USSR grabs western Europe.

[Kongzilla]

I was just wondering what would happen if for some reason the WAllies didn't liberate western Europe for some reason, maybe D-day fails meaning the Soviets do all the work grabbing Germany, Austria, the Lowlands and France.

What does this do for the cold war.

Does this mean Britain and America are more heavily militarized. Do they follow a more anti colonialism route seeing as most of the colonial powers are Communist. Do they push more in Asia continuing to support the KMT and try to Unify Korea, do they re-arm the Japanese.

What is Europe like, does France suffer through a civil war. Does Sweden enter NATO or TTL equivalent. Is Spain and Italy heavily militarized or do they fall to communism post war as well. What's Britain like with Europe Red. Is Italy divided in the Post War world or does it remain like OTL.

Anyway yes, tell me what you think. I am intrigued.

 

[Alternate History Geek]

Does this mean Britain and America are more heavily militarized.

Yes.

Do they follow a more anti colonialism route seeing as most of the colonial powers are Communist.

Probably not, seeing as the colonies (Algeria plus maybe western Libya and French West Africa on the French side, and Spanish Morocco on the Spanish side if Spain goes Communist) would be the seats of the "free" (i.e. non-Communist) governments of said countries, and combining that with the fact that the communist motherlands are likely to support decolonisation... to communist sister republics...

Do they push more in Asia continuing to support the KMT and try to Unify Korea, do they re-arm the Japanese.

Quite possibly, but the KMT already has some serious problems, and unless the US literally forces reform down their throats or gets the US Army fighting in China, the KMT is probably doomed unless CKS has a face-to-face meeting with a small, red-hot lump of metal travelling at several hundred kilometres per hour. Korea can go either way, with increased US determination opposed to increased Communist strength; if China still goes Communist in 1948/1949, Kim's knockout blow might well succeed ITTL. Rearming Japan is possible, but only as an American puppet after utterly wiping out all traces of the previous military.

What is Europe like, does France suffer through a civil war.

If D-Day fails but Dragoon manages to hold on in Provence until the Red Army gets there, then yes, but it would be extremely bloody, for little gain, and would probably see the US-supported Provence government forced to flee to North Africa after a US pullout. Otherwise, no French Civil War.

Does Sweden enter NATO or TTL equivalent.

Probably not, seeing as they would be crushed in any war. Most likely they maintain armed neutrality Switzerland-style, quite possibl with their own independent nuclear arsenal. NATO-equivalent TTL is likely to be just the US, Canada, the UK, Portugal, and Italy, and Portugal would likely only serve as a missile sponge, seeing as it would likely be overrun with the first Communist attack.

Is Spain and Italy heavily militarized or do they fall to communism post war as well.

Spain likely goes Communist as the government is overthrown with Soviet help and Franco either flees to the Balearics or Spanish Morocco, setting up a rump government there, or ends up riddled with bullets in the name of the revolution. Portugal could remain non-Communist, but would likely need continuous US help in putting down Communist revolts. Italy, having already been invaded and occupied, might initially lean left but would slam back to the right with the help of US propaganda once the Soviets tightened their hold on Europe. Who knows, you might even see the Fascists be relegalised and returned to power.

What's Britain like with Europe Red.

She stays an island fortress, quite possibly either turning fascist or being subject to a military junta. More forceful interventions in Ireland are possible, and an insane enough government might try a quasi-permanent reoccupation of the south - which the US might actually accept in this scenario. Say hello to the Troubles times one thousand, Britain - and this time over the whole island, not just the north, and quite possibly with one or more Communist rebel groups in for blood, too, along with the British Army and their supporters, the Republicans, other-odd groups... heck, we might see a few Leinster or Munster separatists throwing their lot into the bloodbath for good balance! Might Britain start using WMDs against the rebels?

Is Italy divided in the Post War world or does it remain like OTL.

Probably OTL, what with Avalanche, the Alps, and all.

 

[von Adler]

The war is going to be substantially longer. Without Normandy, Falaise and the Battle of the Bulge, the Germans will have substantially more resources to throw at the Soviets - it might actually be enough to keep the Soviets out of Romania and the Balkans. If parts of the 5. Panzerarmee that was used at Falaise is made available at Iasi in August 1941, that might keep Romania and its oil in German hands. It means Romanian and Hungarian troops and resources for the Eastern Front as well as Bulgarian for the Balkans.

