AH challenge : Soviets win the cold War WITHOUT any direct war.

Yet another way to the same objective could be to have the U.S turn isolationist after World War II. NATO would never exist, and nuclear knowledge would not (if the U.S were being genuinely isolationist) be shared, so the Soviets could overrun much of Europe, then the world slice by slice...
 
A socialist country is easier to influence than a US-propped-up military dictatorship.

Which explains the Sino-Soviet split. Even if your statement were true, what material impact would this influence have? Aside from the Russians needing to prop up many more defective economies, as in Cuba.
 
Glad we have so many serious entries within minutes....

In early 1945 (yeah, I know, the OP said 1 January 1946), Walter Ulbricht upset after hearing of the Nemmersdorf massacre, unorthodoxly seeks an audience with Stalin. He's granted it, and though no one knows exactly what he tells the Marshall of the Soviet Union during their two hour chat, it's effect on Stalin was obvious. While the general consensus among historians is that this meeting was the direct cause for Ulbrichts pre-mature deatht, many speculate that by putting himself in harm's way this way, he might actually have saved his Fatherland much suffering. Indeed, perhaps, he saved Communism itself?

Whatever the case it's undeniable that in the following days Stalin fundamentally revised his planning for post-war Europe. He ordered his generals to rain in the troops when they entered German lands, saying that "the eyes of the oppressed toilers of the world is on the Soviet Union. Do no let the Red Army shame us." Moreover, the post-war map were redrawn. Reactionary East Prussia would still be split between Poland and Russia (and essentially all German populations outside Germany would still be transferred to Germany proper), but otherwise the Germans would have to cede no more territory and would return to the borders of 1937. Moreover, Stalin declared, that "for us as Communists, it's unimportant whether a machine is handled by a German worker in a Berlin factory or a Russian worker in a Moscow factory. What matters is if the factory is owned and controlled by the capitalist class or by the proletarians, through their Soviet state." He thus decided, to the surprise of the politburo, that there would be no large-scale reparations (in machines, products and deportees) for the Germans and the rest of the East and Central Europeans to pay. Instead they would serve as show-cases for the Socialists system, in the hope of even further strengthening the prestige the Communist parties of the West was sure to get from their participation and the Soviet participation in the resistance to Fascism, and the liberation of Europe.

Thus, Soviet policy towards eastern-central Europe came to focus less on revenge and repayment and more on reconstruction and the building of socialism. As a result, the Eastern German economy which had simply taken over and expanded on the planning apparatus already installed by the Nazis actually grew (reconstructed) faster then the Western German economy which had collapsed and was even initially plundered by the Brits and the French, and which until the change of policy in 1946 was supposed to be de-industrialized in accordance to the Morgenthau plan. Similarly was the development in Hungary, in Czechoslovakia etc. In the spirit of this policy Stalin also held-back from breaking with Yugoslavia, after Tito obstinately refused to fall in line.

This strengthened Soviet prestige in Western and southern Europe, and was an important factor (besides the scandal that erupted after a Christian democratic leader was caught receiving money from the CIA) in the strong showing of the Popular Democratic Front in the Italian election, which with 42 % of the votes were able to form a government with the reluctant Socialist Union. As right-wing and military elements soon after tried to secure power with the use of force, the Communists called for the occupation of factories and the formation of Soviets and, with the help of Russians weapons, carried through the Italian revolution.

Bloody purges followed, and Anglo-American troops were expelled, but ultimately the United States were forced to accept the fact on the grounds, and the result of the elections. An Italian People's Republic was proclaimed.

Europe, 1949
 
Last edited:
What if the Soviets got really, really lucky and managed to have a spy elected President? It would have to be an American citizen turncoat, of course, but I wonder what sort of damage that might be able to do.
 
What I'm thinking about is this:

The French especially go all red scare after the fall of Italy, De Gaulle takes power and establishes a Centre-Right government. The Social democrats, unwilling to accept this (and having anyway proven their unreliability in Italy) are banned too, and Unions see their rights restricted. With De Gaule in charge from the start and with much more power France is more stubborn in it's colonial wars, and De Gaulle refuses to withdraw after the catastrophes of Vietnam, instead strengthening his personal autocracy into outright dictatorship, conscripting troops to fight in Indochina and Africa, untill his eventual fall in the revolution of 1968. ATL 1968 could very well had led to socialist revolution if the Communist party had been ready to rise, since the industrial workers and the students were both revolting. This time the powder-keg (with semi-fascism and colonial wars, costing both in lifes and money) will be three times as explosive, and the French government falls in a revolution similar to ATL Portuguese revolution, only with typical French radicalism revolutionary spirit. This in turn emboldens the Portuguese revolutionaries when their time comes in 1975, while making the Francoists less willing to reform, leading to the eventual Spanish revolution.

