You could mail me or go to my home page, or the table of contents.
There are some fundamental facts of World War II that shaped the outcome. First, the Axis had nowhere near half the population and industry of the world, and therefore would eventually lose a war of attrition if they made, and failed to utterly defeat, sufficiently many enemies. Second, the Axis was inferior in naval strength, and greatly inferior in the European theater. This meant that the Allies would have free access to the industry and resources of the neutrals of the New World, and some in Asia, while the Axis wouldn't; it also meant that some Allied homelands were largely safe from direct Axis attack, while the Axis homelands were vulnerable. Fundamentally, it allowed the United States and, to a lesser extent, the British Empire, to take as much or as little of the war as suited them. Third, the Axis generally saw warfare as a state of life, while the Allies saw warfare as an aberration that was to be ended as soon as possible. The Axis societies were largely set up to support a continual state of war, whereas the Allied societies were not.
The economics spelt certain Axis defeat, and therefore the Axis had to change the economic basis or win despite their economic inferiority. This meant that the primary Axis goal had to be to defeat their enemies as economically as possible, and somehow neutralize the ones they couldn't defeat, while the Allies would win eventually if they didn't lose too badly first. A good campaign for the Axis would be a fast one that resulted in the conquest of a major enemy, such as the France campaign of 1940. A good campaign for the Allies could be one that went nowhere important, but drew in and chewed up troops and supplies from both sides, as the Allies could afford such waste more than the Axis. This was even true in such frustrating campaigns as the Italian campaign in 1943 and 1944. The Allied war effort was more successful than the Axis in sticking to what could win the war. The Axis frequently undertook operations that could not gain them any great victories, while the Allies were generally determined to engage the Axis at all possible points.
The balance of naval strength meant that the Axis was even more limited in economics, since the Allies could and did trade with all countries the Axis could not conquer, while the Axis was, in comparison, very limited. Further, it meant that most of the Allied homelands were safe. The United States, the richest and one of the most populous of the Allies, was virtually untouchable. Great Britain, rich and populous, was vulnerable from the air, but only in moments of great weakness could it be invaded. Canada, New Zealand, and South Africa contributed forces to be used where the British Empire thought best, and India contributed divisions to Europe; of the mainstays of the British Empire, only Australia was directly threatened to the extent that it had to concentrate its forces in its own defense. The German navy was suited only to be a raiding force, the Italian navy was badly commanded, and the Japanese, while strong, was not tremendously long-ranged.
The attitude of the societies aided the Allies in realizing much more of their potential than the Axis did. Historically, there is a trade-off between the ability to wage long-term war and the ability to wage short-term war. Some societies have created military aristocracies, who were the only people to carry arms. These societies had all of their military power immediately available, but were unable to expand their armies in case of need. This worked very well when wars had to be long of necessity, such as periods of many forts and inadequate siegecraft. Some societies have relied on citizen militias, enabling them to field massive armies for short periods of time, but these armies could not be maintained for long. Nazi Germany saw war as an ideal, and therefore had to try to make it bearable for the people and compatible with Nazi ideology (which, among other things, prescribed "kitchen, church, and children" as the domain of women).
The result was that Germany's economy, by far the most powerful of any of the Axis powers, was not producing at its full potential, and much of what it did produce was civilian luxuries. In contrast, the somewhat smaller British and Soviet economies were devoted to war, and each succeeded in outproducing the Germans, since both countries considered the war to be a temporary evil to be ended as soon as possible, so that the economies could go back to peace production.
The goal of the Axis had to be to avoid making too many enemies, and to deal decisively with those they could, while fending off the rest until they could be negotiated into a peace of exhaustion. In this respect, the Axis militarism might serve well, as the people of the Allies would presumably weary of the war faster than the people of the Axis. The goal of the Allies could be to engage the Axis and wear it down until it was weakened, and would either negotiate a peace or be conquered. The Allies could, in addition, afford to be particular about who they negotiated with and who they conquered: Italy and Finland surrendered and retained their independence, while Germany was utterly defeated, split into two, and its previous government obliterated.
The ultimate goals of the Axis countries were much more significant than the ultimate Allied goals, since the Axis was the one waging aggressive war, and the Allies were very interested in just making the world a safer place (although they were not averse to furthering their own national interests along the way). Japan wanted to expand their Empire by establishing a "Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere" to be run by and for the Japanese. This would be accomplished by conquering the desired areas, establishing a defensive perimeter, and holding off their enemies until they decided to spend no more lives and treasure in futile attacks on obscure places. Italy wanted glory and territory, to recreate the prestige of the Roman Empire. Germany, as far as I can tell, wanted territory in the East, with the additional goal of killing of undesirable people (Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, and so forth). The territory was to be occupied, and the original inhabitants were to be worked and mistreated to death, thus clearing the land for Germans. This is a fundamental difference between Nazi Germany and the rest of the combatants: for most countries, winning the war for defense or aggrandizement was the ultimate goal, and atrocities would be committed toward that goal, or out of hate, or out of convenience. The Nazis were fighting the war to provide an opportunity for committing atrocities. This fact must condition speculations on "what if" Germany had treated civilians in occupied territories better: in the East, this ran directly counter to German war aims.
This gives a blueprint for Axis strategy. Germany is to try to expand in the East, and will aggressively attack any European enemy in the hopes of throwing it out of the war. Italy will go along with Germany for the most part, but will attack targets of opportunity in the Mediterranean area. Japan will run wild with conquest, establish a defensive perimeter in the Pacific, and attempt to threaten as few people outside that perimeter as possible. If Japan and the British Empire go to war, Japan will attempt to take India and Australia out of the war (India is a better choice, as it can possibly be subverted rather than defeated; it will serve the Japanese almost as well if it's neutral). All Axis countries will try to avoid becoming involved in war with countries they cannot reach, particularly the United States. The Axis did not follow this strategy well.
The Allied strategy is to oppose the Axis and attempt to defend home nations. Countries being attacked will defend themselves with whatever aid can be supplied; countries not being directly attacked will try to use all their resources against the Axis, even if the theater is of no importance strategically. The Allies will, of course, aim for important targets when they can, but any fighting is useful if it is not disproportionately costly. The Allies, by and large, followed this strategy.
Go forward to Steps Toward Conflagration
All contents of these pages Copyright 1997, 1998 by David H. Thornley.