Siberian Divisions in the West

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

What if the Soviets realized that the Japanese would not be a threat after 1939 and thus transferred their forces west? What would happen to Zhukov and the veteran troops when Barbarossa kicks off?
I really don't know what the effects would be to be honest, but I could see this going a few different ways. First, these troops get encircled and wiped out and Zhukov loses prestige and does not become the top commander by the end. War still ends in Allied victory, but Soviet recovery takes longer without veteran troops to form the nucleus.
Second, these troops stall the German advance and allow for a quicker Soviet recovery, which ends the war quicker without as much damage to the Soviet Union resulting in a longer Cold War.

Third, a mix that I think is the most likely. The Germans don't advance as rapidly as there are more troops with better equipment, training, and leadership that stop the rapid advance. Moscow is not threatened, but the large encirclements still occur, but with larger leaks that allow for a greater force to survive the opening battles. German logistics are improved, as they are not as strung out and don't suffer as badly in the Russian winter. Hitler also does not have to give is order to hold ground at all cost, which prevents him from getting as arrogant and develop the Hold the Line mentality. The German '42 attacks are focused on the surviving formations, which results in more mobile battles that take their toll on both sides. '43 is much the same, with the Soviets gaining experience and size. German troops never reach the outskirts of Moscow, but Stalingrad is threatened. The Ukraine becomes the primary battleground of the war, with immobile fronts like in our time. However, because the battles never reach all the areas affected in reality, the Soviets are able to build more and recruit more troops. But the counter to this benefit is that the Germans are never at the limit of their logistics and are thus able to fight more effectively without getting sucked into street fights like Stalingrad and suffer massive encirclements. Overall this favors the Germans, because they were able to fight mobile battles more effectively. However, the war turns again them and the Germans are pushed back. War ends about the same, but this higher Russian casualties, as the war has not been fought against an opponent weakened by the unfavorable battles that plagued the Germans in reality. Thoughts?
 
Interesting question. Much depends on where the divisions are deployed. If they are right out there in Białystok, they will make a difference of maybe a couple of days, no more.

But I also wonder if they would be as effective if deployed West. What I mean is that one of the reasons of their effectiveness was good leadership. And one of the reason why they had that was that they were deployed out there on the edge of the world. And while they were out there, good, competent generals were not considered a danger by the man who had beheaded most of the Soviet general corps.
IOW, they might well be redeployed West in 1940, but then will they still have good, competent generals leading them?
 
Top