How far could communism spread?

Xachiavelli · Jun 11, 2012

I'm wondering how far communism could spread and how this would effect the cold war. Would it maybe get hot?

A couple of parameters i should give here:

Any POD's must be after the start of the Russian Civil War (25th of October 1917)
No arguments about just which nations are actually communist. For the purposes of this, if a nation says it's communist, it is
The USSR must remain the dominant communist power in the world, at least politically

I have a fairly decent starting point, and that being that the reds somehow win the Finnish civil war (Not sure how to do that, but i'm sure it's possible), eventually leading to Finland being reabsorbed back into the USSR.
Secondly, the red army captures Warsaw and eventually Poland too joins the USSR. (Not sure what the POD for this could be, but i'm guessing it can be done)
Next have a communist victory in the Spanish Civil War (From what i understand, this involves a Republican victory followed by a communist coup)

Obviously with no Poland, WW2 is bound to be different. You still have a somewhat similar WW1, so you still have the Versailles Treaty, so you likely still have Hitler. The Anschluss of Austria still happens as OTL, yet ITTL, Hitler will next turn to Switzerland, not annexing it as with Austria, but rather partitioning it like Czechoslovakia. Most likely splitting it between France, Germany and Italy. For what it's worth, Lichtenstein probably gets annexed to Germany too, not that it's of much consequence.
Then you have the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact - It probably still exists, but is going to be very different. There is no Poland and no Finland, so here's my idea of how it goes:
The USSR still gets the Baltics, plus Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina. They also get Aaland, which became a Swedish protectorate after the white Fins fled there after the civil war (Probably should have mentioned that earlier, sorry). So the Soviets demand Aaland from the Swedes and also Gotland (Because they can, Stalin was like that). I don't really know enough to comment about how Sweden would react to this, but if they refuse, then the Winter War is a war between the USSR and Sweden (Which the USSR would without a doubt win).
The pivotal point of this pact is Czechoslovakia, which according to the pact, is to be divided between Germany and Hungary (As it was IOTL), Germany invades and WW2 begins.

During WW2, Spain decides to annex Andorra (Permanent revolution theory and all that).

Meanwhile, Hitler, of course is planning to invade the USSR, however, Stalin this time is aware of it and prepares accordingly. Even with the much larger USSR proposed ITTL, won't be able to stop the Axis at the border, but they'll stop them a lot sooner leading to the Iron curtain being pushed further West (That coupled with a more powerful USSR and the lack of Finland as a German ally).
Hopefully, Turkey can join the Axis somehow, leading to them being perhaps annexed into the USSR (The Russians have always wanted Constantinople, now they'll finally get it).
Also, in OTL WW2, the allies issued an ultimatum to Afghanistan to expel all German and Italian diplomatic personnel or else! The Iranians were issued a similar ultimatum and they refused, and we all know how that turned out, so let's assume the Afghans refused so the Soviets occupied them, likely refusing to withdraw after the war.

Moving on to the Iran Crisis, with the possibility of Turkey and Afghanistan being part of the USSR, this doubtless has an effect on the war, perhaps allowing the Soviets to win it, thereby eventually absorbing the Republic of Mahabad and People's Republic of Azerbaijan.

Not sure how plausible all of this is but that's all i have so far. If i get enough ideas i'll write a TL on it.

Things that are essential:

PRC owns Formosa (Taiwan)
The Soviets control Constatinople (Actually own it, not just a puppet state)
No Sino-Soviet split
No Yugoslavian-Soviet split
All communist nations joined by some pact or alliance of some description

Things that are preferred, yet not essential:

Inner Mongolia belongs to Mongolia
East Turkestan belongs to the USSR
The USSR survives until the modern day
Larger DPRK

Expansions of non-communist allies of the communist blocc are also prefered, although i already have a pretty epic one prepared for Muammar al-Gaddafi.

I should add, i have no idea how a communist Spain would fare in WW2, but i'm sure their survival is possible.

Sorry if this was a long one, but i've been thinking about it for a while.

