AHC/WI: USSR not a superpower

Find someone other than Stalin or Trotsky to take over after Lenin; they were both very pro-industrialisation. Someone who neglects industrialisation for whatever reason might very well make sure that the USSR remains a backwater, and would possibly get dissolved by Nazi Germany later on.
 
ASB, they were all committed to industrialization, it was the only way to create the industrial proletariat the Bolsheviks relied on to be the back-bone of Soviet power.

In any case Trotsky would never ever become leader even the Red Army didn't back him. And Stalin's rush to collectivize agriculture & crash industrialization were as much hindrance as help. The U.S.S.R could've industrialized itself at far less cost in lives & popular support under a less murderously paranoid & cruel leadership.

Indeed, for all the Magnificent Bastardy/Chronic-Backstabbing-Disorder that allowed him to gain & keep absolute, unchallengeable power. Or suckering foreign leaders into advancing his agenda. Stalin was actually a pretty shit leader when it came to running the U.S.S.R on a day-to-day basis.
 
Make the USSR mess up more in 1941-1943 and have the Nazis do a bit better

It takes more of a beating and probably won't get much beyond its borders

Without its network of puppet states its influence is much reduced, and if it is hurt more its economy is even worse and it can't afford to be one
 
Kill off Lenin and Trotsky as soon as possible, though not before the creation of the USSR, obviously. The former to get rid of an inspirational leader around whom everyone could rally and the latter to stop him from whipping the Red Army into shape. Strengthen the Whites somehow, make sure the Bolsheviks only win the Civil War by the skin of their teeth, leaving them in charge of a (even more) completely broken and utterly ruined country. Get some kind of power struggle going on which takes a long time to resolve or simply place an incompetent person in charge. No Socialism in One Country would be nice too, just to piss off the rest of the world and make them hesitant to really aid them to any degree.

When Germany attacks (let's assume it does), make the Soviets fuck it all up even worse than they did in real life, which shouldn't be difficult as they'll be weaker. Less lend-lease as a result of worse relations with the outside world as a result of the lack of Socialism in One Country would be nice as well. Again, they should win by the skin of their teeth and by the end of the war the USSR should be a poor, battered and broken backwater.
 

MSZ

Banned
The USSR became a superpower after world war II when it got half of the old world as its sphere of influence. So obviously the simplest way of not letting it to that is to prevent WW2. It would still be a great power by virtue of its population and resource pool, but not a superpower.

I always assumed however that without WW2, the USSR would still try to extend its sphere of influence by suporting anti-colonial forces, trying to build an empire by "liberating" the colonial world to surround the developed world (IIRC Mao had a manifesto about something like that). This could be a ticket to superpowerhood potnetially if itwould succeed, but given Russia's OTL performence at subjecting the post-colonial world it might actually weaken it more than it would strengthen it.
 
What about if the western intervention after WW1 allowed the formation of independent states out of parts of the former Russian Empire?

Basically a much smaller USSR.

Urkraine and Belarus declare independence during the civil war, followed by several of the central Asian republics.

Their independence is guaranteed by France, Britain and the US.

If Germany still attacks could they fail to even take Poland if they are reinforced from the east?
 
Last edited:
With the USA neutral in WWI Brest-Litovsk occurs in the east with a negotiated peace, CP victory lite, in the west. Without the resources of Ukraine and Azerbazan the pace of industrialization is slowed. Post war France and Italy go left but not red. The social democrats in Germany cut defense spending. By 1940 Stalin sees an opportunity to 'liberate' Ukraine, Belarus and Azerbazan. In the ensuing war Soviet industry is devastated.
 
A much more successful Barbarosssa. The Germans drive. To the Urals. Anglo US forces liberate Eastern Europe. There is no Soviet Empire.
 
Lenin lives long enough to form a Dynasty.

