How Much Of Eroupe Can The Soviets Be Prevented From Claiming?

Just curious, but a good part of what become the Eastern Block was given to the Soviets because they had 'liberated' the area first, with the dividing of Germany in a sense recognizing that pushing the Soviets eastward was politically impossible and severely unlikely military wise.

So my question is what changes can happen in the war that ties up the Soviets long enough that Germany, and maybe even a few others, would fall under NATO control in the Cold War.
 
The Soviets have suffered the most of the Big Three and they're going to get their pound of flesh one way or another. If the West tries to nickel and dime them in Central Europe, then maybe they decide to tip the scales in Greece, "intervene" in Turkey, ignore the Finnish team switch, and stay longer in Iran than agreed.

Plus, more difficulties for the Soviets means a harder slog for the Wallies as the Germans have more troops to hold the line, which translates to more misery and starvation in France and the Benelux countries.

So, not much more than they were already prevented from claiming. Austria and Greece were saved, any more is going to be made up elsewhere.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
Czechoslovakia was up for grabs and very well could have tipped west had their been more interest and desire to keep them in the fold.

I don't really see much else happening without WW2 being very differently.
 
FDR agreed to Soviet Domination of eastern Europe at the Tehran conference. If the US/UK are more co-belligerents rather than allies with Stalin and don't extend lend lease and other support to the USSR than the situation would be more open Europe would wind up split wherever the US/UK and USSR eventually met.

However if the USSR was having a harder time against the Germans that would also make the war harder for the US/UK. As previously mentioned the US/UK basically traded eastern Europe in exchange for the USSR taking the brunt of the combat.

If some event happened earlier causing a deep rift between the USSR and US/UK maybe the Big 3 conferences never happen and each side conducts their side of the war independently.
 
The only realistic option I can see is the Germans sending literally everything they've got to try and slow down the Soviet advance, allowing the Western Allies to get further east than they did OTL.

Poland was screwed by geography. As for Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary, they sided with the Germans and their geographic location put them in the same boat as Poland.

A pure fantasy I could envision is this:
  • Allies invade Sardinia and Corsica, thus putting them in a position to invade Italy from further up the peninsula
  • After the Allies invade Italy by landing at Civitaveccia or Anzio (preferably in the summer), a good portion of the German forces are trapped on the southern half of Italy
  • Allies are able to occupy northern Italy sonner and are able to advance into Austria by late 1943 or early 1944
  • Allied advance into Austria allows for further Western Allied advancements into Eastern Europe
I know, the only way this could happen is in my imagination.
 
I've read that if the United States and Britain had insisted that they occupy their sectors of Berlin at the same time as the Soviets and insisted on genuine four power administration of the city that it would've drastically weakened their hold on East Germany and thus on all of Eastern Europe.
 
IOTL, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia could have been kept free of the Soviets except for mistakes made by their own governments.

Bulgaria had never declared war on the Soviet Union, and by summer 1944 was negotiating a peace with the British and Americans. That dragged on too long because of their refusal to declare war on Germany as price for peace with Allies. Instead, the Soviets declared war on Bulgaria, invaded the country, and set up a "popular front" government that allowed them to be subverted. If Bulgaria had moved faster to seal peace with the Allies, US or British paratroopers could have entered Bulgaria before the Red Army arrived at its borders, and Stalin would not have risked invading the country.

Czechoslovakia was actually free of Red Army troops when it fell to the Communists in 1948. If Benes and the non-Communists in government had acted in concert better, they could have avoided the Prague Coup and aligned itself with the West in 1948.

So those two countries are the easiest to handle. No battlefield PODs are really needed.

Romania and Hungary are harder. Both had declared war against the Soviet Union and were farther from the West. Both would require either a substantial delay in the Soviet advance, or a spectacular Allied advance through Italy. Probably both. In that regard, Hungary is easier to reach. However, if it can be, both countries were willing to betray the Nazis and ally with the West. If we assume the Soviets are delayed in the Ukraine, and the Allies can reach Hungary through the Ljublana Gap, then both Admiral Horthy and King Michael could achieve what they tried IOTL which is to defect to the Allies soon enough to prevent their countries occupation by the Soviets. In such a case, it is even possible that being isolated from Moscow, Tito is forced to play nice with the Yugoslav Royalists and may even be removed from power later on. But we'd need the Soviets to be delayed by about a year. With an early enough POD on the Eastern Front, it's possible.

The hard part is Poland as Stalin needs control of Poland to maintain his supply line to any forces stationed in Germany, and the Central European Plain is the obvious invasion route into Germany.

The only way to get a Poland free of Soviet influence is if the Germans collapse in the West while still fighting the Soviets in Belarus and the Baltics. At that point, the Polish government in exile takes control of Poland with Western support.

A more likely scenario is one where the Poles succeed in a Warsaw Uprising situation and complicates postwar Poland where the Soviets also have a lot of influence.

Germany is going to be divided into occupation zones regardless. After WWII ended, nobody intended to create two separate Germanies or start a Cold War. They were just trying to think of how to prevent Germany from starting a third war. How Stalin reacts to events will determine the eventual fate of its occupation zone. If the rest of Central Europe is free of Soviet influence, I don't see him pushing hard to create an isolated East German state, but coming to some other terms.

