The Imperious Chairman-A TL

Excerpt from Sverdlov by Robert Service​
Under the Russian Empire there was officially one ethnicity: Russians. All other ethnicities were classified as aliens. As such the Russian Empire attempted to eliminate local cultures and make Russians out of them. The Bolsheviks reversed this policy, instead declaring a policy of korenizatsiya (literally “putting down roots”). Under korenizatsiya the Bolsheviks encouraged the use of a national language and culture in an republic, even going so far as to force Russian cadres in these republics to learn the local language and culture. As a Jew Sverdlov was especially sensitive to the concerns of “Greater-Russian Chauvinism.” In particular he was disgusted by anti-Semitism; often quoting a phrase variously attributed to August Bebel, Friedrich Engels, and Ferdinand Kronawetter: “anti-Semitism is the Socialism of fools.” Naturally this made Sverdlov one of korenizatsiya's greatest proponents. Under his leadership the Party's membership grew massively and the number of minorities in national positions grew exponentially.​
-​
One of the most ambitious national projects of the 1930s was the latinisation of the various Soviet scripts. Many Bolsheviks felt that the Latin alphabet was “modern” while Cyrillic was, as Kirov wrote, “One of the many primitive legacies of Tsarism.” This sentiment was, at least subconsciously, based on the shame that many Bolsheviks felt about Russia. Lenin had even describe the country as “one of the most benighted, medieval, and shamefully backward of Asian countries.” Following the then popular theory that language equals thought the Bolsheviks thought that by writing in a more “modern” script then the Soviet people would become more modern. Already by 1930 the Chechen, Tartar, and Kazakh alphabets had been latinised and several more languages were being worked on. In 1932 Soviet linguists began work on the two most ambitious and far reaching linguistics projects: the latinisation of the Russian and Ukrainian alphabets. After the alphabets were finished in 1934 the task of getting the populace to use them began. Signs and public notices were published in both scripts, while newspapers began printing two editions. In schools across the republics young children were taught only the new script, older children were taught in both scripts, and special classes were created for literate adults to learn the new script. Starting in 1939 all government documents, which due to the nature of the Soviet state included paychecks, shipping orders, and ration cards, had to be written in the new script.​
-​
While the vast majority of Russians learned the new alphabet and abandoned Cyrillic a few resisted the change. The Bolsheviks dragged a rural, agrarian nation kicking and screaming into the modern world. Along the way they tried to destroy private property, religion, and traditional family life. Many people, shocked and confused by all these changes, continued to use Cyrillic as a form of resistance. There was both a religious element and a political element. In a series of meetings in 1937 Sverdlov bullied Metropolitan Sergius into declaring that the Orthodox Church would no longer use Cyrillic. Already angered by the Church's declaration of loyalty and its many concessions to the Bolsheviks some believers kept their Cyrillic Bibles, icons, and crosses, even though ownership of such artifacts carried a sentence of 3 years in the Gulag. [1] On the political front, as the great dissident Mikhail Gorbachev [2] wrote: “Cyrillic is a part of Russian culture from before it was twisted and perverted by Bolshevism.”​
-​
Culture was very important to Sverdlov. He believed that “Without art the masses are voiceless. Soviet art and culture must echo their sentiments and express their deepest desires.” In 1931 Sverdlov declared that “a new era of Soviet culture has begun.” To start off this new era Sverdlov convinced Maxim Gorky, then Russia's greatest living writer, to return from his Italian exile. It had not been easy but since Gorky was a family friend (he had even adopted Sverdlov's brother) Sverdlov was able to convince him. Part of this new era involved major government subsidies of the arts. Even during the height of the First Five Year Plan and militarization money was found to pay for the arts. The result was an explosion of new works, particularly in cinema. The most famous Soviet filmmaker of this period was Sergei Eisenstein, but there were many others. For instance Mikhail Romm came to prominence after his 1935 film The Jewish Cobbler's Union. The film focused on the life of a Jewish cobbler's family in Kiev during the Russian Civil War. The climatic scene, where the titular cobbler begs for his family's life during a White Army pogrom, has been referenced in dozens of films. Under Kirov's patronage Igor Savchenko prospered. His film The Exile of Ivan Denkanzy (1934), about one revolutionary's loneliness and alienation during his Siberian exile, earned a rare honor. Kirov told him that “it is the only movie I have ever seen bring Yasha [Sverdlov] to tears.”​
-​
June 3rd, 1935 was Sverdlov's 50th birthday. To celebrate a massive parade was held in Red Square. Massive posters of Lenin and Sverdlov were hung on the eastern part of the Kremlin Wall and thousands of people turned out with pictures of Sverdlov. This was that start of Sverdlov's cult of personality. There were two emphases of this cult. The first was that Sverdlov was the epitome of Communist virtue. He was the imperious chairman: a man completely dedicated to revolution whose calm and genius had helped sustain the Soviet Union and would eventually help liberate the world. The second part was his ruthlessness towards the enemies of the Soviet people. A popular image of the period showed him as Saint George slaying the dragon of counterrevolution (this was a common religious image). Sverdlov was privately dismissive of the cult, calling it “completely non-Marxist and foolish,” but felt that it was a useful tool to cement Communist rule; commenting “We have taken their Little Father [the Tsar] and they need something to hold onto.” He was very careful about what honors he would accept; for example he allowed the city of Yekaterinburg (where his early revolutionary activities were based) to be renamed Sverdlovsk and allowed the creation of the Sverdlov Prize for “scientific and technological advances that further the cause of Socialism,” but refused to accept the title “Great Architect of Communism” calling it “something an egomaniac like Stalin would call himself.”​
-​
The new era of culture came to an end in 1937. Following Hitler's Anchluss of Austria [3] the Politburo decided that culture should stress “patriotic, socialist, and pro-war themes” so that the Soviet people could be prepared for war with the West. To oversee this new policy Sverdlov replaced the State Committee for the Arts with the People's Commissariat for Culture, and made Andrei Zhdanov commissioner. Zhdanov had joined the Party in 1915 and became Party boss of Leningrad in 1934. Zhdanov was a dogmatic Communist who Bukharin later remarked “Had knowledge of several subjects, although most of it was from reading Marxist literature.” Sverdlov soon came to admire his competence and philosophical interests; the two of them became very close. Any work that failed to show the correct values was censored; for example Boris Pasternak's masterpiece Ivan's Wall (1938) wasn't published until 1948 due to its pacifist themes while Alexander Fadeyev's far inferior Eastern Thunder (1939), about a Napoleonic cavalryman, became a bestseller. Also banned were surreal or “otherwise inaccessible” works. The main result was that Soviet art went from daring and masterful works to (as Gorbachev wrote) “hollow works who's message, while screamed at the viewer, are devoid of thought or meaning.” Soviet art wouldn't recover from this campaign until the early 1950s.​
-​
[1] This law was created as part of the anti-religious campaigns of the Soviet Union.​
[2] ITTL Mikhail Gorbachev was arrested in 1953 after writing a letter to a friend in which he criticized Sverdlov's conduct before The Second Great War. The friend gave the letter too the authorities and Gorbachev was sentenced to 5 years in the Gulag. In 1961 he defected to America, where he wrote several book critical of the Soviet Union.​
[3] Which occurs pretty much like IOTL.​
 
While korenizatsiya is pretty good from a cultural preservation standpoint, I'm a little skeptical in how well it would work out in forging a cohesive multinational state identity which is what the Soviet Union really needs to remain free from ethnic tension. It seems more likely to encourage regional nationalism and separatism down the road.

