The Cold War with a different Germany

How might the Cold War have been different if the state of Germany had been like this:

Instead of being split, the Soviets and the West reach an accommodation whereby Germany enshrines both neutrality and significant military limits (Japan-style) into its constitution. It guarantees never to use military force, nor that it will possess nuclear weapons, belong to military alliances, or allow the stationing of any foreign troops on its soil. As a result, it effectively acts as a buffer between NATO and the Soviet sphere. After much deliberation this is the settlement and the Federal Republic of Germany is born in the spring of 1950, a single country from the Oder to the Low Countries.
 
Well, the Balkans become much more important. And I can see all kinds of political and espionage maneuvering by both sides in Germany, which will rapidly become the largest economy in Europe.

Come to think of it, I can't see the Soviets or the French signing off on this.
 
Yeah, I can only see the Soviets signing off on this if they think they'll get something big out of it (Germany had just killed 21m of them) and the French will only sign off under severe duress. So what do the Soviets get out of it?

If this does happen, expect a big wall around the Polish and Czechslovakian borders to stop good communist citizens from fleeing across the border to the decadent west (and a population of Poles, Czechs, Slovaks etc who get stuck in Germany and are not comfortable about it).
 

Deleted member 1487

How might the Cold War have been different if the state of Germany had been like this:

Instead of being split, the Soviets and the West reach an accommodation whereby Germany enshrines both neutrality and significant military limits (Japan-style) into its constitution. It guarantees never to use military force, nor that it will possess nuclear weapons, belong to military alliances, or allow the stationing of any foreign troops on its soil. As a result, it effectively acts as a buffer between NATO and the Soviet sphere. After much deliberation this is the settlement and the Federal Republic of Germany is born in the spring of 1950, a single country from the Oder to the Low Countries.
So Stalin's 1952 note is accepted by both sides?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin_Note

Perhaps the Soviets would be more likely to invade during the Cold War if they have a weak Germany on it's own in the middle. Of course it could also reduce tensions. Germany would certainly be remarkably fearful of it's neighbors.
 
How might the Cold War have been different if the state of Germany had been like this:

Instead of being split, the Soviets and the West reach an accommodation whereby Germany enshrines both neutrality and significant military limits (Japan-style) into its constitution. It guarantees never to use military force, nor that it will possess nuclear weapons, belong to military alliances, or allow the stationing of any foreign troops on its soil. As a result, it effectively acts as a buffer between NATO and the Soviet sphere. After much deliberation this is the settlement and the Federal Republic of Germany is born in the spring of 1950, a single country from the Oder to the Low Countries.


IMO: If it's Japanese style, both US and Soviets should base their military base on new Germany's territory.

Lets assume Denmark, Germany, Austria and Italy becomes Japan-style but non-aligned neutral countries. Then there will be created buffer neutral zone from Baltic to Mediterranean in Europe, which will consist neutral/nonaligned and non-militaristic countries. Without direct border how Cold War will play out?
 
As for leadership that could get this to happen.
Beria was the most vocal about this.
Molotov was somewhat inclined to think this was a good idea however this may be because he was a bit dumb.

Khrushchev on the other hand saw German unification as a trap and managed to convince everyone of the need to protect fellow socialist nations.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/ACFB54.pdf
According to this Adenauer would never have accepted and rejected the offer because he wanted western integration as a pre-condition for unification; he would never have accepted neutrality, as he understood what that meant in the context of the Cold War: being out in the cold in international politics with NO friends thanks to the Nazis era that had just ended.
 

Deleted member 1487

What if Schumacher won in 1949? With the right POD this is plausible?
Would he be more inclined towards an offer?
Kurt Schumacher died right around the time Stalin sent his note making this offer, so he may not live to actually do anything about it assuming he won. 1950 is probably too early to make this happen; I think the Soviets would oppose it if it were originated by the Germans or west, it would take Stalin making the offer to make it happen IMHO. Negotiations about the future of Germany were still ongoing by 1952, so unless Stalin comes out with this a lot earlier it's hard to see it happening. Now if Schumacher died in 1952 while this is ongoing it is up in the air who would replace him and what they would do with it. I think though the Germans recognized they needed to integrate with the world rather than being on their own.
 
A big part of this depends on who is in charge, particularly in the Soviet Union after Stalin's death.

Nevertheless, I'm inclined to believe that the Cold War will essentially not exist ITTL, or at the very least will be radically different in nature (and less antagonistic).

We should recognise that the Cold War period itself can be divided into a number of phases. The initial phase (the late 1940s) was characterised by the consolidation of Communist control in Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia, with some testing of Western resolve (Korea, Berlin etc). But there was not yet a strong 'commitment' to the Cold War on either side. With the right leadership, the Soviets will likely be happy digesting Eastern Europe and creating the protective buffer they sought.

With a neutral Germany in the centre of Europe, as well as a neutral Austria, the only place the Eastern and Western blocs will touch is the Yugoslav-Italian border, which also won't be an issue with the Tito-Stalin split, as well as the Greek and Turkish borders (Turkey probably wouldn't join NATO in such circumstances).

In such a geopolitical setup, whilst Greece would essentially be "non-negotiable", I could see Turkey being a pro-Western neutral a la Finland. This will make the Cold War less tense without NATO and Warsaw Pact troops staring each other down in Berlin.

That isn't to say that the US-Soviet relationship won't be without issue. The Soviets will still oppose the Bretton Woods system, will point score off of the Western countries' colonies (although won't do too much to help), whilst the Americans will still talk about subversive Communist agents and the threat to the American lifestyle. It's just too easy a political tool for the likes of opportunists like McCarthy, although the Red Scare would be less severe.

