Likely leaders of ATL Soviet satellite states

[Meadow]

I did a thread on this years ago but it got no replies at all. Let's try again.

Similar to the 'Nazi puppet president' thread, if more of Europe had, via the 112th Handwavian Rifles Division, been under the control of the Soviets in 1945, who would have been the likely leaders during the creation of the new satellite states? And who would have succeeded them?

TL;DR: who would have been the French, Dutch or Danish Ulbricht, Honecker and Krenz? Who might even have been the British Ceaușescu?

Obviously butterflies make picking the leaders in the 1960s onwards difficult, but try to be creative. Trade union leaders are obvious candidates, but why not see if there's famously opportunist politicians or even business leaders IOTL who could've happily manoeuvred their way to the top of a people's socialist republic?

 

[MDSJR1967]

I could see Maurice Thorez as the Soviet puppet leader in France,Gerben Wagenaar in the Netherlands and Harry Pollitt in Great Britain

 

[WhatIsAUserName]

What about Palmiro Togliatti, as the puppet leader for Italy? I'm pretty sure he was less pliable than Maurice Thorez, so maybe he can be the Western European version of Ceausescu.

 

[GiantMonkeyMan]

Maurice Kriegel or some other communist resistance leader would make a good possibility for a French Soviet puppet. He could have been integral to the overthrow of the Nazis and rise up into political power ala Tito and Hoxha. Would be awesome if JP Sartre ended up in a position of power, however.

 

[The Red]

If the Soviet Victory was so utter they'd probably just all become SSR's, but that's not really the spirit.

But if we're talking about a man to oversee the reconstruction of post-Seelöwe, post-Morskoy Lev Britain, I always imagined Stafford Cripps could have been effective in the role, especially with post-war rationing inevitably being dramatically worse in this scenario.

 

[MDSJR1967]

If the Soviet Victory was so utter they'd probably just all become SSR's, but that's not really the spirit.

But if we're talking about a man to oversee the reconstruction of post-Seelöwe, post-Morskoy Lev Britain, I always imagined Stafford Cripps could have been effective in the role, especially with post-war rationing inevitably being dramatically worse in this scenario.

Who do you think would be Soviet puppet leader of the USA? I think it would have been either Earl Browder or William Z Foster.

 

[The Red]

Who do you think would be Soviet puppet leader of the USA? I think it would have been either Earl Browder or William Z Foster.

Honestly I think the Amerika miniseries was probably correct in that the Soviet long term plan would be to balkanise and neuter the United States after their experience with Mao (they possibly would have done this with Germany, Britain, and France as well), in the meantime Zebulon might be a sensible option, it really depends upon the circumstances of how America was occupied by the Soviets in the first place however.

 

[DrakonFin]

For Finland, Mauno Pekkala, a left wing Social Democrat, would be a good choice for an interim leader before the actual hard line Communists come to power. He the OTL postwar Prime Minister for the far left Finnish People's Democratic League. Thought not an actual Communist as such, he was very "accommodating" to the Soviets and in a fledgling Finnish People's Republic he could have been bullied by Stalin to take the role of a puppet leader of a transitional, seemingly legitimate "popular front" cabinet before a hardline takeover.

The one Finnish communist leader that even post-1945 had true power in the USSR was O.W. Kuusinen, but I believe that he would rather stay as member of the Politbyro in Moscow and a behind-the-scenes power broker in the Finnish People's Republic rather than head the Finnish government.

For early 50s Finnish leaders, we could well choose from the top OTL leadership of the Finnish Communist Party (Aimo Aaltonen, Ville Pessi) or the FPDL (J.W.Keto, Kusti Kulo, Yrjö Enne). It is also a possibility the Soviets would import some Finnish-born Soviet citizens to some of the top offices of the People's Republic.

For Sweden, I know very little about the local Communist scene postwar, but I believe Hugo Sillén and Sven Linderot, leaders of the Stalinist Communist Party of Sweden might make plausible leaders of a Swedish puppet regime in the late 40s and early 50s.

 

[Bolt451]

I'm keeping a close eye on this thread. It may come in handy for my current TL "A Brief History of the British Republic"

 

[Petike]

Austria could be interesting. A pity that I don't know any prominent 1940s/1950s Austrian politicians by name.

A Liechtenstein taken over and made part of the East Block could be pretty wacky. Imagine the Iron Curtain at the Swiss border, with walls and barbed wire on both banks of the Rhine.

 

[omnimercurial]

Honestly I think the Amerika miniseries was probably correct in that the Soviet long term plan would be to balkanise and neuter the United States after their experience with Mao (they possibly would have done this with Germany, Britain, and France as well), in the meantime Zebulon might be a sensible option, it really depends upon the circumstances of how America was occupied by the Soviets in the first place however.

can you please give some info or a link on this miniseries?

 

[Plumber]

Portugal's Alvaro Cunhal was craving for the position IOTL.

 

[Othala]

Austria could be interesting. A pity that I don't know any prominent 1940s/1950s Austrian politicians by name.

A Liechtenstein taken over and made part of the East Block could be pretty wacky. Imagine the Iron Curtain at the Swiss border,, with walls and barbed wire on both banks of the Rhine.

Johann Koplenig would probably be the Austrian puppet. He was installed by the Soviets as a Minister after the war. He became a dedicated communist in the Russian POW camps during WWI.
I doubt that the SPÖ (social-democrates) politicians would be considered for a puppet with so many loyal KPÖ members waiting in the wings.

