If The USSR Collapsed Violently Could It Still Reunite?

Let's say that at the end of the Cold War the USSR descends into civil war for any plausible reason. Of course the other Soviets would have the ability to split away from the country due to the chaos. Once a faction takes over Russia would it be able to conquer back the breakaway republics or would too many problems stand in its way?
 
If the rest of the world moves on as per OTL then they couldn't do it militarily and still be acceptable on the world stage, although given how Putin is behaving you could argue that he is in the process of trying to do just as you suggest - rebuild the former USSR into a single nation again.

With a different President, then in theory they would be better off doing it economically into a proto-EU, (which again, Putin has tried which has not gone too well).

I guess in theory, yes, if the Middle East becomes more unstable you could even look to recreate the USSR militarily if the rest of Europe and the US are busy looking elsewhere.
 

nbcman

Donor
Let's say that at the end of the Cold War the USSR descends into civil war for any plausible reason. Of course the other Soviets would have the ability to split away from the country due to the chaos. Once a faction takes over Russia would it be able to conquer back the breakaway republics or would too many problems stand in its way?

See OTL 1917-1922. Perhaps the crisis in 1991 when Gorbachev was imprisoned leads to a second Russian civil war.
 
If the rest of the world moves on as per OTL then they couldn't do it militarily and still be acceptable on the world stage, although given how Putin is behaving you could argue that he is in the process of trying to do just as you suggest - rebuild the former USSR into a single nation again.

With a different President, then in theory they would be better off doing it economically into a proto-EU, (which again, Putin has tried which has not gone too well).

I guess in theory, yes, if the Middle East becomes more unstable you could even look to recreate the USSR militarily if the rest of Europe and the US are busy looking elsewhere.

I was referring to something else. What I meant was if during the end of the Cold War the USSR collapsed violently would Russia be able to reunite the country by force or would things stand in its way?

See OTL 1917-1922. Perhaps the crisis in 1991 when Gorbachev was imprisoned leads to a second Russian civil war.

But what if other countries oppose the move? Because standards are much different now and because of that countries could possible oppose Russia's actions. But would they?
 
I was referring to something else. What I meant was if during the end of the Cold War the USSR collapsed violently would Russia be able to reunite the country by force or would things stand in its way?

OK, If the USSR descends into Civil war and the rest of the world develops roughly as per OTL then they couldn't do it militarily and still be acceptable on the world stage, although given how Putin is behaving at the moment you could argue that he is in the process of trying to do just as you suggest - rebuild the former USSR into a single nation again and given the difficulties he is having, I would say it's unlikely, especially if there's any form of peace, even if it's just a pause.

If they try to do it peaceably, then it will require a different president than Putin or a Putin type president as they will fail. But an economic union type plan is probably best.
 
OK, If the USSR descends into Civil war and the rest of the world develops roughly as per OTL then they couldn't do it militarily and still be acceptable on the world stage, although given how Putin is behaving at the moment you could argue that he is in the process of trying to do just as you suggest - rebuild the former USSR into a single nation again and given the difficulties he is having, I would say it's unlikely, especially if there's any form of peace, even if it's just a pause.

If they try to do it peaceably, then it will require a different president than Putin or a Putin type president as they will fail. But an economic union type plan is probably best.

Well aside the Putin stuff which I understand you're saying that a USSR that suffers a civil war cannot reunite right?
 

nbcman

Donor
{snip}
But what if other countries oppose the move? Because standards are much different now and because of that countries could possible oppose Russia's actions. But would they?

Assuming the rump USSR maintains control of most of their nuclear weapons, I don't see any country trying to oppose the Soviets from forcibly occupying / 'unifying' a former Soviet SSR. Look at recent history for examples on what other countries would (not) do against a resurgent Russian state. The only exception could be if a former SSR had a defense treaty with a larger alliance which would likely prevent the rump USSR from attacking.

EDIT: If you are wanting to ask about current standards based on your statement that 'standards are much different now', you should request this thread be moved to Future History.
 
Assuming the rump USSR maintains control of most of their nuclear weapons, I don't see any country trying to oppose the Soviets from forcibly occupying / 'unifying' a former Soviet SSR. Look at recent history for examples on what other countries would (not) do against a resurgent Russian state. The only exception could be if a former SSR had a defense treaty with a larger alliance which would likely prevent the rump USSR from attacking.

EDIT: If you are wanting to ask about current standards based on your statement that 'standards are much different now', you should request this thread be moved to Future History.

But don't Ukraine and Kazakhstan have nuclear weapons though?

I'm talking about standards that existed since a while- the ones about anti-imperialism and whatnot.
 
But don't Ukraine and Kazakhstan have nuclear weapons though?

I'm talking about standards that existed since a while- the ones about anti-imperialism and whatnot.

Ukraine and Kazakhstan did have former Soviet nuclear weapons. Both were persuaded to give the weapons to Russia in the 1990s per signed treaties which saw Russia guarantee their territorial integrity (hence much of the anger over Russia's theft of the Crimea).

