Have Roosevelt die sooner, possibly in 1944 (after reelection of course) so that Truman becomes POTUS sooner. Truman was not fooled by Stalin and did not have Roosevelt's trust of Stalin. I think a Truman/Churchill alliance instead of a Truman/Atlee alliance could have put Stalin in his place easier regarding some of the demands in Eastern Europe. Perhaps you see Poland or Czechoslovakia in a Finland position instead of Comintern domination. An agreement on a peaceful, neutral, but united Germany outside of any economic or military bloc, such as a position Austria was put into. This means no Coal and Steel community between the Benelux countries and France and Germany. This means the West may look to Franco in Spain as more help, or maybe not, maybe isolate Franco even more since there's a Germany, Austria, Poland, and Czechoslovakia (and don't forget Yugoslavia) buffer between the Soviet sphere and Western Europe; Franco might get toppled instead of a peaceful transition to a constitutional monarchy.
With Tito in Yugoslavia and a smaller eastern bloc, perhaps Bulgaria pulls a Yugoslavia since the Soviet Union would have to go through Romania (or through the Black Sea). Even if crushed this could give incentives to Hungary to be a bit more rebellious as they might see the Soviet Union as too reactionary and overhanded because it is out of weakness. Hungary might see the economic progress of Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Germany as something to aspire to.
Czechoslovakia might actually create a workable nationality out of two, not all that dissimilar ethnic groups if they have 40 or 50 years of peace, prosperity, and democracy to distract from ethnic tensions; the Slovak independence movement may be weaker than Scotland's.
The EEC/EC/EU never forms beyond a France and BeNeLux cooperative. EFTA may not form in response though if it does, you have a French-led pro-western group keeping out the British (because of deGaulle) that maybe brings in Italy, then a German led neutral economic group of Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Austria, Switzerland, Portugal, and Sweden; Finland joins later as OTL; UK, Denmark, and Norway is not initial in formation as the USSR probably would be too suspicious and not allow Finlandized nations to accede to a treaty of magnitude with the UK and other NATO nations. UK, Denmark, Norway might join later during a thaw of the Cold War especially since in ATL the Soviet Union is much weaker, but then again France may need UK or others to counterweight a Germany that as in OTL has great industrial capacity.
So, I say that the results, at least in Europe, of a weaker Soviet Union would be a bigger German-French rivalry in economics and this may set up for a WWIII given the right conditions putting the Soviet Union (one assumes not a super power but still a great power or at least a formidable European power) in a place where they'd have to make decisions on who to back; a UK/USA bloc (possibly including the Commonwealth or at least Canada) would have to also make decisions on who to back, though NATO would make that obvious if it was German aggression, but if it was just an economic "cold war" or trade war it is possible the UK drags the USA into a pro-German led camp.
Am I in ASB territory or is it possible? Love to hear commentary.