939". Flådens Historie. (in Danish)
  120. ^ Aage, Trommer. "'Denmark'. The Occupation 1940–45". Foreign Ministry of Denmark. Archived from the original on 2006-06-18. Retrieved 2006-09-20.
  121. ^ William L. Langer and S. Everett Gleason, The Undeclared War, 1940–1941 (1953), pp. 172–173, 424–431, 575–578
  122. ^ Petrow 1974, p. 165.
  123. ^ "Jasenovac". 11 July 2003. Archived from the original on 11 July 2003.
  124. ^ "Flåden efter 29 August 1943". Archived from the original on 16 August 2007.
  125. ^ "Den Danske Brigade "DANFORCE" Sverige 1943–45". 12 August 2002. Archived from the original on 12 August 2002.
  126. ^ Petrow 1974, pp. 185–195.
  127. ^ Kirby 1979, p. 134.
  128. ^ Kent Forster, "Finland's Foreign Policy 1940–1941: An Ongoing Historiographic Controversy," Scandinavian Studies (1979) 51#2 pp. 109–123
  129. ^ "Treaty of Peace With Finland". 1947. p. 229. Retrieved 23 October 2020.
  130. ^ Wagner, Margaret E.; Osbourne, Linda Barrett; Reyburn, Susan (2007). The Library of Congress World War II companion. New York: Simon & Schuster. p. 39. ISBN 9780743252195. Retrieved 29 April 2021.
  131. ^ Jukes, Geoffrey; O'Neill, Robert (2010). World War II: The Eastern Front 1941–1945. The Rosen Publishing Group. p. 52. ISBN 978-1435891340. Retrieved 7 February 2021.
  132. ^ DiNardo, R.L. (2005). Germany and the Axis Powers from Coalition to Collapse. University Press of Kansas. p. 95. ISBN 9780700614127. Retrieved 9 February 2021.
  133. ^ Piehler & Grant 2023, pp. 109–110.
  134. ^ Tallgren, Immi (2014). "Martyrs and Scapegoats of the Nation? The Finnish War-Responsibility Trial, 1945–1946". Historical Origins of International Criminal Law. 2 (21): 512. Retrieved 25 October 2020.
  135. ^ Mäkinen, Esa (19 October 2008). "Historian professorit hautaavat pitkät kiistat". Helsingin Sanomat. Retrieved 7 February 2021.
  136. ^ Kirby 1979, p. 120.
  137. ^ Kirby 1979, pp. 120–121.
  138. ^ a b Kennedy-Pipe 1995, p. [page needed].
  139. ^ Kirby 1979, p. 123.
  140. ^ Seppinen 1983, p. [page needed].
  141. ^ British Foreign Office Archive, 371/24809/461–556.
  142. ^ Jokipii 1987, p. [page needed].
  143. ^ Wylie 2002, p. 275.
  144. ^ Rohr 2007, p. 99.
  145. ^ a b Bowen 2000, p. 59.
  146. ^ a b c Payne 1987, p. 269.
  147. ^ Preston 1994, p. 857.
  148. ^ Reginbogin, Herbert (2009). Faces of Neutrality: A Comparative Analysis of the Neutrality of Switzerland and other Neutral Nations during WW II (First ed.). LIT Verlag. p. 120.
  149. ^ Leonard & Bratzel 2007, p. 96.
  150. ^ Steinberg 2000, p. 122.
  151. ^ Payne 1999, p. 538.
  152. ^ Seekins, Donald M. (2017). Historical Dictionary of Burma (Myanmar). Rowman & Littlefield. p. 438. ISBN 978-1538101834. Retrieved 27 October 2020.
  153. ^ Yoon, Won Z. (September 1978). "Military Expediency: A Determining Factor in the Japanese Policy regarding Burmese Independence". Journal of Southeast Asian Studies. 9 (2): 262–263. doi:10.1017/S0022463400009772. JSTOR 20062727. S2CID 159799719. Retrieved 25 October 2020.
  154. ^ Fry, Gerald W.; Nieminen, Gayla S.; Smith, Harold E. (2013). Historical Dictionary of Thailand. Scarecrow Press. p. 221. ISBN 978-0810875258. Retrieved 27 October 2020.
  155. ^ Merrill, Dennis; Patterson, Thomas (2009). Major Problems in American Foreign Relations, Volume II: Since 1914. Cengage Learning. p. 343. ISBN 978-1133007548. Retrieved 27 October 2020.
  156. ^ Bowman, John Stewart (1998). Facts About the American Wars. H.W. Wilson Company. p. 432. ISBN 9780824209292. Retrieved 7 February 2021.
  157. ^ Smythe, Hugh H. (Third Quarter 1964). "Thailand Minority Groups". Phylon. 25 (3). Clark Atlanta University: 280–287. doi:10.2307/273786. JSTOR 273786. Retrieved 2 April 2021.
  158. ^ Booth Luce, Clare (14 December 1945). "Not Unduly Exacting About Java". Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the US Congress. U.S. Government Printing Office: A5532. Retrieved 27 October 2020.
  159. ^ a b Murashima, Eiji (October 2006). "The Commemorative Character of Thai Historiography: The 1942–43 Thai Military Campaign in the Shan States Depicted as a Story of National Salvation and the Restoration of Thai Independence". Modern Asian Studies. 40 (4). Cambridge University Press: 1056–1057. doi:10.1017/S0026749X06002198. JSTOR 3876641. S2CID 144491081. Retrieved 1 April 2021.
  160. ^ "Thailand and the Second World War". Archived from the original on 2009-10-27.
  161. ^ Darling, Frank C. (March 1963). "British and American Influence in Post-War Thailand". Journal of Southeast Asian History. 4 (1). Cambridge University Press: 99. doi:10.1017/S0217781100000788. JSTOR 20067423. Retrieved 1 April 2021.
  162. ^ Nekrich, A. M. (Aleksandr Moiseevich) (1997). Pariahs, partners, predators : German-Soviet relations, 1922–1941. Freeze, Gregory L., 1945–. New York: Columbia University Press. pp. 112–120. ISBN 0-231-10676-9. OCLC 36023920.
  163. ^ Shirer 1960, pp. 495–496.
  164. ^ "Internet History Sourcebooks". sourcebooks.fordham.edu. Retrieved 2020-10-29.
  165. ^ Eastern Europe, Russia and Central Asia 2004, Vol. 4. London, England: Europa Publications, 2003. pp. 138–139.
  166. ^ "Avalon Project – Nazi-Soviet Relations 1939–1941". avalon.law.yale.edu.
  167. ^ Wettig 2008, pp. 20–21.
  168. ^ Roberts 2006, p. 58.
  169. ^ a b Brackman 2001, pp. 341–343.
  170. ^ a b Nekrich, Ulam & Freeze 1997, pp. 202–205.
  171. ^ Donaldson & Nogee 2005, pp. 65–66.
  172. ^ Churchill 1949, p. 589.
  173. ^ Roberts 2006, p. 59.
  174. ^ Baranowski, Shelley (2011). Nazi Empire: German Colonialism and Imperialism from Bismarck to Hitler. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-85739-0.
  175. ^ Bachelier 2000, p. 98.
  176. ^ Paxton 1993.
  177. ^ "Rechercher sur le site | Élysée". elysee.fr. Archived from the original on April 14, 2009.
  178. ^ a b "Rashīd ʿAlī al-Gaylānī". Britannica.com. 14 June 2002. Retrieved 12 February 2021.
  179. ^ Silverfarb, Daniel; Khadduri, Majid (1986). Britain's Informal Empire in the Middle East A Case Study of Iraq, 1929–1941. Oxford University Press. p. 113. ISBN 9780195039979. Retrieved 12 February 2021.
  180. ^ Nafi, Basheer M. (Spring 1997). "The Arabs and the Axis: 1933–1940". Arab Studies Quarterly. 19 (2): 16. JSTOR 41858205. Retrieved 12 February 2021.
  181. ^ Jabārah 1985, p. 183.
  182. ^ Churchill, Winston (1950). The Grand Alliance. The Second World War. Vol. III. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. p. 264. LCCN 51002504.
  183. ^ Kurowski, Franz (2005). The Brandenburger Commandos: Germany's Elite Warrior Spies in World War II. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania: Stackpole Book. ISBN 978-0-8117-3250-5, 10: 0-8117-3250-9. p. 141
  184. ^ Lemkin, Raphael (2005) [1944]. Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Laws of Occupation, Analysis of Government, Proposals for Redress. Clark, NJ: Lawbook Exchange. p. 11. ISBN 1584775769. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
  185. ^ Sarner 1997, p. [page needed].
  186. ^ "Shoah Research Center – Albania" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2003-11-27.
  187. ^ Hehn 1971, pp. 344–373.
  188. ^ MacDonald, David Bruce (2002). Balkan holocausts?: Serbian and Croatian victim-centred propaganda and the war in Yugoslavia. Manchester: Manchester University Press. p. 142. ISBN 0719064678.
  189. ^ MacDonald, David Bruce (2007). Identity Politics in the Age of Genocide: The Holocaust and Historical Representation. Routledge. p. 167. ISBN 978-1-134-08572-9.
  190. ^ Raphael Israeli (2013). The Death Camps of Croatia: Visions and Revisions, 1941–1945. Transaction Publishers. p. 31. ISBN 978-1-4128-4930-2. Retrieved 12 May 2013.
  191. ^ Geoffrey C. Gunn, Monarchical Manipulation in Cambodia: France, Japan, and the Sihanouk Crusade for Independence, Copenhagen: Nordic Institute for Asian Studies, 2018, Part V
  192. ^ a b David P. Chandler, A History of Cambodia, Silkworm 1993 [page needed]
  193. ^ Gow, I; Hirama, Y; Chapman, J (2003). Volume III: The Military Dimension The History of Anglo-Japanese Relations, 1600–2000. Springer. p. 208. ISBN 0230378870. Retrieved 27 October 2020.
  194. ^ Ivarsson, Søren; Goscha, Christopher E. (February 2007). "Prince Phetsarath (1890–1959): Nationalism and Royalty in the Making of Modern Laos". Journal of Southeast Asian Studies. 38 (1). Cambridge University Press: 65–71. doi:10.1017/S0022463406000932. JSTOR 20071807. S2CID 159778908. Retrieved 2 April 2021.
  195. ^ Guillermo, Artemio R. (2012). Historical Dictionary of the Philippines. Scarecrow Press. pp. 211, 621. ISBN 978-0-8108-7246-2. Retrieved 22 March 2013.
  196. ^ Abinales, Patricio N; Amoroso, Donna J. (2005). State And Society In The Philippines. State and Society in East Asia Series. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 160, 353. ISBN 978-0-7425-1024-1. Retrieved 22 March 2013.
  197. ^ Cullinane, Michael; Borlaza, Gregorio C.; Hernandez, Carolina G. "Philippines". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Retrieved January 22, 2014.
  198. ^ Kershaw, Ian. Fateful Choices: Ten Decisions the Changed the World, 1940–1941 New York: Penguin, 2007. pp. 444–446 ISBN 978-1-59420-123-3
  199. ^ Kershaw 2007, p. 385.
  200. ^ Longerich, Peter Hitler: A Life (2019) p. 784
  201. ^ Kershaw 2007, Chapter 10.
  202. ^ Duncan Redford; Philip D. Grove (2014). The Royal Navy: A History Since 1900. I.B. Tauris. p. 182. ISBN 9780857735072.
  203. ^ "Franklin D. Roosevelt: Fireside Chat". www.presidency.ucsb.edu.
  204. ^ "Historian: FDR probably engineered famous WWII plans leak". upi.com.
  205. ^ "BBC On This Day – 11 – 1941: Germany and Italy declare war on US". BBC News. BBC. 11 December 1941.

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
The Axis powers were a coalition of nations led by , the Kingdom of under , and the , which formalized their alliance through the signed in on 27 September 1940, pledging mutual assistance against any nation not already engaged in the European or . This pact built on prior agreements, including the 1936 between and aimed at countering Soviet influence, and the 1939 between and committing to military support. The core members pursued aggressive territorial expansion— in , in the Mediterranean and , and in Asia-Pacific—to secure resources and establish dominance, driven by authoritarian regimes emphasizing , , and opposition to both liberal democracies and . Subsequent adherents, including (November 1940), (November 1940), (November 1940), (March 1941), and others like the Independent State of Croatia and , joined for strategic gains such as territorial revisions or protection against Soviet threats, expanding the bloc's reach but revealing its opportunistic rather than ideologically uniform character. Despite initial military successes, including Germany's rapid conquests in and Japan's strikes in the Pacific, the Axis suffered from uncoordinated strategies, overextension, and industrial disparities compared to the Allies' combined output. maintained a separate co-belligerency status against the without fully acceding to the pact, highlighting fractures in unity. The coalition's defining controversies centered on systematic atrocities, including genocides and forced labor, conducted under the guise of wartime necessities, which tribunals attributed to leadership directives rather than mere tactical excesses. By 1945, total defeat led to unconditional surrenders, regime collapses, and the reconfiguration of global power away from Axis visions of a multipolar order.

