Nazi-Soviet Cold War

I'm still trying to figure out a way for either a three-way civil war, or a cold war in which both the fascist west Euro countries (led by Germany) and communist Russia exist.

1. Are there any national socialist leaders who were less fanatic and strategy-poor than Hitler, who could have been willing to settle for a temporary peace with the Soviets after a war with them?

2. Likewise, could there have been a Soviet leader who could have had more moderate attitudes than Stalin?
3. The main question here is what happens to eastern Europe. Could we have some situation where the north of that region (Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia, perhaps) or the south of that region (Balkans, Greece, Turkey) belongs to one bloc, while the rest belongs to the other?

1. Goering is the best I can think of, or perhaps Hitler gets couped around Munich. Best bet would be him dying before Barbarossa, with someone taking over who had reasons to want Britain gone first...

2. This one seems like it may be slightly easier, maybe Stalin doesn't do the Purge as extensively but then ends up being killed by one of the generals he killed in OTL?

3. I see it as a situation a bit more similar to the Iron Curtain, with the blocs facing each other on a roughly east-west axis. The Balkans seem most interesting- Hungary and Romania will likely join opposite sides, while Yugoslavia will have supporters of both ideologies.

Turtledove had a very interesting scenario called "Ready for the Fatherland" (short story) in which Manstein is at a conference with Hitler in 1943, suddenly snaps with anger at the No-retreat policy, and assassinates Hitler and the top Nazis there and takes over. He withdraws the Wehrmacht, manages to beat back the Russians, and Stalin accepts a status quo ante bellum peace. The Germans are then able to redirect all their forces against the Western Allies - the British and Americans are ejected from Italy, though retain Sicily, and although Overlord happens, the Allies are beaten back and there's another Dunkirk followed by a treaty.

It's a three-sided cold war that becomes four-sided when Britain breaks with the US. Notably the British Empire includes all the former colonies of the European powers conquered by Germany - pretty much all Africa, for example - and due to the Soviets being the greater threat to India and British southern Persia, British foreign policy ends up being more pro-German. The Pacific war went similarly to OTL but the Russians entered earlier and the northern half of Japan is a Soviet-allied state. Nuclear weapons ("sunbombs") have never been used in a world war but there was some hinted at incident between the two Japans (possibly an analogue to the Korean War) in which one side may have used a sunbomb, and everyone backed away when they saw the implications.

For this to really work you need the US to stay out of the war or at the very least stay out of the european war and keep lend lease as a cash and carry basis.

This would allow you to have at least a two or three way cold war.

Without the US GB would have been forced to make peace at some point.

If it happens after 43 then the eastern war would have been fought to exhaustion by both the nazis and soviets.

The nazis might well come out ahead but the soviets would probably get nukes before the germans as they had better access to the US program.

How to keep the US out is the big question maybe have Roosevelt's assassination succeed.

Lucky British bomb strike taking out the Nazi Hierarchy leaving a general or committee (made up of Nazi's and Generals (SS wasn't strong enough)) to take charge, they decide to concentrate on Britain and eventually a negotiated peace before Stalin feels ready to strike West and then the Bomb freezes the situation.

I'm not an expert on anti Hitler polts, but was there one which could bowl him over between April and June '41? That would give Germany most of Europe, a continuation war with Britain but nothing which could crush Germany under a massive alliance.

Yes, "Ready for the Fatherland" was my original inspiration for a three-sided Cold War, though not to mention Hearts of Iron II with its trichotomy of an alliance system (rather than just Allies vs. Axis).

Thande said:

It's a three-sided cold war that becomes four-sided when Britain breaks with the US. Notably the British Empire includes all the former colonies of the European powers conquered by Germany - pretty much all Africa, for example - and due to the Soviets being the greater threat to India and British southern Persia, British foreign policy ends up being more pro-German.

Click to expand...

