If Western forces get to Bulgaria before Soviets, would Bulgaria join NATO?

Bulgaria would have joined NATO if western forces got there before Soviet in WWII

  • Yes

    Votes: 41 87.2%
  • No

    Votes: 6 12.8%

  • Total voters
    47

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
what it says on the tin.

I would presume if the western allies got to Bulgaria before the Soviets, Bulgaria would be far less likely than OTL to become a Communist one party state. (If you have a different view I would be interested in hearing it).

Would Even a non communist Bulgaria join NATO or form a western geopolitical alignment like Greece and Turkey did in OTL did? Why or why not?
 
Uh... How would this happen? Are you suggesting an Allied landing in Greece? Advancing up the Balkans would be even more treacherous than the Italian campaign.
 
I am having a lot of trouble seeing this. The UK's political elite, despite a peripheral strategy towards Germany, proposed the percentages agreement. The United States desired a direct route. As such it seems to be upon the UK to make the running, and by August 1944 they seem disinclined and fixated on Greece.

Yours,
Sam R.
 
Without commenting on how it might happen, basically if the Soviets occupied most or all of a country at the end of WWII it became a communist state, if not it was part of NATO or neutral (Austria is an example with a mixed occupation). If for some reason Bulgaria is not occupied by the USSR, then the odds are it would either join NATO or be neutral like Austria. How this would happen hard to see.
 
For this, would need Turkey to join allies. Turks would need to be equipped by West.

Would also nèed western air dominance

Turkey advancing through Bulgaria would be after British landings in Greece and Dalmatia in early '44.

This would be after allied commitment to Med and capturing Sicily and landing in Italy in '43.

Initial POD could be Torch landings a littler farther east, Tunisia captured sooner or possibly better performance in Pacific and decision that light infantry units that were to go to Pac go to eastern Med in '44 and '45.

This could possibly net Hungary to West as well.

More of a commitment is made to Italy.

Overlords and Anvil are reversed with southern France being main landing point in '44 with anvil, a smaller cross channel landing later in '44 to meet up with advancing units from the south as Germans retreat to the Rhine.

Yugo or Hugo split countries, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czech, and West Germany are to the West with Poland, Slovakia, Romania and East Germany are Soviet.

I have read an essay on this, "Through the Soft Underbelly", it was in an Alt Hist book on WWII
 
Last edited:
Depends on who rules Bulgaria. If the Allies prop up a right-wing Monarchist government as in Greece, certainly yes. If the left-wing opposition took over (an alliance between the Agrarians and the Socialist, possibly with Communist support), probably no, unless the Communists made a violent attempt to take power. but the Soviet Union was not that interested in taking over Bulgaria, so they might be satisfied with a neutral Bulgaria with a friendly government with somea Communist influence.

Uh... How would this happen? Are you suggesting an Allied landing in Greece? Advancing up the Balkans would be even more treacherous than the Italian campaign.
There's also the possibility of Bulgaria abandoning the Nazis before the Soviets arrive. Could have happened arguably OTL if the Bulgarian government was slightly quicker.

I am having a lot of trouble seeing this. The UK's political elite, despite a peripheral strategy towards Germany, proposed the percentages agreement. The United States desired a direct route. As such it seems to be upon the UK to make the running, and by August 1944 they seem disinclined and fixated on Greece.

Yours,
Sam R.
The percentages agreement was signed in October 1944, after the Soviet occupation of Bulgaria. And they mattered little in the end, anyway.

For this, would need Turkey to join allies. Turks would need to be equipped by West.
Having Turkey on the side of the Western Allies is the best way to ensure that Bulgaria resists their invasion. Probably long enough for the Soviets to occupy Bulgaria first.
But you would need to change Turkey's government, since the one existed in OTL would never agree to join the war while there was even the slightest risk for Turkey.

Would also nèed western air dominance

Turkey advancing through Bulgaria would be after British landings in Greece and Dalmatia in early '44.

This would be after allied commitment to Med and capturing Sicily and landing in Italy in '43.

Initial POD could be Torch landings a littler farther east, Tunisia captured sooner or possibly better performance in Pacific and decision that light infantry units that were to go to Pac go to eastern Med in '44 and '45.

This could possibly net Hungary to West as well.

More of a commitment is made to Italy.

Overlords and Anvil are reversed with southern France being main landing point in '44 with anvil, a smaller cross channel landing later in '44 to meet up with advancing units from the south as Germans retreat to the Rhine.

Yugo or Hugo split countries, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czech, and West Germany are to the West with Poland, Slovakia, Romania and East Germany are Soviet.

I have read an essay on this, "Through the Soft Underbelly", it was in an Alt Hist book on WWII
The US government would never allow such a diversion of resources from what they (correctly) considered the best and quickest way to defeat Germany - an invasion of France, mainly across the Channel.
 
