AHC: Make the Soviet Union an ally of the West by or before 1950.

The Soviet Union remains communist, and the West remains non-communist, but the two are not hostile towards each other, do not fight each other by proxy, and frequently cooperate with each other. Essentially, the late 1980s, but much earlier. Is this possible?
 
The Soviet Union remains communist, and the West remains non-communist, but the two are not hostile towards each other, do not fight each other by proxy, and frequently cooperate with each other. Essentially, the late 1980s, but much earlier. Is this possible?
Have Nazi Germany invade the Soviet Union.
 
The Soviet Union remains communist, and the West remains non-communist, but the two are not hostile towards each other, do not fight each other by proxy, and frequently cooperate with each other. Essentially, the late 1980s, but much earlier. Is this possible?

The only way I see this as possible is if somehow Germany were to force a stalemate in the war which itself is highly improbable.

Either that or Stalin having a stroke a few years earlier and Beria taking over as I think (could be wrong) he was as pro-west as Soviet leadership gets, but its still a long shot.
 
The only way I see this as possible is if somehow Germany were to force a stalemate in the war which itself is highly improbable.

Either that or Stalin having a stroke a few years earlier and Beria taking over as I think (could be wrong) he was as pro-west as Soviet leadership gets, but its still a long shot.
He was, but Beria was in a terrible position. He was hated by pretty much everyone and his pro-Western policies were regarded as too dangerous by his colleagues.
 
He was, but Beria was in a terrible position. He was hated by pretty much everyone and his pro-Western policies were regarded as too dangerous by his colleagues.

Zhukov was mildly pro-Western (he was, by all accounts, good friends with Ike, and loved Coca-Cola), and if he was in charge you could probably get things to a low simmer, rather than the near boil it was OTL. If you have Stalin get hit by a bus either right before, or shortly after, the end of the war, Zhukov assuming control, and butterfly away the Warsaw Pact, you could probably keep things cordial.

That, or you'd need some mega-threat (along the lines of the Nazi's) to get the USSR and the West to decide that, as much as they don't like each other, the other guy is way worse. Outside of the Nazi's somehow surviving, the only thing that comes to mind is China (either a surviving KMT or the PRC) going really, really round the bend (again, we're talking Nazi Germany threat levels here).
 
Zhukov was mildly pro-Western (he was, by all accounts, good friends with Ike, and loved Coca-Cola), and if he was in charge you could probably get things to a low simmer, rather than the near boil it was OTL. If you have Stalin get hit by a bus either right before, or shortly after, the end of the war, Zhukov assuming control, and butterfly away the Warsaw Pact, you could probably keep things cordial.

That, or you'd need some mega-threat (along the lines of the Nazi's) to get the USSR and the West to decide that, as much as they don't like each other, the other guy is way worse. Outside of the Nazi's somehow surviving, the only thing that comes to mind is China (either a surviving KMT or the PRC) going really, really round the bend (again, we're talking Nazi Germany threat levels here).
Zhukov becoming leader is difficult. The Soviets were terrified of Bonapartism (where a military officer takes over a revolutionary government, leading to the end of the revolution) and the Party would be almost universally against such a move (and they got get a fair number of officers to go along with them). If Stalin dies before 1950 the most likely successors are a Zhdanov or Molotov (or one after the other, since Zhdanov's alcoholism would kill him fairly soon) lead collective leadership. Zhukov will at best be a strong ally, much like he was to Khrushchev.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
All else being historical until 1941?

The Soviet Union remains communist, and the West remains non-communist, but the two are not hostile towards each other, do not fight each other by proxy, and frequently cooperate with each other. Essentially, the late 1980s, but much earlier. Is this possible?

All else being historical until 1941?

Or 1945?

Or 1917?

Best,
 
A different Bolshevik leadership succeeding Lenin upon his death? Nikolai Bukharin and Alexei Rykov maybe?
 
The Soviets advance slower for some reason in 1944 and the Germans inflict greater damage during their retreat. The western allies in Italy, rather than rushing to Rome, make a strategic decision to complete the encirclement of the German troops in northern Italy. This stops he Gothic Line from being created and allows the allies to advance through Northern Italy into eastern Europe and possibly into Austria. While also launching Overlord, this effectively creates a third front from where it might be possible to advance on Germany or at least launch more heavy bombing runs.

The wallies manage to flip some of the minor axis countries in eastern Europe early on since they can open supply routes and also get to Berlin first. Shortly after the war in Europe ends Stalin then has an accident or health problem and someone, possibly Molotov or Beria, takes over.

Unlike OTL the Soviets end up being at least somewhat reliant on western financial assistance, particularly the US, to rebuild since they lost more manpower and the Germans caused more damage. Not so much the Soviets can't do anything independently but enough to give the west some influence. Plus they can't raid eastern Germany for industrial equipment and don't capture any of the German scientists. The Soviets aren't in quite as good of a position militarily either.

Overall whomever takes over decides to make an effort to at least be more civil with the west than OTL and not rock the boat too much. The Soviets seem a bit less menacing, even to people like Churchill, without controlling half of Europe. As a gesture for the sake of stability and political appearances someone has the bright idea to sign a temporary extension of the WWII alliance to last for at least 5 or 6 years, which ensures at least on paper that the two sides will cooperate for a while. Long term it ends up being enough to ensure both sides don't come to blows and are willing to cooperate to ensure some measure of global stability is maintained for at least a decade or two.
 
I'm not sure about allies, but I don't think it's impossible that the post-war settlement could be a lot more cooperative and non-confrontational. Sooner or later the Cold War would probably come, but could be kicked down the line to the mid 50s early 60s.

Have America either go back to isolation or be less aggressive in pursuing their post-war sphere of influence. Have France and Britain pursue peaceful relations with the Soviet union, possibly butterflying away NATO. Have the Soviet Union and America agree to a reunified Germany that's demilitarised and under forced neutrality (I believe there were some calls for this), which along with Austria and Yugoslavia form a neutral buffer between the Western and Soviet spheres in Europe. Have a peaceful resolution to the Korean issue, either through diplomacy or having the Soviet Union completely occupy the peninsula during WW2.

Possible alt Cold War scenario: the European colonial powers form a separate bloc (possibly under Churchill and de Gaulle), and America supports colonial liberation movements as a means of expanding its influence, with tacit support from the Soviet Union.
 
Possible alt Cold War scenario: the European colonial powers form a separate bloc (possibly under Churchill and de Gaulle), and America supports colonial liberation movements as a means of expanding its influence, with tacit support from the Soviet Union.

Problem with the last idea is that the UK and France are probably still too heavily in debt with the US to be willing to be that confrontational. Trying to maintain their empires is probably too expensive as well without some kind of significant reform or at least giving some areas more autonomy.
 
Top