Origins and Diplomatic Formation

Pre-WWI Roots and Interwar Grievances

The in 1871 under Prussian leadership, through the Risorgimento by 1870, and Japan's in 1868 marked the emergence of these states as modern powers pursuing territorial expansion amid European imperial rivalries, fostering early nationalist ideologies that later influenced Axis alignments. Pre-World War I alliances, such as the Triple Alliance of 1882 binding , , and , reflected shared concerns over encirclement by and , though 's defection to the Entente in 1915 via the Treaty of London—promising territories like , , and in exchange for entry—highlighted fragile coalitions driven by irredentist claims. Japan's 1902 positioned it against Russian expansion in Asia, enabling victories in the (1904–1905), but underlying tensions with Western powers over colonial spheres persisted. The interwar period amplified grievances from World War I's unequal settlements, fueling revanchist movements in Germany, Italy, and Japan. Germany's , signed on June 28, 1919, imposed Article 231's war guilt clause, attributing sole responsibility for the conflict and justifying reparations totaling 132 billion gold marks (equivalent to about $442 billion in 2023 dollars), alongside territorial losses including Alsace-Lorraine to France, the Polish Corridor separating East Prussia, and all overseas colonies mandated to Allied powers. Military restrictions capped the army at 100,000 volunteers, banned conscription, submarines, aircraft, and tanks, and demilitarized the Rhineland, conditions widely viewed in Germany as a Diktat that undermined sovereignty and economic recovery, exacerbating hyperinflation in 1923 and unemployment during the Great Depression. Italy's "mutilated victory," a phrase coined by nationalist in 1918, encapsulated resentment over unfulfilled promises from the 1915 Treaty of London; while gained Trentino-Alto Adige and parts of Istria at the 1919 Treaty of Saint-Germain, it was denied , Fiume (Rijeka), and colonies in Africa or Asia, prompting D'Annunzio's seizure of Fiume in September 1919 and widespread perceptions of betrayal by Anglo-American leaders at the Peace Conference. These shortcomings, amid postwar strikes and economic dislocation, eroded faith in and bolstered fascist appeals for territorial revisionism. Japan, despite its Entente alliance and territorial gains like German concessions in Shandong from Versailles, faced rejection of its 1919 Racial Equality Proposal, which sought to affirm non-discrimination among League of Nations members but was blocked by the United States and Britain over domestic immigration policies. The 1922 Washington Naval Treaty established a 5:5:3 capital ship tonnage ratio favoring the U.S. and Britain over Japan, interpreted in as affirming second-tier status, while the U.S. Immigration Act of 1924 effectively banned Japanese laborers, intensifying perceptions of Western hypocrisy on equality and stoking ultranationalist demands for autarky in Asia. These slights, combined with economic pressures from the 1920s silk market crash and the , eroded faith in internationalism and propelled militarist factions toward expansionism.

German-Italian Rapprochement (1930s)

Relations between and in the early 1930s were marked by tension over , where Italian influence clashed with 's irredentist goals. In July 1934, following the failed Nazi putsch and assassination of Austrian Chancellor , deployed four divisions to the to signal opposition to , viewing as a buffer against German expansion. This stance reflected Mussolini's prioritization of Italian dominance in the region, despite ideological sympathies with . The Conference of April 14, 1935, formalized a short-lived Anglo-French-Italian front against , pledging to uphold Austrian independence and the amid fears of Hitler's violations of the . However, the Italian invasion of () on October 3, 1935, exposed fractures: sanctions isolated , but abstained from economic penalties, maintained trade (exporting coal and steel vital to 's war effort), and withdrew from the itself on October 14, 1935, positioning as a pragmatic partner. This non-intervention eroded the Front's cohesion, as Mussolini perceived Anglo-French hypocrisy in condemning Italian imperialism while tolerating resurgence, prompting a pivot toward to counter diplomatic isolation. Germany's remilitarization of the Rhineland on March 7, 1936, tested the détente; Mussolini, abandoning commitments, refrained from public condemnation and privately endorsed the move through Ambassador on February 22, 1936, signaling acceptance of German power projection. The outbreak of the in July 1936 accelerated alignment: both regimes dispatched substantial aid to General Francisco Franco's Nationalists, with forming the (air and ground forces totaling over 50,000 personnel by 1939) and committing the (CTV, peaking at 150,000 troops), fostering military coordination against perceived Bolshevik threats. This collaboration culminated in the Rome-Berlin Axis, announced by Mussolini in a November 1, 1936, speech declaring a Rome-Berlin "axis" around which "Mediterranean and Central European policy will rotate," with a formal nine-point protocol signed on October 23, 1936, committing to consultation on and opposition to Western interference. Italy's withdrawal from of Nations in May 1937 and adhesion to the German-Japanese on November 6, 1937, deepened ties against Soviet influence. The process peaked with the , signed May 22, 1939, by Foreign Ministers and , establishing a full obligating mutual assistance in wartime, though Mussolini privately assured Hitler of Italy's unreadiness for immediate conflict. The stemmed from pragmatic realignments: Mussolini's Ethiopian venture and League backlash alienated traditional allies, while shared revisionism against post-World War I settlements and bridged ideological gaps, enabling to neutralize a potential southern rival and to secure a powerful patron for expansionist aims.

Inclusion of Japan and Tripartite Pact

Following the of November 25, 1936, between and —which acceded to on November 6, 1937—diplomatic efforts intensified to forge a more comprehensive amid escalating global tensions. The between and on May 22, 1939, prompted German Foreign Minister to pursue 's inclusion, viewing it as essential to counter potential American intervention in following 's conquest of in June 1940. Japanese Ambassador to Hiroshi Ōshima played a key role in facilitating talks, relaying proposals for mutual defense commitments. Negotiations accelerated in summer 1940, driven by Japan's ongoing in and its occupation of , which strained relations with the and raised fears of encirclement by the . Japanese Foreign Minister advocated strongly for the alliance, arguing it would secure Japan's "new order" in while deterring U.S. involvement in Asian affairs, despite internal cabinet divisions over the risks to Japanese-American . sought to leverage Japan's naval power to divide Allied resources, promising recognition of Japanese hegemony in in exchange for support against Britain and potential U.S. aggression. By , the terms were finalized, with the pact explicitly excluding obligations if any signatory provoked with the , reflecting Japan's cautious stance toward after the 1939 Nomonhan border clashes. On September 27, 1940, the —formally the Pact of Friendship and Alliance—was signed in by German Foreign Minister Ribbentrop, Italian Foreign Minister , and Japanese Ambassador , in the presence of and other officials. The ceremony underscored the alliance's propagandistic emphasis on a unified front against "democratic" powers, though practical coordination remained limited due to geographic separation and divergent priorities. The pact's core provisions committed the signatories to immediate military assistance if any were attacked by a power then at peace with all three—implicitly targeting the —while affirming non-interference in each other's spheres of influence. Article 1 pledged mutual aid against aggression; Article 2 recognized Germany's and Italy's leadership in establishing a "new order" in and Japan's in Greater ; Article 3 promoted economic cooperation; and Article 5 set a 10-year duration. While the pact allied Germany, Italy, and Japan for mutual support, recognition of spheres of influence (Germany and Italy in Europe, Japan in East Asia), deterrence of the United States, and countering the Allies, with shared expansionist and anti-communist themes, Germany and Japan were not fighting for the exact same cause; their wars remained largely separate, as Japan's conflict with the United States arose from its Asian expansion rather than direct support for German campaigns in Europe. This formalized Japan's entry into the Axis framework, expanding the bilateral German-Italian pact into a tripartite bloc aimed at global deterrence, though it failed to prevent U.S. entry into the war after in December 1941.

Ideological Cohesion and Divergences

Shared Anti-Communist Foundations

The , formally the Agreement Against the , was signed on November 25, 1936, between and Imperial as a mutual commitment to counter the activities of the (Comintern), established by the in 1919 to promote global . A secret supplementary protocol obligated the signatories to consult if the attacked one of them or supported military action against either, effectively laying groundwork for anti-Soviet military coordination despite the pact's nominal focus on ideological opposition. acceded to the pact on November 6, 1937, expanding its scope and signaling a against perceived Bolshevik expansionism in and Asia. In , stemmed from Adolf Hitler's worldview, articulated in (1925), which portrayed as a Jewish-orchestrated assault on and national sovereignty, necessitating its eradication to secure in the East. The Nazi regime banned the (KPD) after seizing power in 1933, arresting thousands of communists and integrating anti-Bolshevik rhetoric into foreign policy to justify rearmament and alliances. Benito Mussolini's similarly rooted its opposition in rejecting Marxist class warfare, with Mussolini—once a socialist—suppressing the through violence and legal bans starting in the early 1920s, viewing communism as a threat to corporatist national unity and Italian imperialism. By 1926, Fascist squads had dismantled communist organizations, aligning Italy's Mediterranean ambitions with a broader crusade against Soviet influence. Imperial Japan's anti-communist stance arose from border clashes with the , such as the 1939 battles, and domestic crackdowns on leftist groups, including the 1925 that criminalized advocacy for altering the national polity or private property, leading to the arrest of over 60,000 suspected communists by the 1930s. Japanese militarists framed expansion into (1931) and subsequent Asian campaigns as buffers against Bolshevik infiltration, with the serving to legitimize these moves internationally while countering Soviet support for Chinese communists. This convergence of threats—Soviet military power in , ideological subversion, and resource competition—fostered Axis cohesion, as each power banned domestic communist parties and positioned itself as a bulwark against , though tactical divergences, like Germany's 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, later strained unity.

Nationalist and Imperialist Doctrines

The nationalist doctrines of the Axis powers emphasized the supremacy and historical destiny of their respective nations, framing expansion as a vital response to post-World War I territorial losses, economic constraints, and perceived threats from and liberal democracies. In , articulated this through the concept of ("living space"), which he developed between 1921 and 1925 as essential for the survival and growth of the German , necessitating conquest in to provide land, resources, and settlement opportunities for ethnic Germans. This doctrine, rooted in geopolitical theories like those of , justified aggressive eastward expansion as a biological imperative for the , integrating racial hierarchy with imperial ambition to achieve and prevent national decline. Fascist Italy under Benito Mussolini pursued a parallel imperialist vision centered on reviving the 's grandeur, promoting romanità (Roman-ness) as a cultural and territorial inheritance that entitled Italy to dominate the Mediterranean (Mare Nostrum) and African territories. Mussolini's regime invoked ancient Roman precedents to legitimize invasions, such as the 1935–1936 conquest of , which was propagandized as restoring Italy's imperial mission and civilizing influence, thereby fulfilling a nationalist narrative of national rebirth after unification and World War I setbacks. This doctrine blended militaristic expansionism with corporatist economics, aiming to secure raw materials and prestige while rejecting multilateral constraints like the League of Nations. Imperial Japan's doctrines fused Shinto-based emperor reverence (kokutai) with pan-Asianist rhetoric, positing Japan as Asia's liberator from Western colonialism while pursuing a hakko ichiu (world under one roof) order under Japanese hegemony. The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, formalized in 1940, masked resource-driven imperialism—targeting oil, rubber, and metals in Southeast Asia—as a cooperative bloc for Asian economic self-sufficiency, but in practice enforced Japanese military control and economic exploitation. These ideologies aligned across the Axis through a common rejection of Wilsonian internationalism and Versailles Treaty restrictions, viewing imperialism as a Darwinian necessity for national vitality and resource security in an era of global scarcity. Despite divergences—such as Germany's racial focus versus Japan's cultural pan-Asianism—the doctrines reinforced mutual diplomatic overtures in the 1930s, culminating in the Tripartite Pact.

Racial Hierarchies and Totalitarian Governance

Nazi Germany's racial ideology established a strict with the —embodied primarily by Nordic Germans—at the apex as the Herrenvolk (master people), deeming a parasitic racial threat warranting elimination, untermenschen (subhumans) fit for labor or expulsion, and other groups like Roma similarly inferior. This framework, rooted in pseudoscientific and völkisch traditions, justified expansion eastward to secure Aryan dominance, with policies escalating from the 1933 purge of to the 1935 barring intermarriage and citizenship for non-Aryans. Implementation involved sterilization of over 400,000 individuals deemed hereditarily unfit by 1945, alongside mass programs targeting the disabled as racial burdens. Fascist Italy's approach to race initially prioritized national unity over biology, viewing Italians as a Mediterranean civilization superior in imperial destiny, but shifted under Nazi influence with the October 1938 declaring Jews biologically alien and enacting laws expelling 10,000 Jewish pupils from schools and barring intermarriages. These measures, affecting fewer than 1% of Italy's population as , stemmed more from alliance imperatives than indigenous doctrine—Mussolini had previously dismissed biological —yet enabled discriminatory administration until , when German occupation intensified enforcement. Italian racial policy thus diverged from Germany's exhaustive hierarchy, focusing on anti-Semitic exclusion to affirm Axis solidarity without equivalent eugenic programs. Imperial Japan's ideology centered on Yamato racial purity and superiority as divine descendants of the sun goddess, positioning Japanese as natural leaders over lesser Asian peoples in the 1940-declared , which masked exploitation with rhetoric of fraternal liberation from Western imperialism. Unlike Nazi exclusivity, Japanese views emphasized potential for Koreans and Chinese under tutelage, though atrocities like the (1937, claiming 200,000 Chinese lives) reflected hierarchical contempt; propaganda rejected white racial supremacy while asserting intra-Asian dominance, avoiding full alignment with European . This pragmatic adaptation allowed the despite ideological frictions, as Japan prioritized anti-communist expansion over shared racial . Totalitarian governance across the Axis fused personal dictatorship with state penetration of society, subordinating individual will to regime goals. In Germany, the enshrined Hitler's infallible authority from 1934 onward, dissolving via the and (coordination) that purged opposition, controlled media through the , and mobilized 8 million into the by 1939 for ideological indoctrination. Italy's system idolized Mussolini as Il Duce, with the 1925 establishment of his supreme authority via the Fascist Grand Council, though polycratic rivalries and incomplete atomization preserved regional autonomies, as evidenced by uneven enforcement of corporatist economics affecting only 25% of workers by 1939. Japan's governance, formalized in the 1930s militarization, vested deified authority in Emperor Hirohito while army cliques dominated via the 1889 Meiji Constitution's military independence from civilian oversight, culminating in the 1940 as a unitary political body dissolving parties and conscripting 2 million into labor battalions. Thought police () suppressed dissent, with ultranationalist education emphasizing (national essence) to sustain war efforts, though factional military infighting diluted pure total control compared to Germany's hierarchy. These elements coexisted through anti-communist , enabling joint aggression, yet racial divergences—Germany's universal versus Japan's regional —highlighted opportunistic rather than doctrinal unity, as Mussolini and Japanese leaders critiqued Nazi biologism privately while adopting totalitarian tools for domestic control.

