AHC: Shortest, least extensive civil war possible for Boleshevik Russia

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
What is the shortest and least extensive civil war the Bolesheviks might face consolidating their control over Russian imperial territory.

Could a single PoD lead the Bolsheviks never losing control of the far north, Siberia, Central Asia and Don-Kuban area?
 
Instead of refusing to sign the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk at Trotsky's behest and waiting until the German's had advanced to 200 km to Petrograd, the Bolsheviks could have a signed a peace that would have just given up the Baltics and Poland.

Yes, segments of the Left-SRs and Whites would have rebelled, but the Bolsheviks would be in a much stronger position to destroy them quickly with Ukraine and other territories still in hand.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Instead of refusing to sign the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk at Trotsky's behest and waiting until the German's had advanced to 200 km to Petrograd, the Bolsheviks could have a signed a peace that would have just given up the Baltics and Poland.

Yes, segments of the Left-SRs and Whites would have rebelled, but the Bolsheviks would be in a much stronger position to destroy them quickly with Ukraine and other territories still in hand.

Would they have to give any territory at all up to the Turks? If they are not required to make any concessions of pre-war Russian territory in the Caucasus, does that guarantee that Enver will not send in the "Army of Islam" anyway? If not compromised by heavy great power invasion, would the Bolsheviks suppress Menshevik Georgia sooner?

I imagine how this the situation you described of an earlier, milder Brest-Litovsk would give fewer opportunities to separatists (or Whites like Denikin and Yudenich) in Bessarabia, the Ukraine, Estonia and Livonia. But it seems to be it does not reduce the centers of resistance in Siberia and the Don Kuban Cossack homelands. I suppose the northern Russia situation, Caucasus situation and Siberia situation depends in some small degree at least on whether the Allies can/will send an intervention force earlier than OTL. Maybe, maybe that reduces the size of opposition to the Bolsheviks in the northern, southern and eastern fringes of the USSR, but maybe not.
 
Successfully evacuating the Czechoslovak Legion would go a long way to shortening the Civil War. Their uprising destroyed Soviet Power in Siberia and was a major catalyst for sparking further uprisings and convincing foreign powers that the Whites weren't a lost cause which encouraged them to intervene.

Without the uprising the Soviets have more time to consolidate, one less front to worry about and the Whites will have less foreign aid.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Successfully evacuating the Czechoslovak Legion would go a long way to shortening the Civil War. Their uprising destroyed Soviet Power in Siberia and was a major catalyst for sparking further uprisings and convincing foreign powers that the Whites weren't a lost cause which encouraged them to intervene.

Without the uprising the Soviets have more time to consolidate, one less front to worry about and the Whites will have less foreign aid.

I had thought this item with the Czech Legion was an important thing, but when I mentioned it at SHWI, @alexmilman asserted it wasn't so important, the officers and cossacks were going full uprising just for survival anyway.
 
I had thought this item with the Czech Legion was an important thing, but when I mentioned it at SHWI, @alexmilman asserted it wasn't so important, the officers and cossacks were going full uprising just for survival anyway.

Just to clarify, I (probably) said that is was not critically important as a catalyst of the RCW. Operations of the Volunteer Army and the Cossacks allied with it started in January 1918.

Czech Uprising started in May 1918. Provisional Siberian Government had been established in in January 1918 and numerous "white" military organizations already existed in Siberia. "At the same time as the Czechs moved in, Russian officers' organizations overthrew the Bolsheviks in Petropavlovsk and Omsk".

Czech Uprising was obviously important as a military factor on the Eastern front of that war.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Just to clarify, I (probably) said that is was not critically important as a catalyst of the RCW. Operations of the Volunteer Army and the Cossacks allied with it started in January 1918.

Czech Uprising started in May 1918. Provisional Siberian Government had been established in in January 1918 and numerous "white" military organizations already existed in Siberia. "At the same time as the Czechs moved in, Russian officers' organizations overthrew the Bolsheviks in Petropavlovsk and Omsk".

