Had the White Army won, how would they have governed Russia?

[lafollette]

Let us suppose that Fanny Kaplan assassinates Lenin in August 1918, and Trotsky captured and executed by the Whites early in 1919, as he nearly was. Without Lenin's political or Trotsky's military leadership, the Red Army ends up losing the Russian Civil War.

How would the White Army have ruled Russia? The Whites would obviously have ruled dictatorially: free and fair Constituent Assembly elections would have produced SR/Green majorities, who the Whites regarded as being little better than the Bolsheviks. But who would have led White Russia? Yudenich? Denikin? Wrangel? Kolchak? Or Kornilov if he had survived the Civil War?

A Stolypin-style restriction of the suffrage would probably have produced a right-wing CA acceptable to the Whites. The Russian Prime Minister will likely be a Kadet for window-dressing purposes, such as Milyukov, or a Cossack such as Krasnov to award the Cossacks for their contribution to the White victory.

As for foreign policy, the Whites would have recognized the independence of Finland and a Poland restricted by military force to the Curzon Line. As for the question of national minorities, I doubt that they would have allowed Ukrainian indepedence at all: Kiev was simply too important as a symbol of Slavic power. However, how would the Whites have conducted economic policy? My own view is that the presence of a White Russia allied with France on the international stage would have at least mitigated the effects of the 1920s-1930s farm crisis due to the influx of Russian agricultural products into the markets of the UK and the USA.

 

[The Ranger]

Most likely-not very well but with less violence and nastiness then Stalin did.

 

[LNSS]

I can see an alliance with Mussolini and a military-conservative Germany, meaning that this new triple alliance trounces the WAllies in a WW2.

 

[Slime_blob]

No forced industrialization, collectivisation. But still rapid industrialization like pre war. Rapid economic recovery growth and development. Modernization, industrialization, and mechanisation funded via huge chunk of it, Foreign loans and investments, aside from exports mainly agricultural

What about Kerensky? Like Kerensky and Kornilov Scheming to rid of the Soviets. Technically there was confusion. Kornilov claims he is under orders from Kerensky meanwhile Kerensky panicked thinking it's a coup de ta.

Kornilov wanted just more unified Russia iirc so that they will focus on the bigger enemy which is the central powers. In his opinion.

Maybe Kerensky cuts deal with Kornilov, where Kornilov becomes president, meanwhile head of government, also cabinet president is Kerensky.

 

[Admiral Spaun]

A white government would be very unstable at least in the short term, with the tensions between the various factions and commanders coming to the fore. Russia's economic future depends on if this instability is dealt with quickly or not. You could easily end up with a Russia wracked by coups and ethnic/political insurgencies, limiting foreign investment and industrial progress.

 

[Aisha Clan-Clan]

Latin-type cuadilloism combined with strong social conservatism. My guess is you see some sort of revolution circa the depression. Dunno if it's just *bolshevik revolution with a different cast of characters, a vaguely centrist-nationalist regime like peronism/mexico/s PRI or just third world tpye coup loop.

 

[PrinceofApathy]

Pogroms. Lots of them.

 

[AltoRegnant]

Depends; the White Army was led by anyone from nationalist militarists who would feel right at home in fascist states, or liberal democrats, or a few fringe monarchists, and just about ever ideology you can think of. Kolchak seems the most likely leader since AFAIK he was the most powerful, and I think he was at least somewhat in favor of democracy, having actively favored the Provisional Government and agreed to restore the provisional government. given that Wikipedia also describes him as an honor-bound guy with no politicking skills or interest, and that he wanted the provisional assembly to recognize finland instead of him personally, i guess he would try and build some form of democracy? but i also suspect it would be very illiberal and prone to militaristic influence?

Alexander Kolchak - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[NAF]

As in, how would they govern in the immediate decades after the Civil War, or how the government could evolve all the way into the modern day?