Core Axis Powers

Nazi Germany

was the preeminent power within the Axis alliance, providing ideological impetus, military dominance, and strategic direction to its partners and following the signing of the on September 27, 1940, in . This agreement committed the signatories to mutual assistance against any nation not already engaged in hostilities with them—implicitly aimed at deterring intervention—while formalizing a coalition bound by shared opposition to and liberal democracies. Under Hitler's direction, Germany pursued aggressive expansion that expanded Axis influence across Europe, from the with in March 1938 to the occupation of much of the continent by 1941, often coordinating with Italian campaigns in the Mediterranean and enabling Japanese advances in through diverted Allied resources. Germany's entry into the Axis framework stemmed from its revisionist foreign policy, which sought to overturn the Treaty of Versailles and establish hegemony in Europe, aligning with Italy's imperial ambitions and Japan's in Asia. Despite divergences—such as Japan's racial views conflicting with Nazi Aryan supremacy—the pact emphasized anti-Soviet solidarity, culminating in Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, which complemented Japan's non-aggression stance toward the USSR until 1945. Nazi Germany's economic and industrial capacity, bolstered by rearmament since the mid-1930s, underpinned Axis war efforts, though internal rivalries and overextension ultimately undermined the coalition.

Leadership Structure and Expansionist Rationale

The Nazi leadership structure was organized according to the , or leader principle, which mandated absolute obedience to as the supreme authority, enabling him to override legal norms through personal command. This principle permeated the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) and state apparatus, blurring distinctions between party and government functions, with Hitler serving as both and Chancellor from 1934 onward. Subordinates, including as Reichsmarschall and head of the , as , and as Minister of Propaganda, held overlapping roles but derived all power from Hitler's directives, fostering a polycratic system of rival fiefdoms under centralized personal rule. Nazi expansionism was ideologically rooted in the concept of , articulated by Hitler between 1921 and 1925 as essential for Germany's survival, necessitating the conquest of territory in to provide living space and resources for the population. This rationale, detailed in (1925), posited that demographic pressures and racial superiority demanded the displacement of Slavic peoples and elimination of Jewish influence to secure agrarian land and prevent national decline, viewing Bolshevik as both a territorial target and ideological foe. Foreign policy aims included revising the through rearmament—announced on March 16, 1935—and annexations like the with in 1938, justified as reuniting ethnic Germans while preparing for broader conquests to achieve and racial dominance. These objectives prioritized ideological imperatives over mere economic recovery, with Hitler opportunistically exploiting international to advance toward a greater oriented eastward.

Key Military Operations

Nazi Germany's key military operations commenced with the on September 1, 1939, involving over 1.5 million troops, 2,000 tanks, and 1,900 aircraft, which overwhelmed Polish defenses through rapid armored advances and air support, leading to the fall of by September 27. This operation marked the start of in Europe, with German forces employing coordinated tactics that minimized prolonged engagements. In May 1940, launched the Western Offensive, codenamed Fall Gelb, invading the , , and on May 10 with spearheading a through the Forest, bypassing the and encircling Allied forces at by late May, resulting in the evacuation of over 300,000 British and French troops. The campaign concluded with the French armistice on June 22, 1940, after fell on June 14, securing German control over . The followed from July to October 1940, as the , under , conducted air raids to achieve air superiority for a potential , targeting RAF airfields and convoys but sustaining heavy losses of around 1,700 aircraft against RAF Fighter Command's resilience, ultimately failing to neutralize British defenses. Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the on June 22, 1941, mobilized three million Axis troops, 3,600 tanks, and 2,500 aircraft across a 1,800-mile front, achieving initial encirclements like the Battle of Kiev that captured 665,000 Soviet prisoners by September, but logistical strains and Soviet resistance halted advances short of by December, with German casualties exceeding 750,000. In , from February 1941, the Deutsches Afrikakorps under reinforced Italian forces, launching offensives that recaptured by April and reached by July 1942, but supply shortages and Allied counterattacks, including the Second in October-November 1942, forced retreats culminating in Axis surrender in on May 13, 1943. To support Italian campaigns, Germany intervened in the Balkans (Operation Marita, April 1941) and North Africa (1941–1943 under Rommel's Afrika Korps), temporarily bolstering Axis positions before defeats at . The Battle of Stalingrad from August 23, 1942, to February 2, 1943, saw the German 6th Army under Friedrich Paulus advance to capture the city but become encircled by Soviet forces on November 19, leading to the surrender of 91,000 Germans amid freezing conditions and relentless assaults, with total Axis losses around 800,000, marking a strategic turning point. German defenses against the Normandy Invasion on June 6, 1944, involved Field Marshal Erwin Rommel's Atlantic Wall fortifications and panzer reserves, but delayed responses and Allied air superiority enabled five beachhead landings, with German counterattacks like those by the 21st Panzer Division failing to dislodge forces, leading to the breakout at Operation Cobra in July and the liberation of Paris by August 25.

Territorial Administration and Exploitation

Nazi Germany established varied administrative structures for occupied territories, differentiating between western and based on perceived racial hierarchies and strategic needs. In western occupied areas such as , , and , initial military governments transitioned to civilian administrations under Reichskommissars, allowing limited with local authorities to maintain order and extract resources with less direct brutality. These regimes, like the established in May 1940, focused on into the German war machine while suppressing resistance through policing rather than mass extermination. In contrast, eastern territories faced harsher direct rule designed for exploitation and demographic reconfiguration under the . The General Government in occupied Poland, created on October 26, 1939, under Governor-General , served as a reservoir for forced labor and raw materials, with Polish industry and agriculture systematically plundered to supply the —extracting, for instance, over 2 million tons of grain annually by 1941. Further east, after the 1941 invasion of the , skommissariats such as Ostland (covering and ) and were imposed in July 1941, led by figures like and , to colonize "living space" through German settlement and Slavic subjugation. These entities prioritized resource stripping, with Ukrainian grain production redirected almost entirely to , yielding 3.5 million tons in 1942 alone despite local famines. Exploitation centered on human and material assets to sustain the war economy. By 1944, approximately 7.6 million foreign civilians and prisoners of war labored in the Reich under coercive programs, with Eastern Europeans comprising the majority—deported via Ostarbeiter schemes that funneled over 5 million Poles and Soviets into factories and farms, often under conditions causing death rates exceeding 20% from malnutrition and abuse. Economic directives, such as the Hunger Plan of 1941, aimed to starve 30 million Slavs to free food for Germans, redirecting caloric output equivalent to 10 million tons of grain from occupied zones. Industrial looting included seizing 20% of France's machinery by 1943 and vast art collections, while POWs—numbering nearly 2 million by 1944—were integrated into armaments production despite Geneva Convention violations. This system, coordinated by the Four-Year Plan Office under Hermann Göring since 1936, prioritized total mobilization but ultimately strained logistics, contributing to overextension.

Fascist Italy

Fascist Italy, under 's regime established after the in October 1922, pursued expansionist policies aligned with Axis objectives, formalizing its partnership with through the signed on 22 May 1939, which pledged mutual military assistance in the event of war. This bilateral agreement evolved into the on 27 September 1940, incorporating Imperial Japan and committing the signatories to defend each other against powers not already involved in the European or Sino-Japanese conflicts. Mussolini's alignment stemmed from shared anti-communist stances and ambitions for territorial aggrandizement, though Italy's military preparedness lagged, with Mussolini declaring war on and Britain only on 10 June 1940, after France's imminent defeat, to position Italy as a victor without full commitment to prolonged conflict.

Mussolini's Foreign Policy Justifications

Mussolini framed Italy's foreign policy as a quest to restore national prestige and secure "vital space" for a growing population, drawing on fascist doctrines of and imperial revival reminiscent of ancient Rome's dominance over the Mediterranean, termed . He rationalized interventions as countermeasures to perceived encirclement by Anglo-French powers and Bolshevik threats, emphasizing in public addresses the need for Italy to claim its "place in the sun" denied by the , which awarded territories like to despite Italian sacrifices in . Expansion into was portrayed as civilizing missions against backward regions, with the 1935 invasion of justified partly as reprisal for the 1896 defeat and to preempt British influence, despite sanctions that Mussolini decried as hypocritical imperialism by the victors. Alignment with was presented as pragmatic solidarity against democratic plutocracies, though privately Mussolini harbored reservations about Hitler's rapid ascendancy, viewing the Axis as a means to extract concessions like French or in potential peace settlements.

Mediterranean and African Campaigns

Italy's Mediterranean efforts focused on securing naval supremacy and projecting power into the and , initiating hostilities with an invasion of on 7 April 1939 to establish a , followed by the failed launched on 28 October 1940, where 500,000 Italian troops stalled against Greek defenses, necessitating German intervention via Operation Marita in April 1941. In , Italian forces under Marshal advanced from into starting 13 September 1940, capturing but halting due to supply shortages and British counteroffensives, leading to the loss of 130,000 troops by February 1941 before German reinforcement under shifted momentum temporarily. African theaters extended to , where British Commonwealth forces dismantled Italian holdings in and between July 1940 and November 1941, culminating in the surrender of 420,000 Italian and colonial troops at on 27 November 1941, exposing Italy's logistical vulnerabilities and overreliance on outdated equipment like the . These campaigns strained Italy's 2.5 million-man army, revealing deficiencies in and air power, with total Axis losses in exceeding 620,000 by May 1943.

Dependencies and Colonial Holdings

Mussolini's empire encompassed pre-fascist acquisitions like (conquered 1911-1920), (1882 onward), and , augmented by Ethiopia's annexation in May 1936 forming , administered as a under Amedeo di Savoia until its wartime collapse. served as a de facto dependency after occupation, with King Zog I exiled and Italian troops numbering 100,000 by 1940 enforcing puppet governance. Wartime expansions included the annexed from in 1941, administering islands and coastal areas for strategic naval bases, alongside occupations in and under Italian military administration. These holdings, totaling over 4 million square kilometers at peak, were exploited for resources like Libyan oil explorations and Ethiopian , but settler efforts faltered, with only 170,000 civilians relocated by 1940 amid resistance and economic unviability, ultimately lost to Allied advances by 1943.

Mussolini's Foreign Policy Justifications

Mussolini framed his foreign policy as a necessary restoration of Italy's historical greatness, drawing on the to justify territorial expansion in the Mediterranean and beyond. He argued that , constrained by post-World War I treaties and demographic pressures, required spazio vitale—vital space—to accommodate its growing population and secure economic resources, echoing concepts of national self-sufficiency and imperial destiny articulated in his addresses to military and political audiences. This rationale positioned expansion not as aggression but as a corrective to the injustices of the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, where Italy received fewer territorial gains than anticipated despite its wartime sacrifices. In specific campaigns, such as the 1935 invasion of , Mussolini invoked revenge for Italy's 1896 defeat at , portraying the action as a to eradicate and modernize a backward state while asserting Italy's right to African colonies denied by earlier diplomatic failures. He emphasized economic imperatives, claiming Ethiopia's resources would enable and prevent Italy's overpopulation from stifling development, as outlined in fascist and debates where Italy rejected sanctions as hypocritical given other powers' colonial holdings. Similarly, interventions like the 1923 Corfu crisis were justified as defenses of Italian dignity and influence in the Adriatic, responding to the murder of an Italian general by enforcing reparations and withdrawing only after complied, thereby demonstrating resolve against perceived weakness in international bodies. Mussolini's speeches, such as the 1927 Address on the Ascension, reinforced these themes by invoking Rome's imperial traditions—from and to ancient legions—as a mandate for a unitary Italian state to resume its "imperial mission" through bold and . By 1939, in directives to the Grand Council of Fascism, he outlined short- and long-term strategies prioritizing Mediterranean dominance and alliances against , framing expansion as essential for Italy's survival amid European power shifts rather than mere adventurism. These justifications blended nationalist revisionism with pragmatic , though critics noted their selective historical invocation often masked domestic consolidation needs.

Mediterranean and African Campaigns

Italy's ambitions in the Mediterranean and stemmed from Mussolini's vision of restoring a Roman-style empire, targeting regions for colonial expansion and strategic dominance over sea lanes. The regime pursued aggressive campaigns to seize territories, beginning with the conquest of in 1935, which involved the use of chemical weapons and overwhelming numerical superiority against Ethiopian forces. On October 3, 1935, Italian troops invaded from and , employing and aerial bombings that caused tens of thousands of Ethiopian casualties, leading to the fall of on May 5, 1936, and Emperor Haile Selassie's exile. This victory, achieved through 500,000 Italian and against Ethiopia's 250,000, bolstered fascist prestige domestically but isolated Italy internationally, prompting of Nations to impose ineffective sanctions. In during , leveraged its Libyan colony to challenge British control of and the . Following 's declaration of war on June 10, 1940, Marshal led the 10th Army in an invasion of on September 13, 1940, advancing 60 miles to but halting due to supply shortages and low morale among under-equipped troops. British Commonwealth forces under launched a counteroffensive on , 1940, inflicting heavy losses—capturing 130,000 Italian prisoners by February 1941—and pushing Axis forces back to El Agheila. Mussolini's insistence on independent action, despite inadequate and , exposed Italian military weaknesses, including obsolete equipment and poor training compared to British armored units. German intervention via the under in February 1941 temporarily reversed Italian fortunes, recapturing and advancing toward , but Italian units suffered disproportionate casualties—over 200,000 by mid-1942—due to reliance on static defenses and vulnerability to Allied air superiority. The campaign culminated in Axis defeat at the Second in October-November 1942, followed by retreat to , where 250,000 Axis troops, including Italians, surrendered on May 13, 1943. These operations highlighted Italy's logistical failures, with desert supply lines stretching over 1,000 miles, exacerbating fuel and water shortages that hampered motorized divisions. In the Mediterranean theater, Italy's invasion of aimed to secure the and challenge British influence. On October 28, 1940, 162,000 Italian troops from attacked , expecting rapid capitulation from the Greek regime, but encountered fierce resistance from 150,000 Greek soldiers equipped with British aid and fighting in mountainous terrain. Greek counteroffensives by November pushed Italians back into , inflicting 100,000 casualties and stalling the advance amid harsh winter conditions and inadequate Italian cold-weather gear. Mussolini's underestimation of Greek resolve, coupled with only 13 days of preparation, led to operational disarray, including supply breakdowns and low troop morale, forcing to intervene in April 1941 to bail out the faltering offensive. The Greek campaign diverted Axis resources, delaying Barbarossa and contributing to broader strategic overextension for Italy's Mediterranean pretensions.

