Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact Fails

What if the Soviet Union refused to sign the Non-Aggression treaty, given that the at the time leading Soviet general were concerned of an imminent German betrayal?
In addition, we know that Hitler had informed his generals that if the Munich Agreement failed, he would still have ordered the mobilization of forces into the Sudetenland.
So... given this background, if the Non-Aggression treaty failed, would Hitler continued to have invaded Poland, without Soviet support? If he did, do you think the members of the Oster Conspiracy would have had greater support, and launched a coup?
 
Hitler wouldn't invade Poland. He knew that if that happened he would face a two-front war without the resources to fight either enemy.
 
Germany Collapses

Without the Russian resources, minerals, oil, etc, the Nazi economy collapses, and Hitler is shot by the Generals. Shortly thereafter, Stalin, never one not to kick an enemy when he's down, invades Poland. The lessons of the Winter War and Polish Campaign serve to vastly improve the Red Army. However, the West is now on the alert to Bolshevik aggression, and eventually supports (props up) the very ailing German Generals' State as a buffer. Japan is suddenly seen as a valuable ally to contain the Bear, and given access to more resources. Then, all Hell breaks loose.:eek:
 
Last edited:
Without the Russian resources, minerals, oil, etc, the Nazi economy collapses, and Hitler is shot by the Generals. Shortly thereafter, Stalin, never one not to kick an enemy when he's down, invades Poland. The lessons of the Winter War and Polish Campaign serve to vastly improve the Red Army. However, the West is now on the alert to Bolshevik aggression, and eventually supports (props up) the very ailing German Generals' State as a buffer. Japan is suddenly seen as a valuable ally to contain the Bear, and given access to more resources. Then, all Hell breaks loose.:eek:

No. Stalin is not this dumb and reckless. He won't unite the entire world against the Soviet Union.
 
It might butterfly WW2 as we know it if Hitler backs down.

But, the issue is, why would Stalin do it? If Hitler invades Poland anyway, it sort of forces Stalin's hand. Russia is like to become a co-belligerant and press claims in Poland.If they do this, they will likely make a deal with the Germans so that they may press claims in the Baltic states. If not, the Russians risk the Germans arming the Baltic states. Stalin does not have hindsight, so he doesn't know what shape the German economy is in (and I would argue, is massively exaggerated here to begin with). So, it might be an awkward couple of months, especially when the French sit on their hands and do nothing. Stalin at this point is right after the purge, and is desperate, which is why he signed the pact to begin with. Being that he also invaded Poland, he will get no guarantees from the Allies.

So, the Germans and Russians hammer out a similar agreement in a few months. The winter war happens probably Summer of 1940 and is similarly a prolonged disaster. The question then is, how cozy the Romanians are with the Germans come 1941, as Stalin likely cannot place any claims against them until 1941, which he probably wouldn't do if Germany beats France 1940. THis means ATL Barbarossa might get pushed off until 1942, and the Germans employ a Mediterranean strategy to bring the Balkans into their camp.

If Britain is still in the war, the US is probably in the war, and now Germany is in much worse shape. If Britain drops out in 41 in a Wiking-like scenerio, this butterflies away a DoW on the US and Germany likely invades Russia in 42, but without a war in the west. It will be an even worse bloodbath which the west will sit out of, the net result being a more well to do ATL US and UK, and a much weaker USSR (whether they win or lose). Germany could be much worse than OTL if the USSR absorbs them. If Germany wins, then that mean long term Nazism, and Germany might still be much worse, totally collapse, and who knows what Europe looks like today.
 
Top