Treaty of Brest-Litovsk is upheld after world one

What if that the eastern European countries had enough time to establish them selves that the ould remain independent to world war 2
 
Wouldn't this leave them in the German sphere? If so, Germany does better economically (a major reason the Nazis rose as the economy sunk) and animosity arises between the Soviets and Weimar(?) preventing any sort of alliance. WWII would likely be the Soviets vs the Allies if it still happens.
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
Wouldn't this leave them in the German sphere? If so, Germany does better economically (a major reason the Nazis rose as the economy sunk) and animosity arises between the Soviets and Weimar(?) preventing any sort of alliance. WWII would likely be the Soviets vs the Allies if it still happens.
The only way the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk is upheld is if Germany wins the war, so there is no Weimar anyways.
 
The only way the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk is upheld is if Germany wins the war, so there is no Weimar anyways.

^This. The Entente can't project the level of power into Eastern Europe they'd need to have a prayer of contesting the Soviets, so you need a Germany with its military and economy intact.
 

BigBlueBox

Banned
^This. The Entente can't project the level of power into Eastern Europe they'd need to have a prayer of contesting the Soviets, so you need a Germany with its military and economy intact.
Even if the Entente could contest the Soviets they wouldn’t because they didn’t care about Belarus and Ukraine anyways.
 
The main POD I could see for this is a Spring Offensive that goes gangbusters for the Germans and causes France to give up outright and Britain to go defensive. Meanwhile the Americans are not willing to play cannon fodder.

Alternately, the Stupid Luck and Happenstance POD of a Verdun win works too.

You get a Bled-Out (white) Peace where essentially Germany gets Eastern Europe and the Allies get all of the colonies.
 
Ukraine is much more fertile and has more resources. Didn't you read my post?
Sure Russia may be weaker after the loss of Ukraine but they would adapt eventually. I am not saying they would be just as strong but they would still be a dominant regional power like today.
 
What if that the eastern European countries had enough time to establish them selves that the ould remain independent to world war 2

Huh? Except for Ukraine, they did remain independent until World War II.

I honestly don't get the OP here. Is it (1) What if the treaty of Brest-Litovsk is upheld because Germany wins the war? If that's the case a lot of things are going to change, way beyond Brest-Litovsk! (For one thing there might not be a World War II, and if there is one it would probably be at a different time than in OTL.) Or is it (2) What if the Entente win but they enforce the Brest-Litovsk boundaries anyway? The answer is that--again except for Ukraine--they actually did enforce borders less favorable to Soviet Russia. (As George Kennan pointed out in Russia and the West Under Lenin and Stalin, "The settlement accepted by the Allies at the end of the Russian Civil War--the arrangement, that is, that prevailed from 1920 to 1939--was considerably less favorable to Russia, territorially, in the Baltic-Polish region than that which the Germans imposed on Russia in 1918 [at Brest-Litovsk].")

So basically this simply comes down to "what if independent Ukraine after 1918?" My answer is that it's hard to see this except with the Germans victorious and propping up Skoropadski as a puppet regime. With an Entente victory, the most you could see would be the Poles establishing Petliura west of the Dnieper as they briefly managed to do in OTL in 1920. And given the way they had overextended themselves, it is hard to see them keeping their gains.
 
Huh? Except for Ukraine, they did remain independent until World War II.
You're forgetting Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan - though not established directly because of the Brest Litovsk treaty, the Treaty of Batum stemmed from it and can be considered a part of the "Brest Litovsk borders".

The Belarusian People's Republic is not chopped liver, either.
 
You're forgetting Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan - though not established directly because of the Brest Litovsk treaty, the Treaty of Batum stemmed from it and can be considered a part of the "Brest Litovsk borders".

The Belarusian People's Republic is not chopped liver, either.

Well, the original post asked "What if that the eastern European countries had enough time to establish them selves" so I confined myself to that area.

As for Belorussia, while it was occupied by German troops, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk did not recognize its independence (unlike Ukraine). Indeed, Germany never recognized the BNR (Bielarúskaja Naródnaja Respublika). What a victorious Germany would have done with it, I don't know--they might have recognized its independence or they might have made it part of a Polish/Lithuanian client state or they might have even given it back to Russia--especially if they overthrew the Bolsheviks and established a Russian puppet state. (In OTL, even when the Kaiser rejected the idea of military intervention against the Bolsheviks in the summer of 1918, he significantly added the words "without foreclosing future opportunities." https://books.google.com/books?id=5mSkxsos488C&pg=PA184 A German victory in the West might provide such an opportunity, given that the Germans were well aware that the Bolsheviks still wanted a revolution in Germany.)
 
Top