The latter offers a wide range of possibilities -- the former, IMO, not so much. I think that the conditions wrought by the destruction of the Civil War combined with the economic turmoil of the Depression make democracy untenable for the time being, even if the leaders of the victorious Whites were democratically-inclined (and as I understand, the big names in the White Movement most certainly were not). Rather, the scenario I see is some form of authoritarian government coming into being, most likely a military junta of some sort, that then sets to work on the unenviable task of stabilizing and rebuilding Russia and her territories.

As said before, however, the long run offers many more possibilities. You could see anything ranging from a stumbling along of a tinpot dictatorship, a plunge into fascism, or even maybe (hopefully) a gradual transition into a stable, working democracy. White Russia's future will be influenced in large part by the world around it, which will undoubtedly go down a much different path compared to OTL without a communist victory. Weimar Germany may very well survive in such a scenario. If Weimar hangs on, European democracy doesn't erode too far, and the great powers can avert another big war and come together to promote global trade and cooperation under the aegis of a more successful League of Nations, then better conditions are in place for Russia to gradually soften and transition to a more democratic form of government. Such a change is by no means guaranteed, of course, but I think they have alright enough chances.

As for your question pertaining to White Russia's foreign policy toward its breakaway states, I think that whatever White leader emerges victorious will also necessarily have gained enough sense to realize that they aren't getting everything back. The western Entente at that point was firmly in support of an independent Poland, something I think our alt White Russia could stomach so long as they get their Curzon Line border. I see a similar understanding being made regarding Finland. An independent Ukraine, however, is a no-go IMO. Such a notion would be anathema to most of the Whites, and I don't see any of the other Entente powers arguing too hard in their favor.

 

[Julius Vogel]

The Depression could also be rather different too, if just because Russia would not be economically and diplomatically isolated in the same way it was under Soviet rule.

It would even be possible that a White regime might partially resume bond payments. Certainly quite likely they restore ownership of expropriated assets like mines or factories if the owners are likely to invest.

None of that stops a big economic collapse globally but it could delay it ameliorate it.

 

[Clandango]

If Fanny weren’t Jewish I can see her being canonized. As it is, she was a genuine revolutionary and the Whites will probably have propaganda showing the Reds tearing each other not pieces. Maaaaaaaybe a few slightly socialist groups are allowed at the very end, but those that are let by parish priests at the village level, who with local leaders very pointedly saying they are just continuing the peasant government they had been doing for centuries. Perhaps those would count as Greens, though. I don’t know much on the Russian Civil War, but I assume many generals who re conquered areas will be given military governorship of the area, probably with some local palace as their headquarters or residence. It would only last for so long though, and many will want to go to Moscow, even if some decide that having their own powerbase is preferable. Moscow will be the capital without a doubt, as Petrograd is in a precarious area. Do we think the Russians still try the highly manpower-expensive canal between the White Sea and Baltic Sea? Having a Baltic navy might be a lot less feasible now, though I expect they would want to just reconquer the Baltic States first, for their coastlines, ports, and their extremely high (by Russian standards at the time) industrial and commercial activities.

We expect the Japanese, Americans, Entente, and others all withdraw from Russia, right? Or would they stay awhile in the clearly non-Russian areas? The British might not want to waste too much time in Caucasia, while the Far East has too many Europeans for the Japanese to hold onto, though they might try to get some of the Russian concessions in China, though I doubt the Russian government would be sincere on it. The Japanese likely remember the time they Europeans forced the Japanese to roll back on concessions from the Chinese in a war, only for the Russians to take those ports within a year or two.

 

[TheReformer]

As others have mentioned here, a white victory probably means an unstable republican system or a foolish attempt at a tsarist restoration (though I suspect we'd more likely get an eternal regency like Hungary).

The whites would not implement such aggressive industrialization, and probably would not vastly improve their military capacity as a state - if just because their state would be highly unstable.

Peasant land reform would be implemented slower, probably causing immeasurable damage to the country's economy. Additionally it's entirely possible that Russia, like China, would end up de facto as a warlord state because of its vast territory and competing personalities.

