Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in early 1917

After the February revolution,the preovisional government ends the Russia's patricipation in World War?How will World War I end and what will happen to Russia?
 
You would need as new leader someone who wants peace. Peace terms probably would be bit lesser harsh as OTL B-L treaty. If Russia is knocked succesfully out from war,t hen CPs might win the war when Americans aren't yet arrived to Europe.

Russia probably not fell to revolution when PG has finished the war and Russia can begin recovery. But there might be civil war between PG, Communists and tsarist conservative nationalists.
 
This is just not politically possible. Sukhanov, a left-wing "Zimmerwaldist" Menshevik wrote with regret that "During the first weeks the soldiers of Petrograd not only would not listen, but would not permit any talk of peace. They were ready to lift up on their bayonets any uncautious 'traitor' or exponent of 'opening the front to the enemy.'" (Quoted in Adam Ulam, *The Bolsheviks* [New York: Macmillan 1965], p. 325. https://books.google.com/books?id=TdCK1WkconkC&pg=PA325 (See https://books.google.com/books?id=6-D_AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA202 for a slightly different translation.)
 

trajen777

Banned
Russia -
1. Have the food production programs which dramatically increased food production in 1915 - 16 fail
2. Have Soviets take total power vs shared power
3. Have Lenin arrive earlier

Results of the peace :
1. Cortland and Poland to Germany
2. Germans transfer majority of forces west
3. No need for unrestricted warfare - USA stays out
4. Choice A - Attack Italy first drive them to worthless or peace (10 German Divisions) + majority of AH army
5. From here then attack France with German forces (add 1/3 of AH army)
6. Choice B: Attack West --
7. 80% of Germany army - 25 AH army (support and flanks and holding efforts + occupation) Transfer 33% of HA from AH army
8. Train thru winter and spring -- find strategic holes (best would be Amiens )
9. All out effort to take AMIENS - Brit evacuate -- France falls back on Paris --
Peace -- Germany cuts fleet and loses colonies (no way to get at GB) -- France loses Brie coal fields
With Russian rev -- Germany and others take peices of Russia -- Ukraine / Bel./ Finland / Georgia independent - Japan takes much of Siberia -- Ottomans take crimea -- Germany
 
This is just not politically possible. Sukhanov, a left-wing "Zimmerwaldist" Menshevik wrote with regret that "During the first weeks the soldiers of Petrograd not only would not listen, but would not permit any talk of peace. They were ready to lift up on their bayonets any uncautious 'traitor' or exponent of 'opening the front to the enemy.'" (Quoted in Adam Ulam, *The Bolsheviks* [New York: Macmillan 1965], p. 325. https://books.google.com/books?id=TdCK1WkconkC&pg=PA325 (See https://books.google.com/books?id=6-D_AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA202 for a slightly different translation.)


Though as Ulam notes a bit further on, a demand for all land to be distributed among the peasants would have achieved a similar result, as the peasant soldiers would have rushed back to their villages so as not to miss out.

The problem there, of course, is that this would have left the government with no bargaining power at the peace table, and allowed Germany to dictate terms. Essentially it was an "all or nothing" situation. The Russian government (whoever they were) had a choice between continuing the war or else disbanding the army and signing whatever treaty the Germans chose to offer them - there was no middle way.

For an earlier Brest-Litovsk, you need an earlier revolution. If the Tsar falls around October 1916, and the rot sets in a bit faster than OTL, the Bolsheviks could perhaps gain power by March, and sign a peace similar to OTLs. This could have the ironic result of seeing the Tsar overthrown in the "October Revolution", and Lenin seizing power in the February one, rather than vice versa.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
After the February revolution,the preovisional government ends the Russia's patricipation in World War?How will World War I end and what will happen to Russia?
The February revolution actually in many way restored Russian morale for a little while. The Kornilov offensive of course crushed it completely. But after the February Revolution the cries for peace went silent for some time (except from the Bolsheviks).
 
The February revolution actually in many way restored Russian morale for a little while. The Kornilov offensive of course crushed it completely. But after the February Revolution the cries for peace went silent for some time (except from the Bolsheviks).

Kornilov offensive? Don't you mean the Brusilov offensive, which went very well at first, before the Germans once again came to A-H's aid (honestly, the Russians did quite well during the war against any CP that wasn't Germany). Kornilov tried to overthrow the Provisional Government in a coup, which I'm sure didn't do any wonders for morale either, admittedly.
 
Kornilov offensive? Don't you mean the Brusilov offensive, which went very well at first, before the Germans once again came to A-H's aid (honestly, the Russians did quite well during the war against any CP that wasn't Germany). Kornilov tried to overthrow the Provisional Government in a coup, which I'm sure didn't do any wonders for morale either, admittedly.
I think he actually meant the Kerensky Offensive. There was also the Kornilov Affair, where Alexander Kerensky (who ordered the aforemented offensive) had to arm the bolsheviks to prevent Lavr Kornilov from taking over the russian government, so maybe it still counts.
 
I think he actually meant the Kerensky Offensive. There was also the Kornilov Affair, where Alexander Kerensky (who ordered the aforemented offensive) had to arm the bolsheviks to prevent Lavr Kornilov from taking over the russian government, so maybe it still counts.

That's right, it was the Kerensky Offensive, though Brusilov commanded it. I confused it with the Brusilov Offensive of 1916, in which Russia actually won, but at a tremendous loss of life.
 
Though as Ulam notes a bit further on, a demand for all land to be distributed among the peasants would have achieved a similar result, as the peasant soldiers would have rushed back to their villages so as not to miss out.

