I mean that France manages to beat the Germans in WWII. In such a TL, either the USSR never gets involved in WWII at all or--if the war lasts long enough--enters the war on the Franco-British side and achieves victory with much less casualties in comparison to our TL and also with a smaller post-World War II empire afterwards.
Such sentiments could certainly be there; however, would the Soviet leadership have allowed these sentiments to be publicly expressed?
To be fair, though, you could have an arms race between the Soviets and the Franco-British in a TL where the U.S. never enters World War II.
Well than, the result is the following:
While the Soviet Union may be stronger, it also ends up being Public Enemy Number 1 for the rest of the world: after all, who was feeding the Nazi's all those raw materials and carved up Eastern Europe with them? Communism was already something of a boogeyman in the eyes of the world, and was only really put on the back burner because Stalin was more willing to back the European status quo while the Facists were trying to rock the boat.
In a war in which France and Great Britain manage to beat the Nazi's without Soviet assistance, Centeral and Southern Europe are now firmly in the camp of the center-right Imperial Capitalist-Merchantalist powers (With no quick Fall of France, I'm assuming Mussolini hesitates and dosen't join the war on Germany's side. It's not like they haden't sent out plenty of diplomatic feelers towards the Western Powers IRL during the 1920's, and could be trusted to exist within the international system: especially one where Communism is now the extistential threat). Russia, at best, gets to keep Bessarabia, parts of Poland, and the Baltic states... the later two of which are tarred pretty heavily with the brown paint of Nazi collaboration and have functional, pretty legitimate governments (The Poles even with part of their country liberated) backed by the British and French.
The problem for the Soviets is, while they may be less wrecked internally, their potential enemies also haven't been completely spent in an extended war and occupation... and Stalin dosen't get the reputation as the man who beat Hitler, but rather the one who shook hands with him and divided up Eastern Europe and provided the feedstock for his genocidal war machine. Expect this to have a huge knock-on effect in public opinion across Europe, even among moderate left-wingers: Stalin isen't the workers'' liberator and defender from Facist aggression, only showing he was willing to co-operate with even the most anti-Socialist governments for a naked land-grab. This reputation and lack of the political capital their WW II victory provided, combined with the absence of Red Army bayonets in Eastern Europe, and their influence is likely pushed back to their internal border. If horror stories of what they're pulling in Ukraine get out too... oh boy, I can imagine the field day Western propagandists are going to have with THAT.
Also, I think its fairly likely Japan dosen't jump on France or Britian's colonial Empires (Or the Dutch East Indies either... hell, I imagine the Dutch government would be eager to sell Japan the oil it needs so they could use the money to rebuild their country), as the two don't look like they're on the ropes or too militarily distracted in Europe to notice. This radically reduces the power of the naval clique, as they don't have many feathers in their cap or even targets they can push for (Without looking suicidal), while the army builds up its prestige in China. Given France and Britain now have the Soviets on the top of their threat list, and I can see them at least begrudgingly accepting Japan's strengthened position as a hedge against Communist power in the Far East. If nothing else, they aren't going to actively try to dick Japan over: I think the most likely scenario is an offer of "international mediation" to reach a reasonable settlement in China: in which recognition of Manchuko and certain economic privileges for the Japanese are recognized in exchange for Japan keeping order/suppressing the Reds in Asia and agreeing to a guarantee of British, French, and Dutch territorial sovergeinties in East Asia (The Americans might explicently sign onto this, but I doubt they'd do much more than politely protest from their isolationist position. After all, how easy is it going to be to sell the American public on a war, after the international community has come together to hammer out a peace, for the sake of yelllow people while the economy is still recovering?)
So, by the mid 50's the Soviet Union is effectively contained by a ring of Imperial powers: Britain and France leading an alliance with Facist Italy, West/liberated-Nazi-Occupied Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, The 2nd Weimar Republic (or whatever the new government in Germany is), The Magyar Republic (or whatever government they accept in Budapest), and Bulgaria at the absolute least. Yugoslavia and Greece too, assuming France and Britain don't sell them out as a sop for Italian co-operation, with British clients in Iraq and Iran to complete the southern cordon. Let's call these the "White" powers.
