Operation Barbarossa against White Russia.

What if the Whites had won the Russian Civil War, and Bolshevism had been eradicated in Russia? By this point, Hitler had already assumed the leadership of the Nazi party, and events in Germany may well have transpired as in our time line. Hitler would still have viewed Russia as potential lebensraum, even if he did not have the motive to attack it as a hotbed of "Jewish Bolshevism". Russia would be much less industrialised than it became under Stalin, but may well have been much more tied in to the Western Alliance system at the time of the invasion of Poland. How would this have affected the course of World War 2?
 
If the Nazis choose to attack Russia, and that's a big if, as Nazism would not realistically come to power with a White victory, they'd likely win, if the Russians didn't use the Soviet technique of throw people at them til they die.
 

Spengler

Banned
I have my doubts that there would be a Nazi Germany if the whites won the civil war. One of the main reasons for the support of the far right in Germany was the threat of Communists in Russia.
 
Last edited:
How does the Civil War even turn out and who is leading the white movement Denklin,Wrangel,Kolchak or in a very unlikely sense Ungarn-Sturnberg? By the time the Civil War was in the Bolsheviks favor Hitler wasn't even in power nor did he attempt his coup. Without Communism being as major as factor, I don't think him and the Nazi's would be able to be elected, so we are talking about a completely different world where Barbarossa and World War may not happen as we know it, or won't even happen at all.

Even if we assume everything does happen according to schedule, Hitler will have less allies willing to join him, such as the Whites and Ukrainians. Eventually, the Nazi War Machine would most likely wear itself out.
 
There's no Barbarossa because there's no Hitler.

Nazism gained a lot of support because many ordinary people feared Communism. If the Whites win the Civil War Communism has no 'mother country' to supply Communists abroad with inspiration and funding and it's likely that most of the German Left would be absorbed by the SPD.

A White Russia would have less industrialisation than a Stalinist one but would have a stronger agriculture and service sector and a higher overall standard of living. That's if the new rulers aren't too corrupt and make a mess of things (a big if).

It would still have a large army with better officers and reasonable weapons. If the Germans looked threatening they would have easily made a new Triple Entente with France and Britain and this would be enough to contain any revanchist Germany.
 
How about this? Germany ends up communist (that's the hard part). Has its own civil war in which, unlike the Russian one, the communists wins. Germany and Russia lick their wounds and, eventually, there is war between Germany and the Entente (Maybe Red Germany goes into a similar policy as the nazis in reuniting ethnic Germans, there is also Danzig, one of the two sides might be wary of the other attacking first, or something else completely). As in OTL, Red Germany conquers France and, unable to invade the UK, proceeds to invade Russia.
 
If the Nazis choose to attack Russia, and that's a big if, as Nazism would not realistically come to power with a White victory, they'd likely win, if the Russians didn't use the Soviet technique of throw people at them til they die.

The Soviets didnt do that either, they threw newly drafted troops at the Germans in 1941-2 because much of the Red Army was simply wiped out at the start of Barbarossa. In later years the Soviets used massed firepower & armour to beat the Germans, not a form of Zerg Rush.:rolleyes:

Frankly an expansionist Germany ITL would have a much better chance against a White Russia. Because such a Russian state would look more like China under the KMT not the old Tsarist Empire or the U.S.S.R, in other words a basket case...
 
All of this ignores the fact that a White victory would require German troops. This would probably swing a White Russia into the German camp in the first place.
 
assuming the russian civilw ar is as apocalyptic as otl, would a victorious white russia beable to push through an industrialization programm as large (and brutal) as the soviet one? it could trigger a new revolution, making the country easy to pick apart by japan/poland/turkey/germany/whoever is interested.

it's necessary to beat the nazis (or a weimar germany which wants back what once belonged to them)
 

MSZ

Banned
First of all, it is not certain if the Nazis would rise to power if the whites won the civil war. OTL a lot of support for the NSDAP came from fear of communism, symbolized by the USSR existence. Further, a lot of support for the KPD also came from the fact that communism “had succeeded”, as well as from Moscow support. I remind that OTL in 1933 first idea was for a “grand coalition” government, which was impossible, but would be possible if the NSDAP and KPD together had only about 8% less votes. Of the USSR’s non-existence can cause the two to have that much less support, Weimar survives.

Second of all, Russia being not-communist butterflies at least some of the OTL difficulties of establishing an anti-German European alliance system. “White” Russia wouldn’t be the same pariah as the USSR was, thus making more possible for the Versailles Treaty to be enforced, preventing WW2, whether it would happen in 1934 and Germany refusing to pay reparations, or with Russia being present in Munich, causing the war to come early and Germany being squashed.

Third, there is no implication that “White” Russia would be less industrialized than OTL USSR – it could easily have undergone the same, or even better process under a different leadership. The assumption is that a “White” Russia would have to pay off its debts to the Entente and thus wouldn’t have the funds to finance an industrialization process, but it is just as likely that the west would forgive Russia its debts just to keep it within its alliance system or for any other reason. Or the new regime could just refuse to pay like OTL.

Fourth, even a less industrialized Russia would be a challenge for Germany, as it is very likely it would still get Lend-Lease aid, only more due to its greater needs. So even if the Russians would perform worse than OTL, a “White” Russia still stands a large chance of winning the war, thanks to western aid.
 
Third, there is no implication that “White” Russia would be less industrialized than OTL USSR – it could easily have undergone the same, or even better process under a different leadership. The assumption is that a “White” Russia would have to pay off its debts to the Entente and thus wouldn’t have the funds to finance an industrialization process, but it is just as likely that the west would forgive Russia its debts just to keep it within its alliance system or for any other reason. Or the new regime could just refuse to pay like OTL..

