Stars and Sickles - An Alternative Cold War

[Hrvatskiwi]

The origins of the global competition between the Soviet Union and the United States lay in the endgame of the Second World War. The Soviet advances into Eastern Europe in 1944, combined with the Western Allied landings in France, was the final death knell of the Third Reich. After vanquishing Hitler, the Soviets and Americans set up friendly governments in their sectors of liberated Europe. Socialist governments were put into power in Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Finland[1], Yugoslavia, Greece and Albania*. In Western Europe, free elections were held in France, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark and Norway. Germany was divided into four sectors: A Soviet sector, a British sector, a French sector and an American sector. Berlin was divided similarly, with the Eastern half occupied by the Soviet Union, and the Western half divided between Britain, France and the US. This division of Europe became known as the 'Iron Curtain'. This division would remain until the end of the Cold War.

The face of the post-war world was decided by the Big Three at the Potsdam Conference. The United Kingdom was represented by Prime Minister Winston Churchill and (after a successful campaign for PM, defeating Churchill) Clement Attlee, whilst the United States was represented by President Henry A. Wallace[2] and the Soviet Union by General Secretary of the Central Committee Joseph Stalin. The British stance was significantly less uncompromising after the replacement of Churchill, with Attlee's priority being British recovery from the deprivations and damages of the Second World War.
Wallace was also fairly easy-going with the Soviets, continuing Roosevelt's focus on a peaceful post-war world, and heavily influenced by his trip to Magadan as Vice President in 1944. The main achievements of the Potsdam Conference was the agreement on the need to establish the United Nations Organisation (UNO); the shifting of the Polish border to the West and recognition of the Soviet annexations in Eastern Poland; the decision that all Allied troops would be withdrawn from Iran; the division of French Indochina at the 17th parallel (for the purposes of Anglo-Chinese occupation) and the Potsdam Declaration that defined the terms for Japanese surrender to the Allies.

[1] ITTL, the Finns were defeated militarily by the Soviets, and a puppet government was put in place in Finland (this will be explained in more depth in an upcoming update).

[2] ITTL, Truman does not usurp Wallace as Vice President at the Democratic National Convention in 1944. Roosevelt is present and speaks in favour of Wallace, despite his ailing health. This endorsement, and the effect of voter loyalty to Roosevelt resulted in Wallace's victory. It was actually quite a close-run thing in OTL, so this isn't implausible.

 

[Edward_Elric]

Keep going, this is already very interesting. Not very many TLs I know of (besides For All Time and Kalter Krieg) that feature a Henry Wallace presidency.

 

[Paul V McNutt]

I think if Wallace were president and had access to better information he would be less naive about the Soviet Union.

 

[Hrvatskiwi]

Opening Moves: Finland

In the aftermath of WWII, Communist governments were established in the states of Eastern Europe liberated by the Red Army. Additionally, independent (but Soviet-aligned) Communist governments rose in Albania and Yugoslavia. For the most part, the transition to Communism in these states didn't generate significant friction with neighbouring states. In Poland, the borders were moved further West, to compensate for Soviet annexations in the East, and the adjustments led to the forced expulsion of the majority of the German population to the Soviet occupation zone (Sovozone) in Eastern Germany. This was at first problematic, but the main areas of friction in Eastern Europe were Finland and Greece.

To understand the seizure of power by Finnish Communists and the crisis with Sweden, we have to look back at the last months of WWII. In June of 1944, the Red Army mounted a strategic offensive against Finnish forces by the Leningrad and Karelian fronts. The Soviet offensive smashed the Finnish lines at the Battle of Tali-Ihantala [3] and advanced rapidly towards the Salpa Line. The heavily fortified Salpa line proved to be a major obstacle, but after heavy bombardment and heavy casualties, Soviet forces breached the Salpa Line on July 19th. After the penetration of the Salpa Line, Finnish forces all along the frontline retreated hurriedly back towards Helsinki. Many of these units were cut off and captured by Soviet forces. Helsinki was captured on the 28th, after heavy fighting, although not as severe as in the Battles of Budapest or Berlin. The Finnish government surrendered unconditionally to Soviet forces. Although some pockets of Finnish resistance remained, they posed no real threat to the Soviet forces. Upon the surrender, there was an uprising in Vaasa by Swedish-speaking residents, which was quickly put down by arriving Soviet occupation troops.