Dependencies and Colonial Holdings

Italy's colonial holdings prior to primarily consisted of , , and , acquired through conquests in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. was seized from the following the of 1911–1912, with formal annexation completed by 1934 after prolonged resistance from local tribes, during which Italian forces employed concentration camps and aerial bombings that resulted in tens of thousands of deaths. was established as a in 1890 after Italian occupation of and subsequent expansion inland. originated from agreements in the 1880s and formal colonization by 1905, encompassing southern Somali territories along the coast. The Second Italo-Ethiopian War of 1935–1936 expanded these holdings significantly, culminating in the occupation of on May 9, 1936, and the proclamation of on June 1, 1936, which unified , , and under a single administration headed by a . This entity spanned approximately 1.8 million square kilometers with a estimated at 7.6 million, predominantly Ethiopian, and was divided into six governorates for administrative control, emphasizing extraction such as , hides, and minerals to support the metropolitan economy. Italian policy promoted settler colonization, with incentives for agricultural development, though remained limited and reliant on forced labor. In Europe, Italy formalized dependencies through the invasion and annexation of on April 7, 1939, following an ultimatum to King Zog I, who fled into exile; Italian forces encountered minimal organized resistance and installed a puppet regime under as king. was administered as a with over 100,000 Italian troops deployed for security and more than 30,000 civilian settlers encouraged to migrate for , including projects like roads and ports to facilitate resource flows back to . Additional holdings included the Islands, occupied since 1912 and administered as the province, serving as naval bases. During , Italy's dependencies expanded via wartime occupations, though these proved tenuous. Following the declaration of war on in June 1940, Italian forces occupied modest border areas in the , incorporating them administratively but with limited control before the armistice. The failed invasion of in October 1940 led to occupation zones after German intervention in April 1941, with Italy administering about 50% of Greek territory, including islands and the northwest mainland, extracting foodstuffs and imposing requisitions that exacerbated local famines. In , after the April 1941 invasion, Italy annexed the Province, occupied coastal , and established the puppet Governorate of , controlling roughly a third of the country to secure Adriatic access and suppress partisans through deportations and reprisals. These occupations prioritized strategic denial and economic drain, with Italian administrators facing persistent that strained resources. By 1941, British-led campaigns dismantled , liberating and , rendering most African holdings lost before Italy's 1943 surrender.

Imperial Japan

Militarist Ideology and Continental Ambitions

in fused , emperor-centric ideology, and a drive for territorial expansion to address resource shortages and population pressures, viewing military conquest as essential for national survival amid global economic contraction. The , increasingly dominant over civilian government, promoted the concept of hakko ichiu—bringing the eight corners of the world under one roof—as a divine mandate for Japanese in , often rationalized through pan-Asian against Western while prioritizing Japanese supremacy. This ideology justified the Kwantung Army's orchestration of the on September 18, 1931, a staged railway explosion used as pretext for invading , securing coal, iron, and farmland for 's industrial needs. By February 1932, installed as puppet emperor of , withdrawing from the League of Nations in 1933 after international condemnation failed to deter further advances. Escalation continued with the full-scale invasion of on July 7, 1937, following the , as army factions sought to consolidate control over northern and eliminate perceived threats from Chinese nationalists and communists. Japan's continental ambitions targeted resource-rich areas to sustain its war machine, but overextension strained logistics and provoked Western sanctions, particularly U.S. oil embargoes in 1940-1941 that threatened economic collapse. To counter this isolation and deter U.S. intervention, Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka negotiated the , signed on September 27, 1940, in by representatives of , , and , pledging mutual assistance against unprovoked aggression—implicitly aimed at the and Britain. The aligned Japan's expansionist rationale with Axis partners, though limited practical coordination ensued due to geographic separation and divergent priorities.

Pacific and Asian Theaters

Japan's entry into broader Pacific conflict began with the on December 7, 1941 (December 8 local time), a preemptive strike destroying much of the U.S. Pacific Fleet to neutralize opposition to simultaneous invasions across . Coordinated assaults followed: Japanese forces invaded on December 8, 1941, securing basing rights; captured by December 25; overran Malaya and advanced toward ; seized the , including by January 2, 1942; and occupied the (modern ) by March 1942 for its oil fields. In Asia, the ongoing Sino-Japanese War saw brutal urban campaigns, such as the fall of in December 1937, but bogged down into protracted guerrilla resistance, with Japanese troops numbering over 1 million by 1941 yet unable to subdue Chinese forces. The commenced in January 1942, expelling British and Chinese allies from Rangoon by March and threatening via in 1944, though supply failures led to retreat. Naval dominance initially favored Japan, with victories at the in February 1942 securing sea lanes, but the tide turned at the on June 4-7, 1942, where U.S. codebreaking enabled ambush of four Japanese carriers, inflicting irreplaceable losses of 248 aircraft and skilled pilots. Allied island-hopping ensued: Guadalcanal's grueling six-month campaign ended in February 1943 with Japanese evacuation; in November 1943 cost over 1,000 U.S. lives but eliminated a key ; while later battles like (February-March 1945, 26,000 Japanese dead) and Okinawa (April-June 1945, 110,000 Japanese casualties including civilians) demonstrated tactics and fanatical defense, yet failed to halt Allied advances toward the home islands. By 1945, Japan's army of 5.5 million faced attrition, with atomic bombings of (August 6) and (August 9) precipitating surrender on September 2, 1945, after .

Sphere of Co-Prosperity and Occupied Zones

The , articulated by Prime Minister in 1940, envisioned a Japanese-led economic bloc encompassing East and to foster self-sufficiency, expel Western colonial influence, and promote mutual prosperity—though in execution, it prioritized resource extraction for Japan's war effort, including rubber from Malaya, tin from , and oil from . Administrative control involved puppet regimes and military governance: served as a model since 1932, with Japanese firms dominating ; in China, the Reorganized National Government under (established March 1940) claimed legitimacy but exerted minimal authority outside occupied cities; occupied under Laurel's republic (1943) and Burma under (1943) mirrored this facade of independence while enforcing labor conscription. Exploitation was systematic: In , the Japanese military administration from March 1942 requisitioned 4 million tons of rice annually, exacerbating famines; across the sphere, an estimated 4-10 million Asians endured forced labor on projects like the Thailand-Burma railway, where 12-16% mortality rates stemmed from and abuse. Security relied on the military police, enforcing loyalty through mass executions and , as in Singapore's purge of suspected Chinese subversives in February 1942, killing 5,000-25,000. While emphasized anti-colonial liberation—evident in the 1943 attended by leaders from occupied states—the sphere's collapse by 1945 revealed its coercive nature, with local resistance movements like the in Indochina exploiting Japanese weakening to challenge both occupiers and returning Europeans. Japanese administration yielded short-term gains, such as doubling Manchukuo's output to 3 million tons by 1943, but unsustainable extraction and resistance undermined long-term viability.

Militarist Ideology and Continental Ambitions


Japanese militarism in the 1930s emphasized the supremacy of military values, drawing on traditional concepts like bushido and the divine kokutai centered on the emperor, to advocate for national regeneration through expansion. Ultranationalist thinkers promoted the idea that Japan, as a superior Yamato race, had a mission to lead Asia, blending Shinto revivalism with modern imperialism to justify territorial conquests as a defense against Western dominance and communism.
Economic pressures from the Great Depression intensified these ideologies, with military leaders arguing that acquiring resource-rich territories would resolve Japan's industrial shortages in iron, coal, and oil, while providing markets and strategic depth against Soviet threats. The Kwantung Army, stationed in Manchuria to guard Japanese railway interests, emerged as a vanguard of this expansionism, operating semi-autonomously and pushing policies beyond civilian government control.
Continental ambitions crystallized with the Mukden Incident on September 18, 1931, when Kwantung Army officers staged a railway explosion near Shenyang as a pretext for invading Manchuria, rapidly occupying the region despite Tokyo's initial hesitation. This led to the establishment of the puppet state of Manchukuo on March 1, 1932, under the nominal rule of Puyi, aimed at exploiting Manchuria's resources and serving as a base for further incursions into China.
Ideological rationales framed these actions as liberating Asia from Western imperialism under the banner of pan-Asianism, though in practice they asserted Japanese hegemony, with doctrines like hakkō ichiu—"bringing the eight corners of the world under one roof"—portraying expansion as a divine imperial destiny. The disputed Tanaka Memorial, allegedly outlining plans to conquer Manchuria, Mongolia, and China from 1927, mirrored these real policies despite scholarly consensus on its forgery, influencing foreign perceptions of Japan's intent.
By 1937, escalating incidents like the Marco Polo Bridge affair on July 7 triggered the full-scale Second Sino-Japanese War, reflecting militarists' vision of a unified northern China under Japanese control to secure continental dominance and counterbalance naval vulnerabilities. These ambitions prioritized land-based empire-building, contrasting with later Pacific strategies, and positioned Japan as a revisionist power challenging the post-World War I order.

Pacific and Asian Theaters

Japan's military engagements in Asia predated its formal entry into the broader Axis-aligned conflict, commencing with the Second Sino-Japanese War on July 7, 1937, following the Marco Polo Bridge Incident near Beijing, which escalated skirmishes into full-scale invasion. Japanese forces rapidly captured Beijing on July 29, 1937, and Shanghai after intense fighting from August 13 to November 26, 1937, incurring over 40,000 casualties in the latter battle alone. The subsequent advance on Nanjing resulted in its fall on December 13, 1937, amid reports of widespread civilian atrocities, though Japanese command denied systematic orders for such events. By 1938, Japan controlled major coastal cities and rail lines, but Chinese Nationalist and Communist forces shifted to interior guerrilla warfare, prolonging the stalemate and tying down over 1 million Japanese troops by 1941. Seeking to neutralize threats to its Asian holdings and secure vital resources like oil from the and rubber from Malaya, Japan launched coordinated strikes across the Pacific on December 7, 1941, including the , which sank or damaged 18 U.S. ships and destroyed 188 aircraft while losing 29 planes. This enabled rapid conquests: fell on December 10, 1941; on December 23, 1941; on December 25, 1941; and in the on January 2, 1942, followed by the surrender of U.S. and Filipino forces at on April 9, 1942, and on May 6, 1942. In , Japanese troops overran , capturing on February 15, 1942, after just 70 days, yielding 85,000 Allied prisoners; by May 1942; and the by March 1942, securing petroleum fields producing 65 million barrels annually. These victories expanded Japanese control over a vast arc from the Aleutians to the Solomons, but overstretched supply lines vulnerable to Allied submarines and air power. The tide turned at the from June 4–7, 1942, where U.S. carriers sank four Japanese carriers, shifting naval initiative to the Allies and costing 3,057 men and 248 aircraft. Allied counteroffensives followed, including the from August 7, 1942, to February 9, 1943, marking the first sustained U.S. land offensive and depleting Japanese with losses of two carriers and over 600 planes. In the Central Pacific, intense fighting at Tarawa Atoll from November 20–23, 1943, saw Japanese defenders inflict 1,700 U.S. Marine casualties before annihilation, highlighting banzai charges and fortified positions. By 1944, U.S. forces captured the Marianas, including Saipan in June–July, enabling B-29 bomber raids on ; the from October 23–26, 1944, destroyed much of Japan's remaining surface fleet, with 26 major warships sunk. Final offensives included from February 19 to March 26, 1945, where 21,000 Japanese survivors fought from caves, resulting in 6,800 U.S. deaths and near-total Japanese annihilation. The from April 1 to June 22, 1945, involved 100,000 Japanese deaths and 12,500 U.S. fatalities amid attacks sinking 36 ships and damaging 368. Concurrently, on August 9, 1945, overran 1.2 million Japanese troops, capturing 594,000 prisoners. U.S. atomic bombings of on August 6 and on August 9 prompted Japan's surrender announcement on August 15, 1945, formalized aboard on September 2. These theaters underscored Japan's initial successes driven by resource imperatives, but ultimate defeat stemmed from industrial disparities, with U.S. production outpacing Japan 10-to-1 in aircraft by 1944.

Sphere of Co-Prosperity and Occupied Zones

The was a Japanese imperialist concept proclaimed in July 1940 by Prime Minister as a means to unify under Japanese leadership, ostensibly to counter Western colonial influence and promote economic self-sufficiency among Asian nations. In practice, it served as ideological cover for Japan's expansionist policies, enabling the extraction of resources critical to its , including oil from the , rubber from Malaya, and rice from . The sphere encompassed Japan's core territories—Manchukuo (established 1932), the puppet state of Mengjiang in , and occupied areas of —along with puppet regimes like Wang Jingwei's Reorganized National Government in , founded in March 1940. Following the on December 7, 1941, rapidly occupied vast swaths of and the Pacific, integrating them into the sphere by mid-1942. Key conquests included the (declared independent under in October 1943), and (fallen February 15, 1942), the (secured by March 1942), (fully occupied July 1941 onward), and (occupied by May 1942, with Ba Maw's established August 1943). In the Pacific, islands such as (December 10, 1941), Wake (December 23, 1941), and the (including , May 3, 1942) fell under direct military control, though these were primarily strategic outposts rather than economically integrated zones. Administration in occupied zones relied on military governance, with the and Navy establishing commands that prioritized resource mobilization over local autonomy. In , for instance, the oversaw operations, implementing policies that diverted 80-90% of extracted commodities—like 7 million barrels of oil monthly from —to , often through forced labor systems akin to romusha affecting millions. was framed as a "hierarchical bloc" where positioned itself at the apex, supplying manufactured goods in exchange for raw materials, but trade imbalances and requisitions led to widespread famine and resistance, as seen in the 1944-1945 Java rice crisis. The , held November 5-6, 1943, in under Prime Minister , symbolized the sphere's Pan-Asian rhetoric by convening leaders from , Manchukuo, , , , the , and Free (). Tojo declared intentions for mutual prosperity and independence from Western dominance, but the event yielded no concrete economic or military pacts, functioning primarily as to bolster morale amid mounting defeats, such as the loss of in February 1943. By 1944, Allied counteroffensives eroded Japanese control, collapsing the sphere with Japan's surrender on September 2, 1945, after atomic bombings of (August 6) and (August 9).