The Soviets might reach the Rhine, but I seriously doubt they can prevent the Western Allies from taking France once they have pushed to Berlin and destroyed the vast majority of the Heer.

The Allies are already far into Italy - they can push harder there and break out into France over the Alps early to mid-1945 combined with landings in northern and southern France.

The Rhine will probably be where the Soviets and Allies meets.

 

[katchen]

I tend to agree with everything you said except Italy, Alternate History Geek. I think the Russian Army would sweep through Slovenia and into Italy taking everything north of the Gothic Line. Italy would keep Libya and perhaps Eritrea and Italian Somalia.
And we just might see a revived Occitania from Operation Dragoon. Langedoc is as broken country as Appalachia. I could easily see a rump Free French State with it's capital in Marseilles and also including Algeria and French West and Equatorial Africa facing off Thorez and the French Democratic Republic. I could also see a free Kingdom of Denmark with it's capital in Rejkavik (sorry Iceland, no independence) and about a million Danes living in Iceland, Greenland and the Faeroes who fled the Danish People's Republic via Sweden. I have my doubts if Norway could pull off the same trick in Svalbard, though. Spain, definitely a free Spain on Gran Canary and if Portugal is overrun, a Free Portugal capitaled at Funchal, Madiera. And a divided Greece, probably at Corinth Canal. and perhaps Soviet gains in Turkey and Iranian Azerbijan and Kurdestan and maybe even Iraqi Kurdestan.
Possibly a Free Netherlands with it's capital at Willemstad, Curacao or Paramaribo, Suriname. A million or more Dutch refugees who made their break to the UK resettled in Suriname or Dutch New Guinea. Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia either get a European majority or become a polyglot region when the roads and railroads to West Africa open that area up. They do not remain majority Arabic or Berber speaking. Nor does Libya. Nor do they remain majority Muslim either.

 

[Alternate History Geek]

Norway will probably be Finlandised instead of puppetised because it's difficult terrain and probably not worth the trouble. The Soviets might split off the part of Norway from Trondheim north as a puppet state, though. It would probably include Svalbard, thanks to the latter being too inhospitable for anywhere near the population needed for a Free Norwegian Kingdom and thanks to the latter still existing, though Finlandised and reduced somewhat. At most we may see another wave of Norwegian immigrants and an enlargement of the Norwegian communities in the US.

I have a Red Europe scenario with maps somewhere, let me dig it up...

 

[Alternate History Geek]

Here it is.

The 1944 Allied landings in France fail miserably and are pushed back into the sea, but the nation is eventually liberated... by the Red Army...

Thus we have 1950.

Okay, here's the corrected map.

Stalin's Empire, 1970 edition.

Snip

 

[Kongzilla]

Here it is.

I can't see the maps or anything else.

 

[juanml82]

I don't think the Spanish would have the stomach for another civil war after WWII, so maybe Spain remains fascist by default. I think it will be up to whether Franco agrees to ally with the USA or not. If he does, or if the KGB thinks he will, the USSR will try to incite communist revolts or attack Spain.

Regarding Italy, no matter the military borders, communists might win the elections in the American liberated areas if they have the USSR right next to them (so there isn't that much dependence in American aid and trade, thus influencing the elections). If that happens, only a military coup would keep part of Italy in capitalists hands. Italian civil war perhaps?

I'm not quiet sure Britain would be heavily militarized. The Soviets can't walk over the channel, so Alt-Nato forces in Britain would be focused in ships, airplanes and air defence. If there isn't a land border with the communist states, the whole defence policy of Nato and the Warsaw Pact will be changed, with their air forces and navies demanding far more resources than OTL and, overall, there will be less armies stationed in Europe.

 

[Alternate History Geek]

I can't see the maps or anything else.

Try the links.

 

[Alternate History Geek]

I don't think the Spanish would have the stomach for another civil war after WWII, so maybe Spain remains fascist by default. I think it will be up to whether Franco agrees to ally with the USA or not. If he does, or if the KGB thinks he will, the USSR will try to incite communist revolts or attack Spain.

Regarding Italy, no matter the military borders, communists might win the elections in the American liberated areas if they have the USSR right next to them (so there isn't that much dependence in American aid and trade, thus influencing the elections). If that happens, only a military coup would keep part of Italy in capitalists hands. Italian civil war perhaps?