Thanks in advance

GiantMonkeyMan · Jun 11, 2012

There were a host of potential communist (or at least left-wing) countries in Africa and South America. With a larger, more powerful and united Sino-Soviet front in anti-imperialist ventures you could easily see many more successful revolutions across the third world. Congo, Chile, Bolivia, Angola just to name a few and each of these could be proxy-battlegrounds that would avoid full-scale war.

EternalCynic · Jun 11, 2012

I think Mao and Tito were too indigenous to be Soviet lackeys for too long. Without ASBs, both China and Yugoslavia are bound to split with the Soviets, though perhaps for different reasons than OTL.

I also think there are limits to how far the Soviet Union was prepared to formally annex new land, especially after Stalin used Russian nationalism to rally support during Barbarossa. The Soviets will try to reconquer all former Russian Empire territories. Beyond that would involve setting up puppet states. A more successful pan-Arab movement, perhaps one without an Israel in its core, would be a reliable ally but not a puppet of the Soviets.

Moving to the east, no atomic bombing leads to Operation Downfall and a Soviet invasion from the north, partitioning Japan into four sectors. The Red Army captures all of Korea and sets up an all-Korean DPRK.

In Manchuria, where Mao had regrouped his forces, he already starts quietly subverting Soviet presence while preparing to conquer all of China. The KMT melt away from all of China, including Taiwan. The Chinese occupation sector in Japan is merged with the Soviet one, forming a Japanese Democratic Republic. Japan then experiences a Korean-style civil war which leads to a Vietnam-like outcome into the late 50s.

Moving to the south, Ho Chi Minh and Sukarno more openly align with Mao. The British in Malaya fight an increasingly futile insurgency against Communist-backed rebels and by the early 60s retreat like the French after Dien Bien Phu.

As a result, Mao becomes more internationalist and emerges as head of a second Communist bloc, which begins a crash industrialization program. Both Communist blocs and the west are engaged in a three-way Cold War, and the three superpowers use remaining European colonies as proxy battlegrounds. The west is deeply demoralized by this string of defeats, resulting in less openness and democracy.

But that sounds like a backstory to 1984!

Xachiavelli · Jun 11, 2012

EternalCynic said:
I think Mao and Tito were too indigenous to be Soviet lackeys for too long. Without ASBs, both China and Yugoslavia are bound to split with the Soviets, though perhaps for different reasons than OTL.

They don't need to be Soviet lackies, but Soviet allies. If the USSR and the PRC each head their own communist bloccs and then ally with each other formally, that's a truly formidable force!

EternalCynic said:
I also think there are limits to how far the Soviet Union was prepared to formally annex new land, especially after Stalin used Russian nationalism to rally support during Barbarossa. The Soviets will try to reconquer all former Russian Empire territories. Beyond that would involve setting up puppet states.

Well, that works for Poland and Finland (Including Aaland). As for Gotland, it's not important or large enough a territory to require setting up a puppet state

EternalCynic said:
A more successful pan-Arab movement, perhaps one without an Israel in its core, would be a reliable ally but not a puppet of the Soviets.

I have a plan to use Gaddafi to unite most of the Arab world and subsequently lead an African blocc (Including the likes of Idi Amin, Thomas Sankara, Mano Dayak and Charles Bokassa) who will be a close ally of the Eastern blocc, yet not a puppet, not by any means.

EternalCynic said:
Moving to the east, no atomic bombing leads to Operation Downfall and a Soviet invasion from the north, partitioning Japan into four sectors. The Red Army captures all of Korea and sets up an all-Korean DPRK.

That's perfect. I think with the proposed expanded USSR, a Communist Spain (Who, somewhat ironically will send volunteers to the Eastern Front) and of course the USSR being prepared, the war in Europe will be over much quicker, allowing the Allies to turn East quicker, perhaps before the bomb is done. You could also delay the bomb by a year or so by having Einstein fail to flee Germany for whatever reason.

EternalCynic said:
In Manchuria, where Mao had regrouped his forces, he already starts quietly subverting Soviet presence while preparing to conquer all of China. The KMT melt away from all of China, including Taiwan. The Chinese occupation sector in Japan is merged with the Soviet one, forming a Japanese Democratic Republic. Japan then experiences a Korean-style civil war which leads to a Vietnam-like outcome into the late 50s.