After the surrender of Germany, the Soviets went about setting up a Communist government. In the 1946 Finnish elections, the Finnish People's Democratic League (SKDL) won 65% of the vote. Many historians believe that this number was rigged, with the real level of support approximately 17-25%. The SKDL was a pan-leftist umbrella organisation, but was dominated by the Communist Party of Finland (SKP). The tactics used in the Communist takeover of Finland was similar to those used in other countries, but differed in one major way: there were far less purges of Communists in Finland. Whilst right-wing politicians were purged, Otto Wille Kuusinen's government was fairly liberal with the left. Kuusinen was fairly unpopular, even among the Finnish working-class, despite his liberal Communist attitudes. This was largely due to his image as a collaborator with the Soviets in the Winter War. Nevertheless, Kuusinen became General Secretary of the SKP, whilst prominent Communist Aimo Aaltonen became President of the Presidium of the National Assembly. Whilst Aaltonen was therefore Head of State, Kuusinen wielded the real power in Finland. On October 17th 1946, Aaltonen declared the Finnish People's Republic (FPR).

The new socialist government went about implementing a number of reforms. In order to stimulate the economy, the state revived large scale mining and timber operations, as well as redistributing wealth from wealthy Swedish-speakers. Many of these same Swedish speakers were imprisoned in gulags in Karelia. Despite these efforts, the Finnish government still suffered from a lack of goodwill amongst the Finnish population. Many Finns considered the government to be Soviet puppets. Kuusinen and Aaltonen realised that they needed to appease the spirit of nationalism within Finland. To this end, Kuusinen visited Moscow during the February of 1947. Kuusinen met with various Soviet leaders, including Molotov, Beria and Stalin himself, attempting to convince them to cede back the territory taken from Finland in the Winter War. Though at first received with suspicion, especially by Beria, Kuusinen managed to convince Molotov of the benefits of ceding back Karelia. By ceding Karelia, Kuusinen conjectured, Finland would be more reliably Communist and therefore pro-Soviet, and with the elimination of Nazi Germany and a potentially hostile White regime in Finland, there was less urgency for a buffer area to the North of Leningrad. Additionally, Finland provides more strategic depth for the USSR, and guards the Gulf of Finland, and therefore Leningrad. After much deliberation, Molotov managed to convince Stalin of the wisdom of Kuusinen's ideas, and Stalin allowed for the cessation of most of those territories, with conditions: the Soviets were allowed to use naval and airbases along the Finnish coast, as well as having a right to garrison troops in Finland. Furthermore, Stalin ceded only Karelia, retaining Petsamo.

The transfer to Finnish control occurred on April 1st. A joint Finnish-Soviet parade marched to Viipuri, singing songs and waving banners to fraternal socialist solidarity. The Finnish people were ecstatic about the return of Viipuri to Finland. The conquest of Viipuri by Soviet soldiers was traumatic for the Finns, as Viipuri had always been inviolate, never before subjected to the jackboots of a foreign army. But there was still one more thorn in the Kuusinen government's side: the Aland Islands. During the chaos of the Soviet offensive on 1944, Sweden had occupied the Aland Islands. Despite the archipelago being over 95% Swedish-speaking, the League of Nations had recognised Finland's claim to the Islands. Since the end of the war, the Swedes had continued their unlawful occupation, but were supported unanimously by the Alanders. On May 16th 1947, Finnish marines, hiding in a cargo ship, revealed themselves and attacked the Swedish positions on the Aland Islands. The archipelago wasn't heavily-guarded, and the Finnish soldiers quickly captured the Swedish garrison in the capital of Maarianhamina. This was followed up by securing the other islands in the archipelago. In response, the Swedes moved a cruiser group, centered around the HSwMS Gotland (an anti-aircraft cruiser) to the vicinity of the islands. As the Gotland anchored near the islands to await orders, Finnish IL-2 Sturmoviks (probably piloted by Soviet airmen) attack the ships. The Gotland was struck with several bombs, and although not sunk, the ship was heavily damaged. Escorted by the other ships of the group, the Gotland limped to Stockholm, where it awaited repairs. In the meantime, the cruiser HSwMS Göta Lejon moved towards the islands, but didn't anchor, and kept further from shore than the Gotland.