Most of the anti-imperialism standards refer to actions in the 3rd world, not reuniting a collapsed country that isn't in the third world.
 
Ukraine and Kazakhstan did have former Soviet nuclear weapons. Both were persuaded to give the weapons to Russia in the 1990s per signed treaties which saw Russia guarantee their territorial integrity (hence much of the anger over Russia's theft of the Crimea).

Most of the anti-imperialism standards refer to actions in the 3rd world, not reuniting a collapsed country that isn't in the third world.

Not after the mid 1990s. The former Soviet SSRs that had nukes either returned them to Russia or destroyed them.

Whose flavor of anti-imperialism? The Soviet version? Maoist? Right Wing? Anti-Capitalism?

Regarding to the nuclear weapons that I know. But if there was a violent collapse of the USSR would they still have their nuclear weapons?

When I mean that I mean the one from the West.
 

RousseauX

Donor
Let's say that at the end of the Cold War the USSR descends into civil war for any plausible reason. Of course the other Soviets would have the ability to split away from the country due to the chaos. Once a faction takes over Russia would it be able to conquer back the breakaway republics or would too many problems stand in its way?

The problem is that -Russia- was the primary driver behind the breakup of the Soviet Union, the Russians got tired of making transfers to the prephiaries and had at least the temporary option of keeping certain republics as client states on cheaper basis than Soviet Repubics. Every single Central Asian Republic voted to stay in the Union in 1991.

Even today you dont' see the Russians eager to re-invade central asia.
 
Last edited:

RousseauX

Donor
I was referring to something else. What I meant was if during the end of the Cold War the USSR collapsed violently would Russia be able to reunite the country by force or would things stand in its way?

The thing is Russia didn't want and doesn't want to reunify the Soviet Union, at least not as a unified nation-state.
 
Without Gorbachev, Perestroika and Continuing Stalinist Hardliners Could Lead to a Violent Soviet Collapse and a lot Worser than in Yugoslavia
 
The problem is that -Russia- was the primary driver behind the breakup of the Soviet Union, the Russians got tired of making transfers to the prephiaries and had at least the temporary option of keeping certain republics as client states on cheaper basis than Soviet Repubics. Every single Central Asian Republic voted to stay in the Union in 1991.

Even today you dont' see the Russians eager to re-invade central asia.

Then how did the Communists during the Russian Civil War were able to regain control of most of its territory?

errrr...of course, why wouldn't they?

I mean yeah of course.
 

RousseauX

Donor
Then how did the Communists during the Russian Civil War were able to regain control of most of its territory?

Because the Bolsheviks wanted control of the former Tsarist empire as stepping stone to world revolution.

The Russians of the late Soviet era cared limited about the non-Russian parts of the Soviet Union, the breakup of the USSR occurred because Yeltsin (the elected president of the Russian republic) made a power grab from Gorbachev in the aftermath of the August coup.
 
Because the Bolsheviks wanted control of the former Tsarist empire as stepping stone to world revolution.

The Russians of the late Soviet era cared limited about the non-Russian parts of the Soviet Union, the breakup of the USSR occurred because Yeltsin (the elected president of the Russian republic) made a power grab from Gorbachev in the aftermath of the August coup.

Since the breakup was peaceful of course they'd care less about conquest. I'm talking of a different scenario here.
 
It would depend upon who comes to power. If communists or fascists come to power, they would likely try to restore Moscow's control over these countries. However they would immediately wade into several "Afghanistans" all across Central Asia, the Balts, and the Caucauses.
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
As this has not happened yet IoTL, I'm going to stab in the dark and say no, in the event of a violent breakup, the Soviet Union will not reunite.

It is worth establishing that the breakup of Soviet Union was not peaceful. What you cannot ignore are events such as April 9th and Black January, in which anti-Soviet activity and protest was met with violent crackdown. Seeing more of these is not too hard to imagine, given how prevalent they were anyway, however if we see more Januaries, then hope for Soviet Reunification is going to have to come from the barrel of a gun, because no one would want reunification if the last memories of the Soviet Union were protesters being killed by the Soviet Forces.

Now, the extreme of this is a violent collapse in the style of Yugoslavia. In this case, the Soviet Authority, led largely by Soviet/Russian Nationalists, would try and keep what is seen as Russian in the USSR, flooding largely Russian regions would with troops and propaganda who will protect the local Russian minorities and fight the local ethnic groups to keep these regions under Russian Control. At this point, you have the Chechnya conflict on steroids, happening across the entirety of the Soviet Union. At this point, reunification is impossible.

So no, in a violently collapsing USSR, there is no hope for reunification, at all. Even attempts to invade these countries suffer due to the state of the Russian military since the end of the Cold War, and support for these states by NATO or even other regional powers will simply make it impracticable or needless. Zhirinovsky's Russian Empire explores this kind of situation, and it shows how hard it would be to reconquer the old Union.
 
Last edited:
Top