*Applauds*
That's perfect in every way, i love it!

EternalCynic said:
Moving to the south, Ho Chi Minh and Sukarno more openly align with Mao. The British in Malaya fight an increasingly futile insurgency against Communist-backed rebels and by the early 60s retreat like the French after Dien Bien Phu.

Again, perfect.

EternalCynic said:
As a result, Mao becomes more internationalist and emerges as head of a second Communist bloc, which begins a crash industrialization program. Both Communist blocs and the west are engaged in a three-way Cold War, and the three superpowers use remaining European colonies as proxy battlegrounds. The west is deeply demoralized by this string of defeats, resulting in less openness and democracy.

Don't love it as much. The tri-polar cold war is what i'm trying to avoid. Is there really no way to keep the USSR and the PRC in each other's good books?

Xachiavelli · Jun 11, 2012

Couple of questions for everyone regarding my initial suggestions for this different WW2:

How would a communist Spain fare during WW2?
With a more powerful, better prepared USSR, just how far West would the Iron Curtain be pushed?
Would Sweden surrender Aaland and Gotland or would there be a war? If there's a war, how does it go?
What would happen to Norway, Denmark and Greece?

EternalCynic · Jun 11, 2012

Assuming Khrushchev does roll back Stalinism, it's possible for Deng Xiaoping helped by Zhou Enlai and Lin Biao, both spooked by Mao's dogma, to seize power during the Hundred Flowers Campaign, or after the Great Leap Forward. With a more pragmatic and frankly less insane Chinese leadership, Sino-Soviet relations may not be so hostile. Both may respectfully disagree about the method of implementing socialism while agreeing to socialist solidarity.

Whatever happens in India, the new leadership will be even more socialist than IOTL, while deftly dealing with both blocs. I think it will emerge as a respectable socialist power in its own right, with the Congress Party emerging as a dominant party in a democratic framework.

In the long term having multiple socialist powers might eventually put an end to accusations of revisionism, merely because it's accepted that no power can monopolize the socialist banner.

Xachiavelli · Jun 11, 2012

EternalCynic said:
Assuming Khrushchev does roll back Stalinism, it's possible for Deng Xiaoping helped by Zhou Enlai and Lin Biao, both spooked by Mao's dogma, to seize power during the Hundred Flowers Campaign, or after the Great Leap Forward. With a more pragmatic and frankly less insane Chinese leadership, Sino-Soviet relations may not be so hostile. Both may respectfully disagree about the method of implementing socialism while agreeing to socialist solidarity.

That works pretty well. That disagreement yet solidarity is pretty much exactly what i'm going for.

EternalCynic said:
Whatever happens in India, the new leadership will be even more socialist than IOTL, while deftly dealing with both blocs. I think it will emerge as a respectable socialist power in its own right, with the Congress Party emerging as a dominant party in a democratic framework.

Quick question - Are we talking about a communist India here?

Detlef · Jun 11, 2012

Xachiavelli said:
I'm wondering how far communism could spread and how this would effect the cold war. Would it maybe get hot?

A couple of parameters i should give here:

Any POD's must be after the start of the Russian Civil War (25th of October 1917)

No arguments about just which nations are actually communist. For the purposes of this, if a nation says it's communist, it is

The USSR must remain the dominant communist power in the world, at least politically

I have a fairly decent starting point, and that being that the reds somehow win the Finnish civil war (Not sure how to do that, but i'm sure it's possible), eventually leading to Finland being reabsorbed back into the USSR.
Secondly, the red army captures Warsaw and eventually Poland too joins the USSR. (Not sure what the POD for this could be, but i'm guessing it can be done))

With the Red Army at the German border in 1920 there is a good chance Germany will become communist too. Either during the political unrest in the early 1929s (Lenin at that time might have pushed for it) or during the Great Depression (Stalin supporting the German communists, remember the common border here).
Given the 100,000 Versailles Treaty limit to the German armed forces I suspect Stalin would have decided in favor of any German communist petition for help.