Lenin lives longer, and has a son whom he grooms for leadership whom comes to power in 1937. The son having travelled in the West, and throughout the world takes a more pragmatic approach in regard to the Red Army, and relations with Germany. Never trusting, he refuses the offer to occupy Eastern Poland. He can read German and he does not trust Hitler, so, when the Germans attack, they go up against a prepared Red Army on Soviet soil, and the Blitzkrieg stalls. The war in the east quickly turns into a stalemate. Without German success against the USSR, Japan does not attack the US, but instead only goes after the Dutch East Indies. Eventually, Germany simply goes bankrupt, running out of both money and manpower to fight the USSR, while Japan holds on to Manchuria, Korea, Indonesia and other areas. China is withdrawn from by all outside parties, but is given enough weapons to fight a nasty 20 year Civil War. Germany is never truly invaded, but instead sues for peace and falls apart as its constituent parts fight for dominance. The USSR, unified, but tired from a long war rests for a decade. It never becomes a Super Power, but neither does the USA, which has set out this series of wars. Instead the world continues with a multiple of powers including a freed but Fascist France, loosely allied with Germany, but deep down hating them, a screwed up Nazi State, more a failure than anything, though they never will admit it (and a global pariah as what they did to their own citizens comes out), and the USSR sandwiched between Germany, a still shaky China of one Political bend or another (I do not know whom would win a very long civil war) and Japan, frustrated but still armed to its teeth.
 
Yeah, another ''fine'' cheer-leading chorus for those wacky Nazis. Classy guys classy.:rolleyes:

Never mind the fact that no Stalin could mean no Nazis & Brest-Litosk wasn't going to stand. Due to the Kaiserreich bring, well utterly buggered.

The Lenin's son thing is a non-starter. Lenin was faithful to his wife and she was a tad beyond childbearing years by 1917. Also the U,S,S,R want North Korea, Lenin JR would be dead if he tried to stand up against the reavers in the Central Committee. Stalin was the best backstabber & killer within the ranks of the Old Bolsheviks, he wasn't the only one however.:eek:
 
How could the USSR be prevented from rising to superpower status, and how would this change global geopolitics?

Keep the ussr from forming and have a superpwer democratic russia state?

Seriously, after the establishment of the ussr, it would be difficult to prevent it from surpassing britain, france and germany. It might not reach global power parity with the us, but it going to be bigger than any of the other great powers.
 
a Second wife?

If an assassination attempt on Lenin had occurred when his wife was present she could have been killed, and he could have been left relatively unhurt, and with no long term health effects. He was at the top of his Society at the time, and so would have likely been the focus of a lot of attention from possible second wifes. This was the early 20th Century, and the loss of a spouse, and the taking of a second wife was fairly common. If she was younger, say early 30s, then Lenin could have fathered a son, or two, or three.

My idea is that the USSR stronger and better prepared when WW2 started could have stopped the Germans earlier, and that this would be enough of a blow to Germany to cause it to go back to negotiation, and with negotiation, a German Nation, unified, and marginally strong survives. Japan does not go after the US as they can not count on the USSR from going after Manchuria, etc. to assist the Chinese Communists and cause them problems.

Yes the USSR would be strong, very strong, but instead of there being two Super-Powers as a result of their competitors having been hurt by WW2 while they strengthened, there would be many strong nations, none of the Super-Power level. The USSR, not because they are not strong, but because they have too many possible enemies, on all sides, and would to devote a lot of resources to protect themselves.
 
Find someone other than Stalin or Trotsky to take over after Lenin; they were both very pro-industrialisation. Someone who neglects industrialisation for whatever reason might very well make sure that the USSR remains a backwater, and would possibly get dissolved by Nazi Germany later on.

No way! In OTL Stalin significantly delayed Soviet industrialisation and had a significant negative effect upon Soviet military performance, not to mention the disastrous M-R Pact etc.
 
If Stalin after 1945 pulls back from Central Europe and lets those countries be fully independent, and abstains from any foreign projects, so the Soviet Union keeps to itself. This means that it would choose not to be a super power.
 
What about making the Civil War last longer? Say 10 or 20 years of fighting. The Reds still win the war but are left with a Russia/Soviet Union far more devastated by the fighting. Longer war might also allow more of the breakaways like Ukraine and in Central Asia to survive.
 
Top