In the end it wouldn't matter, as the Nazis (who would absolutely still invade) would obliterate them.

 

[lafollette]

A white government would be very unstable at least in the short term, with the tensions between the various factions and commanders coming to the fore. Russia's economic future depends on if this instability is dealt with quickly or not. You could easily end up with a Russia wracked by coups and ethnic/political insurgencies, limiting foreign investment and industrial progress.

In the event that a single White leader wins the ensuing power struggle, I don't think that you can rule out a post-war recovery on the lines of the Annees folles in France.

Pogroms. Lots of them.

To be fair, nobody in the Civil War was willing to concede ground on the national minority question, as evident by Bolshevik ethnic cleansing of Cossacks and later Ukrainians.

 

[Sol Zagato]

In the end it wouldn't matter, as the Nazis (who would absolutely still invade) would obliterate them

Without a Red victory in Russia, the Nazis probably don't exist as a viable party. Not that something else nasty coming from Germany is unimaginable...

 

[TheReformer]

Without a Red victory in Russia, the Nazis probably don't exist as a viable party. Not that something else nasty coming from Germany is unimaginable...

Perhaps, perhaps not. Regardless, Ostraum will still be the primary objective of any revanchist German ministry and, given most of the extremists on the German right (even those softer than the Nazis) still sought it - I'd expect a disasterous total war with Russian defeat would be probable.

 

[Godot]

The Whites weren't really a cohesive ideological bloc in the same way the Reds were (Mensheviks v Bolsheviks aside) - in the White coalition included reactionaries, constitutional monarchists, liberals, nationalists of assorted regions and shades, proto-fascists, etc etc.

A white victory would surely result in further conflict, if not literally civil War at least strong political infighting over the direction the government would take. I'm inclined to think of the Irish Civil War, or the French Fourth Republic's early years and many battles over particular shades of monarchism and republicanism.

 

[Gukpard]

One of the main problems I have with the whites is that they are highly aristocratic, even the republicans still wanted the people of Russia to be ruled by "them" ("them" ranging from the army to the church to the landed aristocracy) so while the regime ain't going to be brutal as the Soviet Union, some really needed stuff like education gonna be ignored.

I think that a fair comparison would be Salazar. Basically the lower classes would be left ignorant to keep the status quo strong for the ongoing decades.

 

[lafollette]

Depends; the White Army was led by anyone from nationalist militarists who would feel right at home in fascist states, or liberal democrats, or a few fringe monarchists, and just about ever ideology you can think of. Kolchak seems the most likely leader since AFAIK he was the most powerful, and I think he was at least somewhat in favor of democracy, having actively favored the Provisional Government and agreed to restore the provisional government. given that Wikipedia also describes him as an honor-bound guy with no politicking skills or interest, and that he wanted the provisional assembly to recognize finland instead of him personally, i guess he would try and build some form of democracy? but i also suspect it would be very illiberal and prone to militaristic influence?

Alexander Kolchak - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Kadets would have quickly acquiesced themselves with the new White regime, although socialist parties will remain banned.

As in, how would they govern in the immediate decades after the Civil War, or how the government could evolve all the way into the modern day?

The latter offers a wide range of possibilities -- the former, IMO, not so much. I think that the conditions wrought by the destruction of the Civil War combined with the economic turmoil of the Depression make democracy untenable for the time being, even if the leaders of the victorious Whites were democratically-inclined (and as I understand, the big names in the White Movement most certainly were not). Rather, the scenario I see is some form of authoritarian government coming into being, most likely a military junta of some sort, that then sets to work on the unenviable task of stabilizing and rebuilding Russia and her territories.