Peripheral Allies and Pact Signatories

European Co-Belligerents

The European co-belligerents of the Axis powers included , , , , and the Independent State of , which provided military forces and territorial support to and primarily on the Eastern Front and in the . These states aligned with the Axis through formal accession to the or bilateral agreements, driven by desires for territorial revisionism following the post-World War I settlements and fears of Soviet expansionism. operated as a distinct co-belligerent, coordinating with German forces against the during the from June 1941 to September 1944 without entering the or declaring war on Western powers, focused solely on recovering territories ceded after the . Military contributions varied by state but emphasized infantry and auxiliary units for Operation Barbarossa and subsequent campaigns. Romania dispatched the largest contingent among the minor partners, with its forces securing flanks in Bessarabia and advancing toward Stalingrad, while also supplying critical oil resources from Ploiești fields under German protection. Hungary committed expeditionary corps to Yugoslavia's occupation and the Don River front, suffering heavy losses in the 1942–1943 winter retreats. Bulgaria occupied parts of Greece, Yugoslavia, and Macedonia after April 1941 but refrained from deploying combat troops against the Soviet Union, limiting involvement to logistics and garrisons. Slovakia and Croatia, as client states, sent smaller units—a mobile division from Slovakia and a legion from Croatia—to the Eastern Front, alongside internal security roles against partisans. Alignments shifted decisively in 1944 amid Soviet advances. Romania's King Michael orchestrated a coup on August 23, 1944, arresting General and declaring war on , followed by Bulgaria's Fatherland Front seizure of power on September 5, 1944, prompting a similar pivot. Hungary's attempted an on October 15, 1944, but German occupation ensued, installing the regime. Slovakia faced partisan uprisings and German suppression, while Croatia's government persisted until May 1945. concluded a separate with the on September 19, 1944, expelling German troops in the . These defections reflected pragmatic calculations as Axis defeats mounted, with earlier commitments yielding mixed territorial gains like Hungary's acquisitions via the Vienna Awards.

Hungary and Romania's Motivations

Hungary sought alliance with the Axis primarily to revise the territorial losses imposed by the Treaty of Trianon in 1920, which reduced its territory by approximately two-thirds and its population by one-third, fostering widespread revanchist sentiment under Regent Miklós Horthy. Horthy's government pursued border adjustments through diplomatic alignment with Nazi Germany, which facilitated the First Vienna Award on November 2, 1938, granting Hungary southern Slovakia and Carpathian Ruthenia from Czechoslovakia amid the Munich Agreement's fallout. This success reinforced Hungary's strategy of leveraging German arbitration for gains, culminating in formal adherence to the Tripartite Pact on November 20, 1940, driven by expectations of further territorial rewards and protection against Soviet expansionism, given Horthy's explicit anti-Bolshevik orientation. Economic dependencies on German trade and military pressure also factored in, though Hungary initially avoided direct belligerency until the Second Vienna Award on August 30, 1940, which awarded northern Transylvania—home to over 2.5 million people, including significant Hungarian minorities—from Romania, heightening regional tensions but solidifying the alignment. Romania's motivations centered on recovering territories lost in 1940 amid geopolitical upheaval, particularly the Soviet on June 26 that forced the cession of and Northern on June 28, stripping Romania of about 30,000 square kilometers and over 3 million inhabitants. These losses, compounded by the Second Vienna Award's transfer of to and the Craiova Treaty of August 7, 1940, yielding to , eroded King Carol II's authority and fueled domestic fascist agitation from groups like the . Ion Antonescu's coup on , 1940, overthrew Carol, establishing a that pledged allegiance to the Axis on , 1940, viewing as the sole power capable of deterring further Soviet incursions and enabling reclamation of annexed regions through joint operations. Romania's vast oil reserves at , supplying up to 60% of 's wartime fuel needs, created mutual strategic interests, but Antonescu prioritized anti-communist security and territorial restoration over ideological affinity with , committing troops to in June 1941 explicitly to liberate . This pragmatic calculus reflected broader Eastern European fears of Bolshevik domination, with Axis alignment serving as a bulwark despite initial neutrality efforts and internal divisions.

Bulgaria, Slovakia, and Croatia

acceded to the on March 1, 1941, under pressure from and enticed by territorial concessions, including the return of from via the on September 7, 1940, and subsequent occupation of Vardar Macedonia, parts of , and Serbian following Axis campaigns in the . Tsar Boris III permitted German transit through for the invasion of in April 1941 but avoided direct combat against the Allies, declining to declare war on the despite German demands and refusing to dispatch Bulgarian troops to the Eastern Front, thereby limiting participation to occupation duties in annexed areas. This pragmatic alignment preserved Bulgarian control over occupied territories until a coup on September 9, 1944, prompted withdrawal from the Axis and alignment with the advance. The Slovak Republic emerged as an Axis client state on March 14, 1939, after declaring from amid German-orchestrated dismemberment, followed by a protection treaty with on March 23, 1939, that ensured military and economic dependence in exchange for autonomy from . Motivated by ethnic Slovak separatism and fear of , the regime under President joined the on November 24, 1940, and contributed forces including a mobile division and infantry units to the September 1939 , then deployed approximately 45,000 troops in the to the Eastern Front starting June 25, 1941, supporting with rear-area security and limited combat before sustaining heavy casualties and facing desertions. Internal resistance culminated in the from August 29 to October 27, 1944, which briefly challenged Axis control until suppressed by German intervention. The Independent State of Croatia (NDH) was established as an Axis puppet on April 10, 1941, immediately after the German-led invasion of Yugoslavia dismantled the royal Yugoslav state, with Ante Pavelić's Ustaše movement assuming power under Italian and German sponsorship to counter Serb dominance in the prior federation. Encompassing Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, the NDH formalized Axis allegiance through troop exchanges and resource provision, deploying the Croatian Legion—including an infantry regiment, air squadron, and naval units—to the Eastern Front from 1941 onward to bolster German operations, while domestic forces like the Ustaše militia and Home Guard suppressed partisans and conducted ethnic cleansing targeting Serbs, Jews, and Roma. The regime's ultranationalist ideology aligned with Axis racial policies, facilitating deportations of over 30,000 Jews to Auschwitz by mid-1943, though partisan warfare eroded control, leading to NDH collapse amid the 1945 Soviet-Yugoslav offensives.

Asian and Middle Eastern Partners

Thailand under Prime Minister Plaek Phibunsongkhram adopted a policy of armed neutrality but permitted Japanese forces to enter the country on December 8, 1941, following a brief invasion, in exchange for territorial concessions in French Indochina and support against British influence. On December 21, 1941, Thailand signed a formal military alliance with Japan, granting basing rights and airfields for operations into British Malaya and Burma, while retaining internal autonomy and nominal control over its forces. This pact enabled Thailand to reclaim territories like the Shan State and parts of Malaya, with Thai troops participating in limited offensives, such as the invasion of Shan State in May 1942, though overall military engagement remained minimal compared to Japanese efforts. Thailand declared war on the United Kingdom and United States on January 25, 1942, but internal resistance via the Free Thai Movement, coordinated with Allied intelligence, undermined full commitment, leading to Thailand's avoidance of occupation post-war. In , Japanese occupation began with the fall of Rangoon on , 1942, paving the way for a puppet regime under , a nationalist leader released from British detention to head the State of Burma. On August 1, 1943, Japan granted nominal independence to as part of its , installing as Adipadi (head of state), who pledged loyalty to and declared war on Britain and the . 's government, reliant on Japanese military oversight, mobilized Burmese auxiliary forces for labor and combat, including contributions to the Burma National Army, though underlying fueled defections to Allied-aligned groups by 1944. attended the in on November 5-6, 1943, symbolizing Burma's integration into Japan's sphere, but the regime collapsed with Japan's defeat, leading to 's flight to Japan and later exile. In the Middle East, Iraq under Rashid Ali al-Gaylani briefly aligned with Axis ambitions through a coup on April 1, 1941, orchestrated by pro-German officers known as the , aiming to expel British influence and secure oil resources for . The regime received limited German air support and Italian arms, dispatching a diplomatic mission to on April 8, 1941, but failed to consolidate power amid British reinforcements. British-led forces, invoking the 1930 Anglo-Iraqi Treaty, launched operations culminating in the Battle of Habbaniya on May 2, 1941, and Rashid Ali's government collapsed by May 31, 1941, with him fleeing to Axis-held territory. This short-lived alignment disrupted British supply lines temporarily but did not yield sustained Axis gains in the region. Vichy France maintained limited alignment in the Middle East via control of Syria and Lebanon, where it permitted Luftwaffe staging in May 1941 under a German accord to support Iraqi rebels, though without full belligerency. British and Free French forces invaded on June 8, 1941, to neutralize potential Axis bases, facing Vichy resistance that inflicted 3,000 Allied casualties before armistice on July 14, 1941, after which Vichy troops largely ceased hostilities. Despite collaborationist rhetoric from Marshal , Vichy never acceded to the or declared war on the Allies, prioritizing armistice terms over deeper Axis integration, which constrained its Middle Eastern role to defensive actions against Allied advances.

Thailand and Ba Maw's Burma

Thailand maintained neutrality at the outset of but shifted toward alignment with after the latter's on December 8, 1941, which involved landings at key southern ports like Singora and Pattani. Thai forces offered brief resistance before an armistice was signed, allowing Japanese troops transit rights through the country to advance into and facilitate further operations in . On December 21, 1941, formalized a with , granting access to airfields, naval bases, and railroads in exchange for territorial concessions, including parts of ceded after 's earlier border conflicts with in 1940–1941. This pact reflected Plaek Phibunsongkhram's strategic opportunism, driven by desires to expand Thai influence and recover lands lost in prior colonial disputes, rather than ideological affinity with Axis principles. Under Japanese pressure, Thailand declared war on the United Kingdom and the United States on January 25, 1942, via a radio announcement by the deputy foreign minister, though Thai combat involvement remained limited to auxiliary support for Japanese campaigns. Phibunsongkhram's government cooperated by permitting Japanese forces to stage from Thai territory, contributing to the fall of Singapore in February 1942, while Thai troops occupied contested areas in Malaya and the Shan States of Burma. Despite this alignment, internal opposition grew, manifesting in the Seri Thai (Free Thai) movement, which conducted espionage and sabotage against Japanese interests and coordinated with Allied intelligence, ultimately aiding Phibunsongkhram's ouster in 1944 amid wartime hardships. The United States refused to recognize Thailand's declaration of war as legitimate, viewing it as coerced, and postwar negotiations allowed Thailand to avoid formal Axis classification by returning seized territories and compensating Allied powers. In Burma, Japanese forces overran British defenses by May 1942, establishing occupation control and installing Burmese nationalist as head of a provisional administration to legitimize their rule. , an anti-colonial figure previously imprisoned by the British for sedition, embraced Japanese overtures as a path to , forming the in 1941 to support the invasion. On August 1, 1943, Japan proclaimed the State of Burma as a nominally sovereign entity under 's leadership as Adipati (), complete with a constitution and flag, though real authority resided with Japanese military advisors and economic exploitation persisted via forced labor and resource extraction for the war effort. This puppet regime aligned with the Axis through Japan's , with attending the November 1943 conference in alongside leaders from occupied Asian territories to symbolize pan-Asian unity against Western imperialism. Ba Maw's government mobilized the Burma National Army, initially trained by Japan, to secure internal order and counter British remnants, but disillusionment mounted as Japanese promises of autonomy faltered amid supply shortages and brutal conscription practices like the construction of the Thailand-Burma Railway. By 1944, key figures including defected to form the , reflecting widespread Burmese realization that the Japanese aimed at domination rather than liberation. Ba Maw fled with retreating Japanese forces in 1945, later facing trial by the British for before ; the State of Burma dissolved upon Allied reconquest, underscoring its role as a facade for Japanese rather than genuine Axis partnership.

Iraq and Vichy France's Limited Alignment

In April 1941, led a in , overthrowing the pro-British regency of ʿAbd al-Ilāh and establishing a government sympathetic to the Axis powers, primarily , in an effort to end British influence and secure Iraqi independence. The new regime, backed by the nationalist "" officers, sought German military aid, including a small detachment under that arrived in May 1941 to support Iraqi forces against British positions. This alignment threatened British access to Iraqi oil fields and supply routes to the , prompting the from May 2 to 31, 1941, during which British forces from and Ḥabbāniyyah air base defeated the pro-Axis government, forcing to flee to Axis territory. The brief pro-Axis episode ended with the restoration of the under British protection, and formally declared war on the Axis powers on January 16, 1943, under a new pro-Allied regime. Vichy France, established after the June 1940 armistice with Germany, pursued a policy of collaboration with the Axis to preserve nominal sovereignty in its unoccupied southern zone, providing economic support and labor to Germany without formally joining the Tripartite Pact or declaring war on the Allies. Under Marshal Philippe Pétain, Vichy maintained an army and administered colonies, including Syria and Lebanon, where it resisted Allied invasions in June–July 1941 (Operation Exporter) to prevent Axis exploitation of those territories as potential staging grounds, though German and Italian aircraft had used Syrian airfields earlier that year. This limited alignment involved concessions like allowing German overflights and naval access in some areas but stopped short of full military integration, as Vichy leaders sought to negotiate better terms amid German dominance; full German occupation of the unoccupied zone followed Operation Torch in November 1942, eroding Vichy's autonomy. Vichy's collaboration facilitated Nazi policies, including deportations, but its independent diplomatic maneuvers and colonial defenses underscored a pragmatic rather than ideological commitment to the Axis.