It's funny doing the whole compare-contrast between how Sverdlov is acting compared to Stalin. Both fostered cults of personality which they were privately cynical about but they are cynical about it in different ways. Stalin was cynical because he seems to have known the whole thing was a ruse to perpetrate his power, which he believed was necessary for the success of the Soviet Union and the communist cause (in that order). Sverdlov, on the other hand, skips the middleman and goes straight to believing a cult of personality is necessary for the Soviet Union and the communist cause (possibly not in that order). What is Tsaritsyn being called ITTL, by the by?

So is it industrialization next?
 
Last edited:
Eastern Karelia will be a rather interesting place in this TL: http://www.genealogia.fi/emi/art/article255e.htm
Same goes for Volga German territories.
It will also be interesting to see how Sverdlov will deal with the Soviet Jews. If the plans to create an autonomous oblast to the Caspian Region go forward, IKOR might be able to convince more Jewish settlers to emigrate from the US.
 
While korenizatsiya is pretty good from a cultural preservation standpoint, I'm a little skeptical in how well it would work out in forging a cohesive multinational state identity which is what the Soviet Union really needs to remain free from ethnic tension. It seems more likely to encourage regional nationalism and separatism down the road.

It's funny doing the whole compare-contrast between how Sverdlov is acting compared to Stalin. Both fostered cults of personality which they were privately cynical about but they are cynical about it in different ways. Stalin was cynical because he seems to have known the whole thing was a ruse to perpetrate his power, which he believed was necessary for the success of the Soviet Union and the communist cause (in that order). Sverdlov, on the other hand, skips the middleman and goes straight to believing a cult of personality is necessary for the Soviet Union and the communist cause (possibly not in that order). What is Tsaritsyn being called ITTL, by the by?

So is it industrialization next?

Industrialization is next. ITTL Tsaritsyn is renamed Marks (Russian for Marx) in 1928. The Battle of Tsaritsyn's importance is downplayed since the main figures there were Stalin and Voroshilov.

It is definitely interesting to look at Sverdlov vs. Stalin. I was inspired to write this TL in part due to Weber's Germany by Tom Colton. I was reading it and thinking "The idea of a different Fuhrer is interesting. I wonder what a different Soviet leader would do?" I would say that one of the main differences between Sverdlov and Stalin's cults of personality is the extent. Due to collective leadership, Sverdlov actively trying to reign in the excesses of his cult of personality, and no Great Terror Sverdlov will never be able just to walk into a room, give his opinion, and have no one disagree. If he mentally collapses like Stalin did after the German invasion the government won't shut down-on the contrary this would probably be the end of Sverdlov's reign as Kirov and Frunze take over.

Karelian said:
Eastern Karelia will be a rather interesting place in this TL: http://www.genealogia.fi/emi/art/article255e.htm
Same goes for Volga German territories.
It will also be interesting to see how Sverdlov will deal with the Soviet Jews. If the plans to create an autonomous oblast to the Caspian Region go forward, IKOR might be able to convince more Jewish settlers to emigrate from the US.

That was a interesting article.:D Certainly the nationalities policy will be far different and the Volga Germans are going to cause problems in the future.;) I haven't figured out yet what Sverdlov is going to do with the Soviet Jews but what part of the Caspian Region were the plans focused on?
 
Excerpt from Sverdlov by Robert Service​

The rise of Hitler terrified the Soviets. After studying the industrial and military might of the Soviet Union as compared to Western countries the Troika came to one conclusion: the Soviets were not ready for war. The biggest problem was industry. While Britain, France, and Germany were all modern, industrialized nations Russia was still in the 19th century. The vast majority of the population was rural and many, particularly in isolated areas such as Siberia and Central Asia, lived a life virtually unchanged from that of their grandparents or great-grandparents. As Sverdlov put it at the 20th Party Congress in June 1932: “How can a nation of peasants, a nation in which the assembly line or the car is as foreign a concept to most people as interstellar travel, ever hope to defeat to defeat an industrialized nation? The West is ahead of us by 40 or 50 years and if we cannot bridge the gap in the next 10 years than Soviet Communism will be destroyed.” To get the Soviet Union ready the Congress created the First Five Year Plan. The goal was, by 1937, the Soviet Union would get increase its coal production from 40 to 65 million tons, oil production from 14 to 24 million tons, steel production from 4.5 to 9 million tons, and electricity from 6000 to 14000 million kilowatts. In addition massive projects such as canals and hydroelectric dams were to be built; mostly by slave labor from the Gulags.​

In 1935 Soviet authorities invited American author and committed Socialist Theodore Dreiser to tour the massive steelworks in Magnitogorsk. He was extremely impressed, writing: “From miles away one can see the smokestacks, exhaling the breath of Soviet Russia. Inside the mill thousands of workers, still proud despite a lifetime of toil, turned rivers of molten iron and slag into steel.” Accounts like Dreiser's convinced many Westerners that the Soviet experiment was working; that the Soviets were able to condense the progress that took the West decades into a few years. And in part they were right. Ground was broken on thousands of new factories and mines, and those that already existed were massively expanded. Whole new industrial cities were built, including Magnitogorsk and the Kazakh city of Balkhash. Millions of peasants, drawn by higher wages [1] and the promise of a better life, moved to the cities. But with the rapid industrialization came incredible hardship. Managers were held responsible for meeting quotas, and managers who failed to meet them suffered punishments ranging from fines to being expelled from the Party. So managers made workers put in long hours-generally 12-15 hours in factories and 16-18 hours for miners. Since many of the workers had little knowledge of modern technology (some had never even seen a car or electric lights) they didn't know proper safety protocols. This, combined with the heavy workload, caused industrial accidents to skyrocket; a fact not helped by the terrible work conditions. The factories were designed to be quick to build and valued efficiency over safety and worker comfort. One worker noted the result: “By noon you needed a lamp see through the smoke and it was so hot that pools of sweat flowed across the floor."​

The Bolsheviks quickly realized that the peasants' lack of industrial skills was a major barrier to meeting the 5 Year Plan's goals. To solve this in 1934 Gosplan head Valerian Kubyshev proposed recruiting Westerners to work in and manage factories. Already there were around 2,500 Germans emigres, mostly refugees from Hitler's regime, in the Soviet Union. Most worked in factories, and Kubyshev could not help but notice that there were slightly fewer accidents in these factories and their production was higher. So starting in June the Comintern instructed Western Communist parties to began recruiting. The recruiting methods varied; for example in Welsh coal country local Communists promised “A job, an apartment, and three square meals a day,” while in France the message was “move to the land where Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity are guaranteed.” Perhaps the most interesting recruiting techniques were directed at African-Americans. CPUSA head Earl Browder ordered The Daily Worker to run stories everyday about the racial equality in the Soviet Union; contrasting this with American segregation. After an all-white jury acquitted several KKK members of a lynching Communists went around to black neighborhoods and quoted Sergei Kirov as saying “Racial violence is the most abhorrent kind of violence.” (There is still a debate as to whether Kirov actually said this) These recruiting efforts paid off: 4,678 Americans (1,541 of whom were African-American), 6,203 people from the UK, 3,008 French, 1,973 Scandinavians, and 3,456 others had emigrated to the Soviet Union. Once they arrived they were assigned to a city, then given a crash course in that area's language. This is how William Isaac, an African-American cooper miner, found himself managing the massive mine in Balkhash, Kazakhstan. His family joined him in 1939 and they became the model Soviet family, with his wife working in a nearby kolkhoz and his son fighting in the Red Army during the Second Great War. But life was also hard for these emigres. Many of them found that, as one woman put it, “There is nothing to do but work and sleep.” Some left, disillusioned with Communism. After the German invasion those who tried to leave found that they couldn't as their services were needed for the war effort. Still, on the whole the emigre experience was a positive one, particularly for African-Americans; who were amazed at the lack of segregation and open racism.​

