"Nazi" Russia in a Central Powers Victory WWI

In the case of a Central Power's victory in WWI which results in the development of a reactionary Russia (ala OTL's Nazi Germany). What are the chances of it winning a second world conflict?
I know it all depends on the developments during the war period and exactly who is aligned with who. I find it likely that a similar reactionary France will ally itself with Russia but it is likely to be the lesser force. Like in OTLs Second War it can be taken fast.
But what would the eastern tehater between Germany and Russia look like?
 
So basically a rightist movement taking power instead of a leftist one?
Well, it depends on who leads it. If Admiral Kolchak or someone of his ilk take control then I think we'll see Russia go the way of Qing China. He owed so much to the western powers and would be so weakened that he'd have to grant massive concessions in industry etc.
You're not likely to see a popular rightist movement in the way the Bolsheviks were a popular leftist movement. The garrisons, armies and workers aren't going to flock to the banner of a general or Prince. You're gonna have to have either a restructured army which is more pofessional and politically conservative (and thus change the outcome of WW1) or have foreign forces (e.g. Czech legion) or mercenary contingents fighting to keep order. These will be very unpopular and will ultimately be overthrown.
 
I'd expect that the 'nazism' (improbably the same, since Nazis also hated Slavs) in Russia and France would rise in the 20s, and that the countries would, if ever, only be ready for another conflict with Germany in the 40s.

Even then, i think especially the French will make little chance against the Germans. Or at least the European theater, that is! Russia will make much more chance, but still, i don't think they'll be able to defeat the victorious Germany.

What is also important to know, is, what happened to the USA: Did they lose the war? Did they never join it? :confused:

But, of course, you were focusing on the Eastern Front. Personally i think that, with all those puppet states created after a CP victory (if they aren't butterflied away and still stand), the Germans would definitely be at the winning hand, although the war will likely be long and bloody.

-Korporal Nooij.
 
But, of course, you were focusing on the Eastern Front. Personally i think that, with all those puppet states created after a CP victory (if they aren't butterflied away and still stand), the Germans would definitely be at the winning hand, although the war will likely be long and bloody.

-Korporal Nooij.

Yeah that's what I though. I even imagined it locked in stalemate for enough time that both sides would have to give concessions. Russia might not necessarily gain any extra territory but Germany would loose significant influence in the area.

Other things to consider would be how central Europe developed in the interwar years.

Shouldn't this be in the After 1900 Discussion Thing?

Yeah it should. Sorry didn't pay attention when I posted.
 
You could Russian backed nationalist Polish risings, along the lines of the British support of the Arab revolts in WWI against the Ottomans, with them supporting the rebellion to weaken their enemy but not planning on letting them gte independence.
 
Stalin will still wind up a genocidal maniac in charge of a militarized Russia I predict. He was right at home with the Nazis since he was willing to split up Poland.
 
Stalin will still wind up a genocidal maniac in charge of a militarized Russia I predict. He was right at home with the Nazis since he was willing to split up Poland.

He carved up Poland after repeatedly trying to build broad fronts with his former enemies to resist Hitler. That's hardly snuggling. It was only after he became convinced that co-operation against them was impossible (which took Munich and months of fruitless negotiations for an alliance in which the Russians jumped at the call and the Entente refused to offer a concrete military commitmet) that Stalin co-operated with them, but he never trusted them and was saying that Russian should prepare for war already in 1940.

This doesn't make it right that he invaded Poland and started killing people or shipping them to Siberia, but looking at Soviet foreign policy it's clear that, while absolutely willing to wage greedy war without any but the most cynircal justification (and what exactly was Britain up to in Iraq in May 1940?), they didn't practice rabid expansionism just because in the way that the Nazis did.

Stalin was ultimatly a statesman, an unstable, mass-murdering, evil statesman, and like all statesmen he feared the uncertainties of war and preferred to avoid them, which is one reason he willed himself to blindness in the run-up to Barbarossa. Hitler was war-hungry and outright insane.
 
Top