Well, this should be easy to discuss. How did Poland and Hungary fare in industrialization compare to the USSR during this period?
 
Second of all, Russia being not-communist butterflies at least some of the OTL difficulties of establishing an anti-German European alliance system. “White” Russia wouldn’t be the same pariah as the USSR was, thus making more possible for the Versailles Treaty to be enforced, preventing WW2, whether it would happen in 1934 and Germany refusing to pay reparations, or with Russia being present in Munich, causing the war to come early and Germany being squashed.

or, seeing themselves as one of the losers of the first war, having lost lots of "traditionally russian" land, they cooperate fully with germany.

now that would make an interesting TL :cool:
 
Well, this should be easy to discuss. How did Poland and Hungary fare in industrialization compare to the USSR during this period?

Faeelin

Is that a valid comparison? I don't think either have anything like the industrial resources of the Donbas, or the sheer size of the home market. There were other industrial centres in Russia before the revolution and even if the civil war is as disruptive as OTL there is potential for dramatic growth. Especially since a non-communist Russia would be a lot more open to western funds and technical support.

The key question would be the internal stability and policy of the government. If its struggling to suppress continued unrest and/or seeking to restore aristocratic autocracy then there will be deep problems. If its more capitalistic but allowing some hope for ordinary people then there is great potential for rapid development. Especially since the probable agricultural exports can provide a sizeable home market for small scale goods.

The other big thing is, even if the civil war is as bad as OTL, without the brutal rule that the Bolsheviks imposed, with mass suppression and frequent slaughters of anyone who might potentially pose an economic challenge to the parties rule there are going to be a lot more 'Russians'. Presumingly their not so alienated by the regime as OTL Soviet subjects you can see a lot more resistance from the start.

One other unknown is how the 'White' army would compare with the OTL Red army for efficiency, especially at the higher level. If there is no stand and die orders refusing retreating then a lot less troops will die or be captured in the first few months.

Steve
 

MSZ

Banned
Well, this should be easy to discuss. How did Poland and Hungary fare in industrialization compare to the USSR during this period?

Probably should, if someone had the numbers for USSR, Poland and Hungary regarding the size of their industrial capacity in the years 1918 and 1939. I have no doubt that if industrial production was taken into account, the USSR would show incredible growth, since it's production was stimulated by 5-year plans, rather than consumer demand like in Poland or Hungary.

or, seeing themselves as one of the losers of the first war, having lost lots of "traditionally russian" land, they cooperate fully with germany.

now that would make an interesting TL :cool:

That was what happened OTL.... With Rapallo, Weimar-Soviet cooperation, Ribbentrop-Molotov, franktly, Russia could only cooperate with Germany "more fully" if it signed an official alliance earlier and invaded Persia.

A "White" Russia would be less isolated since at least it was somewhat present in Versailles (Sazonov and Lvov were members of the Provisional Government and associated with the White movement). And if the Whites won early enough, they could still get to participate in the war against Turkey and "compensate" themselves with gains from a different treaty of Lausanne.
 
I have no doubt that if industrial production was taken into account, the USSR would show incredible growth, since it's production was stimulated by 5-year plans, rather than consumer demand like in Poland or Hungary.

Isn't industrial growth what matters?


Is that a valid comparison? I don't think either have anything like the industrial resources of the Donbas, or the sheer size of the home market. There were other industrial centres in Russia before the revolution and even if the civil war is as disruptive as OTL there is potential for dramatic growth. Especially since a non-communist Russia would be a lot more open to western funds and technical support.

This is why I'm skeptical. In OTL, there wasn't much foreign investment in eastern Europe in the interwar period, and what was invested went mostly towards government debt, not industrial development.

Now, Russia still has its huge debts from the war. Do those go away? This seems unlikely, given French reticence to wave them for the USSR OTL. It was not just a communist thing; they claimed for years Mexico owed French investors for money the Mexican Empire borrowed.

I'm also not so sanguine about the Russian people. The Soviets made real strides in human capital, if you want to call ti that; literacy skyrocketed under the Soviets, especially for women, in a way that I can't see a Tsarist Russia pushing for.
 

MSZ

Banned
Isn't industrial growth what matters?

And what would "industrial growth" mean? Number of factories? Output of those factories? Potential maximum output of those factories? Population percentage employed in factories/industry?

It is kind of difficult to say what "better" or "larger" industralization would mean. Old joke had that "Soviet progress" means having 5 people operate a machine that does a task one man could do without it. But machine = progress.


Now, Russia still has its huge debts from the war. Do those go away? This seems unlikely, given French reticence to wave them for the USSR OTL. It was not just a communist thing; they claimed for years Mexico owed French investors for money the Mexican Empire borrowed.
The French weren't so strong about pushing Russia to pay its debts (since they gave up on it during the Russian Civil War) nor for Germany to pay reperations (Dawes Plan, Young Plan, Hitler's stop to any reperations). What would France do if Russia refused to pay? My opinion is that they would sacrifice that money for a potential alliance against Germany, as security from Germany was the driving forceof French foreign policy during almost the entire inter-war period.
 
And what would "industrial growth" mean? Number of factories? Output of those factories? Potential maximum output of those factories? Population percentage employed in factories/industry?

I would say GNP, steel production, etc.

The French weren't so strong about pushing Russia to pay its debts (since they gave up on it during the Russian Civil War)

do you have a cite for this? It doesn't square with the fact that the French were demanding repayment at Genoa in 1922...

nor for Germany to pay reperations (Dawes Plan, Young Plan, Hitler's stop to any reperations).

Since Dawes only emerged after Britain and America screamed bloody murder during the French occupation of the Ruhr, I am not sure if it's the best example.

And even if the French forgave the debts, given the lack of investment in OTL's Eastern Europe I don't see why that much more would flow to Russia.
 
Top