In the UNO, the Aland Islands issue was a point of debate in both the Security Council and the General Assembly. Although the British in particular condemned the Finnish seizure of the islands, Soviet representative Andrei Gromyko noted that the League of Nations had accepted Finnish sovereignty of the islands, and that the Swedish seizure was illegal and aggressive. The Americans were also influenced by instructions from their administration, that urged acceptance of a Finnish re-occupation of the Aland Islands, considering it too small an issue to ruin relations with the Soviets over. The UNSC adopted a resolution that recognised Finnish sovereignty over the islands, but stressed the need for cultural rights for the local Swedish-speakers, and dictated that the archipelago would be demilitarised. This last condition was demanded by the Swedes, who under British and American pressure would only back down if there was a guarantee that the Aland Islands wouldn't harbour potentially hostile military personnel.

Kuusinen experienced an upsurge in popularity in Finland, whilst the Swedish government was pushed more towards the West. This would manifest itself in Sweden becoming one of the founding members of NATO, and the shift in Swedish politics towards the right.

 

[kung Zog]

An interesting timeline, subscribing

I would however say that the Swedish behaviour seem a bit erratic, given how strongly they tried to remain neutral during WW2.

 

[Lalli]

Good TL. Become very intresting Cold War. But Swedish invasion to Åland seems bit implausible altough not impossible when Soviets begun occupying Finland.

 

[Michel Van]

Nice TL, Hrvatskiwi
TL that feature a Henry Wallace presidency, are rare here.

some proposal free to use:
It would make a good alternative Europe:
There nice option here to dismantle Belgium with Royal Question
were eider the Parts of Belgium become independence States
or Flanders become part of Netherlands and Walloon to France or fusion with Luxembourg.

or the North Sea flood of 1953 hit netherlands much harder and they evacuated large part of the population to Flemish Belgium.

 

[Hrvatskiwi]

Thanks Michel Van! I hadn't even considered those two things at all, and I'll take them into consideration No guarantee that I'll cover them in any real detail, but I really appreciate the collaborative effort!

If anyone else has similar things they'd like to see in the TL, or events to cover (or of course, suggestions as to potential events), then feel more than welcome to contribute them here.

 

[Turquoise Blue]

Well, what's going on in British and Irish politics, for one?

 

[Kolade]

The Royal Question in Belgium is highly important as I think that the US could not use a civil war in Belgium. That was in OTL possible in 1950. It's also interesting to see what happens with Germany.... Can't wait for the next update.

 

[Lalli]

If anyone else has similar things they'd like to see in the TL, or events to cover (or of course, suggestions as to potential events), then feel more than welcome to contribute them here.

Perhaps surviving Italian monarchy? On referendum monarchy get quiet much support and it was very close victory.

 

[Michel Van]

The Royal Question in Belgium is major crossroad in Belgium history

it was question: keep Leopold III as King and ruler of Belgium.
Consider by most Belgium's as a traitor, because he surrender to Nazi and Talk directly with Hitler about Belgium's future in Third Reich.
His lack of sense of tact, his open admiration for fascism and that he secretly married the governess of his children, after he impregnated her, was to much...

Even his presence in Belgium, was most insupportable for Belgium's and as he return from Exile in june 1950, the kingdom had 3 day of civil war.
in end he resign in favor of oldest son Baudouin, but with 20 years old to young to rule wisely.

here we can have a Belgium Republic, (OTL Julien Lahaut shouted "Long life the Republic" during the constitutional oath of Baudouin I and was later murder by royalist for that)
or that Belgium split in two or more parts:
Were the agriculture Flemish remain Kingdom, taking Leopold III back with open arms. (they collaborated with NAZI)
while the industrial Wallon become a Republic. (were in the Resistance against NAZI)

Alternative Leopolds Brother Prince Charles, who was interim ruler of Belgium from 1945 to 1950 and War hero of Belgium Resistance.
becomes King of Belgium, after the Parliament change the Rules of succeeding the Belgium Throne.
irony, he was much better monarch as Leopold III or Baudouin I, during his 5 years of Regency

 

[Unknown]

Henry Wallace probably loses in 1948, IMO, given his...trust of Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White.