Client States and Puppets

German-Dominated Regimes

was established on , 1939, following the German occupation of the after the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, with proclaiming it a nominally autonomous entity under Reich Protector . The regime, headed by President Emil Hácha, retained limited Czech administrative functions but operated under direct German oversight, including economic exploitation for armaments production—Bohemia-Moravia supplied over 30% of Germany's artillery shells by 1944—and suppression of dissent through the and SS. German authorities deported approximately 118,000 from the protectorate to extermination camps between 1941 and 1945, with local collaboration aiding roundups, resulting in only 2,803 Jewish survivors by liberation in May 1945. Resistance activities, including the 1942 , prompted brutal reprisals such as the , underscoring the regime's role as a facade for total German control. In occupied Serbia, the Government of National Salvation, installed on August 29, 1941, under , functioned as a puppet administration appointed by the German commander to manage amid partisan warfare. This regime commanded the , approximately 37,000 strong by 1943, which collaborated with German forces in anti-partisan operations and the deportation of over 20,000 Jews to camps like Sajmište, where most perished. Economic policies prioritized German resource extraction, including forced labor for infrastructure like the Belgrade-Salonika railway, while Nedić's appeals for Serbian autonomy yielded no independence, as ultimate authority rested with plenipotentiaries. The government dissolved on October 4, 1944, as Soviet and Yugoslav forces advanced, with Nedić fleeing and later committing suicide in detention. Norway's Quisling regime, formally recognized by on February 1, 1942, placed as of a collaborationist government in the occupied territory administered by . 's party, with membership peaking at 45,000, enforced Nazi-aligned policies such as the confiscation of 60% of Norway's merchant fleet for German use and the internment of over 700 Jews, facilitating their deportation to Auschwitz where 531 died. The regime mobilized 15,000 Norwegians into auxiliary forces for the Eastern Front, yet faced widespread resistance, with only 10% public support, rendering it a tool for German occupation rather than genuine governance until dissolution on May 8, 1945. 's execution for on October 24, 1945, symbolized postwar reckoning with such entities. These regimes exemplified Nazi strategy of through local proxies to minimize administrative burdens while extracting labor—estimated at 1.5 million forced workers across occupied —and quelling uprisings, though their fragility contributed to Axis overextension as resistance intensified.

Italian and Joint Ventures

The Kingdom of served as Italy's principal prior to and during the early phases of . Italian forces invaded on April 7, 1939, rapidly overthrowing King Zog I and occupying the country by April 12; the Albanian parliament then proclaimed of as , establishing a regime under Italian oversight. A fascist government was installed under Prime Minister , who aligned with Italy's policies, including integration of Albanian units into the and economic subordination to . This arrangement persisted until Italy's with the Allies in , after which German forces assumed control, highlighting 's status as a strategically marginal but symbolically important extension of Italian influence in the . Following the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia in April 1941, Italy annexed territories such as the Ljubljana Province, coastal Dalmatia, and established the Governorate of Montenegro as an occupied puppet territory on October 3, 1941. Montenegro, previously part of Yugoslavia, came under direct Italian military administration, with local governance manipulated to support Italian resource extraction and anti-partisan operations; efforts to install a nominal monarchy under Italian protection faltered amid widespread resistance, including the July 1941 uprising that challenged puppet authority. Italian control emphasized suppression of communist and Chetnik insurgents, but administrative inefficiencies and overextension limited effective governance, with the governorate dissolving upon Italy's 1943 capitulation. Joint ventures with included co-sponsorship of the Independent State of (NDH), proclaimed on April 10, 1941, after the fall of . This puppet regime under Ante Pavelić's movement encompassed and much of Bosnia-Herzegovina, with securing territorial concessions like Dalmatian islands and bays in exchange for recognition and military support against internal dissent. Italian occupation forces, numbering around 200,000 in the by 1942, collaborated with German counterparts in NDH stabilization efforts, though tensions arose over Italy's ambitions for Adriatic dominance and reluctance to fully endorse extremism. The arrangement facilitated joint anti-partisan campaigns but underscored Italy's subordinate role, as German influence predominated in NDH policy and resource allocation.

Japanese-Controlled Entities

Japan created several puppet regimes in occupied territories to formalize control, extract resources, and propagate the ideology of the , which promised Asian liberation from Western imperialism while ensuring Japanese dominance. These entities maintained nominal independence with local figureheads but were administered by Japanese military advisors, economic overseers, and , often relying on collaborationist armies to suppress resistance. Primary examples included states in and the , where Japan installed compliant leaders to legitimize annexations and facilitate wartime production. , proclaimed on March 1, 1932, after Japan's seizure of in September 1931, exemplified early Japanese puppetry. , the last Qing emperor, was installed as chief executive and later emperor in 1934, but real authority rested with the , which directed railways, industry, and forced labor for , , and iron extraction to fuel Japan's military machine. The regime's 42 million inhabitants endured and epidemics, with Japanese settlers prioritizing strategic assets over local welfare. Manchukuo collapsed in August 1945 upon Soviet invasion. In , fragmented control through interim puppets before consolidation. The of the Republic of China, formed December 14, 1937, in under , administered northern occupied areas with Japanese oversight, issuing currency and managing railways until merger. The Reformed Government in , established May 1938 under , handled central zones similarly. These dissolved into the Reorganized National Government on March 30, 1940, led by from , which claimed legitimacy as the true Republic of China but served Japanese aims by mobilizing 500,000 collaborationist troops and facilitating resource shipments. Wang's regime, recognized only by , disintegrated by 1945 amid guerrilla attrition. Mengjiang, a smaller Inner Mongolian entity formed , under Prince , covered parts of , Chahar, and provinces, with Japanese forces exploiting coal and herding lands while promoting pan-Mongol separatism against Chinese central rule. Nominally autonomous, it integrated into Wang Jingwei's framework from , fielding auxiliary units but remaining marginal due to ethnic tensions and limited viability. The Second Philippine Republic, inaugurated October 14, 1943, under President José P. Laurel, marked Japan's Southeast Asian extension. Following the 1942 conquest, Laurel's government, comprising Filipino elites, enacted for 260,000 laborers and promoted rice production under Japanese quotas, while the suppressed insurgents. Lacking international recognition beyond the Axis, it functioned as a facade for resource extraction until Allied liberation in 1945.

Economic Mobilization and Resource Strategies

Autarky Efforts and Industrial Output

Germany's Four-Year Plan, announced by on September 9, 1936, and placed under Hermann Göring's oversight on October 18, 1936, prioritized through massive state-directed investments in synthetic fuels, rubber, and metals to prepare for war and withstand blockades. Between 1936 and 1939, approximately two-thirds of all industrial investment supported the plan's goals, redirecting the toward rearmament and reducing import reliance, though full self-sufficiency proved unattainable without conquests for raw materials like and oil. This effort expanded coal and steel output, with production reaching 4.5 million tons annually by 1943 via , covering about 50% of needs despite inefficiencies and high costs. Italy's autarky campaign intensified after the League of Nations sanctions imposed in response to the 1935-1936 invasion of , prompting Mussolini to emphasize domestic substitution in foodstuffs, textiles, and fuels through initiatives like the 1925 Battle for Grain, which boosted production from 5.5 million tons in 1925 to over 8 million tons by 1939 via and incentives. Corporatist structures centralized control under the Institute for Industrial Reconstruction from 1933, fostering synthetic textile and fuel industries, but chronic deficits in coal, oil, and machinery—exacerbated by outdated infrastructure and protectionist tariffs—limited success, with industrial output stagnating relative to prewar levels and reliant on German imports by 1940. Japan, acutely vulnerable to resource imports due to its island geography, pursued via the 1937 establishment of the Planning Board and the 1938 National Mobilization Law, which enforced , labor , and zaibatsu-directed expansion, including aluminum and facilities modeled on German techniques. Investments in from the 1930s created integrated steel complexes, producing 2 million tons of annually by 1940, while naval and output emphasized quality over quantity; however, prewar oil self-sufficiency hovered below 10%, driving southward expansion for rubber and rather than pure domestic substitution. Axis industrial output, geared toward autarkic war economies, emphasized armaments but faced bottlenecks from Allied bombing and raw material shortages. led in and production, manufacturing over 19,000 tanks in 1944 alone amid peak mobilization under from 1942. contributed modestly, with and Ansaldo plants yielding around 2,500 and 1,000 tanks total by 1943, hampered by aluminum scarcity. focused on naval tonnage and Zero fighters, producing approximately 28,000 from 1941-1945, though output lagged at 7-8 million tons yearly due to import disruptions.
CountryKey Autarky FocusPeak Annual Steel Production (million tons, ca. 1940-1944)Armaments Output Example
GermanySynthetics, rearmament~30 (1943)~40,000 aircraft (1944)
ItalyAgriculture, corporatism~2.5 (1940)~600 aircraft (1942)
JapanImperial resource extraction~7-8 (1943)~28,000 aircraft total war
Smaller partners like supplied 5-6 million tons of oil annually to by 1941, bolstering Axis fuel marginally, while Hungary's exports aided aluminum production; however, these dependencies underscored the limits of collective self-sufficiency without broader territorial gains.

Looting and Trade Networks

The Axis powers sustained their war economies through systematic of occupied territories and exploitation of client states, supplemented by limited internal trade networks hampered by and Allied blockades. extracted vast quantities of raw materials, machinery, and from conquered , with operations targeting industrial assets and financial reserves to offset domestic shortages. In , U.S. forces uncovered approximately 250 tons of bars, coinage, and currency—valued at billions in contemporary terms—in the Merkers salt mine, comprising holdings and SS-looted plunder from across . Contemporary reports described this plunder as the largest in history, encompassing not only precious metals and art but also factory equipment, vehicles, and consumer goods shipped back to for redistribution or use. Such extraction extended to property, with German troops and officials seizing furs, livestock, and tools amid broader campaigns of resource stripping in , , and the . Imperial Japan pursued analogous plunder in Asia and the Pacific, targeting gold, artworks, and natural resources to fuel its expansion under the guise of the . Japanese forces systematically looted banks, temples, and depositories across occupied , , and the , amassing treasures that included private holdings and state assets shipped to or concealed in fortified sites. In the alone, operations under General reportedly hid billions in looted and artifacts in underground vaults to evade advancing Allied forces, reflecting a pattern of wartime asset concealment amid naval interdictions. This exploitation prioritized strategic commodities like rubber, tin, and oil, with Japanese military administrations enforcing quotas on local populations and infrastructure to redirect output toward Tokyo's needs. Inter-Axis trade remained underdeveloped despite the Tripartite Pact's 1940 commitment to mutual economic assistance, as transoceanic distances and curtailed exchanges between Europe and Asia. and maintained some bilateral —such as Italian foodstuffs for German —but volumes paled against unilateral extraction from puppets like Romania's fields or Hungary's mines, which fed German industry without reciprocal benefits. similarly integrated Manchukuo's , soybeans, and iron into its economy through direct control, treating the puppet as a resource colony rather than a trading partner. Overall, these networks prioritized coercive acquisition over voluntary commerce, enabling short-term mobilization but exacerbating Axis vulnerabilities to supply disruptions.

Comparative Advantages Over Allies

The Axis powers exhibited advantages in the speed and intensity of economic mobilization compared to the Allies, particularly in the war's early phases, due to their authoritarian regimes' ability to impose economies without parliamentary delays or public opposition. Germany's rearmament from onward prioritized military production, achieving a higher proportion of GDP devoted to armaments—reaching 23% by —before full Allied entry, enabling rapid deployment of forces that outpaced British and French preparations. Japan's prewar policies, including state-directed industrial conglomerates (), facilitated quicker conversion to wartime needs, with naval expansion yielding carrier production advantages in 1941-1942 over U.S. output initially disrupted by peacetime constraints. In resource acquisition, the Axis benefited from aggressive territorial conquests that provided immediate access to raw materials, contrasting with the Allies' reliance on slower global trade networks vulnerable to . German occupation of by mid- yielded an estimated 10-15% boost in and supplies through exploitation, temporarily equalizing effective GDP parity with the Allies at around 1:1 in 1940 terms despite prewar disparities. Japan’s seizures in , including 80% of the region's oil from the by early 1942, granted short-term self-sufficiency in —covering 90% of needs—bypassing Allied embargoes that had previously crippled imports. Efficiency in substituting scarce resources through innovation offered another edge; Germany's synthetic fuel program, scaling to 6.5 million tons annually by 1943 via , mitigated oil shortages more effectively per capita than Allied imports-dependent strategies until U.S. production ramped up. Forced labor mobilization, drawing 7-8 million workers from occupied territories by 1944, sustained output under bombing, achieving higher aircraft production rates (e.g., 40,000 fighters in ) relative to resource inputs than democratic Allies' voluntary systems initially. These factors enabled the Axis to maintain operational tempo longer than expected, though unsustainable against Allied scale.