Romania, Finland, and Turkey are a bit of a toss-up, since these are within Soviet reach during a German collapse. The former two are the most likely to be brought into Moscow's orbit, being German allies and with their political centers of gravity being so close to the borders, so I'll be generous and assume you get Communist governments in both; hell, let's throw in Romania regaining all her Vienna Awards territories from Hungary too. Turkey is more of a mixed bag: bordered by both Franco-British and Soviet territories, and the Straits easy to threaten by either the Black Sea or combined, Mediterranean -focused Franco-Italian fleet. Depending on how the dice fall, things could either go very very good (Leveraging the best deals and aid from both sides: possibly involving border rectifications in Western Thrace, Syria, and the Mosul regions in Ankara's favor alongside economic aid) or very very bad (Ending up the site of proxy wars and espionage/covert efforts by both sides... to say nothing of an actual hot war where both sides try to force the straits and start blowing eachother up just outside Istanbul) if Turkey decides to remain neutral, which I think is the most likely case considering how vulnerable they are if they lean too heavily towards one side or the other. This leaves the "Red" powers in Europe limited to the USSR, Finnish Socialist Worker's Republic, Socialist Republic of Romania, and maybe a Polish People's Republic/Eastern Poland assuming Stalin dosen't just keep the land as part of the USSR.
Meanwhile, in the Far East Japan's "Lesser" East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere (Including itself, Manchuko, Inner Mongolia, whatever concessions they manage to carve out of China's corpse, and maybe the Phillipenes if the US liberates it on time as promised and the new government drifts into Japan's orbit) provides a firm Anti-Communist force aimed at the Russian Far East. What remains of China would probably be too much of a hassal for even the French, British, and Japanese combined to keep fully compliant without becoming a giant ulser, so I'll assume as long as the government isen't Red, keeps Mao and his comrad's power to tolerable levels, and provides basic protection and stability for Imperial and European property/businesses' profitability the Whites and Japanese will accept whatever the Chinese come up with. This means China needs to end its Civil War, lest that provide justification for further intervention (All the factions could agree to THAT, at least), so I'll say for the sake of having the least White-Imperial friendly government possible a cohalition in which the KMT plays a major (though not nessicerily leading, if their reputation gets the kibosh following their 'capitulation to the foreign devils': Chiang, at the very least, would lose enough prestige to be unacceptable as the head of the new government), alongside parties headed by the various regional warlords, members of Wang Jingwei's "reformed" government, and some pro-Western/Liberal elites from the coastal cities.
We'll assume such a state is at least a benevolant/sympathetic neutral towards the Soviets (seeing them as anti-Imperialist), but in all likelihood this China will try to cozy up as close as they can to the Americans if at all possible: after all, the Americans were the only ones who argued for Chinese interests through the whole process, including providing economic aid, even if it was too little too late. I'll even give the Soviets breaking off client states and the Nanjing Regeime not being too sore about it in, say, Mongolia and East Turkestan/Xinjang. Mao and his Reds, of course, aren't going to be an official part of the government: that's not something Japan will tolerate, but I could see them sneaking in as "Agrarian" parties and maintaining unofficial power in the countryside, maintaining friendly relations with the more anti-White and anti-Imperialist/Pro-Sovergeinity factions within the official government, maintining a more permenant "United Front". Weather or not this China would be stable, and how the various powers would play power politics within it, is something that I'd very much like to see other's opinions on and discuss: would the regional warlords be willing to acts as proxies for the Western Powers or Japan if it means power for themselves and more wealth for their cliques and provinces; buying the loyalty of "their" citizens in a kind African-esque spoils system? Are interests in China enough to drag America out of its isolationist stupor without the shock of the 2nd World War?