 

[MDSJR1967]

I think the Soviet puppet in Belgium post WW2 would have been Julian Lahaut.

 

[DrakonFin]

I doubt that the SPÖ (social-democrates) politicians would be considered for a puppet with so many loyal KPÖ members waiting in the wings.

This would be an issue to consider in regards to many (if not most) of the countries we arer talking about: during the early days, Stalin would have to choose between dyed in the wool Communists, possibly ones that had lived in the USSR (in exile) or opportunist Social Democrats of various stripes, mostly leftist, for government positions. At first, it is likely many a government would have a collection of both. While the Communists would probably be loyal and easy to control, they would be despised by most of the population. The Social Democrats, on the other hand, would be hard to handle but would have the support of a large part of the population.

Going totally for the Communist option would likely alienate a lot of the moderate left and make it likelier they join resistance movement or flee the country. And that is why keeping some Social Democrats in leadership positions, at first, even if they are just a smoke screen, might seem like a good idea to the Soviets. It would pacify the people if they thought the situation is still somewhat "normal": people do cling into such hopes. Stalin was pretty adept at this stuff, and the Soviet leaders who survived his regime were very much political animals: they would see wisdom in this too.

Such events do present a curve ball for us when we consider the postwar leadership of these Soviet puppets/satellites: after some years, some of these Social Democrats might out-Communist the Communists themselves, as it were, in their ability to follow Moscow's wishes and to repress the right, etc.

And this is just one of the reasons for the fact that when we come into the late 50s, early 60s and beyond, the actual top leadership of many countries would be pretty hard to predict. There would be turncoats and opportunists who would shake up things. And we also need to remember that people who made the top positions in Communist parties IOTL might not make that ITTL because those parties would now be the ruling parties of the nation instead of small, Soviet-backed splinter groups - men (and women) with different qualities would be needed. Additionally, postwar infighting and even purges might cause even dedicated Communists and people we would consider Moscow's most loyal allies gone for spurious reasons. Nevermind the fact that ITTL de-Stalinization will bound to be at least somewhat different than IOTL and that process would make or break several leaders in these countries, too, come the mid-to-late-50s.

 

[The Red]

can you please give some info or a link on this miniseries?

There we are

Also, a very good map by B Munro

 

[Amakan]

If the Soviet Victory was so utter they'd probably just all become SSR's, but that's not really the spirit.

I can see the truth in that.

I mean, where is the need for buffer states when (a majority of) Europe is under your control?

 

[omnimercurial]

Thanks.

 

[Francisco Cojuanco]

This would be an issue to consider in regards to many (if not most) of the countries we arer talking about: during the early days, Stalin would have to choose between dyed in the wool Communists, possibly ones that had lived in the USSR (in exile) or opportunist Social Democrats of various stripes, mostly leftist, for government positions. At first, it is likely many a government would have a collection of both. While the Communists would probably be loyal and easy to control, they would be despised by most of the population. The Social Democrats, on the other hand, would be hard to handle but would have the support of a large part of the population.

Going totally for the Communist option would likely alienate a lot of the moderate left and make it likelier they join resistance movement or flee the country. And that is why keeping some Social Democrats in leadership positions, at first, even if they are just a smoke screen, might seem like a good idea to the Soviets. It would pacify the people if they thought the situation is still somewhat "normal": people do cling into such hopes. Stalin was pretty adept at this stuff, and the Soviet leaders who survived his regime were very much political animals: they would see wisdom in this too.

Such events do present a curve ball for us when we consider the postwar leadership of these Soviet puppets/satellites: after some years, some of these Social Democrats might out-Communist the Communists themselves, as it were, in their ability to follow Moscow's wishes and to repress the right, etc.

And this is just one of the reasons for the fact that when we come into the late 50s, early 60s and beyond, the actual top leadership of many countries would be pretty hard to predict. There would be turncoats and opportunists who would shake up things. And we also need to remember that people who made the top positions in Communist parties IOTL might not make that ITTL because those parties would now be the ruling parties of the nation instead of small, Soviet-backed splinter groups - men (and women) with different qualities would be needed. Additionally, postwar infighting and even purges might cause even dedicated Communists and people we would consider Moscow's most loyal allies gone for spurious reasons. Nevermind the fact that ITTL de-Stalinization will bound to be at least somewhat different than IOTL and that process would make or break several leaders in these countries, too, come the mid-to-late-50s.

Heck, in some cases like OTL Poland and Hungary, they may even have token bourgeois parties in government at start.

 

[DrakonFin]

Heck, in some cases like OTL Poland and Hungary, they may even have token bourgeois parties in government at start.

Yes, why not. Couldn't look past "the left" when I wrote that, but you are right. Opportunism is not restricted to the left or even the centre-left.

Also we can consider those Agrarian parties many countries have had, in many places they also had a left component and would survive as auxiliary political groups like in the GDR. Many of these countries would dub themselves Workers' and Farmers' States, after all.

In the explicitly bourgeois or right-wing parties we should of course consider who would be right out because of postwar purges, show trials and such, the attrition rates in those parties might be a lot worse, especially for people who already had important positions politically, economically or socially during the war. But many younger people that IOTL become known as leading bourgeois politicians, or even some business leaders, might make it into Party leadership ITTL. Look for the self-made men (and women) especially from the working or lower middle classes: a scion of a well-known bourgeois family or a prewar right-wing dynasty might face some serious obstacles in this new world. Or then not: it often was a game of chance even in the OTL People's Republics.