 

[Minchandre]

I wonder what TTL is going to use instead of "Finlandization".

 

[Lalli]

I wonder what TTL is going to use instead of "Finlandization".

Maybe Austria would be like Finland during Cold War. But this might demand bit difficult. Austria might not be so willingful making the Agreement of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance than OTL Finland. And Sweden it not be, it is quiet clear. So hardly there is equivaliment for Finlandization.

 

[Michel Van]

the term "Finlandization" aka "Finnlandisierung" originating from West German politic scientist Walter Hallstein and Richard Löwenthal.
It referred to the decision of a country to not challenge a more powerful neighbor in foreign politics, while maintaining national sovereignty.
but in context of theoretical neutral Germany were US-force leave the country-
Franz Joseph Strauß used the term to libel new east politic by Egon Bahr and Willy Brandt in 1970s.

in this TL the therm "Finlandization" will exists, but in context that a small nation lost it sovereignty to it's more powerful neighbor...

 

[Hrvatskiwi]

Opening Moves: Iran

The Iranian crisis of 1946 was the first major point of friction between the United States and the Soviet Union in the Cold War. It had it's origins in the wartime division of Iran between Allied (primarily British) forces in the South and Soviet forces in the North. The occupation was for the purpose of securing the route of 'lend-lease' aid to the Soviet Union, to prevent any defection by the Iranian government to the Nazi cause and to secure control over the Iranian oil-fields. At the Potsdam Conference, the Allied powers had agreed to withdraw from Iran, but after the withdrawal of Western troops, the Soviets refused to withdraw their forces from the North, and even made some efforts to expand their control South. In the North-West, the Soviets established two puppet governments: The Azerbaijan People's Government (APG) and the Republic of Kurdistan (ROKu, not to be confused with the ROK, or the short-lived state of South Korea), also known as the Mahabad Republic.

Alarmed at the threat of Soviet expansion southward, the United States and United Kingdom applied significant diplomatic pressure on the Soviets, and several UNSC resolutions were passed which attempted to push the Soviets into withdrawing. American ambassador to the USSR, Charles E. Bohlen[3], in a telegram sent on the 30th of January 1946, informed the Soviets that "whilst the American government firmly believes that co-operation between the United States and the Soviet Union is key to the prosperity and stability of the postwar world, the United States cannot be comfortable with the occupation of Iran and the Iranian oilfields by any Great Power, and the US government requests strongly that the Soviet Union withdraw military forces from Iran in the interests of co-operation, understanding, friendship and peace between our two nations."

After sustained US diplomatic pressure, the Soviets withdrew out of Iran, but continued to support the APG and ROKu. The APG's small regular forces, equipped with Soviet weaponry, had several successes against the Iranian forces loyal to Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. The APG and ROKu's forces were both comprised of militias, armed with both Soviet weapons and equipment confiscated from Iranian troops, who were disarmed and arrested. Despite the good performance of the separatist forces initially, they were unable to perpetually repel the forces of the Iranian central government, who continued to send more heavily-armed troops to combat the separatists. In response to Kurdish and Azerbaijani pleas for help, the Soviets sent troops into the area at the onset of June 1946[4]. Panic ensued amongst the American and British foreign policy establishment. Some hardliners believed in a show of force to eject the Soviets, some suggested strengthening the Iranian government forces with aid, military equipment, and advisors. But in the end, President Wallace adopted the most conciliatory stance. He brokered a deal with Stalin, recognising the APG and ROKu and conceding to a 30% Soviet share in Iranian oil in exchange for a guarantee that the Soviet Union would halt any aggression towards Iran[5]. The British and the more hard-line in American political circles were enraged. The British felt that the presence of the Soviets in Northern Iran still threatened the Persian Gulf in the event of hostilities with the Soviet Union, and were concerned that the ROKu's pan-Kurdish rhetoric and policy threatened to undermine the stability of their mandate in Iraq, which in the North was largely Kurdish. Hardline Americans shared these concerns, but were especially upset that Stalin had been given a lot, whilst having given very little at all. Later Wallace would write in his memoirs that "it was either give the Soviets a little piece of the pie, or the whole thing. I chose to share. In hindsight, I shouldn't have. But back then, I really thought that Stalin was willing to compromise. I thought he could be appeased. I made a mistake." In Moscow it was a huge propaganda coup. In the Azerbaijani SSR, a huge parade was held in Baku, with the themes of "brotherhood" and "solidarity".