As said before, however, the long run offers many more possibilities. You could see anything ranging from a stumbling along of a tinpot dictatorship, a plunge into fascism, or even maybe (hopefully) a gradual transition into a stable, working democracy. White Russia's future will be influenced in large part by the world around it, which will undoubtedly go down a much different path compared to OTL without a communist victory. Weimar Germany may very well survive in such a scenario. If Weimar hangs on, European democracy doesn't erode too far, and the great powers can avert another big war and come together to promote global trade and cooperation under the aegis of a more successful League of Nations, then better conditions are in place for Russia to gradually soften and transition to a more democratic form of government. Such a change is by no means guaranteed, of course, but I think they have alright enough chances.

As for your question pertaining to White Russia's foreign policy toward its breakaway states, I think that whatever White leader emerges victorious will also necessarily have gained enough sense to realize that they aren't getting everything back. The western Entente at that point was firmly in support of an independent Poland, something I think our alt White Russia could stomach so long as they get their Curzon Line border. I see a similar understanding being made regarding Finland. An independent Ukraine, however, is a no-go IMO. Such a notion would be anathema to most of the Whites, and I don't see any of the other Entente powers arguing too hard in their favor.

Of course, the Whites would have blamed any movement for Ukrainian independence on 'the Germans and the Bolsheviks'.

The Depression could also be rather different too, if just because Russia would not be economically and diplomatically isolated in the same way it was under Soviet rule.

It would even be possible that a White regime might partially resume bond payments. Certainly quite likely they restore ownership of expropriated assets like mines or factories if the owners are likely to invest.

None of that stops a big economic collapse globally but it could delay it ameliorate it.

The presence of Russian grain in Western markets (controlled by tariffs, obviously) could have at least ameliorated the pre-Great Depression agricultural prices crisis.

The Whites weren't really a cohesive ideological bloc in the same way the Reds were (Mensheviks v Bolsheviks aside) - in the White coalition included reactionaries, constitutional monarchists, liberals, nationalists of assorted regions and shades, proto-fascists, etc etc.

A white victory would surely result in further conflict, if not literally civil War at least strong political infighting over the direction the government would take. I'm inclined to think of the Irish Civil War, or the French Fourth Republic's early years and many battles over particular shades of monarchism and republicanism.

A Hungary-style 'Regency' to appease both republicans and monarchists is perfectly feasible- with the Prime Minister being a moderate like Milyukov or a member of the national minorities such as the Cossack Krasnov?

One of the main problems I have with the whites is that they are highly aristocratic, even the republicans still wanted the people of Russia to be ruled by "them" ("them" ranging from the army to the church to the landed aristocracy) so while the regime ain't going to be brutal as the Soviet Union, some really needed stuff like education gonna be ignored.

I think that a fair comparison would be Salazar. Basically the lower classes would be left ignorant to keep the status quo strong for the ongoing decades.

I doubt that the majority of the elites who fled during the war would have remained abroad in the event of a White victory: Russia would be recovering from the Civil War from a better position and with international support (especially from France) here.

 

[Slime_blob]

One of the main problems I have with the whites is that they are highly aristocratic, even the republicans still wanted the people of Russia to be ruled by "them" ("them" ranging from the army to the church to the landed aristocracy) so while the regime ain't going to be brutal as the Soviet Union, some really needed stuff like education gonna be ignored.

I think that a fair comparison would be Salazar. Basically the lower classes would be left ignorant to keep the status quo strong for the ongoing decades.

Majority of the Provisional government iirc was like Kadets, who iirc put rights and everything to the people. Education probably still goes like Russia pre war where it's free and I'm not sure if mandatory but rather alot of literacy iirc 90%? or just majority is literate. Unlike the common misconception that it isn't.

Well if they have the money, I don't think they would neglect education. Probably even expand it as the Kadets and Kerenskyists the two main cliques stronghold seems to have wanted reform to be like a modern " western " state.

Unless they can't fund it though which is imo quite unlikely, probably the US and co sends some emergency loans and aid to prevent Russia's economy from collapsing totally.

 

[Slime_blob]

The Kadets would have quickly acquiesced themselves with the new White regime, although socialist parties will remain banned.

Kerensky iirc was leading the moderate socialists. Maybe the radicals only?