Czech Uprising was obviously important as a military factor on the Eastern front of that war.

Thanks for clarifying.
 
What is the shortest and least extensive civil war the Bolesheviks might face consolidating their control over Russian imperial territory.

Could a single PoD lead the Bolsheviks never losing control of the far north, Siberia, Central Asia and Don-Kuban area?

How about them not being a bunch of the blood-thirsty idiots who triggered the CW by indiscriminate murders of the "class enemies" just to end up (within a year or so) forcefully enlisting them into the Red Army on commanding positions and, even before the dust settled, using the civic "old regime specialists" as well?
 
Hard to say and execute. Don-Kuban to me is going to rebel sooner or later. The North was more of Entente fearful of what is happening in Russia and finding anyone with half-credibility to lead a smattering of locals to oppose the Bolsheviks. Central Asia... woof, that'd be hard, because you have a variety of factors, including (in some parts) oil, religion (Islam vs. declared militant atheism), Soviet neo-imperialism ("we want a brotherhood of all peoples, comrades... dominated by Russians). As Sukhov says in "White Sun of the Desert" - "The East... is a delicate thing." As for Siberia, any little thing could have tipped it over the edge. I am not sure if any little thing would have helped make it less blood soaked. Probably a combination of factors. But the chief reason for the blood is the mule stubborn Soviet approach to changing Russia that made them enemies everywhere. But asking Bolshevik to be less Bolshevik is a bit ASB at this point of the juncture.

One initial bloody approach that could save some blood later, at the initial October Revolution, there were a lot of Tsarist officers rounded up or already rounded up and taken prisoner. Some key officers escaped due to the confusion and lack of planning by the Bolshies. Had the Bolsheviks executed their Tsarist officer prisoners via "laws of military time" (an un-lovely euphemism), they could have shortened the war, in my view.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
How about them not being a bunch of the blood-thirsty idiots who triggered the CW by indiscriminate murders of the "class enemies" just to end up (within a year or so) forcefully enlisting them into the Red Army on commanding positions and, even before the dust settled, using the civic "old regime specialists" as well?

There would be alot of quite fascinating possibilities with a more tolerant or selectively/pragmatically violent regime Soviet regime. Has that ever been done on the board?

I guess my excluding this type of possibility (and I think most others do) because they figure it is as out of character as a "not-Hitler" or "Notsis" conquering Europe in a "humane" way. I mean if they weren't killing class enemies, would they they be Communists or "Commun-nots"?
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
What does everybody think about NukeZeit's idea? It seems to me it gives the Soviets a nice early edge within the European part of the ex-Russian Empire at least.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
One initial bloody approach that could save some blood later, at the initial October Revolution, there were a lot of Tsarist officers rounded up or already rounded up and taken prisoner. Some key officers escaped due to the confusion and lack of planning by the Bolshies. Had the Bolsheviks executed their Tsarist officer prisoners via "laws of military time" (an un-lovely euphemism), they could have shortened the war, in my view.

It should be a knowable thing which White commanders had spent any time in Boleshevik captivity (or captive to Soldiers' Soviets), and than that could be compared with the skill level they displayed in the wartime White commands.

I mean, I think Wrangel and Denikin were considered more skilled than Kolchak. Yudenich, regardless of his record during the civil war, had a decent record in fighting the Turks. I don't know which of these had ever been under arrest.
 
There would be alot of quite fascinating possibilities with a more tolerant or selectively/pragmatically violent regime Soviet regime. Has that ever been done on the board?

I guess my excluding this type of possibility (and I think most others do) because they figure it is as out of character as a "not-Hitler" or "Notsis" conquering Europe in a "humane" way. I mean if they weren't killing class enemies, would they they be Communists or "Commun-nots"?