By 1935 the First Five Year Plan was meeting its goals. But there were many problems. For example 10% of steel, 12% of oil, and 9% of smelted copper was of too low quality to be useful. Inefficiencies abounded and the number of industrial accidents was drawing protests from workers. Kubyshev was also not doing well. His drinking was out of control and in late 1934 he had to go to a sanatorium, where he died in February. After Kubyshev's funeral Sverdlov met with NKVB head Matvei Berman [2] and asked him to find someone “Who can impose Chekist discipline on Gosplan.” Berman though he had the perfect person. Lavrentiy Beria was head of the Georgian OGPU/NKVB. He was a distinguished officer, having won the Order of the Red Banner for suppressing a Georgian nationalist uprising. “He was a cold, reptilian man,” Anastas Mikoyan later wrote, “At one moment he was gregarious and charming, able to light up a room with his humor and wit. Then someone who say something wrong and the mask would fall off and the vicious torturer emerged.” Sverdlov also had his misgivings. After his first meeting with Beria he asked Berman “Can we trust him?” to which Berman responded “If he becomes too much of a problem we can always get rid of him.” Time would show that Berman was dead wrong about Beria, whom he quickly came to despise.

Immediately after taking command of Gosplan Beria set out to reform it. He started with a massive campaign of centralization. He convinced the Central Committee that it was more efficient to merge several industrial-related committees into Gosplan, including railways, armaments, and large parts of Gossnab. This also had the effect of massively expanding Gosplan's power; a move that was compounded by the appointment of several of Beria's friends. (the so-called “Caucasian Mafia”) to various positions in Gosplan. This done Beria turned to “tighten work discipline.” Workers now began to face harsh punishments for a variety of offenses. Someone who was at least 20 minutes late more than twice a week faced the loss of that days wages and rations, someone absent without reason could be fired and blacklisted, and if waste got above a certain percent (set by Gosplan) then everyone at the factory would forfeit half of their pay. Beria also convinced Sverdlov to declare the cause of many industrial accidents to be “wrecking.” This was a supposed conspiracy by counterrevolutionaries to slow the pace of Soviet industrialization. Perhaps 98,000 people were sent to the Gulag for this new crime. Beria's methods were harsh but they got results. The last two years of the First Five Year Plan showed stronger growth than the previous three. The Second Five Year Plan also far surpassed the results of the First, even though it was interrupted by the German invasion. The end result of the Five Year Plans was that the Soviet Union was prepared for the Second Great War. For his work Beria received his second Order of the Red Banner and, more importantly, Sverdlov's favor.


[1] At Bukharin's suggestion people who worked in heavy industry were paid one and a half times greater than workers in agricultural or light industry fields.​
[2] The next update will show the reasons for Yagoda's departure and Berman's rise.
 
Last edited:
German invasion in 1939? That won't end well for the Germans. Without looting France or having the time to properly prepare a planned attack, they lack the logistical assets needed to penetrate beyond to D'viba-D'niepr line and thereby penetrate into the major Soviet centers of industry, manpower, raw materials, and agriculture! Combine this with a more prepared Red Army and a (presumably) still intact "Stalin"-line* and things are not looking good for the Germans.

*Obviously not called that ITTL.
 
German invasion in 1939? That won't end well for the Germans. Without looting France or having the time to properly prepare a planned attack, they lack the logistical assets needed to penetrate beyond to D'viba-D'niepr line and thereby penetrate into the major Soviet centers of industry, manpower, raw materials, and agriculture! Combine this with a more prepared Red Army and a (presumably) still intact "Stalin"-line* and things are not looking good for the Germans.

*Obviously not called that ITTL.

Technically the German invasion is in 1940. I'm not sure what the Stalin Line would be called, or if it would be a series of lines working with defense in depth. As for the war let's just say this isn't an Axis victory timeline.
 
Oh, I have a variety of things to say and no time right now!

But an early German invasion implies either that Hitler conquers Western Europe earlier first--almost impossible as OTL the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe of 1938 was far inferior to that of '39, and Hitler only had 6 years to build up to '39 and has no earlier start now, nor is there any obvious reason why the Nazis could do in 5 years what it took 6 OTL--or else as ObsessedNuker says, he attempts it first, before attacking the West.

And the latter is exactly what Sverdlov figured Hitler would do and was being covertly backed by the Western European capitalists to do.

I'm guessing that when Hitler determines to invade Poland ITTL, there is no treaty or pact in place between the Reich and the Soviet Union--and the Red Army mobilizes, the Kremlin offers to aid the Poles in defending themselves--the Polish government might possibly agree (probably quite belatedly--they'd hate the idea of Red Army forces on their soil, possibly more than losing it all to the Nazis) and might refuse--but then perhaps the Soviets cross the border to engage the Germans anyway, probably (if they have no invitation from what is left of Poland's government) claiming the east as Belarusian territory. If they have Polish government support they would instead be agreeing to fight the Germans wherever they are--and so the "invasion" is on. The technicality of it starting in 1940 suggests that initially Hitler offers a truce which the Troika accepts, but it doesn't last long.

Can Hitler dream of Barbarossa without having first secured his rear and by the way conquered vast resources from France and the lowland countries to sustain the campaign? More to the point, can he convince the Army leadership he knows what he is doing without the stunning successes of the Blitzkreig in the West to awe them?

Is it possible there is no Western Entente to be allied with, that Britain and France are still sitting on the fence and never made Poland the guarantees they did OTL? That would be even more in line with Sverdlov's perception of the nature of Hitler's rise to power. Could Hitler persuade the general staff that victory over the Soviets could be had without his track record and conquests in the West on one hand--but also with no war behind them in the west on the other?

If anyone wants to suggest it might be possible but irrational and unlikely, that Hitler surely would seek to control Europe before taking on the whole USSR--I would have to agree that all the evidence points that way. And Hitler attacking in the East while still fending off a mobilized and hostile Entente in the West would be ASB foolhardy!

However--the Germans did well against the Russians in the first war, conquering vast swathes of Russian Imperial territory and gaining far more from the Bolsheviks in the negotiations at Brest-Litovsk. Hitler may be mistaken and arrogant to underestimate the Red Army and to suppose the Russians will simply collapse, but he may not be the only German thinking that way! Hitler certainly is capable of ASB foolhardiness (though one should remember, he got crazier as time elapsed, initial successes inflated him and then later failures filled him with fury and despair). As to the notion that the General Staff would simply take him out in a coup if he did something too stupid too soon--well, some of them did try OTL. We have the word of a number of surviving generals that they were considering it during the Czech crisis. But aside from the possibility that the latter is self-serving nonsense (for what it's worth I suppose they were mostly telling the truth) we also know, these coup attempts were quashed pretty effectively by the Nazi loyalists.