I think you might be overextrapolating the British conditions, though. I think the U.K. is just playing a more independent diplomatic/espionage game by dealing with one devil for one week before the other the next. Kind of like in the James Bond universe, the British have their own policy in the Cold War, while allied to the U.S. they had their own dealings with both the SU and the various criminal super-organizations. I don't think they necessarily became a fourth side in the Cold War- after all, nation-blocs with similar ideologies won't necessarily risk nuclear war with each other.

How about a surviving Ernst Röhm in conjunction with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact holding?

Maybe a surviving Röhm leads Germany after a conspiracy against Hitler after 1939, but before Barbarossa?

Riain said:

I'm not an expert on anti Hitler polts, but was there one which could bowl him over between April and June '41? That would give Germany most of Europe, a continuation war with Britain but nothing which could crush Germany under a massive alliance.

Click to expand...

I agree. ITTL, Göring would take over, and he was initially against the war but followed his Führer.

With Hitler dead before Barbarossa, the Nazis could use the whole of occupied Europe for their war against Britain, maybe invading Matla and trying a successful mediterranean strategy.

I was thinking that Scandinavia (minus neutral Sweden and Soviet Finland) are in the Axis, but under a Nordic League of Quislings. Poland and Cezechoslovakia are also under the Reich's dominion. Parts of the western Balkans (Albania, maybe even the lands of Yugoslavia) are also under Axis rule, either German or Italian. The Soviets have the rest of the Balkans, Greece communists win out, and they took Iran. The Middle East is hotly contested.

I'm still unsure what the Allies would do. Let's say that the Vichy France rules all of France and is an Axis member state, while a Free France movement has control of North Africa or some other colony. War there is certain. The Allies are basically the Anglo-American alliance plus various Latin American states not seduced by fascism and also the European gov'ts in exile. Eventually, both the British and the Japanese try for a freer position within their respective alliance systems, and do some adventurism to protect their colonial empires.

Strategos' Risk said:

I think you might be overextrapolating the British conditions, though. I think the U.K. is just playing a more independent diplomatic/espionage game by dealing with one devil for one week before the other the next. Kind of like in the James Bond universe, the British have their own policy in the Cold War, while allied to the U.S. they had their own dealings with both the SU and the various criminal super-organizations.

Click to expand...

Well I based that on the phrasing used by the internal monologue of one of the characters - "The Soviet Union, the United States, Britain, and the Nazis were ready to throw sunbombs at each other".

Strategos' Risk said:

I don't think they necessarily became a fourth side in the Cold War- after all, nation-blocs with similar ideologies won't necessarily risk nuclear war with each other.

Click to expand...

China had a similar ideology to the USSR throughout the 60s and 70s but that didn't stop them being on the verge of nuclear war a few times.

Strategos' Risk said:

I was thinking that Scandinavia (minus neutral Sweden and Soviet Finland) are in the Axis, but under a Nordic League of Quislings. Poland and Cezechoslovakia are also under the Reich's dominion. Parts of the western Balkans (Albania, maybe even the lands of Yugoslavia) are also under Axis rule, either German or Italian. The Soviets have the rest of the Balkans, Greece communists win out, and they took Iran. The Middle East is hotly contested.

Click to expand...

Hmm, why would the Balkans be that entirely Soviet? I'd imagine Hungry certainly and possibly Bulgaria as well would be in the Axis. Some kind of Yugoslav break-up could also be possible, say with a facist Croatia and a Serbia under Tito... Sweden also wouldn't be neutral for long with a commie Finland on its borders, and Greece might end up becoming the only still democratic state in Eastern Europe instead of another red puppet. In the ME we sould see Iraq allying with the USSR for spoils in Iran, while the German-supported UAR of Egypt and Syria is their major opposition, and that's not even mentioning the continuing problems in Palestine.

Thande said:

China had a similar ideology to the USSR throughout the 60s and 70s but that didn't stop them being on the verge of nuclear war a few times.

Click to expand...

That's true. I guess I've just been kind of influenced by this excellent thread about three-way atomic cold wars.

Darkest said:

No one else really had the option to become a superpower, unless you went back pretty far. Or, there could always be a nuclear cold war that operates on nationalist levels. Still, it seemed like powers would jockey for one alliance to combat another alliance.

