A Tsarist-U.S. Cold War?

CaliGuy

Banned
Had Tsarist Russia had more competent leadership in the early 20th century and thus would have been able to get through WWI without enduring a revolution, could we eventually see a Tsarist-U.S. Cold War develop?

Or would Tsarist Russia have been uninterested in a struggle for global influence with the U.S. in this TL?

(Also, please keep in mind that a victorious Tsarist Russia will have no immediate enemies in continental Europe; indeed, Germany would be crushed, France would still be its ally, and Britain isn't actually on the European mainland.)
 
Why there would be cold war between tsarist Russia and USA? OTL cold war was caused by huge ideological differences. These wouldn't be exist ITTL. So not very plausible that there would be cold war between USA and tsarist Russia.
 
Why there would be cold war between tsarist Russia and USA? OTL cold war was caused by huge ideological differences. These wouldn't be exist ITTL. So not very plausible that there would be cold war between USA and tsarist Russia.
Well, who said the ideological differences OTL couldn't take another form in TTL? Take a read of Look To the West by @Thande, it's a fascinating piece, especially given its premise of a cold war along different lines to OTL.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Why there would be cold war between tsarist Russia and USA? OTL cold war was caused by huge ideological differences. These wouldn't be exist ITTL. So not very plausible that there would be cold war between USA and tsarist Russia.
Wouldn't the ideological difference be autocracy vs. freedom?
 
Had Tsarist Russia had more competent leadership in the early 20th century and thus would have been able to get through WWI without enduring a revolution, could we eventually see a Tsarist-U.S. Cold War develop?

Or would Tsarist Russia have been uninterested in a struggle for global influence with the U.S. in this TL?

(Also, please keep in mind that a victorious Tsarist Russia will have no immediate enemies in continental Europe; indeed, Germany would be crushed, France would still be its ally, and Britain isn't actually on the European mainland.)

I am quite doubtful that Tsarist Russia would be a rival to the US in the 20th Century. The odds are that had the Tsars remained in power, Russia would look like a large Latin American state with a population of 800 million (mostly poor people). That would be enough to make them a great power, but it would not allow them to even pretend to be a superpower as they did OTL (no doubt about it, the Soviets were pretending - the Soviets were at no point an equal to the US in economic or military power).

(Of course, such a Tsarist Russia could emerge as the superpower rival to China in TTL's 21st Century - so a slower path, but also maybe a more sustainable one than was taken OTL.)

To be able to reach superpower status in the 20th Century, Russia needed radical economic policies, which likely means radical political parties who can't work with a Tsar (since the Tsar was linked to the nobility and the nobility would oppose the radical land reform any serious Russian reformers would need to implement).

The best way to get a non-Soviet 20th Century superpower Russia is probably a Russian republic that hung on to the end of WW1 and was controlled by moderate socialists and Social Revolutionaries (in other words, a government who governed in the interests of the cities and the peasants).

Wouldn't the ideological difference be autocracy vs. freedom?

So the US is upset at Russian autocracy, but in TTL, France, birthplace of Freedom (tm), is not?

I think it would be more likely that the US and Russia would continue to be friendly (both have good reasons to be wary of British power and neither have interests that clash much). By contrast, France may not be a Russian ally for long (in OTL the Franco-Russian Entente was fraying badly due to French distaste at Tsarism before WW1 happened), particularly if Germany is seen to be cut down to size.

To get a cold war between Russia and America, one really needs an ideology that has enough universal appeal that the US would feel threatened by it.

I'm not sure what could alarm the US as much as the atheist working-class violence of Bolshevism (which hit alot of the hot buttons of the time).

EDIT: OK... Maybe a Cold War could happen due to non-ideological competition to claim Europe as a sphere of influence. Such a cold war would require a MUCH stronger Russia though. The Soviet Union was able to use Socialism in OTL to really make itself seem much more influential than it was.

fasquardon
 
Last edited:
I am quite doubtful that Tsarist Russia would be a rival to the US in the 20th Century. The odds are that had the Tsars remained in power, Russia would look like a large Latin American state with a population of 800 million (mostly poor people). That would be enough to make them a great power, but it would not allow them to even pretend to be a superpower as they did OTL (no doubt about it, the Soviets were pretending - the Soviets were at no point an equal to the US in economic or military power).