The problem there, of course, is that this would have left the government with no bargaining power at the peace table, and allowed Germany to dictate terms. Essentially it was an "all or nothing" situation. The Russian government (whoever they were) had a choice between continuing the war or else disbanding the army and signing whatever treaty the Germans chose to offer them - there was no middle way.

For an earlier Brest-Litovsk, you need an earlier revolution. If the Tsar falls around October 1916, and the rot sets in a bit faster than OTL, the Bolsheviks could perhaps gain power by March, and sign a peace similar to OTLs. This could have the ironic result of seeing the Tsar overthrown in the "October Revolution", and Lenin seizing power in the February one, rather than vice versa.

Well, the terms might not be QUITE as harsh as OTL's if you don't see any silly period of "neither war nor peace" on the part of the Russian government that Lenin adopted IOTL. A Kerensky surrender, at the very least, would mean the lines would be those of a Pre-Faustschlag Eastern Front rather than a Post-Faustschlag one. Now, there's no way the Russians would know that in advance, but its still possible. Lenin himself might even be willing to take the peace terms right away in the event of this earlier Revolution, if it takes place while the "Reactionary" forces still control a more or less intact army and the Center-Right wasn't entirely discredited by another long stint of intense warfare (They'd be ruling over the winter; when the activity on the front slowed down, rather than during the main campaigning season)
 
After the February revolution,the preovisional government ends the Russia's patricipation in World War?How will World War I end and what will happen to Russia?

Whether or not this is realistical I'll leave to the others to decide, but in terms of effects it would be pretty major.

Presuming peace is achieved in either February or March, by April or May the Germans will have been able to transfer sufficient forces westwards. This means the Nivelle Offensive is going to be an even worse failure for the Anglo-French, and that the Germans can carry out a major counter-attack in the aftermath that might be able to shatter the French. Presuming that doesn't happen, in the fall at the very least the Italians should be knocked out at Caporetto thanks to the Austro-Hungarians having a large reserve.
 
Well, the terms might not be QUITE as harsh as OTL's if you don't see any silly period of "neither war nor peace" on the part of the Russian government that Lenin adopted IOTL. A Kerensky surrender, at the very least, would mean the lines would be those of a Pre-Faustschlag Eastern Front rather than a Post-Faustschlag one. Now, there's no way the Russians would know that in advance, but its still possible. Lenin himself might even be willing to take the peace terms right away in the event of this earlier Revolution, if it takes place while the "Reactionary" forces still control a more or less intact army and the Center-Right wasn't entirely discredited by another long stint of intense warfare (They'd be ruling over the winter; when the activity on the front slowed down, rather than during the main campaigning season)

But would there still be an intact army once the peasants had been promised the land? Won't they be off to their villages to make sure of getting their cut?
 
But would there still be an intact army once the peasants had been promised the land? Won't they be off to their villages to make sure of getting their cut?

Most likely they would, yes. Its because of that pressure that a Kerensky government might decide to go to the negotiating table reguardless of their personal conviction to continue the war: better to start the negotiations now while the army is at least somewhat intact (I can imagine the flow of peasants back home might be a tad slower in the dead of winter when such peace negotiations would be taking place. Or maybe not, if the general idea becomes one of getting home before planting season. Either way, the total dissolution is not going to be immediate). This would be the result of them trying to undercut the Bolsheviks by pulling the Land and Peace planks out of their platform. If Lenin does it, than he might decide to start negations right away after determining the Germans aren't like to accept peace without annexations, and so similarly tries to get the best deal possible so he can consolidate power at home.

Either way, the fact that when they sit down at the negotiating table the German army is sitting 150 miles further east than it was IOTL is going to have an impact on the exact terms of B-L. That treaty's sheer scope was only really possible because the Germans had demonstrated that they could march virtually unopposed into the Russian heartland, making the new government's vulnerability obvious. Some troops will probably still be on the line for one reason or another; particularly those in combat contact with the Germans, who can't exactly just pack up and walk away without running the risk of getting overrun and captured, so while still negotiating from weakness Russia won't be getting quite as much ripped off.
 
One point. How, if at all, does this impact on events in the US?

If the last week or two of the election campaign is full of newspaper reports of Socialist ministers being appointed, workers' Soviets being set up, and people running around Petrograd waving red flags, might this give the Socialist candidate a modest boost at Wilson's expense - perhaps just enough to tip CA and NH to Hughes?

OTOH, assuming Wilson still wins, would the Russian provisional government be more receptive to his peace note than Nicholas II's was? And would it make any difference?

Also, by March 1917 Britain was already having difficulty raising loans in the US. Do these dry up altogether now that the Entente suddenly look like losers?

Finally, the big one. OTL,, it appears tat Wilson didn't finally make up his mind for war until March 20. In this situation, will he still do so if any US intervention seems likely to come too late, esp if, say, sinkings of the Vigilancia and Healdton are butterflied away?
 
Either way, the fact that when they sit down at the negotiating table the German army is sitting 150 miles further east than it was IOTL is going to have an impact on the exact terms of B-L. That treaty's sheer scope was only really possible because the Germans had demonstrated that they could march virtually unopposed into the Russian heartland, making the new government's vulnerability obvious. Some troops will probably still be on the line for one reason or another; particularly those in combat contact with the Germans, who can't exactly just pack up and walk away without running the risk of getting overrun and captured, so while still negotiating from weakness Russia won't be getting quite as much ripped off.


What happens in the Ukraine? Presumably it will be no keener than OTL on being ruled by the Bolsheviks, so will still declare independence. Will the Germans really resist the temptation to move in?
 
Top