By the late 40's/early 50's, I see a world with three primary poles: in the best case scenario for the "Whites". First, a united European front, based around a center-right semi-Liberal "Responsable government" (With rights for the right sort of people; namely white, capitalist-minded individuals who respect traditional values, and slow change to ensure the masses are properly educated and uplifted enough to use their franchise responsably: after all, look what happened when you gave those Germans the right to pick their leaders. Obviously, we diden't spend long enough tutoring them in how to run a proper democracy), with Great Britain and France playingthe dominant roles with Italy acting as both a mediator and "morale motivator" for the two superpowers: co-ordinating a sub faction of more traditionalist-inclined states including at least Spain and Portugal. They would, naturally, maintain the traditional view of "The White Man's Burdan" and the natural superiority of Western European civilization (Though maybe not the white race, per say: though Nazism wasen't around long enough nor brought about the same level of utter destruction and genocide to quite taint the idea of scientific racism as much as it did in our timeline).
Second, the "Lesser East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere", consisting off Japan and its clients, who have a more traditionalist hard-right, ultra-nationalist view. They would believe in the importance of economic autarky and the importance of harmony of purpose in society/ the health of the
Kokka/Nation over the individual: or at the very least that economics/bussiness existed to serve and obey the government rather than doing the most good for society by being given freedom to act on their own with only some government interference and being allowed to advise the government in turn, as well as the government acting to support their interests (As the Europeans would see it: a mix between Italy's corporatism and British capitalism which placed the government and bussiness more as equal partners). While I can't imagine they'd be Asian supremacists and could hardly be totally anti-Imperialist they would carry the manner of "Asia for Asians!", perhaps promoting an idea of "Regionalism/'nation groups" where races ought to be considered "separate, but equal" (Though some groups within each race could be more equal than others: the Japanese were obviously appointed by provindence to lead the East Asians, the Angles best suited to lead the Germanic peoples, the Franks the Latins, etc. Where the Americans would fit into this framework, I don't know). Class divisions would, of course, be antithetical to this and lead to disharmony within the nation, and so would remainfundamentally anti-Communist, with everybody being expected to do their part / fill their assigned role in
This could go along well with the revival of Bushido, leading to a wholesale Neo-
Bakufuism where everybody has a place in the celestial order. Hell, it would resonate with traditional Confusian ideals and the Hindu idea of castes/the Karmatic order pretty well too, and could be played as proof of the commonality and natural unity of Asiatic societies to Japan's advantage.
Third, you have the "Reds"/Commintern, made up of the USSR and her "Sister Republics". Obviously, they're Communists and (at least rhetorically) Moscow is going to be talking as such. They will, naturally, be anti-colonialist as a rule, since its the most crass and most exploitive form of capitalism (and is what gives their rivals so much of their power), and poo-poo the idea of nationalism since the worker ought to primarily identify with his class, and socialism's end result isen't supposed to have national borders... which could be spun quite well into a "Socialism in one country" narrative. Centeral planning and inter-regional co-operation would be seen as key, with different areas being specialized in producing different types of goods (Similar to the whole 'let's build one giant lightbulb factory in Latvia, and it can supply the whole USSR so much more efficiently than a lot of small factories acting in an uncoordinated manner'), focusing on providing for the people's material needs over such abstract and empty trinkets as "political rights" (Which of course includes building up the Red Army for the vital material need of security, so as to keep counter-revolutionaries at bay).
The US in such a scenario would likely still be isolationist, though doing its best to keep the sparring in the Western Hemisphere to a minimum. Not that it woulden't happen at all: meddling in South America will likely be tolerataed to some extent, but don't expect to see regime changes in, say, Nicaragua or Cuba. Nobody wants to get the US on their bad side, since she could swing the delicate international balance, and would recognize that while her vital interests are few, they are held very close to heart.
(Din's Red Earth that took awhile... though I'm quite happy with the end result. It's just one option though: there's plenty of points that could be debated here. EDIT: I think I'll actually make a map of what I think the world would look like tomorrow, just for the fun of it. )