Inter-Axis Cooperation and Friction

Technological and Intelligence Exchanges

Technological exchanges among the Axis powers were constrained by vast geographic distances, divergent strategic priorities, and logistical challenges, resulting in sporadic rather than systematic cooperation. Germany and Japan pursued the most substantive transfers, primarily through blockade-running surface ships and specialized submarine missions known as Yanagi voyages, which aimed to convey blueprints, prototypes, and raw materials despite Allied interdiction. Italy participated marginally, sharing limited aviation and naval designs but lagging in advanced weaponry. These efforts, formalized under the 1942 Three-Power Military Agreement, focused on high-priority domains like aviation, rocketry, and submarinery, yet yielded uneven results due to incomplete deliveries and adaptation difficulties. Germany transferred significant aeronautical technology to Japan, including designs for the rocket-powered interceptor and components for the Me 262 jet fighter, with blueprints dispatched via submarines like U-234 in late 1944, which carried detailed schematics alongside 1,200 kilograms of for potential nuclear research. Japanese engineers studied these upon receipt of partial shipments, influencing late-war projects such as the jet bomber, though production was minimal due to resource shortages and bombing. Rocketry cooperation involved German V-1 pulse-jet and V-2 data, adapted by Japan into the I-10 and I-8 experimental weapons, but operational deployment was negligible as transfers arrived too late or were lost at sea. Submarine technology exchanges were more fruitful in the naval sphere; Germany provided Japan with electro-boat (Type XXI) innovations, including snorkel systems and improved batteries, which Japanese I-400-class partially incorporated after 1943 inspections and document exchanges. Italy's contributions were overshadowed by its technological inferiority, with exchanges limited to Fiat G.55 fighter blueprints shared with Germany in 1943 and some torpedo boat designs, but these had negligible impact on Axis-wide capabilities. Raw material flows complemented hardware transfers; Japan supplied Germany with rubber, tin, and tungsten via U-boat convoys, while Germany reciprocated with optical instruments and synthetic fuel formulas, though only about a dozen successful transits occurred between 1942 and 1945 amid heavy losses. Overall, these exchanges enhanced neither power's war effort decisively, as adaptation required years and Allied naval dominance disrupted most missions—exemplified by the sinking of U-864 in February 1945 with 66.5 tons of mercury and missile parts aboard. Intelligence sharing remained desultory, hampered by incompatible codes, mutual suspicions, and siloed operations, with no integrated Axis intelligence apparatus comparable to Allied Ultra or systems. and exchanged diplomatic reports sporadically through embassies, such as warnings of Soviet mobilizations in , but operational intelligence on Allied movements was rarely shared effectively; for instance, provided no detailed Pacific theater data to ahead of the Battle of the Atlantic escalations. Italy's SIM service funneled some Balkan reconnaissance to , yet interceptions of enemy communications were not pooled, reflecting structural silos where each power prioritized unilateral cryptanalytic efforts over collaborative decryption. This fragmented approach contributed to strategic surprises, including 's unshared intelligence on and 's limited foreknowledge of Midway, underscoring causal failures in trust and infrastructure that undermined potential synergies.

Operational Coordination Attempts

The Axis powers pursued operational coordination primarily through diplomatic channels and limited bilateral agreements, but these efforts were undermined by geographical separation, independent strategic priorities, and the absence of a centralized . Unlike the Allies' , the Axis relied on ad hoc consultations that rarely translated into synchronized campaigns. Germany and Italy achieved partial coordination in the European and Mediterranean theaters, where proximity allowed for direct intervention. Following Italy's unsuccessful invasion of Greece on October 28, 1940, Germany committed forces to Operation Marita, the joint Axis invasion of Greece and Yugoslavia commencing April 6, 1941, aimed at securing supply lines and preventing Allied footholds ahead of the Eastern Front offensive. In , German units arrived in on February 12, 1941, to bolster Italian defenses against British advances, operating under a nominal Italo-German command structure that emphasized rapid mobile warfare. These actions demonstrated tactical alignment but were marred by Italian logistical shortcomings and divergent operational tempos, such as Erwin Rommel's independent advances outpacing Italian support. Broader Axis attempts to align major offensives faltered decisively. Germany urged Japan to strike the Soviet Union from the east during , launched June 22, 1941, to divide Soviet resources, but Japan—deterred by prior defeats at in 1939 and committed to southern expansion—refused, adhering instead to its April 13, 1941, neutrality pact with Moscow. Japan's subsequent attack on Pearl Harbor December 7, 1941, prompted to declare war on the on December 11, honoring the , yet no pre-coordinated strikes occurred across theaters, allowing the U.S. to reorient forces independently. The Three-Power Military Agreement signed January 19, 1942, sought to rectify these gaps by formalizing operational collaboration, especially naval, including submarine exchanges, joint patrols in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, and shared intelligence on shipping routes. Practical outcomes were negligible: German U-boats, such as U-848 and U-849, reached in 1943 for refueling and repairs, but incompatible radio codes, vast oceanic distances, and Japan's resource constraints limited joint wolfpack actions to sporadic, ineffective engagements that sank fewer than a dozen Allied vessels. These failures underscored causal realities—technological mismatches and siloed decision-making—preventing the Axis from exploiting potential synergies against global Allied supply lines.

Underlying Tensions and Missed Opportunities

The Axis alliance harbored fundamental ideological tensions, particularly between Nazi Germany's racial hierarchy and Imperial Japan's pan-Asian imperialism. pragmatically classified the Japanese as "honorary Aryans" to sustain the partnership, despite his private assessments viewing East Asians as culturally capable imitators of superior civilizations but biologically inferior, as evidenced in his pre-war writings and wartime exemptions from full application to Japanese-Germans. These concessions masked deeper incompatibilities, including Nazi anti-Slavic doctrines clashing with Japan's neutrality toward the and Italian Fascism's Mediterranean focus conflicting with German ambitions in . Such divergences fostered mutual suspicion, limiting ideological alignment beyond shared and anti-Anglo-American sentiments. Strategic frictions compounded these issues, notably between and . Benito Mussolini's unilateral invasion of on October 28, 1940—launched without prior consultation with Hitler despite Italian military unpreparedness—devolved into stalemate by early 1941, prompting German intervention via Operation Marita in April. This Balkan diversion delayed , 's invasion of the , by four to six weeks, as divisions originally earmarked for the Eastern Front were redeployed, resulting in the facing Russian winter conditions and missing the opportunity for a decisive summer campaign. Hitler reportedly expressed fury over Mussolini's "stab in the back" to Axis planning, highlighting Italy's role as a burdensome junior partner whose independent adventurism strained German resources without reciprocal benefits. The most consequential missed opportunity arose from and Germany's failure to synchronize against the . On April 13, 1941, formalized the Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact, binding it to non-aggression for five years and freeing Soviet Far Eastern forces for redeployment westward. When Germany launched Barbarossa on June 22, 1941, Japanese leaders, prioritizing southern expansion for oil and rubber amid U.S. embargoes, declined to open a second front in despite German entreaties; this allowed approximately 20 Soviet divisions to shift to Moscow's defense, bolstering the Red Army's counteroffensive. Geographic separation and divergent priorities—Japan's Pacific focus versus Germany's European theater—precluded unified command structures, while Hitler's reluctance to share operational details eroded trust, forgoing potential pincer movements that might have fragmented Soviet resistance early.

Wartime Strategies and Realities

Grand Strategic Objectives

The Axis powers lacked a unified , operating instead as ideologically aligned but operationally independent actors whose objectives centered on territorial expansion, resource acquisition, and regional hegemony to counter perceived encirclement by Anglo-American and Soviet powers. Germany's core aim, articulated by as early as (1925), was the pursuit of —living space for the German —through the conquest and colonization of , particularly targeting the to eliminate , secure agricultural lands, and establish a racially purified empire extending to the Urals. This objective, rooted in geopolitical theories of autarkic continental dominance, prioritized the Barbarossa campaign launched on June 22, 1941, with an initial force of over 3 million troops aimed at rapid decapitation of Soviet leadership and resource extraction to sustain prolonged war against Britain and potential U.S. intervention. Italy's ambitions under focused on restoring a Mediterranean empire, dubbed , by seizing control of North African colonies, the , and key chokepoints like and to dominate sea lanes vital for Italian trade and military projection. Mussolini's , formalized in pacts with from 1936 onward, envisioned opportunistic interventions to exploit European instability, as seen in the invasion of on April 7, 1939, and on October 28, 1940, though constrained by Italy's industrial inferiority—producing only 2,000 by 1940 compared to 's 10,000—and reliance on German support for sustained offensives. Japan, driven by imperial expansionism and resource scarcity exacerbated by U.S. oil embargoes in July 1941, sought to forge the , a bloc encompassing , , and the Pacific islands to monopolize raw materials like rubber, tin, and oil while expelling Western influence under the guise of Asian self-sufficiency. This culminated in the strike south strategy, including the on December 7, 1941, to neutralize U.S. naval power and secure a defensive perimeter from to the , with initial conquests yielding 90% of global supplies by mid-1942 but straining logistics across vast oceans without a viable plan for total Allied defeat. These divergent priorities—Germany's continental Drang nach Osten, Italy's mare clausum, and Japan's island-hopping resource grab—reflected causal realities of geographic imperatives and ideological imperatives over alliance cohesion, as evidenced by minimal joint planning beyond the Tripartite Pact of September 27, 1940, which committed mutual aid against new aggressors but failed to synchronize theaters, allowing the Allies to exploit serial rather than simultaneous threats.

Conduct of Warfare and Civilian Policies

The German emphasized tactics, involving concentrated armored thrusts supported by motorized infantry and dive bombers to achieve rapid breakthroughs and encircle enemy forces. This approach enabled the conquest of beginning , and the Low Countries and starting May 10, 1940, paralyzing defenders through speed and coordination. Later, as the war turned defensive, Germany shifted to on the Eastern Front after the June 22, 1941, invasion of the , where initial gains stalled due to overextension and harsh winter conditions. Japan's Imperial Army and Navy pursued aggressive expansion to secure resources, launching coordinated strikes across and the Pacific following the December 7, 1941, . By mid-1942, Japanese forces had captured Hong Kong, the , Malaya, , and the through amphibious assaults and rapid ground advances, exploiting Allied dispersion. Defensive strategies emerged later, including fortified island defenses and attacks during the 1945 , inflicting heavy casualties on invading U.S. forces. Italian forces under Mussolini focused on Mediterranean and African theaters, employing mass infantry assaults augmented by colonial troops in the 1935-1936 invasion of Ethiopia, where chemical agents including mustard gas were deployed against Ethiopian troops and villages starting in December 1935. In North Africa from 1940, Italian expeditions against British Egypt relied on numerical superiority but suffered defeats due to poor logistics and leadership, necessitating German intervention via the Afrika Korps in February 1941. European campaigns, such as the 1940 invasion of Greece, exposed Italian vulnerabilities, leading to Axis-wide delays. Axis civilian policies in occupied territories prioritized resource extraction and security through coercion. German administrations conscripted millions of Eastern Europeans as forced laborers for the Reich's , with deportations intensifying after to replace dwindling domestic manpower. Reprisals against suspected partisans became systematic, particularly in the , where initial attempts at conciliatory governance shifted to punitive measures amid escalating guerrilla activity. Japanese occupations in involved enslaving civilians for labor in brutal conditions, interning over 130,000 Allied non-combatants—primarily Dutch from the —in camps marked by and . In , scorched-earth operations from 1941 aimed to eradicate resistance by destroying villages and infrastructure, contributing to widespread civilian hardship. Italian colonial rule in post-1936 enforced harsh suppression, including forced relocations and resource requisitions, while reprisals in occupied from 1941 targeted civilians in response to partisan attacks, exacerbating local unrest.

Atrocities in Causal Context

The Nazi regime's systematic extermination of approximately six million , known as , stemmed from longstanding antisemitic ideology fused with the strategic imperatives of and territorial expansion in . Rooted in Hitler's worldview of racial struggle, as outlined in , the policy evolved from discriminatory laws like the 1935 to mass shootings by units following the June 1941 invasion of the , targeting as perceived partisan threats and ideological enemies to secure Lebensraum. This escalated to industrialized killing in camps like Auschwitz-Birkenau after the January 1942 , where wartime logistics—deporting 2.7 million victims to extermination sites—intersected with the aim of eliminating "racial pollutants" to consolidate the amid resource strains and combat losses. Imperial Japan's atrocities, exemplified by the from December 1937 to January 1938, arose from militaristic indoctrination emphasizing codes of absolute obedience and contempt for "inferior" Asian populations, compounded by the chaos of rapid conquests in the Second Sino-Japanese War. Japanese forces killed an estimated 200,000 Chinese and disarmed soldiers while raping 20,000 to 80,000 women, driven by commands to terrorize resistance and extract submission in occupied territories to support resource-driven expansion against Western embargoes. Broader war policies, such as the "Three Alls" directive (kill all, burn all, loot all) in from 1941, reflected strategic needs to pacify vast areas for rice and labor requisitions, with army culture rewarding brutality as a means to break will and deter guerrillas, unhindered by central oversight due to field commanders' . Fascist Italy's war crimes, including the deployment of and aerial bombings in the 1935-1936 invasion of Ethiopia, were causally linked to Mussolini's imperial revivalism and the exigencies of suppressing colonial insurgencies with minimal troop commitments. Italian forces caused tens of thousands of deaths through chemical attacks on poorly equipped Ethiopian troops and civilians, justified internally as necessary for rapid pacification to claim prestige and resources amid domestic economic pressures. In occupied , the February 1937 Yekatit 12 massacre killed 19,000 to 20,000 Ethiopians in reprisal for an assassination attempt on Viceroy , exemplifying a pattern where fascist racial hierarchies and punitive doctrines amplified retaliatory violence to enforce order in under-resourced empires. Among minor Axis allies, Romania under and under contributed to Jewish deportations and pogroms, motivated by opportunistic and territorial revisions gained through German alliance. Romanian forces killed around 280,000 in and from 1941, framing them as Bolshevik fifth columnists to justify during the Eastern Front advance, while Hungarian gendarmes facilitated the 1944 deportation of over 400,000 to Auschwitz amid fears of internal subversion as Soviet forces neared. These actions, while subordinate to German direction, were propelled by regimes' nationalist agendas to homogenize populations and secure spoils, revealing how Axis alignment amplified pre-existing ethnic animosities into systematic violence under wartime cover.