Nuclear cold wars must operate by ideology. Superpowered USA isn't going to attack the superpowered British Commonwealth. They are going to work together. And what ideologies are available that would be hostile to all others.

Capitalist democracy, ultranationalist fascism, totalitarianist communism, maybe unionism, theocracy... that's all I can think of. It also seems that some fascist or communist governments might oppose other fascist or communist governments... like the Soviet Union against the PRC. Theocracies could oppose everyone, including other theocracies.

You might be able to get a five-sided war if you merely separated the world into theocracies. Protestantism, Catholicism, Islam, Juche?, Hinduism... really don't know if you could get more than that.

Click to expand...

1]I always think Goring would be a very poor Fuhrer.For a start,he was lazy,fat,incompetant[messing up the Luftwaffe,even putting Luftwaffe personel into ground-combat roles].He did not get on well with other members of the Nazi hierarchy[Himmler,Bormann,Raeder etc].His own staff laughed at him and condemned his actions.In fact the only skill he could market was his loyalty to Hitler.Goring was lucky that the fuhrer never seemed to see him at his worst,otherwise he would have been surely have been fired or shot.I think Albert Speer or Erwin Rommel would have been more moderate and better at strategic thinking.However neither had the support to become Fuhrer.So,its really down to Bormann,Himmler or Donitz.
2]Molotov,he has experience in foreign relations.He was more moderate than Stalin.In OTL,he was actually first to address the Soviet people following the German invaision in 1941.
3]Well,Finland and Czechoslovakia are probably in the German bloc.Can't imagine the Romanians in the Soviet Bloc as the germans needed the oil from that country.Balkans are not likely to be in the soviet sphere either as Germany and Italy would not want easy Russian naval access to the the Med.Soviet occupied Iran is possible.Post-war Soviets could try and occupy some of the Middle east.Oil fields would be valuable and the Germans could only raise hollow objections or risk another General war.Poland would probably be split the same as 1939.

A neat way to have the Balkans would be to have Horthy do his split from Hitler 5 years early, joining up with the Soviets. Bulgaria could go with it's historical ties to Russia, but Romania would be taken over by the Iron Guard and become a strong German ally.

It woudn't matter that Goering was incompetent, Hitler was no model of competence either. What would matter is that the invasion of SU was tripped up at a crucial time, and didn't go ahead. This would ensure Germany remained a self-reliant superpower rivalling the SU and USA. Over the winter months of 1941-2 a proper leadership team could emerge, which could be satisifed with the gains up to April '41 plus whatever was taken from the Brits afterward.

I'm actually contemplating having Japan not attack the U.S., either. I'm kind of thinking, in broad strokes, that first we have Hitler dying, Goering/less fanatic Nazi coming to power, no invasion of Russia before European conquest is finalized.

Sometime after the Germans consolidate rule over their empire of puppets and satellites, they do a more coordinated Barbarossa with Japan. The Soviets take great hits, but then one thing leads to another and the Anglo-Americans are dragged into it. The Reich starts feeling the heat, possibly undergo a "revolt of the generals" type of event, and end up making peace, but not before the Soviets recover and gain back their territory. There's no love lost between the SU and the late Allies, and a shaky peace is signed.

I'm also wondering if Japan would not have lost their empire and whole imperialist/fascistic system had they not made the U.S. so angry and intent on getting an unconditional surrender.

Hmm, you could get a five-way cold war with no Japan in the war...

Six if China is liberated and a Sino-Soviet split occurs once they've rebuilt themselves.

luakel said:

A neat way to have the Balkans would be to have Horthy do his split from Hitler 5 years early, joining up with the Soviets. Bulgaria could go with it's historical ties to Russia, but Romania would be taken over by the Iron Guard and become a strong German ally.

Click to expand...

Horthy would not have alligned with the Soviet Union. Too much of his power depended upon being anticommunist, and the nation had bad memories of Bela Kun.