Of course, NOT killing the "class enemies" would be out of character but calling the same enemies (including some highly-positioned) to their service in big numbers was a clear contradiction to their own ideology so my point is that if they started with that "contradiction" they may not have an opposition or perhaps the opposition would be much weaker. :biggrin:
 
How about them not being a bunch of the blood-thirsty idiots who triggered the CW by indiscriminate murders of the "class enemies" just to end up (within a year or so) forcefully enlisting them into the Red Army on commanding positions and, even before the dust settled, using the civic "old regime specialists" as well?

There really isn't any evidence that the Bolsheviks were the ones to kick off the violence against "class enemies" outside of overthrowing the Provisional Government (which was basically bloodless). Almost of all of the Red Terror (led by Dzerzhinsky & Co.) was a response to violence and pogroms initiated by the opposition which was reacting to the seizure of power by the Soviets and the peace treaty with Germany

*Edit*

An additional thought - if the Bolsheviks sign an earlier treaty with the Germans, it likely frees up a couple of corps for action on the Western Front for the final offensive. Although it probably doesn't end with Entente defeat, it makes it a much closer-run thing in the medium term, making it harder for the Entente to intervene in Russia as well.
 
Almost of all of the Red Terror (led by Dzerzhinsky & Co.) was a response to violence and pogroms initiated by the opposition which was reacting to the seizure of power by the Soviets and the peace treaty with Germany
Bullshit. The Red Terror was a reaction to the Bolsheviks not being politically popular among the peasantry as the SRs were, wanting to provide cheaper food for the cities to shore up their supporters, and generally wanting to seize total control of the economy to shore up their authority. (Well that, and generally having no shortage of psychopaths willing to terrorize villagers like the Tsars of old, or sadistic assholes capable looking to blow off steam by finding new creative ways of torturing people.)

Which actually brings me to my answer to the OP - find a way for the various leftists (particularly the Bolsheviks and the SRs) to maintain a coalition, instead of going to war with each other.
 
There really isn't any evidence that the Bolsheviks were the ones to kick off the violence against "class enemies" outside of overthrowing the Provisional Government (which was basically bloodless).

Yes, sure. Outside of the killing the "class enemies" even before the Red Terror was officially declared they were just a bunch of the peaceful harmless idealists. x'D
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
An additional thought - if the Bolsheviks sign an earlier treaty with the Germans, it likely frees up a couple of corps for action on the Western Front for the final offensive. Although it probably doesn't end with Entente defeat, it makes it a much closer-run thing in the medium term, making it harder for the Entente to intervene in Russia as well.

Good point.

Also, I wonder if a Bolshevik Russia that never loses its western fringes (Finland, Estonia, Livonia, Belarus, Ukraine & Bessarabia), can intervene in Galicia with a limited force after eventual CP capitulation. [I would note that between Nov 1917 and Jan 1918, Bolsheviks seized power in Kishinev, Bessarabia, the towns of western Ukraine, Riga and Tallinn, and they only lost control after the Germans resumed the offensive against them] Perhaps the Soviets can with Carpatho-Ruthenia and what became southeast Poland in the interwar period in OTL could use this as a land bridge linking Soviet Russia with Bela Kun's Republic of Councils.

Of course the changes could butterfly Bela Kun's opportunity in the first place. In any case though, if you did have the Bela set up his republic and the Bolesheviks in a position to aid him directly, David T noted

If that happens, with Soviet power extended almost all the way to Vienna, the entire Little Entente, including Czechoslovakia, is going to be violently anti-Communist.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
An additional thought - if the Bolsheviks sign an earlier treaty with the Germans, it likely frees up a couple of corps for action on the Western Front for the final offensive. Although it probably doesn't end with Entente defeat, it makes it a much closer-run thing in the medium term, making it harder for the Entente to intervene in Russia as well.

I wonder what the maximum extent of a "Germany does better in the 1918 offensive, but still loses" would look like. How far into France they might reach territorially, and what this means for the end date of the war, the front-line when the war ends and the nature of the settlement, plus the knock-on effects for all the peripheral fronts and the lesser Central Powers.
 
Top