Collapse and Immediate Aftermath

Military Defeats and Surrenders

The Kingdom of Italy capitulated following the , which commenced on July 10, 1943, and exposed the fragility of Italian defenses after earlier setbacks in . On September 3, 1943, Italian representatives signed the at Fairfield Camp near , agreeing to cease hostilities and facilitate Allied landings on the mainland; the armistice was publicly broadcast on September 8, 1943, prompting German forces to occupy northern and and prop up the under . This surrender dissolved Italy's active participation as a co-belligerent, though partisan warfare and German countermeasures prolonged conflict in the peninsula until April 1945. As Soviet offensives dismantled Axis positions on the Eastern Front—culminating in the encirclement and fall of key cities like Kiev in November 1943 and the destruction of in 1944—several minor Axis allies defected to mitigate territorial losses and occupation. Romania's King Michael I orchestrated a coup on August 23, 1944, overthrowing Ion Antonescu's pro-German regime and aligning with the Allies, which enabled rapid Soviet advances into the . , after declaring neutrality on August 26, 1944, amid Fatherland Front pressure, signed an with the on September 9, 1944, effectively ending its wartime alliance. , having coordinated with against the USSR since , concluded a separate on September 19, 1944, following the , which forced expulsion of German troops and the . Hungary's regime resisted until the Siege of ended on February 13, 1945, with over 38,000 German and Hungarian troops killed or captured; a then signed an on April 4, 1945, though Soviet forces had already secured control. Nazi Germany's collapse accelerated after the failure of the Ardennes Offensive () from December 16, 1944, to January 25, 1945, which depleted reserves without halting Allied momentum, followed by the Soviet capture of in late April 1945. On May 7, 1945, General signed the of all German forces at , France, effective at 23:01 Central European Time on May 8; Field Marshal ratified it in on May 8–9, marking . This instrument bound remaining units, scattered across fronts from to , to lay down arms, with isolated holdouts like the surrendering by May 10. Imperial Japan's defeat stemmed from naval and air attrition, including the loss of carrier-based aviation at Midway in June 1942 and island-hopping campaigns that isolated garrisons, culminating in the firebombing of Tokyo on March 9–10, 1945, which killed approximately 100,000 civilians, and atomic strikes on (August 6) and (August 9). The on August 9 overwhelmed the , capturing 594,000 troops. Emperor broadcast acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration's unconditional terms on August 15, 1945; Foreign Minister and General Yoshijiro Umezu signed the formal instrument aboard in on September 2, 1945, obligating all Japanese forces worldwide to surrender, though some units in remote areas demobilized into 1946.

Internal Dissolutions and Betrayals

The fall of Benito Mussolini on July 25, 1943, marked the initial major internal fracture within the Axis alliance, as the Fascist Grand Council of Fascism voted 19-7 to strip him of power, prompting King Victor Emmanuel III to dismiss and arrest him, appointing Marshal Pietro Badoglio as prime minister. This coup reflected mounting disillusionment with Mussolini's leadership amid Allied invasions of Sicily and mounting military defeats, though Badoglio initially maintained Italy's Axis commitments. Secret negotiations ensued, culminating in the Armistice of Cassibile signed on September 3, 1943, between General Giuseppe Castellano and Allied representatives, which Italy publicly announced on September 8, effectively defecting from the Axis and declaring war on Germany. German forces responded with Operation Achse, swiftly occupying northern and central Italy, disarming Italian troops—resulting in over 600,000 Italians interned or deported—and installing Mussolini as head of the puppet Italian Social Republic, fracturing Italy into co-belligerent southern forces aligned with the Allies and a northern fascist remnant. Subsequent dissolutions among Axis satellites accelerated the alliance's unraveling. In , King Michael I orchestrated a coup on August 23, 1944, arresting Prime Minister and his government during a meeting at the royal palace, prompting Romania to switch allegiance, sign an with the , and declare war on the following day; Romanian forces then turned against German troops, contributing to the rapid Soviet advance into the . This defection preserved much of Romania's infrastructure from destruction, unlike more prolonged Axis holdouts. followed suit with a on September 9, 1944, led by the communist-dominated Fatherland Front, which overthrew the pro-Axis government of and Boris III's regime (Boris having died mysteriously in August), declaring war on after a brief neutrality declaration on September 5 amid Soviet declarations of war. These shifts stemmed from fears of Soviet invasion and internal opposition to continued alignment with a collapsing , enabling Soviet occupation and the execution of key Axis figures like Filov. Hungary's Regent Miklós Horthy attempted a similar reversal on October 15, 1944, announcing an armistice with the and ordering a , but German commando forces under abducted Horthy's son and staged , compelling Horthy's resignation and installing the pro-Nazi under , which prolonged Hungarian resistance until Soviet capture of in February 1945. Finland, never a formal Axis member but a co-belligerent against the USSR, signed the on September 19, 1944, requiring expulsion of approximately 200,000 German troops by mid-October; non-compliance led to the from October 1944 to , where Finnish forces systematically drove out units, destroying Lapland's infrastructure in scorched-earth retreats but avoiding full-scale betrayal until compelled by armistice terms. These events underscored the fragility of Axis cohesion, as opportunistic regime changes and armistices—driven by amid Soviet offensives—eroded the from within, hastening Germany's isolation without reciprocal loyalty from satellites.

Long-Term Legacy and Reassessment

Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials' Frameworks

The International Military Tribunal (IMT) at was established under the London Agreement of August 8, 1945, signed by the , , , and , with its annexed Charter defining the tribunal's jurisdiction, procedure, and offenses. The Charter outlined four counts of indictment: participation in a common plan or conspiracy for aggressive war; crimes against peace through planning, initiating, or waging wars of aggression; conventional war crimes such as murder, ill-treatment of prisoners, and destruction of property; and , including extermination, enslavement, and deportation of civilians. Proceedings commenced on November 20, 1945, before four judges and prosecutors from the signatory powers, trying 24 major Nazi leaders, with 19 convicted on at least one count, including 12 death sentences executed on October 16, 1946. Critics, including defense counsel at the trials and subsequent legal scholars, argued that the framework constituted ex post facto law, as offenses like crimes against peace and humanity lacked prior codification in positive international law, violating the principle of nullum crimen sine lege (no crime without prior law). The tribunal rebutted this by asserting that such acts contravened longstanding customary international norms and the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928, which renounced war as an instrument of national policy, though this defense has been contested for retroactively criminalizing policy decisions without explicit penal sanctions beforehand. Furthermore, the selective prosecution of Axis leaders while exempting Allied actions—such as the firebombing of Dresden (resulting in approximately 25,000 civilian deaths) or Soviet mass rapes in occupied Germany—underscored perceptions of victors' justice, where the tribunal served political retribution rather than impartial adjudication. The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) in operated under a similar framework, formalized by a January 19, 1946, from U.S. General as Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, drawing authority from the of July 26, 1945, which demanded Japan's and promised stern justice for war criminals. Modeled on the Nuremberg Charter, it indicted 28 Japanese leaders on charges of conspiracy, crimes against peace (waging aggressive war), war crimes, and , with trials running from May 3, 1946, to November 12, 1948, resulting in 25 convictions, including seven death sentences and 16 life imprisonments. Unlike Nuremberg, the Tokyo tribunal featured 11 Allied judges, including from , , and , but faced additional critiques for prosecutorial dominance by U.S. staff and the exclusion of , whose symbolic role in prewar decisions was not scrutinized despite evidence of his involvement in expansionist policies. Tokyo's framework amplified victors' justice concerns, as Allied firebombing of (killing over 100,000 civilians in March 1945) and the atomic bombings of and went unprosecuted, despite mirroring the destruction attributed to Japanese actions in and elsewhere. The conspiracy charge was particularly strained, applying a Western legal concept to Japan's diffuse decision-making structure, leading dissenting opinions from judges like of , who questioned the tribunal's ahistorical imposition of guilt for aggressive war absent mutual recognition of such criminality pre-1945. Both tribunals prioritized establishing precedents for individual accountability over aggressive war, influencing later instruments like the 1948 and 1998 , yet their ad hoc nature and immunity for victors highlighted enforcement asymmetries rooted in power dynamics rather than universal legal norms.

Historiographical Shifts and Revisionism

Post-war historiography of the Axis powers initially emphasized a unified bloc driven by aggressive expansionism and totalitarian ideologies, portraying the of September 27, 1940, as a deliberate coalition aimed at global domination. This orthodox view, shaped by Allied wartime propaganda and Tribunal proceedings from 1945 to 1946, attributed the war's outbreak to premeditated Axis initiatives, such as Germany's on September 1, 1939, and Japan's full-scale war against beginning July 7, 1937. Historians like in his six-volume "The Second World War" (1948–1953) reinforced this narrative, framing the Axis as a monolithic threat necessitating , with little attention to internal frictions or opportunistic elements. A significant shift occurred in the with revisionist challenges, exemplified by A.J.P. Taylor's "The Origins of the Second World War" (1961), which depicted not as a master conspirator but as an opportunist exploiting diplomatic blunders in a tradition of power politics, rendering the conflict less ideologically driven and more a chain of miscalculations. Taylor argued that Germany's actions followed from the Versailles Treaty's punitive terms—reparations totaling 132 billion gold marks imposed in 1919—and Britain's 1939 guarantee to , which he claimed provoked rather than deterred aggression, though mainstream scholars countered that such views underplayed documented expansionist doctrines like outlined in "" (1925). This revisionism extended to the Axis alliance's cohesion, questioning early portrayals of seamless unity; evidence from diplomatic records shows pursued independent aims in , refusing to join Germany's of the despite the pact's mutual aid clause, resulting in parallel rather than joint campaigns. By the 1970s and 1980s, structuralist and functionalist approaches further nuanced the narrative, emphasizing polycratic chaos within regimes like , where overlapping agencies led to improvised aggression rather than rigid planning, as analyzed in Hans Mommsen's "From to Auschwitz" (1986 English edition). For the alliance, Gerhard L. Weinberg's "A World at Arms" (1994) highlighted divergences: Italy's military underperformance—evident in its failed invasion of requiring German bailout by October 28, 1940—undermined coordination, while Japan's December 7, 1941, attack aimed at securing Pacific resources independently of European theaters. These shifts incorporated economic causal factors, such as Japan's oil embargo by the U.S. on July 26, 1941, prompting southern expansion, over ideological monoliths, drawing on declassified archives revealing Axis overconfidence in early victories like France's fall on June 22, 1940. Revisionist fringes emerged, including Holocaust minimization and claims of Allied —e.g., equating Dresden's February 13–15, 1945, bombing (25,000–35,000 deaths) to Axis atrocities—but these lack empirical support and are rejected by consensus , as forensic evidence confirms the 's systematic scale of 6 million Jewish deaths via gas chambers and from 1941 onward. In , post-1945 narratives shifted toward victimhood, emphasizing atomic bombings ( August 6, 1945; August 9) with 129,000–226,000 fatalities while downplaying (December 1937–January 1938, 200,000+ civilian deaths), reflecting domestic political pressures rather than archival rigor. Germany's debate (1986–1987), pitting Ernst Nolte's relativization of Auschwitz against Jürgen Habermas's defense of its uniqueness, underscored tensions between contextualizing Axis crimes amid Soviet gulags (20 million deaths, –1950s) and preserving causal distinction, with Nolte attributing Nazi actions partly to Bolshevik precedents like the 1933 blamed on communists. Academic sources, often institutionally left-leaning, have critiqued such as excusing , yet empirical data affirms Axis initiatory invasions as primary triggers, absent equivalent Allied preemption. Contemporary historiography integrates global perspectives, viewing the Axis as a loose anti-colonial/anti-communist entente—rooted in the 1936 —marred by strategic , such as and Romania's 1940 accessions yielding minimal joint operations. This reassessment, informed by digitized wartime cables, stresses causal realism: resource scarcity (Germany's 1939 oil imports at 80% foreign-dependent) drove gambles like (June 22, 1941, 3.8 million troops), not mere ideology, while Allied industrial superiority—U.S. GDP tripling to $1.5 trillion (1945 dollars) by war's end—ensured Axis collapse. Revisionism persists in popular works like Patrick Buchanan's "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War" (2008), positing avoidable conflict via reversal, but is countered by evidence of Hitler's unyielding demands, as in the November 1937 outlining conquest. Overall, shifts prioritize verifiable documents over moral absolutism, revealing Axis disunity as a self-defeating factor: no shared command structure, unlike Allied combined chiefs from 1942.

Enduring Geopolitical Influences

The defeat of the Axis powers in 1945 enabled the to occupy , where advances against German forces resulted in the installation of communist regimes across the region. By 1948, governments aligned with had been established in following rigged elections in January 1947, Czechoslovakia via a coup in February 1948, and after show trials and purges by 1949, creating a bloc of satellite states that formed the in 1955. This division solidified the described by in 1946, partitioning Europe into Western capitalist democracies and Eastern Soviet-dominated territories, a geopolitical fault line that persisted until the Soviet collapse in 1991. In , the Allied occupation zones agreed at the in February 1945 evolved into permanent divisions, with the Soviet zone becoming the German Democratic Republic in 1949 and the Western zones forming the of , fostering enduring tensions exemplified by the erected in 1961. This bifurcation influenced NATO's formation in 1949 as a bulwark against Soviet expansion into areas vacated by Axis collapse, shaping transatlantic security structures that remain foundational to European defense. The war's devastation, including Axis occupation policies that weakened national institutions, also catalyzed Western European ; the founded in 1951 by , , , and others aimed to bind economies interdependently to avert revanchist conflicts akin to those preceding Axis aggression. In Asia, Japan's imperial defeat dismantled its , proclaimed in 1940, and created power vacuums that accelerated and realignments. The occupied Japan from 1945 to 1952 under General , implementing demilitarization, land reforms, and a new that transformed it into a parliamentary and enduring U.S. ally, with the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty and U.S.-Japan Security Treaty anchoring Pacific alliances against communist threats. Japanese wartime conquests crippled European colonial administrations in , weakening Britain in (independent 1947), the in (independent 1949), and in Indochina, where declared Vietnam's independence in 1945 amid the collapse of French and Japanese control. These shifts, compounded by Axis disruptions to imperial supply lines and economies, hastened the end of formal European empires, with over 40 Asian and African nations gaining sovereignty by 1960, reshaping global geopolitics toward a multipolar order dominated by U.S.-Soviet rivalry rather than Axis-style autarkic blocs.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.