If the Central Powers Win WWI, How Likely is WWII to Eventually Occur?

[thezerech]

The Hetmanate's troops often defected. And some of the units that were loyal were actually composed of Russian officers.


Can't agree with that - Skoropadsky was pretty damn stupid. The stupid decisions started from day 1 of his regime and forced much of the country into open revolt long before neo-Pereyaslav. The biggest reason he was "forced" to work with Russians (up to and including filling his armies with Russian emigre officers) is that only a tiny minority of Ukrainians could stomach his rabidly reactionary ideas on society, economy and politics. He threatened to reverse pretty much all the achievements made in Ukraine after the fall of the Romanovs.

As for his relations with "Vasyl" - he may have buried the hatchet when he was a powerless exile with nothing to lose; but while Skoropadsky was actually Hetman he worked to expel Vasyl from the country. Not a man inclined to share power.

And IIRC Vasyl's father refused the Polish throne, because he didn't want to be held responsible for the Border Strip plan or any other scandals of CP occupation.

The only achievements in Ukraine after the fall of the Romanovs was Socialist anarchy, and Bolshevik occupation.

Skoropadsky was despised because he was forced to work with the Russians to create a functional state, by the Socialists in the former Rada, who could not accept anything less than their ridiculous utopianistic and disastrous vision.

If the Rada is never formed or if they grow a pair, of brain cells, then things will turn out far better. Skoropadsky was a man who could get things done, and when he was obstructed by the Socialist Nationalist faction he worked with the Russians. If we make the Socialists cooperative, than there is no need to work with the Russians. IOTL He tried his damnedest to get Nationalists in the cabinet and government but they all refused, it cost Ukraine our independence. If Vasyl can come to power earlier than we've headed off almost all of these problems. No stupid Rada, to Reactionary Skoropadsky, they've all got to work under the popular Red Prince, or get trampled under foot. Surely a greater solution.

 

[CaliGuy]

The Hetmanate's troops often defected. And some of the units that were loyal were actually composed of Russian officers.

Why were Russian officers loyal to Ukraine, though?

 

[avernite]

I personally think the Ukraine is always going to be more important to Russia than it is to Germany, same as Austria-Czechia was more important to Germany than to the French/British. Germany could not start the conflict, so any Russian attempt to reintegrate/reconquer Ukraine will come when Germany has issues to deal with before responding.

So, I consider there to be decent odds Russia can reclaim (most of) the Ukraine without quite kicking off WW2 in this ATL; Germany could challenge it, but that requires Germany to be quick on the draw. If the Russians use the proper opportunity they'll be in Kiev before the Germans know they need to respond.

 

[CaliGuy]

I personally think the Ukraine is always going to be more important to Russia than it is to Germany, same as Austria-Czechia was more important to Germany than to the French/British. Germany could not start the conflict, so any Russian attempt to reintegrate/reconquer Ukraine will come when Germany has issues to deal with before responding.

So, I consider there to be decent odds Russia can reclaim (most of) the Ukraine without quite kicking off WW2 in this ATL; Germany could challenge it, but that requires Germany to be quick on the draw. If the Russians use the proper opportunity they'll be in Kiev before the Germans know they need to respond.

How important Ukraine will be to Germany will depend on how crucial Germany thinks Ukraine is for Russia; after all, Germany certainly wants to avoid a resurgent Russia.

Also, though, if Germany is smart enough to realize that it is overstretched and thus agree to install a genuinely independent government (as opposed to German puppet government) in Ukraine, then it might be difficult for Russia to ever reconquer Ukraine--even if this was somehow practically possible--without alienating the Ukrainian people.

 

[sahaidak]

Why were Russian officers loyal to Ukraine, though?

They were loyal to the Skoropadsky regime, which they saw as their protector from the Russian Bolsheviks and Ukrainian Socialists. Had Skoropadsky tried to send them to fight fellow Russian officers of the White Movement, they would have likely rebelled. Also, when Skoropadsky attempted half-hearted Ukrainization of his government apparatus and armed forces (in effect requiring his civil service and officers to learn Ukrainian), these Russian officers sabotaged his efforts. That is, they were loyal to Skoropadsky not because he was Ukrainian, but because he was not a radical Ukrainian nationalist or socialist.

 

[Halagaz]

The only achievements in Ukraine after the fall of the Romanovs was Socialist anarchy, and Bolshevik occupation.

Skoropadsky was despised because he was forced to work with the Russians to create a functional state, by the Socialists in the former Rada, who could not accept anything less than their ridiculous utopianistic and disastrous vision.

