Nazi-Soviet Pact Holds And They Become Firm Allies!

I haven't checked previous posts on this, but I thought I would put it forward. Obviously, Hitler had a frothing at the mouth hatred of communists and Slavs so it was probably never going to be a runner! However Stallin did not believe the pact was broken until the Nazis were well inside Soviet territory,he was paranoid about everything it seems except bizarely that! I don't recall the opposition being as vociferous when the Stallinists invaded Finland and assisted in the invasion of Poland compared to the stern views taken of the Nazis!
Is this a scenario where the Nazis and Stallinists can prevail over all Europe?
No doubt the Stallinists could be urged to become willing accomplices in the extermination of peoples who were targetted for extermination though the communists in this instance would be mostly theTrotskyists!
 
I haven't checked previous posts on this, but I thought I would put it forward.

This subject has been discussed many times before; the search engine, as the cliche has it, is your friend.

Obviously, Hitler had a frothing at the mouth hatred of communists and Slavs so it was probably never going to be a runner! However Stallin did not believe the pact was broken until the Nazis were well inside Soviet territory,he was paranoid about everything it seems except bizarely that!

Stalin was deeply suspicious of his allies and said as early as 1940 that there would be a war eventually; he simply got it into his head that the Nazis would never fight him while still at war with Britain.

Nazi-Soviet relations were not all hugs and kisses during the pact: the Soviets were inconsistent in delivering supplies, cheeky about Kybartai and Bukovina, and trusting enough to wait until the height of the French campaign for the annexation of the Baltics; the Nazis, for their part, stationed troops in Finland which set alarm bells ringing in Moscow.

I don't recall the opposition being as vociferous when the Stallinists invaded Finland and assisted in the invasion of Poland compared to the stern views taken of the Nazis!

Actually, the French and British general staffs both gave serious thought to the concept of a strike against Baku. You can see the sense of it from their point of view, but still, they might have paid more attention to the Nazi war machine in front of their noses. It must be remembered that a secret clause of the Polish guarantee explicitly made it a guarantee against Germany, and as for Finland, the threat of Entente intervention was one reason the Soviets made peace when they did.

Is this a scenario where the Nazis and Stallinists can prevail over all Europe?

Having the Soviets onside doesn't help the Nazis invade Great Britain - and I think they're bound to fall our sooner or later even if they do spend a spell as co-belligerants.

No doubt the Stallinists could be urged to become willing accomplices in the extermination of peoples who were targetted for extermination though the communists in this instance would be mostly theTrotskyists!

Actually, the Soviets handed over all German communists hanging around in their territory, including Jewish ones, but didn't turn back the large numbers of ordinary Jews who fled on foot during the partition of Poland.
 
Last edited:

Eurofed

Banned
As our pal IBC said, this issue has been discussed at length in the past and has been the subject of at least two full-fledged TLs, a complete one by Onkel Wllie (The Great Mistake) and a stalled one by yours truly (The Phony War Turns Very Bad). I'll certainly agree that in order for the Nazi-Soviet alliance to have any long-term future, Hitler needs to be thrown under the bus before he loses patience and orders Barbarossa no matter what.

However, if we can have a slightly more pragmatic leadership in Nazi Germany, it may get a decent co-belligerant cooperation with Soviet Russia for at least as long as they have a meaningful common enemy. With the caveat above, they were no more bound to come to blows during WWII than the Western Allies and the USSR were. As it concerns how much the Nazi-Soviet alliance can make things bad for Britain, true, it can't directly help fulfill a Sealion scenario, but they can make things very difficult for the British Empire elsewhere. See the TLs quoted above fro strategic details.
 
It takes two to tango, and the idea that somebody other than Hitler will neatly solve the problem in German-Soviet relations (ie that neither would trust the other further than they could spit upwind) rests on the assumption that just because the Germans don't want to invade Russia, the Russians know so incotrovertibly and act accordingly.

In fact, they wouldn't, and so it's a question of where a vast mechanised army becomes more dangerous to Soviet interests than the vague theoretical possibility of Baku being bombed.

So the Soviets invade Iran. Then what?
 
So the Soviets invade Iran. Then what?

Can the British stop them?

I wouldn't assume that war would break out, personally. Stalin was a cautious bastard. He'd up his demands, of course, but is there any reason that you couldn't see Europe divided? Russia gets bases on the Black Sea and Finland, while it expands into Iran.

The Germans get Egypt and Mesopotamia.

Such would be the plan, at any rate. The British might have a thing or two to say about it.

As for what Stalin thought? To quote Molotov, "Stalin thought this, Stalin thought that. The only person who knew what Stalin thought was himself." I think a USSR that cements its position in Eastern Europe while Germany exhausts itself is plausible...
 
Top