AH Challenge: USSR wins the Cold War

Heres a map i made bout just such a scenario.

The POD: Hitler sides with China over Japan.;)

World 2009.png
 
Also, thanks to giobastia and Jaded_Railman for making the case against a Soviet victory. I'm convinced that, even if they win the Cold War because of WWII butterflies or whatever, the Soviets need to have some serious economic reforms if they're going to stick around into the 21st century.
 
A map too! How did they get Istanbul?

Turkey was much more closely aligned with the Axis in this Atl-WWII. So the Soviets extracted their pound of flesh from them, instead of attacking them outright. They Soviets need the straights ITTL if they are going to maintain effective control over Europe after all. ;)
 

Keenir

Banned
Turkey was much more closely aligned with the Axis in this Atl-WWII. So the Soviets extracted their pound of flesh from them, instead of attacking them outright. They Soviets need the straights ITTL if they are going to maintain effective control over Europe after all. ;)

uh....why were they aligned with the Axis? Turkish diplomats and civilians were saving the Jews from the Nazis.
 
Turkey was much more closely aligned with the Axis in this Atl-WWII. So the Soviets extracted their pound of flesh from them, instead of attacking them outright. They Soviets need the straights ITTL if they are going to maintain effective control over Europe after all. ;)

Heck, I'm almost surprised you didn't give them the whole Black Sea as a Mare Nostrum thing. Probably wouldn't be practical though.
 
Absolutely false. Russia in 1913 was the fifth industrial power of the world, its GDP was growing faster then Germany and in 20 years it could have surclassed Great Britain (see Richard Pipes: "The Russian Revolution").
No, there is no way that Russia could have outclassed Great Britain under the Tsarist system. First of all, even if Russia had maintained the 1.7% yearly growth which it had from 1885 to 1913 (unlikely), it would not even match up with its OTL Russia in 1989. Secondly, half of Russia's growth in this period was agricultural, and agricultural advances in wheat production (Russia's primary crop) after WW1 were not due until after WW2. Thirdly, wheat prices dropped off radically after WW1. Fourthly, the economic system under the Tsars was ultimately feudal and not bound for any serious changes in class or consumption structure necessary for development into a "western" economy without a revolution.

The late 19th and early 20th century saw growth for Russia the same reason it saw growth for many nations; steam transportation was developed and international markets were quite equal between nations (i.e. two nations on opposite sides of the earth can compete with eachother). Unless Russia ends up growing like Japan (which had a similar GDP per capita in 1913), it isn't going to catch up to the West. And of course, it's insanely optimistic to say that Tsarist Russia would industrialize like Japan - it had an atrocious education system, huge ethnic problems, a semi-feudal class system that was in no danger of correcting itself, and it did not have the economic ability to compete like Japan did (Japan historically managed to compete with Britain with its cotton textile industry, which was no mean feat).

In short, it would take huge social and political reforms for Tsarist Russia to even begin to compete with the Soviet Union in terms of economic growth - reforms which were not likely to come. And even then, you have to take into account the fact that the Soviet Union historically suffered quite a blow economically from the Russian Civil War before you can start talking about which economic system was superior.
 
The easiest answer here is a POD that allows for internationalist-minded communists to come to power in Russia and Germany pre-WWII.

Does that still count? A Soviet Union, rather than The Soviet Union, you know?
 
Nixon fails to end Vietnam War before Watergate on a massive level. This extension of the Vietnam along with the Watergate hit the Republican Party like no major modern American political party has been hit before. This gives Carter an easy win and with the Vietnam War officially ending under his name, he and the Democrats score big points politically. However, due to the prolongment of the War's economical impacts and with the oil crisis still damaging the American economy Carter is hardpressed to change his economic department, with veterans of the Federal Government - a policy turn against his choosing of relative newcomers. This helps somewhat but not enough. However, thanks to the Republican's unpopularity, Carter wins his second term. Overall, this weakens America's policy of aidding anti-Communist forces and weakens the American economy. Years later, the USSR after heavy consideration decide not to enter the Afghan for fear of repeating America's mistakes. In addition, with the weakening of America, the USSR is given more economic breathing room from American pressure - reversing stagnation into slow economic growth. This leads to the 21st century where there is still an America and a USSR, who are on a more even playing field and still engaged in the Cold War, but on a much lesser scale than before.