Sure. if Romania does not change sides in the way it did and holds the soviet army on the FNB line long enough for the western allies to arive first. But they also may choose to remain neutral, to keep good realtions with the soviets.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
People are looking at POD too close in time to the end of the war. We just need the soviet to win a bit slower, and maybe have some more allied forces. It doesn't even take much better Nazi decision making. We probably have a hundred of these threads a year. So for quick brush ATL.

1) POD - German 6th army escapes Stalingrad. Fewer units sent south than OTL, and units that go south, start a few weeks later. Just better logistical/staff work, the boring stuff. While the German positions collapse, it is bit slower.
2) Butterfly #1Romanian units are replaced by some German units. Romanians are in reserve when Soviets launch the major attack to retake Stalingrad. Romania will not switch sides. i think you now have the window to allow Allies to take Bulgaria.
3) Butterfly #3, the Kurst type battle is tougher for Soviets. Germans have the OTL lost 6th Army in this battle. Takes another few months for the Soviets to get to OTL positions.
4) Butterfly #4, Churchill persuades FDR to divert the OTL southern France forces to take Greece and Bulgaria.

This board has a consistently underestimate the layering effects of POD in wars, especially in the time frame of over 12 months.
 
People are looking at POD too close in time to the end of the war. We just need the soviet to win a bit slower, and maybe have some more allied forces. It doesn't even take much better Nazi decision making. We probably have a hundred of these threads a year. So for quick brush ATL.

1) POD - German 6th army escapes Stalingrad. Fewer units sent south than OTL, and units that go south, start a few weeks later. Just better logistical/staff work, the boring stuff. While the German positions collapse, it is bit slower.
2) Butterfly #1Romanian units are replaced by some German units. Romanians are in reserve when Soviets launch the major attack to retake Stalingrad. Romania will not switch sides. i think you now have the window to allow Allies to take Bulgaria.
3) Butterfly #3, the Kurst type battle is tougher for Soviets. Germans have the OTL lost 6th Army in this battle. Takes another few months for the Soviets to get to OTL positions.
4) Butterfly #4, Churchill persuades FDR to divert the OTL southern France forces to take Greece and Bulgaria.

This board has a consistently underestimate the layering effects of POD in wars, especially in the time frame of over 12 months.
You're overlooking the fact that if Germany is stronger on the Eastern Front, they will also be stronger on the Western Front, so the Western allies will not gain nearly as significant head-start to the Soviets as you imagine. And considering how in OTL the British did not land in Greece until well after Bulgaria had switched sides and was occupied by the Soviets, it would have to be a very significant advantage for the Western Allies to advance first in Bulgaria. I think that you practically need a combination of one of 1-3 and 4 for this to happen. And 4 seems much more difficult than any of the possible scenarios about the Germans doing better on the Eastern Front (and none of them is particularly likely). Not only because it makes little sense from the strategic and logistic point of view but Churchill's association with the Gallipoli disaster did not exactly endear the Americans to any suggestions about further adventures on the Balkans.
 
I am having a lot of trouble seeing this. The UK's political elite, despite a peripheral strategy towards Germany, proposed the percentages agreement. The United States desired a direct route. As such it seems to be upon the UK to make the running, and by August 1944 they seem disinclined and fixated on Greece.

Yours,
Sam R.

Well in October of 1944 the Germans pulled out of Greece and the British basically walked in. Have German forces pull out of Bulgaria as well, and British and Greek forces follow into Bulgaria.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
You're overlooking the fact that if Germany is stronger on the Eastern Front, they will also be stronger on the Western Front, so the Western allies will not gain nearly as significant head-start to the Soviets as you imagine. And considering how in OTL the British did not land in Greece until well after Bulgaria had switched sides and was occupied by the Soviets, it would have to be a very significant advantage for the Western Allies to advance first in Bulgaria. I think that you practically need a combination of one of 1-3 and 4 for this to happen. And 4 seems much more difficult than any of the possible scenarios about the Germans doing better on the Eastern Front (and none of them is particularly likely). Not only because it makes little sense from the strategic and logistic point of view but Churchill's association with the Gallipoli disaster did not exactly endear the Americans to any suggestions about further adventures on the Balkans.

I see your point. Another encirclement of some Soviet Army is probably a better choice.
 

Cook

Banned
It is far more likely that Bulgaria would have opted for neutrality, in fact the only likely way that Bulgaria could have avoided becoming part of the Soviet sphere would be if it entered into an understanding with Moscow à la that by which Helsinki managed to withdraw from the war; such an understanding would in fact have been easier for the Bulgarians because, while they were nominally at war with the British and Americans, they had never declared war on the Soviet Union and there was no real animosity between Moscow and Sofia.
 
Top