So, it may be stupid but we can't rule out Hitler trying and crushing all resistance in Germany. I'm not sure the idea that Britain and France are not only sitting it out but actually aiding the Reich in their attack eastward can be ruled out either.:eek:
 

Some things to consider:

Hitler comes to power in 1932, giving him an extra year to build up. (Obviously the buildup is somewhat different ITTL but an extra year can't hurt)

Hitler's strategy is going to known as Ostpolitik. Without giving too much away Ostpolitik is based on the Nazi obsession with race. Sverdlov's Jewishness plays into Hitler's hatreds and magnifies them. Hitler would probably fear that Sverdlov was going to attack him while Germany is busy with the West. Thus, he wants to secure his eastern flank. To that end we may see Hitler trying to gain allies in Eastern Europe.

Sverdlov's assumption that the West is working with Hitler is a major blindspot. It will lead to some bad decisions. I have already hinted that the Indian Communists will turn violent, which will anger the British and lead to more hostility.

Finally just a quick outline of the next few updates:
  • military reform is next
  • an alternate Xi'an Incident
  • fallout from the Xi'an Incident/start of Second Sino-Japanese War
  • India
  • Appeasment
 
I hadn't considered that Hitler had most of year more in power; since his actions were the major drivers of events in Europe in the 1930s we might indeed then see everything advanced a year. And the British imperialist/conservative factions being extremely irate with Soviet-backed international Communism (indeed an ATL version with a stronger emphasis on Third World revolution--which puts not just India but the whole Empire squarely in the crosshairs) could have some grim effects too, especially if the general public is pulled rightward with the elites on this. I don't have too keen a knowledge on whether there was any anti-imperialist sentiment to speak of in the British general public in the interwar years. Guessing, I suppose that while Labour probably had a broad platform agreement that imperial policy was fraught with injustices and in dire need of reform, the average Labour voter's sentiment would be that the right thing to do would be to reform imperial policy, not cut the Empire loose. Even very militant workers would probably feel deep down that their jobs could only suffer if the Empire contracted, and dealt with any guilt that radical leftist critiques would burden them with by the notion that a reformed and more democratic Empire would be good for the colonial subjects as well as the colonizers. So Sverdlov's ideological focus on the colonial subjects rising up and seizing control of their own countries on their own (guided by Leninist revolutionary policy of course) would tend to make British Communism somewhat more marginal than it was OTL, and sharpen the line between proper Third Internationalists and the older-school Second International thinking that would surely tend to dominate the Labour Party; the latter might be somewhat more tightly defined around an alternate ideology of reformist liberation through gradual democratic processes that however assumes the Empire does stay together. Therefore there might even be less sentiment in favor of simply letting India go, since everyone would understand the Raj is the cornerstone of the whole British imperial system. With more support in Britain for hanging on there and less for cutting loose, the conservative imperialists would hold higher cards in the British political game.

Which does not automatically mean the British can hold on to India, particularly if a strong Indian Communist movement manages to really upset imperial order there--they might be repressed, and with broader support in Britain and elsewhere in the "white" Commonwealth than would be plausible for a given level of violence OTL, but their dead would be martyrs and the survivors would have street cred. Enough to divert support from Gandhi's Congress movement? I don't know. Also to consider is the divergences in interest between Hindu and Muslim independence movements; as atheists, the Communists might offer in their platform better hopes of Indian unity--particularly if they develop a soft line on religion that encourages Indians of any level of piety to join them, but emphasizes that their policy is one of secular governance and that all peoples of all religions would become comrade citizens alike. This is more likely to be offensive to Hindu conservatives of course, and might bias the Party toward Indians of Muslim background since Islam emphasizes human equality.

I'm way out on a speculative limb there! I hope you have someone who knows India and its history and societies really well advising you on the probabilities and prospects of a Leninist movement in India, and what line it would take on traditional Indian religions.

Anyway I would still expect that Britain would still have some forthright and outspoken Communists, as it did OTL. Perhaps though the Soviet security agencies, whatever initials they might have that decade, would have a harder time recruiting the upper-class idealists they did OTL. Some of them, probably, but less of them.

The sharper divide might not work out as a simple shrinking of the radical left and a drive of the middle leftists to the right though. I gather than OTL Tory leaders like Baldwin and Chamberlain retained a lot of working-class support because of pragmatic social policies in the context of the Depression. Conceivably an Imperial crisis of rule, in empowering the more conservative thinkers, might cause Tory policy to be less sensitive. (Perhaps for instance instead of supporting a tolerable level of welfare support, the Colonel Blimp types would use the employment crisis to try to drive men into the Army or Navy). Combined with a strong resolution to keep power out of "irresponsible" leftist hands, Britain might take on a distinctly authoritarian character in the '30s--a trend that would hardly set them apart from the general drift of Europe that decade. In these circumstances, perhaps the radical left would actually pick up recruits as Britons who OTL felt confident they could all "muddle through" together now feel that they are forced to pick a side, and the good positions on the right-wing side are all taken already.

Then there is France to consider. I fancied perhaps I had some clue as to the possibilities for Britain; with French society and politics I'm as much at sea as trying to second-guess India.:p The same conflict between a Third-World liberation focus of the Communist International and the bread-and-butter interests of the majority of French citizens exists as in Britain; France is the number two colonial imperial power and Algeria in particular is both very sensitive and very near and important to metropolitan French society. Indochina, as we know, also has its issues simmering, and the question of French power and glory based on her vast African holdings is just as dependent on the resolution of those keystone holdings as Britain's is on India.

Heck, even the Dutch are going to be pretty peeved at Sverdlov's line, what with Indonesia being the main basis of their claim to be any sort of first-rate (well anyway second-string) world power.

The effect on US relations should be considered too. On one hand it is fashionable still in many circles of the USA in this era to look askance at Britain's empire (less so to hold the French empire against them--in many ways US popular culture in the interwar years, at least OTL, was Francophiliac) and so their troubles might bring some smug smiles in the USA.

But the circles of serious power, the owners of large capitalist fortunes and their more diligent servants, would feel the threat that Communist organization of "the wretched of the Earth" quite keenly. US soft power would be infiltrating into a stronger, nearer to controlling interest, in a lot of the nominally independent Third World in this period. And while they might have competitive interests regarding the British and French imperial spheres in the sense that they'd like to see them cut loose and opened up to indirect Yankee domination too, in the short run anyway they'd recognize the great powers of Europe as their colleagues in the greater global capitalist system--for India to cut loose and British and French power in Asia and Africa to dissolve in the context of vague nationalism might be an opportunity for Yankee involvement (offset by costs of likely chaos) but for these territories to be captured by radical Communists determined to control the manner of development of their own resources--that benefits no one who matters in their eyes.

What you seem to be foreshadowing here then is a stark sharpening of the left-right conflict all across the developed world. I can conceive of some nations, possibly the US, possibly France, veering leftward at least somewhat rather than rightward--but the monied ruling classes would very likely panic and do something drastic.

It certainly has implications for other stuff I've brought up too--the Spanish Civil War for instance. I don't know how likely that would be to be butterflied completely, but in addition to Soviet aid and aid from leftist international volunteer brigades, I gather the Republican side OTL relied very heavily on French aid. If France is driven rightward, perhaps even if Sverdlov put forth more aid than OTL Stalin did and the Communist faction in Spain worked hard to build a broad and united front rather than trying to take it over and purge it, they still might be dead in the water without French help. Again you'd need a proper student of that Civil War to guide you here--and perhaps the whole crisis would be butterflied away anyway.