If the Rada is never formed or if they grow a pair, of brain cells, then things will turn out far better. Skoropadsky was a man who could get things done, and when he was obstructed by the Socialist Nationalist faction he worked with the Russians. If we make the Socialists cooperative, than there is no need to work with the Russians. IOTL He tried his damnedest to get Nationalists in the cabinet and government but they all refused, it cost Ukraine our independence. If Vasyl can come to power earlier than we've headed off almost all of these problems. No stupid Rada, to Reactionary Skoropadsky, they've all got to work under the popular Red Prince, or get trampled under foot. Surely a greater solution.

Again, "forced" to work with the Russians? Hardly. Skoropadsky was a Russophile, wanted Ukraine to be in a federation with Russia, and held both those views long before the proclamation you refer to as Pereyaslav 2.0.

The crucial achievements of Ukraine after the fall of the Romanovs were the very real democratization and land reform - both of which Skoropadsky tore up.

The fall of the Rada was inevitable; the Central Powers were offended by the Rada's progressive social policies, and even more by how it actually tried to look after Ukrainian interests instead of being a good little resource-extraction machine for Germany and Austria. But this doesn't excuse Skoropadsky, their willing executioner in downgrading Ukraine from "junior ally" to "naked puppet regime". A barely recognizable, farcical puppet regime, at that. The Hetmanate was a gendarme-state of great landowners...a Russian Empire restored in fancy cossack clothing, as one historian calls it.

Not that the state Skoropadsky created was even particularly "functional" - no matter how hard they tried and how many atrocities they committed, the German-Austrian-Hetmanite combo never managed to assert their authority over large swathes of Ukraine (let alone to create actual order).

 

[thezerech]

Again, "forced" to work with the Russians? Hardly. Skoropadsky was a Russophile, wanted Ukraine to be in a federation with Russia, and held both those views long before the proclamation you refer to as Pereyaslav 2.0.

The crucial achievements of Ukraine after the fall of the Romanovs were the very real democratization and land reform - both of which Skoropadsky tore up.

The fall of the Rada was inevitable; the Central Powers were offended by the Rada's progressive social policies, and even more by how it actually tried to look after Ukrainian interests instead of being a good little resource-extraction machine for Germany and Austria. But this doesn't excuse Skoropadsky, their willing executioner in downgrading Ukraine from "junior ally" to "naked puppet regime". A barely recognizable, farcical puppet regime, at that. The Hetmanate was a gendarme-state of great landowners...a Russian Empire restored in fancy cossack clothing, as one historian calls it.

Not that the state Skoropadsky created was even particularly "functional" - no matter how hard they tried and how many atrocities they committed, the German-Austrian-Hetmanite combo never managed to assert their authority over large swathes of Ukraine (let alone to create actual order).

During the Hermanate period almost the entire country was under a great amount of order, everything I've read points to that conclusion. And again, had the Socialists compromised with Skoropadsky than he would not have had to work with the Russians.

Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

But, when compared to the traitor Petliura I hope you understand why I speak so highly of Skoropadsky.

 

[CaliGuy]

Again, "forced" to work with the Russians? Hardly. Skoropadsky was a Russophile, wanted Ukraine to be in a federation with Russia, and held both those views long before the proclamation you refer to as Pereyaslav 2.0.

Did Skoropadsky ever renounce these views? After all, if Germany has any power to stop a Ukraine-Russia reunion, it will almost certainly do this!

 

[avernite]

How important Ukraine will be to Germany will depend on how crucial Germany thinks Ukraine is for Russia; after all, Germany certainly wants to avoid a resurgent Russia.

Also, though, if Germany is smart enough to realize that it is overstretched and thus agree to install a genuinely independent government (as opposed to German puppet government) in Ukraine, then it might be difficult for Russia to ever reconquer Ukraine--even if this was somehow practically possible--without alienating the Ukrainian people.

Again, Germany managed just fine despite Austria not being a very puppety country, and Czechia even less so.

Ukraine, like Austria and Czechia, has significant factions who want to join their bigger neighbour; not big enough to pull it off all alone, but when backed by their buddy while the opposing great powers are busy with something else (like internal politics) they can.

 

[CaliGuy]

Again, Germany managed just fine despite Austria not being a very puppety country, and Czechia even less so.

Ukraine, like Austria and Czechia, has significant factions who want to join their bigger neighbour; not big enough to pull it off all alone, but when backed by their buddy while the opposing great powers are busy with something else (like internal politics) they can.

Reunion with Russia might not be very popular in Ukraine if it had already gotten, say, a decade or two of independence; indeed, take a look at what happened in Ukraine 20+ years after it got its independence (in 1991) in our TL!