(Of course, such a Tsarist Russia could emerge as the superpower rival to China in TTL's 21st Century - so a slower path, but also maybe a more sustainable one than was taken OTL.)

To be able to reach superpower status in the 20th Century, Russia needed radical economic policies, which likely means radical political parties who can't work with a Tsar (since the Tsar was linked to the nobility and the nobility would oppose the radical land reform any serious Russian reformers would need to implement).

The best way to get a non-Soviet 20th Century superpower Russia is probably a Russian republic that hung on to the end of WW1 and was controlled by moderate socialists and Social Revolutionaries (in other words, a government who governed in the interests of the cities and the peasants).



So the US is upset at Russian autocracy, but in TTL, France, birthplace of Freedom (tm), is not?

I think it would be more likely that the US and Russia would continue to be friendly (both have good reasons to be wary of British power and neither have interests that clash much). By contrast, France may not be a Russian ally for long (in OTL the Franco-Russian Entente was fraying badly due to French distaste at Tsarism before WW1 happened), particularly if Germany is seen to be cut down to size.

To get a cold war between Russia and America, one really needs an ideology that has enough universal appeal that the US would feel threatened by it.

I'm not sure what could alarm the US as much as the atheist working-class violence of Bolshevism (which hit alot of the hot buttons of the time).

EDIT: OK... Maybe a Cold War could happen due to non-ideological competition to claim Europe as a sphere of influence. Such a cold war would require a MUCH stronger Russia though. The Soviet Union was able to use Socialism in OTL to really make itself seem much more influential than it was.

fasquardon
Whatever factors lead to a surviving Russian monarchy would also result in a much stronger Russia, since the monarchy only fell due to a lack of economic and political reform. A surviving Alexander II could give Russia a precedent of legitimate parliamentary rule that would allow it to progress at a steady pace towards solidifying a global presence.
This is in no way ASB, seeing as how by 1914, most German military estimates stressed the fact that if the war was averted by even a single year, Russia's military reforms would make it an unbeatable behemoth, and that's with Russia's OTL record of hodge-podge modernization.

Now, the only place I could see Russia truly compete with the United States would be in Asia, where the two empires were patrons of radically different policies.
Perhaps a Great War where Germany and Britain are driven into powerlessness results in America succeeding Britain as the primary naval power, whilst Russia aligns itself as an ally to a slumped Germany?
 
I once again bring up Mladorossi.

If the October Revolution were somehow avoided or the Bolsheviks were defeated early enough, a some sort of early and actually influential National Bolshevik ideology could form in Russia, calling for both the restoration of the Tsar and the reorganization of the Russian economy along central planning and anti-capitalist lines. Think fascism, just even weirder and redder.

This weird cocktail could very well end up as strong as the OTL Soviet Union, get into an ideological and sphere of influence struggle with the United States, and fulfill the requirements in the OP.
 
Some dick of a Tzar ( Nicholas II if he avoids war with Japan) trying to expand into China and the Pacific could do the trick. If that happens expect the British, Germany and Japan to be on America's side.
 
This is in no way ASB, seeing as how by 1914, most German military estimates stressed the fact that if the war was averted by even a single year, Russia's military reforms would make it an unbeatable behemoth, and that's with Russia's OTL record of hodge-podge modernization.

There are good reasons to doubt the projections the German military was making - for one thing, they were making these projections by drawing a straight line from Russia's pre war growth (which was fueled by a commodity boom which could not be sustained beyond 1919 - or beyond 1914 if there were no WW1). Also, the German military had reasons to fudge the numbers to convince the German government to give them more money. Also, the German army was fighting with the navy for money. Remember, the Kaiser had a boat fetish, so the generals felt they needed to fight Germany.