As for what can be done to delay the Red Army's advance by a year or more, there can be very PODs. I'd prefer one where Hitler realized he was overextended in both late 1941 and 1942, and the German Army is hunkered down and prepared when the Red Army launches their Winter Offensives. With less German and more Soviet casualties, Germany will be able to hold out longer.
 
As for Bulgaria ... they sided with the Germans...
Not really, the Bulgarians seem to have held fairly aloof from the Germans and co-operated with as absolutely little as possible to survive. Case in point they refused to deport their Jewish population, except for the areas of Yugoslavia and Greece they had militarily occupied, to Germany and German-occupied Poland. As Blackfox5 mentioned they also declined to declare war on the Soviet Union.


  • Allied advance into Austria allows for further Western Allied advancements into Eastern Europe
Oh gods no, have you seen the terrain in the north of Italy along the border with Austria or even Slovenia? It's terrain that's practically tailor made for defensive fighting. If the Western Allies were in Italy and had managed to avoid our timeline's slog up the peninsula though then a short hop across the Adriatic into the coastal areas of Yugoslavia might have been interesting.
 

Ian_W

Banned
If the Western Allies were in Italy and had managed to avoid our timeline's slog up the peninsula though then a short hop across the Adriatic into the coastal areas of Yugoslavia might have been interesting.

Regrettably, there isnt the road network to support the Allies' very vehicle heavy way of war.

That said, you could do a lot with some air support in Yugoslavia.

If Italy effectively manages to replace Mussolini and change sides, then you might get the line up to the Alps in late 1943. Regrettably, the Alps are still a thing.
 
Best scenario for this is to have an American president less wooed by Stalin, that way America is co-belligerent, but not allied. Then have no Lend-Lease, have Moscow fall. Have the Commonwealth launch a separate invasion of Greece, while America still hits Sicily.

Then have landing in Normandy, while the Russians are still farther back, have Italy switch side. Allies link up somewhere in Poland, maybe the Iron curtain falls there, but the rest of Eastern Europe will be Wallied. It's a stretch, and the allies will be shedding a lot more blood, and a couple million more Russians are dying, but there it is.
 
FDR agreed to Soviet Domination of eastern Europe at the Tehran conference. If the US/UK are more co-belligerents rather than allies with Stalin and don't extend lend lease and other support to the USSR than the situation would be more open Europe would wind up split wherever the US/UK and USSR eventually met.

However if the USSR was having a harder time against the Germans that would also make the war harder for the US/UK. As previously mentioned the US/UK basically traded eastern Europe in exchange for the USSR taking the brunt of the combat.

If some event happened earlier causing a deep rift between the USSR and US/UK maybe the Big 3 conferences never happen and each side conducts their side of the war independently.

FDR did NOT agree to Soviet domination of Eastern Europe at Tehran or at Yalta. The closest a Western leader came to making such an agreement with Stalin was Churchill when he met with Stalin in Moscow in 1944 and drew up a percentages agreement with him regarding various Eastern European countries. The European Advisory Commission, which met in 1944, did place Berlin in the Soviet occupation zone (due to military logistics, not FDR being charmed by Stalin), but the occupation of Europe was decided by the location of the respective armies at the time Germany surrendered, not on any agreement between Stalin and the West.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
This...

FDR did NOT agree to Soviet domination of Eastern Europe at Tehran or at Yalta. The closest a Western leader came to making such an agreement with Stalin was Churchill when he met with Stalin in Moscow in 1944 and drew up a percentages agreement with him regarding various Eastern European countries. The European Advisory Commission, which met in 1944, did place Berlin in the Soviet occupation zone (due to military logistics, not FDR being charmed by Stalin), but the occupation of Europe was decided by the location of the respective armies at the time Germany surrendered, not on any agreement between Stalin and the West.

This ... nicely summed up.

The only sure way for the Western allies to get more of Central Europe west of the line of control once the Germans surrender is to:

a) have the Soviets move more slowly;
b) have the Allies move more quickly.

A, all things considered, is challenging given the overall progress of the war (I presume you want things as they were, historically, up to 1942 or so?); b is doable, if the Alllies land in NE Europe in 1943, rather than 1944.

That depends on decisions being made early enough to delay, cancel, or modify the Allied strategy for 1942-44, of course, so about the latest one can push the point of departure is probabaly the 2nd Washington Conference, in the summer of 1942.

The Casablanca conference is too late.

Best,
 
This ... nicely summed up.

The only sure way for the Western allies to get more of Central Europe west of the line of control once the Germans surrender is to:

a) have the Soviets move more slowly;
b) have the Allies move more quickly.
,

I'd think about the only way to have this is to have Hitler kick the bucket in '44 and his successors see the writing on the wall and deliberately weaken the western front, transfering forces to the eastern front, slowing down the Russians and allowing the western allies to basically move in with scarcely a fight... don't see that happening...
 

TFSmith121

Banned
The Allies actually planned for that, under the RANKIN scenario

I'd think about the only way to have this is to have Hitler kick the bucket in '44 and his successors see the writing on the wall and deliberately weaken the western front, transfering forces to the eastern front, slowing down the Russians and allowing the western allies to basically move in with scarcely a fight... don't see that happening...

The Allies actually planned for that, under the RANKIN scenario; not very likely, given the odds - generally - against the Valkyrie plotters.

ROUNDUP is more likely, I think.

Best,
 
Top