An unforeseen and (from a Western perspective) undesirable consequence of the secession of the APG from Iran was on the status of the Turkish Straits. With both the secession of the APG and the Communist victory in Greece[6], the Turkish government acquiesced to Soviet pressure for military bases on and free access through the Straits. This allowed Soviet naval presence in the Eastern Mediterranean, and would prove to be an area of extreme significance in the Cold War. The seeming pandering to the Soviet Union, which was later explained by Turkish historians and foreign policy experts as "the art of bordering a superpower without being dominated by it" has become know as "Turkicisation". Whilst that term is still in pejorative use as submission to a larger power, as a foreign policy direction it is now more commonly referred to as the "Saka Doctrine", after Turkish Foreign Minister Hasan Saka. Modern historians consider a stronger Soviet presence on Turkey's East, as well as the potential danger of Soviet support of Kurdish separatists, as one of the reasons for the Turkish willingness to accept such demands. There is a ongoing debate about whether that reasoning dominated contemporary Turkish politics, or whether the Communisation of Greece was the key factor.

[3] ITTL, Bohlen dominates American diplomatic interaction with the USSR, rather than Kennan. This means no Kennan Telegram, and whilst there are still a lot of voices pushing for containment, Bohlen believed that some concessions should be made to the Soviets (such as a sphere in Eastern Europe).

[4] In OTL, the Soviets continually had military presence in Iran until pulling out in June 1946. But ITTL, the Soviets withdrew earlier, but then sent troops back in to bolster the separatists. This gives the West a stronger "back off" message, which prompts the Americans to come to the table.

[5] In OTL, the Soviets were really concerned with getting a large percentage of Iranian oil, and wanted to push through an agreement with Iran to have 51% ownership of Iran's oil. After the Americans pledged support for Iran, the Iranians refused it and the Soviets got pretty much nothing out of Iran. So, ITTL, the Iran Crisis was much more even in terms of benefit.

[6] Yes, this is massive. And the butterflies are equally massive, but don't worry, it'll be explained in the next update!

 

[kung Zog]

Nice! I like the situation Turkey is in.

 

[Henriksson]

Kuusinen experienced an upsurge in popularity in Finland, whilst the Swedish government was pushed more towards the West. This would manifest itself in Sweden becoming one of the founding members of NATO, and the shift in Swedish politics towards the right.

The old "shift-to-the-right-in-the-post war-despite-very-strong-working class-movement" trope. OK.

 

[DrakonFin]

A very nice TL so far, Hrvatskiwi. The occupation of Finland, etc, is mostly plausibly written and the post-war border changes with the USSR seem logical. Only Kuusinen getting such a prominent position bothered me a bit; as he was thoroughly discredited during the Winter War, it would be to be expected that Stalin would choose less reviled people for all the prominent positions in the new Finnish government, a combination of the domestic left with a sprinkling of the Red Finnish emigres of 1918 vintage. Don't get me wrong - I believe Kuusinen would wield some real power in this new Finland as his position in Moscow was reasonably strong as a survivor of the purges, but I also think he would do that mostly from behind the scenes and while holding on to a prominent post in Moscow, too.

In future updates I am interest to know how the inevitable flight of nationalists and members of the upper and upper middle classes from Finland to Scandinavia (and beyond) will affect different things, Swedish politics and various butterflies in the years to come. Tens of thousands of Finns would try to flee the new regime. Many Finnish military officers, too, would seek to make their escape, and several Western militaries would find former Finnish officers knocking on their doors, offering info on the USSR (military intelligence, communication encryption codes and so on - look up Operation Stella Polaris and its ties to the Venona Project, frex), on winter warfare and other stuff the Finns were good at, in exchange for asylum, a home and and a decent salary. Also, there woud be a resistance movement in Finland as there was in Estonia, and one that might keep going for many years after the war officially ends.