So the least dark prospect I see here is that Britain and France both remain on the whole liberal and perhaps even more strongly under more or less Socialist influence, but probably reject and condemn the Soviet approach. A worse possibility would be if both Britain and France come under the power of a rightist clique that manipulates democracy or suspends it completely to stay in power, and uses the manipulative powers of the state alongside powerful private channels to propagandize the broad public, and repress those who don't seem to be listening.

Before I sink too deeply into despair regarding Western Europe though, we should not forget that neither Britain nor France wants to see Hitler too triumphant either. It is a commonplace that British policy was constantly guided by the maxim they needed to build up counterbalances to any single power becoming too strong in Europe; if Hitler rules to the Urals, western Europe as a whole is in grave peril. The French of course were quite frankly fearful of a revived and renewed Germany on almost any terms, keenly aware that population statistics were against them and the Germans had scores to settle with them.

And unless both liberal Great Powers succumbed to a rather far-fetched authoritarian regime, both remain democracies in which viewpoints that disagree strongly with conservative reaction had voices and publics. The Communist Party would probably be weaker than OTL in both if a liberal regime still holds, but moderate left-wing parties would be quite strong. Therefore there could hardly be an alignment and coordination of interests as sweeping and frank as existed OTL between Hitler and Stalin during the Berlin-Moscow pact period. Anglo-French opposition to the Reich might be suspended and neutralized in the morass of party politics, but neither government could mobilize their respective nations to give a lot of active material support to Hitler's crusade. (Rich private citizens might be in a position to donate substantial amounts to be sure). The picture changes if one or both go down a repressive road, but then part of that change would be the rise of radical revolutionary sentiment underground I suppose--therefore it seems less likely to happen.

Similarly in the USA--the capitalist ruling class remains the dominant player, but in considerably poorer repute than has been normal in US history. In addition to the basic capitalist interest in a world without a Communist movement, the American right can mobilize the US racist order as well--the analogy between Communist liberation of the impoverished non-European "South" of the world and a reversal of the US racial hierarchy will be pretty bluntly obvious to everyone. But this two is a double-edged sword in a decade where the capitalist system is literally bankrupt; without the softening effect of New Deal unity against "fear itself" too much reactionary aggression can perhaps call forth a left-wing radicalism that OTL Americans could hardly credit possible. This is exactly what Sverdlov's doctrines are meant to cause and these possibilities are what it is based on, of course.

So it seems that broadly speaking, Sverdlov's fears about Hitler are a self-fullfilling prophecy; in assuming the capitalist West in general has brought Hitler up precisely to attack the USSR, he has burned his bridges to the "satisfied" world powers that he does not believe will leave the Worker's Republic alone anyhow, by seeking to raise up the mortal enemies to the whole edifice of Western society.

I still don't think that, as much as Hitler really wants to attack and destroy the USSR, that he would actually move to do so unless he thought he had the means of victory well in hand. Can he reasonably think he can dare attack the USSR with German resources alone?

I noticed by the way your suggestion that Hitler may have allies in the East--perhaps ITTL Poland is not attacked at all, but rather opens itself to allowing the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe to pass through, probably with token Polish forces joining them.:eek:

Since Hitler brought all of continental Europe to its knees and then systematically looted it (and not so systematically incorporated it into a continental war machine) and yet still could not break Stalin's Soviet Union, I don't suppose he is going to be able to succeed here, even with all the other governments in the world backing him quietly.
 
