Sure, one radically different from any suggestions here yet:
A "Liberal-Wank" world at peace, with no superpower polarization, and no threats from major insurgent third-countries.
I think we could have come really close to it just by having Hitler fail to take power in Germany. No Third Reich, no WWII. Maybe Mussolini rocks the boat a bit by his scheme to conquer Ethiopia--and maybe the Anglo-French leadership of the League of Nations, undistracted by concerns of a rapidly recovering Germany under a ruthless and aggressive dictator, follow through on serious sanctions by the League followed by military confrontation that Italy loses. Or vice versa, they complacently let Italy have its bit of colonial empire and chest-pounding and it all just cools down from there. In Asia of course Japan would presumably still be stirring up all kinds of mayhem, but undistracted by European tensions again the Western powers can handle Japan without recourse to the total war and massive investment in weapons development of OTL.
As for the USSR--I suppose over time everyone would become complacent about it. Under Stalin the country was in tension, in constant warlike preparation for the inevitable war against the capitalist west--but with Stalin always decapitating his military leadership before it can become too competent. If the West never attacks the Soviet Union, the USSR will never, in my opinion, attack the West. Stalin keeps meaning to but never gets around to it, and his successors will presumably value peace. With no Nazi invasion, there are no conquests in Eastern Europe.
So--under these circumstances, will there eventually nevertheless be a big war to follow WWI? Perhaps there can be, but let's look at the timelines where there isn't one--they also seem plausible unless one takes as an axiom that war is inevitable. How about major international tensions leading to arms races that however don't result in war? Those seem quite likely, but I think under those circumstances military rocketry, and even early and substantial regime backing of explicitly space-based tech like spy satellites and communications, navigation and weather satellites will come up on the agendas of the leaders of both sides.
So--as the bumper stickers say, "Visualize World Peace!" Imagine that the mutual fear between economically recovering Europe and self-constructing USSR gradually relaxes. It may never go away completely, but with no European nations arming as Hitler led the way in doing OTL, the Soviets don't need to divert so much effort to amassing arms themselves. The United States, slowly recovering from the Depression itself, does not have the world turned upside down nor any excuses for any major military ventures except against Japan, which would mostly be a Naval war, one the USN can win handily, with likely RN and French naval support, without rapidly pushing the rate of tech nor even engaging a massive building program in the shipyards. Eventually one way or another the conflict with Japan is settled. In fact we can go one better and make the POD far back enough that not only are the Nazis a disgruntled political side show in Germany, but Japan is somehow diverted from her militaristic path and the Empire is just a bunch of islands (including Taiwan) and Korea, and it never goes on the warpath to get more.
So, we don't have to imagine a world completely free of all arms and where no one could conceivably take advantage to try to become a mighty warlord. But the latter would not have actually happened yet in the world we should envision--perhaps some tried here or there but were put down by collective security under the League of Nations.
This timeline might have its Von Brauns, and Korolevs, and Goddards. What they lack is funding and publicity. No generals showed up with blank checks. There was no track record of success on the tactical scale and no long series of taxpayer-funded experiments with small rockets to lay the groundwork for more ambitious Army schemes for bigger and longer-range rockets to dovetail with the sci-fi dreams of the engineers of achieving orbit.
Without the militaries of their respective countries begging for new weapons, development of rocketry remains in the hand of individual enthusiasts.
Under those circumstances it makes sense to me that progress would be slow. Because of that, enthusiasm would be harder to sustain. Even if individual generals or admirals get excited by the prospects of a medium-range or even intercontinental rocket for weapons delivery, the political powers that be will presumably veto funds in favor of maintaining strength through tried-and-true forms of arms.
So--even if the idea of either communication or surveillance satellites might emerge from the likes of the British Interplanetary Society, with the world in this kind of long-sustained peace, existing solutions will generally seem good enough to governments, since there is no ballistic missile program to "borrow" rockets from to bridge the gap and make these applications. So they will stagnate in file drawers.