Where it would get interesting is with the Sino-Soviet Split. Several US Presidents, including JFK, correctly viewed Mao as a more radical ideologue, and say him as potentially a greater threat than the USSR. We could see a bizarre system where the global north (West and East) actively combat Maoism in the global south. Which will also have the unintentional effect of even more strongly racialising global inequality.
 

Perkeo

Banned
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/ACFB54.pdf
According to this Adenauer would never have accepted and rejected the offer because he wanted western integration as a pre-condition for unification; he would never have accepted neutrality, as he understood what that meant in the context of the Cold War: being out in the cold in international politics with NO friends thanks to the Nazis era that had just ended.

But Adenauer's position was subject to very controversial discussion, so I don't see any problem that another government would have made a different choice.
 

Deleted member 1487

But Adenauer's position was subject to very controversial discussion, so I don't see any problem that another government would have made a different choice.
Sure, but the issue there then is the relationship with the occupying Western powers. They would probably put the kibosh on anything like that. Plus let's not forget how much effort the US and French put into getting Adenauer elected in 1949 to make sure they had a western oriented Chancellor that was not going to break ranks.
 
Why would Stalin pass on an opportunity to extend the communist sphere of influence? What happens then to Poland and Czechoslovakia? Also, Japan has been, from the very beginning a lightly armed ally of the US. It worked because there's water between Japan and the USSR, and because it's Siberia. But this German Hypothetical didnt work in Korea either. So I cant see it applying to Germany, at least as the war concluded OTL.

I think the only way you get this is if the allies invade France in 1943 and allied troops meet at the Oder. In wartime negotiations, Stalin implicitly acknowledges that the Wallies will get to Berlin first and is ok as long as Germany is demilitarized. I think Stalin would require Germany to be broken up in this event into four or five states. There's too much risk of Germany flipping to one side or the other in this scenario. It would be much better to mitigate the risk by requiring all of the individual states to tilt toward the west rather than one.
 
Why would Stalin pass on an opportunity to extend the communist sphere of influence?

I'd wondered that too until the Stalin Note link, which refers to fear of West Germany being part of a Western armed coalition and the fear in the US that Stalin would use this to ensure Germany, now weak, could be eventually all sucked into the Soviet sphere. The Note was most likely disinfo rather than serious, but these are both things Stalin would be interested in.
 
By 1950 the lines are fairly firmly drawn, so this would require the USA to pull out of Germany entirely, and I doubt the basing that was allowed in West Germany could be replaced by bases in the low countries and France. If this is done after 1950 or so, once the US and USSR pull out (and more and further for the US/NATO) you have the eastern sector which has eliminated all political participation except for the communist party, the western sector is more diverse with a segment of left socialists/communists both overt and covert. Once you have unification the communists will be the largest party in the Bundestag, possibly a majority. In places like Czechoslovakia and elsewhere this led to the communists having key ministries such as those that controlled the police and justice systems, and eventual takeover. If the communists predominate, even without a complete takeover, this is a big plus for Stalin/USSR. Germany at a minimum slides to pro-Soviet neutral, US troops in Europe are reduced and pushed farther away from the Rodina, and the communist predominance can occur with free elections (given the solid bloc in the east) so it's "democratic".

If all of Germany is occupied like Austria, with a more open set of demarcation lines, it is harder for the USSR to loot as much as it wants and also "deal" with making sure the political landscape is what they want it to be.
 
Frankly, I think it comes down to one's position on the religious war of "what were Soviet intentions?"

If one buys the propaganda that the peace-loving Soviet Union just wanted some sort of guarantee that the imperialist hordes would not soon be rolling towards Moscow once again, then this might greatly dampen the Cold War since this buffer state might give them some sense of calm. They might concentrate more on fomenting popular revolutions elsewhere, like Africa, Southeast Asia, Central America, etc.- so, maybe not Cold, but different. Or, heck, maybe they and the West just start jockeying for influence in Germany.

OTOH if one buys the propaganda that the Soviets built a massive offensive military for a reason and intended to spread world communism by force, starting with Western Europe, then they would just use this peacenik Germany as an easy highway westwards at some point.
 
Last edited:
By 1950 the lines are fairly firmly drawn, so this would require the USA to pull out of Germany entirely, and I doubt the basing that was allowed in West Germany could be replaced by bases in the low countries and France. If this is done after 1950 or so, once the US and USSR pull out (and more and further for the US/NATO) you have the eastern sector which has eliminated all political participation except for the communist party, the western sector is more diverse with a segment of left socialists/communists both overt and covert. Once you have unification the communists will be the largest party in the Bundestag, possibly a majority. In places like Czechoslovakia and elsewhere this led to the communists having key ministries such as those that controlled the police and justice systems, and eventual takeover. If the communists predominate, even without a complete takeover, this is a big plus for Stalin/USSR. Germany at a minimum slides to pro-Soviet neutral, US troops in Europe are reduced and pushed farther away from the Rodina, and the communist predominance can occur with free elections (given the solid bloc in the east) so it's "democratic".

A unified Germany without foreign troops on its soil is never going to be communist. Even with massive support of the soviet authorities,in the only somewhat fair election in east ermany 1946,the SED failed to get the absolute majority. Now keep in mind that this party not only enjoyed so much support of the authorities,but was a somewhat artificial construct,being a Merger of the KPD and the SPD. The latter (which was bigger) had big segments which opposed the unification,but were pressured or simply purged. In a united Germany,they most likely would follow the western SPD,which opposed the communists. Combine this with the fact that the communists in the much more populous west were pretty weak,and the Bundestag won't see a communist majority.
 
Top