WI: East Germany pulls a Tinanamen in 1989?

From Protestants in Communist East Germany, p. 114: "After the Chinese government's brutal massacre of hundreds of protestors in Tiananmen Square on 3-4 June 1989, Honecker had made approving remarks about the 'Chinese solution' and the People's Chamber had passed a resolution praising China's 'repression of counter-revolution'... the head of the Stasi, Erich Mielke, drew up plans to open secret concentration camps where up to 20,000 dissidents could be put safely away... right up to January 1990 rumours were circulating of a possible military-style coup by the Stasi."

I could cite various other sources but yeah. If the GDR actually went through with suppressing the protests by force I imagine it'd be roundly condemned by all but the "hardline" states (Cuba, the DPRK, Romania, in this instance China, etc.) but it's not like the West could militarily intervene. Gorby opposed Honecker on a personal and political level but reformist elements in the SED would be temporarily cowed into submission, preventing Honecker's removal via party decision. I think the SED eventually falling from power is a given, but how long could it have lasted?

In not an expert but a surviving east Germany post Soviet collapse would be cool.

Gorbachev was not fond of Honecker, and if the Soviet Union isn't around to force things, the East German leadership can only do so much to its own citizens before the West Germans intervene-with probable support from many in the East German populace. It had no national raison d'etre, no reason to exist, and it benefited nobody except the aging farts in Pankow, stuck back in time. When the Soviet Union itself is clearly failing, what German will die for East Germany?

I give the SED until 1994, at best.

West Germany invade in response of civil unrest "spilling over their border"

East German leaderships is captured and tried in courts over violations of human right.

Forcible reunion of Germany done entirely by west german force (with east german populance's help too)

Son of Leman Russ said:

West Germany invade in response of civil unrest "spilling over their border"

East German leaderships is captured and tried in courts over violations of human right.

Forcible reunion of Germany done entirely by west german force (with east german populance's help too)

Click to expand...

Is that even possible without the KGB and hardliners in Moscow deposing Gorby by coup? He had reneged on the USSR's commitment to defend a fraternal socialist state against western neonazism, after all.

I'm not sure the US would have allowed West Germany to invade. It cares more about Washington than about Leipzig, after all.

The problem for the DDR is that other East European countries were already relaxing controls. East Germans were already wandering across the border from Hungary into Austria or camping out in the compound of the West German embassy in Prague. So the DDR is going to have to shut down all of its borders - not just the border with West Germany. That's going to cause even worse economic problems and so increase the unrest.

Cheers,
Nigel.

Son of Leman Russ said:

West Germany invade in response of civil unrest "spilling over their border"

East German leaderships is captured and tried in courts over violations of human right.

Forcible reunion of Germany done entirely by west german force (with east german populance's help too)

Click to expand...

A West German invasion would not only be opposed by the UK and France (which IRL were apprehensive about reunification in 1990), but it would almost certainly result in retaliation by the USSR. The Warsaw Pact and its principle of mutual defense against external invasion was still a very real thing in 1989.

I cannot see the Soviets accepting a massacre. That was not Gorbis agenda. Thus the E.Germans are alone on this and possibly get invaded by W.Germany.

MUC said:

I cannot see the Soviets accepting a massacre. That was not Gorbis agenda. Thus the E.Germans are alone on this and possibly get invaded by W.Germany.

Click to expand...

I don't think Gorby would accept a West German invasion. There's a difference between "whatever happens within a Warsaw Pact country isn't our business" and a key tenet of the Pact (mutual defense against external aggression) being violated. The situation would be different if there was a total state collapse in East Germany and West German forces came in to stabilize things, but a (more or less) stable East Germany being invaded just because it's doing something the West disapproves of would cause Soviet hardliners to demand retaliation.

The East German government was bankrupt. They needed Marks, the West would not give. Furthermore if the armed forces had fired on them or even starting a civil war it would be open.

Ismailov said:

I don't think Gorby would accept a West German invasion. There's a difference between "whatever happens within a Warsaw Pact country isn't our business" and a key tenet of the Pact (mutual defense against external aggression) being violated. The situation would be different if there was a total state collapse in East Germany and West German forces came in to stabilize things, but a (more or less) stable East Germany being invaded just because it's doing something the West disapproves of would cause Soviet hardliners to demand retaliation.

Click to expand...

Nah, but the fact that they can't justify what East Germans do mean its already a lost cause.

And in fact, having seen East Germans "immediately" invaded by West Germans may cause other Warsaw Pact member states to think twice before either get rid of their commies, or supressing unrests too openly. I predict something like compromise and peaceful multiparty elections, but not outright fall of communism.