At the same time, I'm going to have Chrustjev listening more closely to Stalin when he talks about "the great transformation of nature" and thus realizing that ecology matters carrying through a more successful virgin lands campaign, which allows him to remain in power and to continue to demilitarize and de-bureaucratize the Soviet Union. With the Soviet Union having a more normal military expenditure by the 80's (say, 7 % of GDP) and having instead of sacrificing a third of the economy for military spending managed to modernize agriculture to at least DDR levels (that is, 6-7 % of the people working the land, rather then 20 %), as well as allowed computer technology to develop, the Soviet economy is relatively healthy, and GDP per capita is about 80 % of British levels. The cold war ebbs out as Western Germany and the Benelux Comes to terms with the new geostrategical situation, and enters into détente with the Warsaw pact, leaving Nato but remaining Social-Democracies.
 
Last edited:
Europe in 1985:

11lraqd.gif
 
The cold war ebbs out as Western Germany and the Benelux Comes to terms with the new geostrategical situation, and enters into détente with the Warsaw pact, leaving Nato but remaining Social-Democracies.

Thanks for this entry, nicely done effort with perhaps the most important thing being that you've grasped that the Cold War wasn't so much a struggle between 120mm ammunition and T-80U armor plate (although in some situation that might have been important) but a battle of ideologues. It's also that the early cold war is virtually the only time when Soviets are able to win this. By 1960's the difference in state of living with "Trentes Glorieuses" is so large that Communist model has lost any appeal it had. As one patriotic Finnish communist put it: "A worker with a SAAB, summer cottage and annual vacation to the Canaries will not revolt".

Italy going Soviet-Communist, a red scare of massive scale in France with money going to the military instead of industry, education and welfare might just be the key. This might be also coupled with US focused entirely on military effort to counter communism and perhaps an ideological attitude that shuts out social-democrats in all countries, making some of them to join communists.
 
Hi Peter, any chances of working it out into a real time line? It sounds close to ASB (although Stalin could be a pragmatic when situation really called for it), but its also very very promising TL. Since there was no break up with Yugo, Kruschev could allow Hungary to reform to something close to OTL Yugoslavia, Chekoslovakia follows suite in '68. Both stay communist and in WarPac but have now much happier populations.
Maybe someone extremely competent after Kruschev? Mild but more sucesfull Gorbachov style reforms in late '60es and early '70es.

Portugal and Spain were both very close to Faschist, I dont see them becoming communist states by '85. without a war. Otoh, Greece could have easily gone fully Red with more friendlier and competent USSR.
 
Portugal could even in our timeline turned Red. The Portuguese revolution was very leftist, and after the fall of fascism socialism was even put in the constitution. However, by the late 70's right-wing winds were blowing, and socialist reforms were cancelled, the collective farmers driven of the latifundias etc. However, had the communist party acted decisively with support of some of the existing left-wing groups of officers, they kight have taken power in a coup. In a more Soviet Europe, the likelyhood of that increases.

As for Spain.... Well, if the fascists refuses to reform themselves away as they did OTL, when democracy was essentially given to the people by the king, I could see Spain going down in flames. And in such times radicals relish.
 
Portugal could even in our timeline turned Red. The Portuguese revolution was very leftist, and after the fall of fascism socialism was even put in the constitution. However, by the late 70's right-wing winds were blowing, and socialist reforms were cancelled, the collective farmers driven of the latifundias etc. However, had the communist party acted decisively with support of some of the existing left-wing groups of officers, they kight have taken power in a coup. In a more Soviet Europe, the likelyhood of that increases.

As for Spain.... Well, if the fascists refuses to reform themselves away as they did OTL, when democracy was essentially given to the people by the king, I could see Spain going down in flames. And in such times radicals relish.
I know that for outside observers ;), it sometimes looks like the Carnation Revolution in Portugal was very leftist oriented, but the Revolution was made by many people on the right too (the original National Salvation Junta was overwhelming conservative, and the mid-levels of the Movement of the Armed Forces had a strong presence of the centre-left and centre-right).
The far left was very vocally visible, but that didn't mean popular support.
They just turned very visible because some more right wing sectors of the revolution were scared by the far-left and attempted a show of civilian force (the Silent Majority episode of 30 September 1974, to pressure more radical leftist elements of the Movement of the Armed Forces to back down the from the left-wing course the movement was taking: the demonstration by civilian supporters of conservative provisional President General António Spínola was blocked by the Communist Party and its occasional far-left allies) and later tried a coup (the 11 March 1975 attempted coup, a more desperate attempt from more conservative elements close to Spínola to turn the course of things), getting weakened in the process at the eyes of part of the military.
Nevertheless, the majority of population and the military (like Spínola's sucessor, General Francisco da Costa Gomes, a left wing independent democratic socialist) was firmly committed to Democracy (even though the far-left was overrepresented in the Council of the Revolution, successor of the aforementioned National Salvation Junta, and effectively the upper echelon of the Movement of the Armed Forces). The electoral results in the 1975 and 1976 elections gave very clear and solid majorities to democratic parties (the Socialists, Popular-Democratics and Centrists).
A Communist revolution requires a social and economic environment (landless city or rural workers with no tradition of personal property) that didn't exist in most of the country (only most of Alentejo of the time, and part of the Lisbon residents of the time, fitted that description).

In the case of Spain, the same socio-economic conditions would not favor a communist regime.

It's necessary a much earlier POD that alters the economic and social structure of both countries.
 
Last edited:
Top