Feedback on my theory?
 
uh....why were they aligned with the Axis? Turkish diplomats and civilians were saving the Jews from the Nazis.
This is true. However this is a TL where the US doesnt get involved in Europe. So the only real allied powers by 1941 are the UK and the USSR. Also remember that Stalin was a TEH EV0L!!!!!!!111one diktator, whom was just as interested in conquest as Hitler was. With British help being far away and looking more and more impossible, the Turks had to choose between the USSR which had a SIGNIFICANT interest in conquering them, or the Nazis, whom were pretty much only interested in Europe. The Turks went with what they saw as the lesser of two evils. They still saved Jews from the fires of the camps of course, however, they also supplied Hitlers war efforts in order to protect their own independence. Once the war went south for the Nazis in 1945 the Turks quickly tried to go neutral again and forget it ever happened, after all they had not provided huge amounts of aid to the Nazis so they thought that they could get the USSR to overlook them. Then Stalin got his hands on the death camps of the Nazis in early 1946, and all of that went out the window. Using the horrifying photos of the camps, some of them manufactured of course to drum up an even more MASSIVE death toll of 30 million ppl ITTL, he invaded the rest of Europe under the claim of needing to root out the "Satanic Nazi supporters and their genocidal camps". Once he got control of Europe he realized he needed more ways to get into Europe, and so, using the previous friendship treaties as an excuse, in 1947 he invaded the Straits. He stopped once he got control of them because he simply could not conquer all of Turkey at the time, what with all of Europe to deal with.
And thats how the USSR got the straits and Constantinople. Still trying to think up a good name for a Soviet Constantinople, any help would be VERY much welcome. :)

Feedback on my theory?
Umm how is this "Winning" the Cold War? Thats the whole point of this exercise. Other than that it looks decent.:p
 
Last edited:
Well, winning in the sense that the USA falls and along with it - Capitalism (as in the opposite to what happened in reality) is more or less impossible. In my suggestion, I think that's the closest USSR is going to get to 'winning' it. I mean, compare the actual former Soviet Union which was never even close to meeting America's growth, to this one where it's at equal footing with the United States of America. I'd say that's a win.

I suppose to truly 'win', one could predict in the future like 2010 and beyond, the USSR continues growing and at more rapid pace as central planning as become much more effective with the help of technology to manage and expand the planning. In addition to this, the United States of America hits stagnation due to an ineffective presidency or two. Eventually, the USSR's GDP surpasses that of the United States and the tread continues. With the USSR in a new role as the power successful of the two nations, its in a position to apply all the political and economical pressure it can - the United States of America finally is kicked off its position as superpower by 2020-2025, making the Soviet Union the only superpower thus in the purest definition, winning the Cold War.
 
Here's what the superpowers had:

USSR:
- Economy/nation wrecked by Nazis
- Militarily powerful but was unsustainable due to physical destruction of the nation.
- Bad economic system, with inflexible leadership.

NATO:
- Economically powerful, good in standing because of lack of destruction.
- Militarily powerful and could back it with good economics.
- Had competitive capitalist system.
- Was territorially at huge advantage; USSR had only Eastern Europe, Vietnam, and a couple of unloyal African clients, while NATO was in a great position for picking up many more clients and already had allies and bases to surround the USSR with. Also, China was a huge strain on USSR as well.

Therefore, the USSR was totally screwed in the Cold War no matter how you look at it. Their only option is to do all the follwing with PERFECT execution, and only then will they be able to surpass NATO:
- In WW2, USSR decisively defeats invading German armies at around Poland. Hitler pisses his pants and, acting as stupidly as always, continues a losing war in which Germany is overrun in 1943/4 and the USSR lords over most if not all of the Continent. Here, the requirment for "no destruction of Russian nation" is fulfilled.
- After (or in late stages of) WW2, China (nationalist or otherwise) buddies up with USSR, sharing tech and other exchanges. They are probably able to lord over Korea and maybe able to eventually get Japan to be militarily neutral in the upcoming Cold War.
- When India gains indepence, it goes as in OTL to the semi-socialist camp. For extra points, have the combined pressure of USSR, China, and India cause Pakistan to Balkanize.
- In 60's and 70's, USSR keeps solidifying its influence over Eurasia. With reagrds to Central/Eastern Europe, let's say that the Soviet Union sees little value in holding them against their will and allows economic reforms a la China in OTL. These reforms have to occur in the USSR itself as well for this part to work, and they should be able to pull it off since the USSR has much resources to work with.
- In 80's and 90's, the USSR rivals, if not overshadows NATO in terms of might. NATO has probably been restricted to an Oceania (1984) sized territory, with the main area of contention between the superpowers being in the Middle East and probably Western Europe.
-Even in this scenario where the USSR does EVERYTHING right, it is still venerable to whatever the Chinese want to do. If things go well for the USSR, China will just develop mostly economically, competing with the East Asian powers, while aknowledging the USSR's role as a counterbalance to the US military power. If things go badly, by the year 2000 China will have splut with the Soviets and have gone their own way, maybe even allowed Americans to get into East Asia. Even if the USSR survives, it can't "win."

So this is a very hard scenario to pull off. I'd like to read a good TL on it though. I really love uber-USSR situations, since America being the only powerful guys is kinda bland.
 
The easiest answer here is a POD that allows for internationalist-minded communists to come to power in Russia and Germany pre-WWII.

Does that still count? A Soviet Union, rather than The Soviet Union, you know?

I like it. It counts, 'cause the POD doesn't have to be after WWII.

Here's what the superpowers had:

USSR:
- Economy/nation wrecked by Nazis
- Militarily powerful but was unsustainable due to physical destruction of the nation.
- Bad economic system, with inflexible leadership.