 

[avernite]

Reunion with Russia might not be very popular in Ukraine if it had already gotten, say, a decade or two of independence; indeed, take a look at what happened in Ukraine 20+ years after it got its independence (in 1991) in our TL!

You mean how Russia took all the bits it liked and destabilized the rest sufficiently that the rest of Europe was scared by it, despite Russia not even daring all that much?

I imagine 1940's Russia would have been willing and able to pull off the same trick on a grander scale, by delpoying a few divisions openly rather than in secret. There'd be some cheers, they'd organize a referendum to formalize the annexation, and presto, done. Russians at the Carpathians.

 

[CaliGuy]

You mean how Russia took all the bits it liked and destabilized the rest sufficiently that the rest of Europe was scared by it, despite Russia not even daring all that much?

How exactly did Russia destabilize the rest of Ukraine?

I imagine 1940's Russia would have been willing and able to pull off the same trick on a grander scale, by delpoying a few divisions openly rather than in secret. There'd be some cheers, they'd organize a referendum to formalize the annexation, and presto, done. Russians at the Carpathians.

There's a difference between annexing a relatively small, pro-Russian part of a country and annexing the whole country, though!

 

[avernite]

How exactly did Russia destabilize the rest of Ukraine?



There's a difference between annexing a relatively small, pro-Russian part of a country and annexing the whole country, though!

As there was between annexing the Sudetenland and all of Czechia, yet Germany managed (even if annexing Czechia put it on the countdown timer for war).

 

[CaliGuy]

As there was between annexing the Sudetenland and all of Czechia, yet Germany managed (even if annexing Czechia put it on the countdown timer for war).

Very true; however, Czechia's total population (without the Sudetenland) was something like one-tenth of Germany's while Ukraine's population was about one-third of Russia's. Thus, Czechia would have been easier for Germany to swallow than all of Ukraine would be for Russia.

 

[NoMommsen]

... thus having Wilson stick to his commitment to cut off loans to the Entente; ...

Sry for tapping into this thread so late .

What's your source of the above ?

 

[CaliGuy]

Sry for tapping into this thread so late .

What's your source of the above ?

Ask Wiking; I got the information from him.

 

[The Gunslinger]

I'd say a war is pretty slim. The minor German annexations in France will have big repercussions and probably knock her down from truly great power status. Everyone in Europe will be in debt up to their eyeballs and be relatively unstable (compared to pre-war). Russia may or may not implode, but if Ukraine is gone, she'll be much, much worse off financially than before.

With France neutered and Russia pushed back Germany is nigh unassailable. There's nobody who can launch a major war against Germany left.

But Russia, France, Austria-Hungary and Italy will all have pretty shaky stability so there's always a chance a major flare up occurs.

 

[CaliGuy]

I'd say a war is pretty slim. The minor German annexations in France will have big repercussions and probably knock her down from truly great power status. Everyone in Europe will be in debt up to their eyeballs and be relatively unstable (compared to pre-war). Russia may or may not implode, but if Ukraine is gone, she'll be much, much worse off financially than before.

With France neutered and Russia pushed back Germany is nigh unassailable. There's nobody who can launch a major war against Germany left.

But Russia, France, Austria-Hungary and Italy will all have pretty shaky stability so there's always a chance a major flare up occurs.

Agreed; indeed, while a coalition of Britain, the U.S., and Russia (even without Ukraine) might pose a formidable challenge to a victorious Germany down the road, the problem/key issue is successfully assembling such an anti-German coalition.

 

[Napoleonrules]

Why is everyone thinking France would be too weak? One would assume after WWI OTL that Germany would be too weak to start WWII as well. But they did. There's no reason to think that history wouldn't then converge and rhyme, with a rise of nationalist socialism in Germany, rearming, and expanding Hitler-esque; it's not like there aren't plenty of nationalistic Frenchman in history to choose from, we might as well, for convenience sake call him Charles de Gaulle.

 

[The Gunslinger]

Why is everyone thinking France would be too weak? One would assume after WWI OTL that Germany would be too weak to start WWII as well. But they did. There's no reason to think that history wouldn't then converge and rhyme, with a rise of nationalist socialism in Germany, rearming, and expanding Hitler-esque; it's not like there aren't plenty of nationalistic Frenchman in history to choose from, we might as well, for convenience sake call him Charles de Gaulle.

It's because of the German war aims. The Germans will certainly grab Breiy-Longwy and its coal / iron reserves which absolutely kneecaps French industry. Anything else Germany takes in the west is just icing on the cake.