Stalin creates a Galician SSR in western Ukraine

CaliGuy

Banned
What if, in response to the insurgency that Ukrainian nationalists in western Ukraine conducted against the Soviet Union after the end of World War II, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin would have decided to create a separate Galician SSR in these seven Ukrainian oblasts: Rivne, Volyn, Ternopil, Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Chernivtsi, and Zakarpattia? :

http://www.les-crises.fr/images/images-diverses/2014/crimee/21-regions-oblasts-ukraine.jpg

21-regions-oblasts-ukraine.jpg


For the record, I am especially curious about the effect of this in the 1980s and beyond. Indeed, with the most nationalistic Ukrainian provinces being outside of the Ukrainian SSR in this TL, could the (smaller) Ukrainian SSR in this TL remain inside of the Soviet Union (and thus preserve the Soviet Union)? Also, if the Soviet Union still collapses in this TL, would Ukraine drift back into Russia's orbit after the collapse of the Soviet Union (due to nationalistic western Ukrainian voters being located outside of Ukraine in this TL)?

Also, as for the Galician SSR, would it become an independent country after the end of the Cold War or would it seek to rejoin Poland?

Any thoughts on all of this?
 

Deleted member 1487

Why? He wanted to destroy Ukrainian nationalism and having a separate Galician SSR would only encourage that.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Why? He wanted to destroy Ukrainian nationalism and having a separate Galician SSR would only encourage that.
Let's say that he views it as a temporary concession to try placating Ukrainian nationalists. Meanwhile, later Soviet leaders decide to keep the status quo in regards to this due to a lack of desire to rock the boat.

Indeed, you have to remember that the Soviet Union was willing to make concessions to nationalists; in fact, that's why the Soviet Union was created as a federation of various ethnic-based SSRs instead of as a unitary state.
 

Deleted member 1487

Let's say that he views it as a temporary concession to try placating Ukrainian nationalists. Meanwhile, later Soviet leaders decide to keep the status quo in regards to this due to a lack of desire to rock the boat.

Indeed, you have to remember that the Soviet Union was willing to make concessions to nationalists; in fact, that's why the Soviet Union was created as a federation of various ethnic-based SSRs instead of as a unitary state.
That would require a completely different Stalin who wasn't a brutal autocrat who wanted to create only a Soviet nationalism, not a competing ethnic one. He crushed the Eastern Orthodox church too for that reason. The SSRs were created before Stalin became dictator. He brought a different mentality to the situation, but wasn't going to alter the constitution because he didn't want to deal with the fallout from changing Lenin's legacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republics_of_the_Soviet_Union
 

CaliGuy

Banned
That would require a completely different Stalin who wasn't a brutal autocrat who wanted to create only a Soviet nationalism, not a competing ethnic one. He crushed the Eastern Orthodox church too for that reason. The SSRs were created before Stalin became dictator. He brought a different mentality to the situation, but wasn't going to alter the constitution because he didn't want to deal with the fallout from changing Lenin's legacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republics_of_the_Soviet_Union
Actually, separate SSRs were created for the Kyrgyz and Kazakhs under Stalin. In turn, what this indicates is that even Stalin was willing to go beyond what Lenin did in order to further appease nationalists.
 
First of all, (most of) Volhynia and Western Podolia as well as Eastern Galicia had been under Polish rule before World War II. So why would Stalin distinguish between the areas? He could theoretically set up a West Ukrainian SSR consisting of Galicia, Volhynia, Podolia, Carpatho-Rus (which has been under Czechoslovak rule between the wars), and Bukovina (which had been Romanian) but it is hard to see the point. In fact, Stalin was suspicious of even the *Communists* of West Ukraine (and West Belorussia) who--having sought refuge in the USSR from Polish persecution--were executed as "Polish spies" in the 1930's. Never was an area *less* suited for self-government--even the nominal self-government of a Soviet "Union Republic"--in his view than West Ukraine.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
First of all, (most of) Volhynia and Western Podolia as well as Eastern Galicia had been under Polish rule before World War II. So why would Stalin distinguish between the areas?

He wouldn't distinguish between these areas.

He could theoretically set up a West Ukrainian SSR consisting of Galicia, Volhynia, Podolia, Carpatho-Rus (which has been under Czechoslovak rule between the wars), and Bukovina (which had been Romanian) but it is hard to see the point. In fact, Stalin was suspicious of even the *Communists* of West Ukraine (and West Belorussia) who--having sought refuge in the USSR from Polish persecution--were executed as "Polish spies" in the 1930's. Never was an area *less* suited for self-government--even the nominal self-government of a Soviet "Union Republic"--in his view than West Ukraine.

Is trying to reduce the support for the western Ukrainian insurgency not a sufficient reason for Stalin to advocate nominal self-rule in western Ukraine?

Also, if it's unrealistic for Stalin to do this, can a later Soviet leader--such as Mikhail Gorbachev--do this in order to both try pleasing western Ukrainian nationalists and try to save the Soviet Union (by separating most of the Ukrainian nationalists from the rest of Ukraine)?
 
Top