NATO:
- Economically powerful, good in standing because of lack of destruction.
- Militarily powerful and could back it with good economics.
- Had competitive capitalist system.
- Was territorially at huge advantage; USSR had only Eastern Europe, Vietnam, and a couple of unloyal African clients, while NATO was in a great position for picking up many more clients and already had allies and bases to surround the USSR with. Also, China was a huge strain on USSR as well.

Therefore, the USSR was totally screwed in the Cold War no matter how you look at it. Their only option is to do all the follwing with PERFECT execution, and only then will they be able to surpass NATO:
- In WW2, USSR decisively defeats invading German armies at around Poland. Hitler pisses his pants and, acting as stupidly as always, continues a losing war in which Germany is overrun in 1943/4 and the USSR lords over most if not all of the Continent. Here, the requirment for "no destruction of Russian nation" is fulfilled.
- After (or in late stages of) WW2, China (nationalist or otherwise) buddies up with USSR, sharing tech and other exchanges. They are probably able to lord over Korea and maybe able to eventually get Japan to be militarily neutral in the upcoming Cold War.
- When India gains indepence, it goes as in OTL to the semi-socialist camp. For extra points, have the combined pressure of USSR, China, and India cause Pakistan to Balkanize.
- In 60's and 70's, USSR keeps solidifying its influence over Eurasia. With reagrds to Central/Eastern Europe, let's say that the Soviet Union sees little value in holding them against their will and allows economic reforms a la China in OTL. These reforms have to occur in the USSR itself as well for this part to work, and they should be able to pull it off since the USSR has much resources to work with.
- In 80's and 90's, the USSR rivals, if not overshadows NATO in terms of might. NATO has probably been restricted to an Oceania (1984) sized territory, with the main area of contention between the superpowers being in the Middle East and probably Western Europe.
-Even in this scenario where the USSR does EVERYTHING right, it is still venerable to whatever the Chinese want to do. If things go well for the USSR, China will just develop mostly economically, competing with the East Asian powers, while aknowledging the USSR's role as a counterbalance to the US military power. If things go badly, by the year 2000 China will have splut with the Soviets and have gone their own way, maybe even allowed Americans to get into East Asia. Even if the USSR survives, it can't "win."

So this is a very hard scenario to pull off. I'd like to read a good TL on it though. I really love uber-USSR situations, since America being the only powerful guys is kinda bland.

Good answer. Covers a lot of bases. The importance of China is hard to overstate. I'd say it's a bit easier than you suggest, because we don't need to have Stalin as a starting point.

I have a lot of timelines in my head that so far have not come to fruition, so don't expect this one anytime soon, if at all. Still, here's the basic outline of the uber-USSR situation that bore this topic. Some time ago, in a fun thread called "best movies not yet made" in the FH section, I proposed one called "The Space Age," about Orion warships[1] doing battle in a Cold War that had extended to space. The idea was that the bomb has been delayed and was not deployed in World War II, and ideas and fears about nukes are different. Rather than the MAD we know and love, the Space Race has gone nuclear. Nukes were not used on Earth--or were in a brief and horrifying World War III--and the superpowers, thinking nuclear war inevitable, have moved it to space.

Whether I can make Orion ships plausible or not I don't know, but it got me to thinking what a world that might produce them would be like. I ended up with the idea that a Cold War gone badly has done horrible things to the United States. The noble and just impulses of my country which in OTL are ultimately triumphant have been drowned out by the things I don't like (the ideological simplicity, the atrocious urban design, the arrogance, McCarthy...) because the USSR is continually dealing blows to US national identity by winning. Britain, which can almost see the Iron Curtain from Dover on a clear day, has if anything turned out worse--and what kind of self-respecting dystopia doesn't include London?

The USSR meanwhile is pulling a heel face turn[2]. It's liberalizing its economy and eventually its politics while becoming more true to its theoretical basis in equality for workers and women that IOTL it failed to do. In attempt to distinguish itself, the US has mutated into a place of militarism, patriarchy, and religious fanaticism. The counterculture has been dealt with by a nasty counter-revolution, and the South suffers under apartheid through to the end of the century. Eventually it will retire from the 20th century adventure of international standing and return to an isolationist tinkering with the Americas. Unipolar hegemony and globalization will be achieved under an international socialist order.

Unrealistic, and cynical about my own country? Perhaps. This is just a starting point. It also gets some leeway I think by being not only AH but also science fiction, and an elaborate criticism of modernity. Still, the US will probably remain the "good guys" and the USSR the "bad guys" until about 1980 or so.

Anyway, it's a project I'd like to pursue sometime. I'm not great at budgeting time for these things, though. I worry about starting and never finishing. I also have others earlier in line, particularly one with a PoD sometime in the 19th century that examines a more cordial 20th century relationship between Germany and the US. All in good time, I suppose...

[1] Project Orion was an Air Force venture which sought to create spacecraft powered by nuclear warheads dropped aft and detonated against a pusher plate. They hoped to get one to Saturn by 1970 or so. This is probably an overconfident timeframe, but these things have a lot more Delta V than a regular old chemical rocket.
[2] bad guy becomes good guy
 
Top