Excerpt from The Red Army by H.N. Turteltaub​
Military affairs had always been important to the Soviets, but after the rise of the Nazis it took on a special importance. Ever since the end of the Russian Civil War Soviet military leaders had realized the need for a unified military doctrine; one that would bring together both military power and Bolshevik political ideals. Even before the rise of the Nazis Soviet theorists were divided into two camps. One, under the leadership of Mikhail Tukhachevsky and Vladimir Triandafillov, argued that due to the Soviet's large population and economic backwardness the Red Army should stay on offense and quickly destroy the enemy's armies. To do this infantry forces would make a breakthrough and mechanized forces would then drive through, destroy the enemy's reserves, and cut parts of their army off. The other camp, led by Alexander Svechin, argued that the experiences of the First Great War had shown that decisive battles were a thing of the past; instead the Red Army should focus on a war of attrition. They would alternate between offense and defense and wear the enemy down. Frunze, while generally supporting Tukhachevsky's idea, combined what he saw as the best of both theories. The end result was the doctrine of Deep Battle, first put into the Red Army's field regulations in 1933. Deep Battle stressed that in order to win the Red Army would have to break the enemy's ability to fight. To that end there would be multiple corp and army sized assaults on the enemy, to keep them guessing about where the main strike lay. These diversionary attacks would also serve to overrun enemy defenses and force the enemy to divide up their powerful mobile reserves. The main strike would come in the form of several rifle corps smashing through the front line to reach a tactical objective. Then the Soviet's mobile reserves would exploit the breakthrough; overrunning the enemy's reserves and isolating and encircling their units. On the defense there would be several lines of infantry that the enemy would have to get through. This would wear them down to the point where a counterattack by the mobile reserves would force them back.​
-​
Frunze then set about creating an army that could embody the principles of Deep Battle. His first move was to reorganize the High Command. Until this point there were two high commands: the Revolutionary Military Council, which handled military affairs, and the Labor and Defense Council, which marshaled resources for the war. Frunze essentially merged both into the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces (Vykomsovos). The Vykomsovos was composed of the Narkom of Military and Navy Affairs, the Chief of Staff, the Commanders-in-Chief of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, the heads of the OGPU and Gosplan, and Sverdlov, Kirov, and another civilian adviser. The goal was to coordinate civilian and military affairs, efficiently allocate resources, and make certain that the Party controlled the Army. Frunze also reintroduced personal ranks including the new categories of: Kombrig (brigade commander), Komdiv (division commander), Komcor (corp commander), Komandarm (army commander of either first or second rank), and Komsov (Soviet Commander). [1] This was the highest rank in the Red Army and was initially held by 5 men: Frunze, Tukhachevsky, Triandafillov, Svechin, and Vasily Blyukher. In 1939 they were joined by Konstantin Rokossovsky and Boris Shaposhnikov. The lower levels of command also changed. Believing that “The best commander has an iron spine and a Marxist heart” Frunze overhauled the military education system. For many the first step was the Mikhail Frunze Military Academy. To enter one had to be between 25-32 years old, be ranked anywhere from sergeant to senior lieutenant, and pass a series of rigorous tests. Once there they drilled relentlessly, taught subjects ranging from military affairs to mathematics, and (to discourage Bonapartism) instilled with absolute loyalty to the Party. Those who passed came out as either captains or majors [2] and usually went back into service or studied at various specialized academies (such as the Valerian Kubyshev Military Engineering Academy). On June 1st, 1935 the General Staff Academy was reopened to accept the best and the brightest commanders. The Academy was for polkovniks (Colonels) to kombrigs. Admissions to the General Staff Academy was incredibly competitive; less than 5% of those who applied were accepted. The course focused on commanding armies, logistics, and strategy. There were plenty of lectures on Marxism, but it was assumed that anyone who had gotten this far had been instilled with Bolshevik virtues.​
-​
The other part of the army reforms was mechanization. The already existing T-26 light tank and the BT series of cavalry tanks were ordered in ever larger numbers. The T-26 was the backbone of the Soviet tank force in the 1930s. They were some of the best tanks of the interwar period, as demonstrated by their successes in the Spanish Civil War [2]. The main problems were the light armor and the fact that the machine guns tended to overheat. Unfortunately for the Soviets their two best tanks, the T-34 medium tank and the Vladimir Lenin heavy tank, [3] were not ready until the eve of the Second Great War, so there were too few of them to make a difference in the early battles. The massive production of tanks also created problems. Tank production was paramount, as a result trucks and spare parts were not produced in near enough numbers. Unfortunately many tanks were worn down due to poor road quality and poor maintenance. When the Germans invaded in 1940 many tanks broke down in the first few months.​
-​
Excerpt from The Terror State by Mikhail Gorbachev​
Starting in 1936 the Bolsheviks began to reorganize the OGPU. Sverdlov was increasingly hostile to OGPU chief Genrikh Yagoda, mainly due to the latter's corruption (he embezzled enough money to pay for, in his words, “2000 roses and orchids,” and redecorations for his four houses) and sexual perversions, which shocked the prudish Sverdlov. As their relationship cooled Yagoda began to panic. He knew that his corruption and various other illegal activities could land him in the Gulag, where he was unlikely to survive. Sometime in 1935 Yagoda decided to keep abreast of Sverdlov's plans, mainly so he could flee if the need arose. To do this he bugged the offices of Sverdlov, Frunze, Kirov, the Politburo, and the Central Committee. This was a fatal mistake; when on May 25th, 1936 he was arrested on corruption charges the arresting officers discovered pages of notes, which led them to the bugs. Originally Sverdlov was just going to imprison Yagoda for a year or two and then let him live his life, with the possibility of readmission into the Party, but the discovery of the bugs terrified him. Convinced that Yagoda was a spy Sverdlov ordered the OGPU to discover who he was working for and if there were any co-conspirators. The main agent assigned to the case was Nikolai Yezhov. Yezhov was a sadistic killer and depraved psychopath who would later become one of the most infamous traitors in Russian history. For now he contented himself with breaking Yagoda. He did his job too well; after five days Yagoda, who had been tortured so horribly that neither his legs nor his right eye worked anymore, died. When Sverdlov heard this he was furious. Yezhov was demoted to deputy director of the Minsk OGPU, and the official line about Yagoda was that he had been sent to help Xinjiang leader Sheng Shicai under an assumed name. His death was finally acknowledged after the Second Great War; it was declared that Yezhov had murdered him.​
-​
While this was going on Sverdlov decided to reorganize the OGPU. The new People's Commissariat of Internal Security (NKVB) was a secret police agency par excellence. It had three primary branches: the regular forces (police, firefighters, etc.), foreign intelligence, and the political police. The political police were the most feared agency in the Soviet Union. Nickname Os'minog (Russian for octopus), [4] it operated a vast network of agents and informers (the precise number is unknown) to spy on any suspected “enemies of the people.” Those declared enemies of the people were ground up in the gruesome machinery of repression. People were dragged out of their homes and sent to be tortured. Afterwords they were sentenced; for the majority this meant the Gulag. For the majority of people the Gulag was a black hole. Inmates were forbidden from corresponding with the outside world, and often families were not informed as to the fate of their loved ones.​
-​
The man given control of this system was Matvei Berman. Despite his bourgeois roots (he was the son of a Jewish brick factory owner) Berman was one of the most dedicated Chekists. He rose through the ranks of the OGPU thanks to his impressive work ethic and seeming lack of ambition outside of serving the Party; eventually becoming director of the Gulag. Along with Naftaly Frenkel (a prisoner turned Chekist) he created the infamous eat-as-you-work system to squeeze the maximum amount of work out of the prisoners; they also worked together on the White-Sea Baltic Canal, for which Berman received the Order of Lenin in 1933. This brought Berman to the attention of Sverdlov, who met him and was suitably impressed. “This is a man with strong potential” he told Kirov. Berman soon proved his strength in both domestic policing and foreign intelligence; aiding the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War and later throwing partisan units at the Germans.​
-​
[1] The equivalent OTL rank would be Marshal of the Soviet Union​
[2] The Spanish Civil War goes similar to IOTL. The Popular Front initially doesn't include the Communists, but they join the government after the rebellion. The French refuse to give aid after the Communists join, same with the British and the Soviets become the only European country to give the Republicans aid. In February 1940 Madrid falls; the rest of the Republicans fall by March. A junta made up of Franco, Mola, and several other generals (Mola doesn't die ITTL but Sanjurjo still does) takes over Spain.​
[3] The Vladimir Lenin heavy tank is ITTL's equivalent to the Kliment Voroshilov heavy tank.​
[4] A reference to it having its tentacles in many places.​
 
How is training among lower levels ITTL?

Tank production was paramount, as a result trucks and spare parts were not produced in near enough numbers. Unfortunately many tanks were worn down due to poor road quality and poor maintenance. When the Germans invaded in 1940 many tanks broke down in the first few months.

What about radios? The lack of them were a pretty big handicap on Soviet performance IOTL.

Even with that consideration, it looks like the German invasion is in for a hard time (especially without the resources imported from the USSR IOTL, which will put a crimp on their ability to build-up).
 
How is training among lower levels ITTL?
Better than IOTL, but still not to the same level Western armies.


What about radios? The lack of them were a pretty big handicap on Soviet performance IOTL.

Even with that consideration, it looks like the German invasion is in for a hard time (especially without the resources imported from the USSR IOTL, which will put a crimp on their ability to build-up).

They still lack radios (I forgot about that:eek:). Germany is definitely not in for a fun time.;)
 