Xachiavelli said:
Obviously with no Poland, WW2 is bound to be different. You still have a somewhat similar WW1, so you still have the Versailles Treaty, so you likely still have Hitler. The Anschluss of Austria still happens as OTL, yet ITTL, Hitler will next turn to Switzerland, not annexing it as with Austria, but rather partitioning it like Czechoslovakia. Most likely splitting it between France, Germany and Italy. For what it's worth, Lichtenstein probably gets annexed to Germany too, not that it's of much consequence.

See above.
If you still have our TL Versailles Treaty, then Germany quite likely will be a communist country too. Either in the early 1920s or the early 1930s.
If - on the other hand - the Entente gets seriously frightened by the loss of Poland in 1920 then I could maybe envision changes in the Versailles Treaty. Difficult to say how large they might be. I could see the British Empire being more favorable to changes, France probably less so.
If the changes are large enough, Germany might avoid Hitler. If the changes aren´t large enough, a communist Germany seems to me likelier than a Hitler Germany?

And Switzerland?
Why do that?
Austria was understandable back then. The Austrians in 1919 wanted to join Germany, the Entente forbade it. But Switzerland is an entirely different case.
Not to mention that it would make every small neutral country bordering Germany nervous. Making trade for Germany more difficult.
A neutral Switzerland is much more useful to Hitler.

Xachiavelli said:
Then you have the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact - It probably still exists, but is going to be very different. There is no Poland and no Finland, so here's my idea of how it goes:
The USSR still gets the Baltics, plus Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina. They also get Aaland, which became a Swedish protectorate after the white Fins fled there after the civil war (Probably should have mentioned that earlier, sorry). So the Soviets demand Aaland from the Swedes and also Gotland (Because they can, Stalin was like that). I don't really know enough to comment about how Sweden would react to this, but if they refuse, then the Winter War is a war between the USSR and Sweden (Which the USSR would without a doubt win).

I´ve got some problems here.
First of all, how do you envision that "Winter War" between Sweden and the USSR in case Sweden refuses? The Soviet Baltic fleet was pretty weak so I can´t see any large scale invasions by sea? And a land invasion? It´s pretty cold close to the Arctic circle up north. And the infrastructure probably won´t be there to supply large scale attacks?
And second, Germany depends on Swedish iron ore. There is no way Germany would sign such a treaty. Even if Sweden cedes both the Aland islands and Gotland without a war it would mean the USSR controlling much of the Baltic Sea. Not acceptable to Germany. Not to mention that in the summer months quite a bit of Swedish iron ore was shipped from the Swedish port of Lulea instead of Narvik in Norway. With the USSR owning the Aland islands and Gotland that route only survives as long as Stalin allows it.

Xachiavelli said:
The pivotal point of this pact is Czechoslovakia, which according to the pact, is to be divided between Germany and Hungary (As it was IOTL), Germany invades and WW2 begins.

What happened with our TL Slovakia? A Nazi puppet regime to be sure but IOTL not annexed by either Germany of Hungary?

KACKO · Jun 11, 2012

Detlef said:
What happened with our TL Slovakia? A Nazi puppet regime to be sure but IOTL not annexed by either Germany of Hungary?

Well, if there is red Poland, and Germany goes Nazi anyway, would there be any Munich at all? Wouldn't Soviet influence during depression help built stronger communist party in Czechoslovakia? In OTL Czechoslovakia had defense treaty with USSR which depended on France actions. In this TL it could be much stronger or on the other side with plenty of former Legionaries with experience with Russian civil war in Czechoslovak army actually stronly anti communist Czechoslovakia could merge out and form alliance with Germany.

Also don't forget Czechoslovakia fought red Hungary in 1919.

Xachiavelli · Jun 12, 2012

Truthfully, i think the idea of a red Germany this early on hurts communism seeing as without a similar to OTL WW2, Stalin doesn't get the chance to sweep Eastern Europe and later capture Manchuria for Mao. Also, the whole idea of Japan being divided into occupation zones and later united by a civil war is butterflied away.

Any way to still have Hitler come to power and start WW2 in Europe?