Gorby made it clear to Honnecker that (unlike 1953) soviet tanks would not roll this time to rescue the east-german regime. But the fear of the russian soldiers was the main tool to keep the east-german people in check. The DDR police was not strong enough to control the people any longer, in Leipzig on 9th of October there were 70000 protesters and 6000 policemen for example. The Stasi had some soldiers, but not that many. The Kampfgruppen were not reliable enough. Lots of them would probably have switched sides or just not show up. That leaves the army. In my opinion, most of the east-german soldiers would not massacre their own people. Of course, nobody knows for sure. But look what happened in Romania.

My best guess is, if Honnecker ordered the chinese solution, there would be a short civil war that the communist regime would loose. No west-german invasion needed.

The DDR military would probably switch sides. Even during Tiananmen, there were sporadic fights between PLA units and many soldiers refused to obey and had to be brought back in barracks and guarded there (24 May retreat). 3,500 PLA officers disobeyed orders. What happened in Beijing was that protesters attacked soldiers (or fought back), enraging the surviving soldiers who mainly despited the Beijingese and came from poorer provinces, which explains why the soldiers didn't fraternalize.

There are videos of burnt soldiers in mlitary vehicules and beaten soldiers in Beijing. Memories of soldiers and protesters speak of fights and ambushes in the various streets of Beijing. I don't think that DDR citizens would attack soldiers in the same way.

In June 1989, it's almost impossible, as Poland already had a non-Communist government and Hungary was on the same way. So the GDR would have been isolated also geographically (China wasn't really). It certainly wouldn't have worked without direct support from the Soviet Union. With a more orthodox general-secretary in the USSR and a halted reform process in Poland and Hungary, the hardliners might have tried it.

But with the same surrounding scenario as in OTL, the GDR would isolate itself completely. And with the whole population against the SED, a Romanian scenario would have emerged: battles between Stasi forces and the demonstrators, with the NVA soon becoming divided. Some elements might switch sides and eventually join the opposition. It would probably end with a palace revolution. Honecker, Mielke, Hager, Stoph etc. getting ousted by moderates like Modrow, who'd become a Iliescu-like figure, supported by the NVA. That would spark off a radicalisation within the opposition. Think of it as Iran in 1979: you can't rule against the broad majority of the population by force forever.

No, unless they wanted to give West Germany an excuse for war. Frankly, I don't think even Russians could pull that one.

The GDR had long lost political support by the USSR, who by 1989 have been unwilling to intervene in any internal conflicts of other countries. Only an invasion by outside forces would have compelled them to intervene because of their Warsaw Pact treaty obligations, and such an invasion would obviously never have happened.

The best outcome of the scenario that OP described would be something like what happened during Arab Spring in the Egyptian Revolution, with 'only' a few hundreds dead protesters and eventually mutinies in the ranks of the armed forces, resulting in a deposed regime that is about to stand trial for their crimes. The worst outcome of this scenario would be something of an analogy to the current Syrian Civil War, with hundreds of thousands of casualties and a completely ravaged country.

Oh, and to all you guys who are saying 'West Germany would intervene for humanitarian reasons': No, they wouldn't. This would be considered an attack on a Warsaw Pact country, and would then inevitably lead to Soviet intervention.

Most importantly, West Germany wouldn't invade because the West German constitution outright forbids this kind of warfare. Do your homework, FFS. As attractive as an aggressive modern (West) Germany seems to be to some - you know, Nazis and all that, hurr durr - it. Is. Simply. Im. Fucking. Possible.

So fugeddaboudid.

Son of Leman Russ said:

West Germany invade in response of civil unrest "spilling over their border"

East German leaderships is captured and tried in courts over violations of human right.

Forcible reunion of Germany done entirely by west german force (with east german populance's help too)

Click to expand...

Not without blessing of the WW2 allies. Exspecially France and United Kingdom (Thatcher) were very concerned about a united Germany (the Telegraph published a dramatic headline: Germany, an economic and military Superpower.

Byzantion said:

Not without blessing of the WW2 allies. Exspecially France and United Kingdom (Thatcher) were very concerned about a united Germany (the Telegraph published a dramatic headline: Germany, an economic and military Superpower.

Click to expand...

The US wasn't going to interfere, nor was the Soviet Union. Gorbachev isn't going to save East Germany. Bush Sr. had no problem with a unified Germany. So, Britain and France are going to try and prop up the GDR-a Communist state-by themselves? Without the Communist system, East Germany has no reason or basis for existence-the Politburo had been trying for decades to create a separate identity for the East, but failed. The 1989 mass revolt couldn't make that clearer. "Wir bleiben hier!"

What is Thatcher going to say to the world? "We are invading because we are haunted by what happened in the 40s, and never mind that East Germany is falling apart. We will prop up the Communist system if we have to." It'll be pretty bad PR.

The Warsaw pact means nothing by 1989. They aren't going to save Honecker. It'll be just the UK and France, and the rest of the world isn't going to be impressed if they threaten West Germany with nukes or invasion to prevent them from preventing the East German regime from massacring their own people. And remember-the majority of East Germans are going to desert the regime, with all the problems that creates. Anybody who would want to prop up a second Germany won't have many people to prop up.