Excerpt from The Second Sino-Japanese War by Barbara Tuchman​
By 1936 the relationship between the the Chinese Communist Party and the Kuomintang had become incredibly complex. For a decade they had been fighting and several times the Communists had nearly been destroyed. However Japanese attacks on Manchuria and Inner Mongolia made it clear to all but the most obtuse Chinese that war was coming. As a result calls for a “united front against Japanese aggression” emerged in both parties. The main supporters of the united front were Zhang Xueliang and Yang Hucheng (KMT), as well as Wang Ming and Zhou Enlai (CCP). However the leaders of both sides opposed any attempt at a united front. After failing to destroy the CCP during the Long March Chiang Kai-Shek had dreamed of a final offensive that would reunify China. But Japanese aggression and his own machinations of his warlord allies had forced Chiang to put this off. For his part Mao viewed Chiang as “a traitor to the nation” and suspected that any attempt to ally with the KMT would end like it had in the 1920s: with the Communists being betrayed and slaughtered by the KMT. Mao disagreed with his Soviet backers. Soviet leader Yakov Sverdlov wanted to keep Japan bogged down in China and felt that, without a united front, the CCP (still rebuilding from the Long March) would be vulnerable to a Japanese attack, and have nowhere to retreat without being attacked by the KMT as well.
-
On December 4th, 1936 Chiang took a fateful trip to Xi'an. He met with warlords Zhang Xueliang and Yang Hucheng to discuss an offensive against the Communists. But what Zhang and Yang wanted to discuss was the united front. This wasn't a surprise: Zhang had suffered much at the hands of the Japanese. His father, the Manchurian warlord Zhang Zuolin, had been assassinated by the Japanese in 1928, and Zhang Xueliang was forced out of Manchuria a few years later. There was also a political element: neither of the warlords were members of Chiang's Whampoa Clique and they feared that Chiang was using the new campaign to fatally weaken their armies; improving his own position. Chiang politely refused the offer, but Zhang and Yang kept persisting. Finally after several days of fruitless negotiations Yang and Zhang decided to force Chiang's hand. So in the early morning hours of the 12th armed men burst into Chiang's house and placed a startled Chiang under arrest. The two warlords then sent a message to the CCP requesting a delegation to discuss a united front.
-
No one was sure how to react. In Nanjing the top KMT leaders met to figure out their options. With the exception of Yang Hucheng on one involved ever publicly talked about what happened. This has left historians to search through a library's worth of letters, reports, and diaries to determine what they were thinking. For decades it was assumed the He Yingqin was a strong advocate for military action. One of Chiang's top generals He was moderately pro-Japanese and virulently anti-Communist. However several newly discovered documents show the He slightly disagreed with military action. Instead junior officers in the ultra-secret Blue Shirts Society were the strongest advocates for using force. Meanwhile Madame Chiang had become increasingly convinced that the KMT would never be able to rescue her husband. Thus on December 15th she sent her adviser William Henry McDonald to Xi'an to negotiate. McDonald and Zhang Xueliang had a personal history; McDonald had even managed to cure Zhang of his opium addiction. In between these two views were most of the warlords. Of these the most powerful was Li Zongren, one of the leaders of the New Guangxi Clique. Li and Chiang had a complicated relationship. Li had been one of Chiang's top generals and had helped conquer the Northern warlords during the Northern Expedition, but during the Central Plains War of the early '30s Li had been one of Chiang's biggest enemies. Now Chiang sent a telegram to Zhang and Yang reprimanding them, but not going so far as to rule out the possibility of a united front.
-
We know much more about what the Communists' decision making process, mostly due to Yang's memoirs. With the exception of Zhou Enlai the top CCP leaders wanted to execute Chiang, but as Mao said to Zhang Xueliang “We must take care not to anger our Russian friends.” What Mao feared more than anything was the Soviets cutting off aid or overthrow him. In 1936 Mao's control of the CCP was far from absolute, although he had won a large amount of respect and support during the Long March there were plenty of other Chinese Communists that could take his place. So Mao sent a telegram to Moscow asking for directions. It was at this time that Moscow went silent. Sverdlov didn't know what to do. On the one hand he still supported the idea of a united front, but on the other he realized that the CCP would never get another chance to “cut the head off the snake.” For the next several days (December 13-18th) there were dozens of meetings in the Politburo to determine what to do with China. Narkom of Military and Navy Affairs Mikhail Frunze came up with a solution. Killing Chiang would almost certainly create a rift in the KMT. Even Chiang only managed to control the various warlords with great difficulty, and no other figure commanded the same level of respect or had his unique mixture of military skills and political cunning. With the KMT split the CCP could retreat in the face of Japanese aggression and the various KMT factions wouldn't have the power to defeat them. Frunze also proposed putting out feelers for a Soviet-Japanese neutrality pact. Despite the fact that Germany and Japan had signed the Anti-Comintern Pact just a month before Frunze felt that, given enough economic incentive, the Japanese would abandon the Germans. “It is the nature of the Fascists and the Capitalists to betray each other. As soon as one side feels that a betrayal would grant them an advantage they will step all over each other.” To that end the Soviets would offer to provide the Japanese oil, food, coal, and other war materials at below market rates in exchange for a promise of non-aggression. At the same time the Soviets would supply the CCP (eventually this expanded to the KMT) with weapons and supplies to keep the Japanese bogged down in China. Sverdlov eventually came to approve of this deal, and on December 19th he sent a telegram to Mao saying “Eliminate Chiang Kai-Shek.” [1]
-
On December 18th two KMT armies, under the command of He Yingqin, were sent north to pressure Zhang and Yang to free Chiang. Some historians have state that this sealed his fate, but in reality the Soviets and the CCP had decided it before hearing the news. On the early morning of the 19th Chiang was marched out into the middle of a field. There he was forced to kneel and asked if he had any last words, to which he responded with a curt “No.” He was shot once at the base of the skull, Soviet style. There controversy over the fate of his body. Yang Hucheng's memoirs state that the body was cremated and the ashes scattered in a nearby stream. This conflicts with a letter from Zhou Enlai to Peng Duhai. In the letter Zhou mentions that if Peng continues his dissent from Mao's position “you will end up buried with a bunch of cholera victims like Chiang.” This version is supported by the fact that there had been a cholera outbreak in Xi'an where around 50 people died. But in 1995 a farmer uncovered the remains of a well. Inside of the well was a body, shot at the base of the skull. The Chinese government confiscated the body for unknown reasons. [2] The death of Chiang left China vulnerable to Japanese aggression and created the conditions for another round of brutal civil war.
-
[1] This agreement was signed in late August 1937. Japanese units in the Kwantung Army attacked the Soviets in May 1938, leading to the Battle of the Amur River. This was a decisive Soviet victory and the Japanese were forced to reaffirm the nonaggression pact, but had to pay market prices for all goods from there on out.
[2] The most bizarre theory comes from fringe US politician Lyndon LaRouche, who declared that the CCP had given Chiang's body to the Soviets "who brought him back to life only to transfer his brain into a robot's body, creating a race of robot-men."
 