Whatever factors lead to a surviving Russian monarchy would also result in a much stronger Russia, since the monarchy only fell due to a lack of economic and political reform. A surviving Alexander II could give Russia a precedent of legitimate parliamentary rule that would allow it to progress at a steady pace towards solidifying a global presence.

No. Enough reform for the monarchy to survive puts Russia on the same trajectory as Brazil (keep in mind, Brazil had some pretty capable governments in the post-WW1 period). That's significantly worse than the Russia path of OTL until 1989.

Enough reform to push the Russian state onto a Japanese growth curve (Soviet path done right, if you like), IMO kills the monarchy.

Why? Because Alexander III seriously botched land reform, making the low-productivity trap of the serfs and peasants worse and entrenching the nobility even deeper. To fix Alexander's mess quickly would take a violent course change.

That said, maybe a Tsarist superpower could come about if there was a moderate socialist revolution, followed maybe 10-20 years later by a restoration of the Tsar.

fasquardon
 

CECBC

Banned
This is one of my favorite alternate history ideas.

One idea I had was that a more competent Stalin-like Tsar rapidly industrializes Russia and really rips shit up in WWI. Basically you'd need a Tsar that transforms Russia from a mere authoritarian monarchy to a true totalitarian state on par with the Soviet Union. That'd give both an ideological and military challenge to the USA.
 
What about a Fascist Russia which keeps the Tsar around as a figurehead to strengthen their legitimacy and buy the support of old-school reactionaries?
 
What about a Fascist Russia which keeps the Tsar around as a figurehead to strengthen their legitimacy and buy the support of old-school reactionaries?

Like this?:

I once again bring up Mladorossi.

If the October Revolution were somehow avoided or the Bolsheviks were defeated early enough, a some sort of early and actually influential National Bolshevik ideology could form in Russia, calling for both the restoration of the Tsar and the reorganization of the Russian economy along central planning and anti-capitalist lines. Think fascism, just even weirder and redder.

This weird cocktail could very well end up as strong as the OTL Soviet Union, get into an ideological and sphere of influence struggle with the United States, and fulfill the requirements in the OP.

I like the idea. :)
 
You only got the Cold War because the USA took an active role in Europes politics and economy instead of going back to itself like after WW1, without a big war in Europe taking out France and the UK and drawing in the USA to expand its wings over them you have no Cold War, just the usual great power competitions.
 
Some dick of a Tzar ( Nicholas II if he avoids war with Japan) trying to expand into China and the Pacific could do the trick. If that happens expect the British, Germany and Japan to be on America's side.
Agreed, East Asia is an obvious point of conflict. Although I expect that America would passively back Japan/Britain/China, rather then directly enter the war. They weren't willing to attack Japan until Pearl Harbour IOTL, and Japan were a far more plausible target from an American perspective.

On that note, the non-existence of the Soviet Union should completely disrupt the political dynamic in China, given the support they provided to both the KMT and CCP. I'm not familiar enough with 1920s China to speculate what effect this would have. Would the CCP still grow strong enough for a meaningful civil war to take place between them and the KMT? Perhaps some other faction/warlord would emerge as a contender for power, with Russian support?
 
Had Tsarist Russia had more competent leadership in the early 20th century and thus would have been able to get through WWI without enduring a revolution, could we eventually see a Tsarist-U.S. Cold War develop?

Or would Tsarist Russia have been uninterested in a struggle for global influence with the U.S. in this TL?

(Also, please keep in mind that a victorious Tsarist Russia will have no immediate enemies in continental Europe; indeed, Germany would be crushed, France would still be its ally, and Britain isn't actually on the European mainland.)

Maybe an revolutionary Ultra-Nationalist-Bolshevik movement tries to expand and the tsar pulls a Cixi and backs this movement to stay in power and serves as a spiritual figurehead.
 
It would be hard for Tsarist Russia to gain support outside its core territories in OTL they could just invest and help any useful Socialist ,Communist or just general anti Imperalist. A Tsarist regime could support various movements but it's hard to project your power or gain support for you if your reason for backing them is were are not America.
 
Top