Excerpt from China after Chiang by Banjiu Hali​
For the Communists killing Chiang was their Rubicon. Facing He Yingqin's armies Zhang Xueliang and Yang Hucheng moved their troops southeast into the Qin Mountains. For centuries the Qin Mountains had been the natural division between northern and southern China. There were only four mountain passes, and this is where Zhang and Yang placed their 50,000 men. The Battle of Xi'an, as it came to be known, was a horrible ordeal. Temperatures hovered just above freezing and the mountains were blanketed by heavy rain. The result was described by one soldier: “You only felt two things: cold and wet. You felt them in your hands, hands that were frozen to the gun. You felt them as you struggled to wolf down a bowl of rice before they turned it into a cold soup. You even felt them when you dreamed; the only dreams I ever had were of being held down in a tub of ice water.” From December 28th to January 15th the two sides battered each other. He's armies were three times the size of Zhang and Yang's, but every attack ended horribly. The rains had turned the mountain passes to mud and made it virtually impossible to move artillery. Without artillery He's men had to storm the narrow mountain passes where they were cut by machine guns, or try to seize the hills and peaks above the passes, taking heavy losses. But Zhang and Yang were also in a bind. The small amount of artillery He was able to get to the battle was used with devastating effect, the battles for the hills and peaks left them with heavy casualties, and they were running low on ammunition. By the 15th they were about to break, when He's armies suddenly retreated. Even so Zhang and Yang decided to retreat to Yan'an to regroup and join forces with the PLA.
-
To understand why He Yingqin retreated one has to understand the fractious politics of pre-war China. Even a the height of his power Chiang struggled to tame the various warlords and politicians. As a general rule the warlords were brutal, corrupt, and conniving men who stabbed each other in the back at the drop of a hat. It was a testament to Chiang's military and political skills that he was able to bring these men in line; either destroying them or making them swear allegiance to the Kuomintang. But with Chiang gone the various warlords, generals, and politicians now turned on each other. The main contender for power was Chiang's old rival Wang Jingwei. Born in Guangdong province and educated in Japan Wang had been confidant of KMT founder Sun Yat-Sen and, after his death, the leader of the left wing of the KMT until Chiang defeated him several times Wang's politics veered sharply to the right. Wang had the support of He Yingqin (who had invited him back to China during the Xi'an Incident), the Muslim Ma Clique, Feng Yuxiang (as much as Feng, who was known as the Betrayal General, could be relied on to support anyone), and General Tang Shengzhi (who Wang promised the governorship of Hunan in exchange for his support). But to guarantee that he would be able to hold power Wang turned to the New Guangxi Clique, in particular Li Zongren. The New Guangxi Clique was the most powerful of all of the warlord factions and Li Zongren was the most well known and popular of the three Guangxi warlords. Li was a brilliant general and administrator, with no small amount of pride and ambition. To convince Li to support him Wang offered Li $100,000 (about $1.7 million today) and the governorship of Guangdong; making Li even more powerful. With this deal Wang Jingwei declared himself Lingxiu (roughly leader or chief) on January 1st, 1937. [1]
-
Almost as soon as Wang came to power a conspiracy emerged to destroy him. The conspiracy started with three men: T.V. Soong, H.H. Kung, and Yan Xishan. Soong and Kung were not military men, instead they were the brothers-in-law of Sun Yat-Sen and Chiang Kai-Shek. These connections had made them powerful and wealthy men (Kung was possibly the richest man in China). In contrast Yan Xishan was the warlord of Shanxi, one of the poorest regions in China. Despite this he managed to fend off Yuan Shikai, rival warlords, and Chiang Kai-Shek. He and Kung were longtime allies, with Kung even helping protect Yan after his conflicts with Chiang. In addition to his military experience Yan was also very prominent (he had even been on the cover of Time magazine) and had worked tirelessly to modernize Shanxi; all of these traits made him the perfect person to take over after Wang fell. They were joined on the 8th by Chen Cheng. Chen was one of Chiang's closest generals who had helped Chiang defeat several of his enemies. Then on January 10th Wang made one of the greatest mistakes in his short reign. On the surface of it was a relatively uncontroversial: the warlord Liu Wenhui pledged his support for Wang, and Wang publicly thanked him. But Liu Wenhui was a weak warlord, having been pushed to a small, poor area by his nephew, Sichuan warlord Liu Xiang. Liu Xiang became concerned that his uncle and Wang were plotting to oust him and so was very receptive to Chen Cheng's offer to join the conspiracy. They also approached Li Zongren. There were fears that Li, who Wang had given Guangdong shortly after taking power, might reject them outright, but he proved supportive and agreed to join them in exchange for $100,000 and control of Jiangxi. With this done on January 14th the coup started. Chen Cheng (who had taken command of Shanghai in the days after Chiang's death but before Wang's rise) sent thousands of troops to Nanjing. They were joined by several units of soldiers and police who's commanders had been bribed by Kung and Soong. They quickly overwhelmed Wang's forces; forcing him to flee to Wuhan, where Feng Yuxiang was in command.
-
Both sides expected Li Zongren and the New Guangxi Clique to join them, but Li had plans of his own. Like Yuan Shikai with the Qing he used an aliment as an excuse for inaction- in his case hemorrhoids. The other Guangxi warlords refused to move, claiming that Li needed them to manage Guangxi and Guandong while he was ill. It was clear to everyone that Li was plotting something, but nobody wanted to confront him for fear of pushing the New Guangxi Clique into the other side's arms. By mid-May 1937 neither side had a clear advantage. The area between Wuhan and Nanjing looked like a battlefield from the First Great War. The massive trench system (which was to be incredibly useful during the Japanese attack on Wuhan) and the no man's land between them looked virtually the same as when it had first been built, save for the mass graves and shell craters that now littered the landscape. In the north He Yingqin and Yan Xishan's armies fought over the same villages every few weeks. In Sichuan Liu Xiang had defeated and imprisoned Liu Wenhui, but was barely holding off Tang Shengzhi. It was in this environment that Li decided to make his move. His troops were already mobilized and on May 19th he attacked. For the next 19 days the armies of the New Guangxi Clique smashed through their enemies, almost reaching Wuhan. They were helped by the defections of Liu Xiang and Shandong warlord Han Fuju. (Ironically the Betrayal General stayed loyal to Wang Jingwei throughout). The whole world was shocked by this. Policy analysts wrote papers on the new Chinese order, the Japanese moved troops to the China-Manchukuo border, and The New York Times even ran the headline “Li Zongren: Chiang Kai-Shek's Heir.”
-
Had it not been for fighting at the Marco Polo Bridge Li Zongren may well have become leader of China, possibly even defeating the Communists. Japanese troops held several areas around Beiping and on June 6th one of these troops went missing. The Japanese demanded the right to search for him, but the Chinese refused. Even though the soldier eventually turned up angry Japanese soldiers attacked the town of Wanping; they were repulsed. The next day fighting broke out on the Marco Polo Bridge. The new infuriated the Japanese government. Army Chief of Staff Kan'in Kotohito even declared “The Chinese are unable to control their soldiers. In fact I would say that, in view of the current chaos in China, we must take decisive action to prevent both further incidents and a Communist takeover.” There were many factors that caused the Japanese to invade, but perhaps the biggest was the fear of reunification. Despite the conclusion of the majority of historians that Li's armies would have slowed down due to overstretched supply lines and heavy casualties it had suffered in June 1937 it seemed like Li was going to become the next Chiang Kai-Shek. Japanese military leaders knew that a divided China would be far easier to take then a united one. To the Emperor they argued that “if we invade now China will fall in three months; if we wait it might take three years.” Time would quickly show that both these estimates were very overoptimistic.
-
After the Japanese invaded the Chinese realized that, if they wanted to have a chance of fending off the invasion, they would have to put aside their differences. This would have been an easier task without Wang Jingwei. Convinced that it was he was the best man to rule China, indeed that China might even be destroyed without him, Wang refused to back down. For what became known as the “Ten Days of Delay and Tragedy” two factions (those who wanted Wang and those who wanted Li Zongren) debated. Wang ultimately lost, but the delay may have led to the fall of Beiping and Tanjin, as well as other Japanese successes in the north. Now leader of China Li began consolidating his power as best he could. Still, it was a deeply divided Chinese government that faced the Japanese invaders.
-
[1] An admirer of European Fascism Wang sought to create a similar type of state in China and "make China the center of the world again."
 

guinazacity

Banned
Great update

In a very unrelated note, every time I see the title on the subscriptions panel I misread it as My imperious chairman and think this is some kind of romance novel.
 
Great update

In a very unrelated note, every time I see the title on the subscriptions panel I misread it as My imperious chairman and think this is some kind of romance novel.

Yakov Sverdlov held Natalia's face in his hands. "Kiss me Comrade" he whispered, "let us surrender to desire and passion." "But are the successor to Lenin, the man chosen to liberate the proletariat from capitalist oppression." she said. "I am just a simple peasant girl, how can I be worthy of sharing your bed?" Sverdlov whispered "It does not matter. In the Soviet Union all are equals and even a simple peasant girl can cool the fire that burns in a Chairman's heart."

For the rest of My Imperious Chairman or 50 Shades of Sverdlov PM me and send $10 to me via Paypal. It is the sexiest romance involving historical figures since Long Nights with Lincoln.
 
Yakov Sverdlov held Natalia's face in his hands. "Kiss me Comrade" he whispered, "let us surrender to desire and passion." "But are the successor to Lenin, the man chosen to liberate the proletariat from capitalist oppression." she said. "I am just a simple peasant girl, how can I be worthy of sharing your bed?" Sverdlov whispered "It does not matter. In the Soviet Union all are equals and even a simple peasant girl can cool the fire that burns in a Chairman's heart."

Huh... somehow I am detecting a bit of the Princess Bride in there.
 
Top