I'm not quiet sure Britain would be heavily militarized. The Soviets can't walk over the channel, so Alt-Nato forces in Britain would be focused in ships, airplanes and air defence. If there isn't a land border with the communist states, the whole defence policy of Nato and the Warsaw Pact will be changed, with their air forces and navies demanding far more resources than OTL and, overall, there will be less armies stationed in Europe.

What do you think would happen with Portugal if Spain:

1. goes Communist?
2. remains fascist?

 

[katchen]

I think Russia would have invaded Spain once it got to the Spanish border.. Spain after all did send troops to fight in Babarossa against Russia. So while Spain was neutral to the Western Allies, to the USSR, Spain was a belligerent.
The question then becomes: What does the West do?
Protect Franco?
Let the USSR take over Mainland Spain probably in June 1945, going all the way to Gibraltar?
Or cobble together a new Republican government and wind up splitting "Metropolitan" Spain" with a Communist regime, perhaps with a non-Communist Republican regime on the Mediteranean side if an Allied Occitanian France is organized from Dragoon with the Communists entering on the Basque side of the Pyrenees and creating a People's republic in Old Castille, New Castille , Asturias, Galicia, Cantabria and perhaps Estremaduera. And Metropolitan Portugal unless there is Allied intervention there too.
Iberia could be where we really start to see the new Cold War battle lines form. Maybe matching independent Catalonian and Basque states.

 

[omnimercurial]

How would Indobesia go in this TL?

Communist or Capitalist?

 

[Onkel Willie]

One thing that so far has not been mentioned is how exactly the Red Army pulls this off. The Red Army was in a poor state when the Germans invaded, though if Stalin had allowed for a mobilization then the Germans likely wouldn't have advanced as far. That, however, could have backfired if Stalin had insisted in deploying most of his forces in occupied eastern Poland to stop the Wehrmacht at the border, something the Red Army plainly isn't capable of. Your best bet here is to have Stalin suffer a stroke in 1940 and to have his successor be someone willing to listen to his generals from the get go.

So, the Red Army mobilizes but is still in poor shape and manages to halt the Germans at a Leningrad-Perekop line and from there the rollback begins. Even then I don't see the Soviets overrunning Western Europe:

1) Logistically it's difficult, especially considering many of the areas the Red Army is occupying will be be hostile and will therefore try to hamper the Soviets.

2) The Red Army's successes will mean more and more forces will be shifted to the East to stem the tide, denuding other fronts. That translates to corresponding greater successes for the Western Allies: they could possibly invade France in 1943 already. The Red Army and the Western Allies will likely meet on the Weser rather than the Elbe, which is still far from T-34s rolling through Paris.

That said, the Soviet position in the Cold War will be way better. Considering France is unlikely to allow US and British forces to be stationed in France on any permanent basis, so that leaves the Benelux as a stronghold to protect Western Europe. Pretty meagre compared to OTL's West Germany if you ask me. Having Germany, Europe's largest economy, in the USSR's sphere of influence will also do the strength of the Soviet bloc a lot of good. All of this leaves room for the Soviet leadership to backstab the Western Allies after consolidating his gains. But would they? They, like Stalin, will know of the Manhattan Project through their moles in it.

Another option is to remove Stalin from the picture (possibly through the publication of Lenin's will), thus preventing the purge altogether. That, however, could completely butterfly away the rise of Nazism and thus WW II as we know it.

 

[juanml82]

1) Logistically it's difficult, especially considering many of the areas the Red Army is occupying will be be hostile and will therefore try to hamper the Soviets.

With what? For all the deeds of the different resistances, only Tito may have been able to make the Red Army reconsider an invasion of Yugoslavia. And I might be stretching Tito's capabilities there.

As for logistics, it's not like the infrastructure the Soviets used to push back the Germans was exactly in good conditions, given how most of it was fought over twice.

I believe it doable, if the W. Allies don't jump on France with whatever they can scrap. I'm not sure of the capacity of the Red Army in the immediate postwar to invade neutral countries as Sweden, Spain or Turkey.

What do you think would happen with Portugal if Spain:

1. goes Communist?
2. remains fascist?

No idea

 

[BBadolato]

It's been discussed that a Soviet invasion of Europe in 1946 would be impossible the Soviet supply lines were stretched to furthest they could go. What if various resistance groups decide to make hell for the Soviets, The Soviets can try and there going to end up with egg on their faces and then some.

 

[Alternate History Geek]

We were thinking more what if D-Day gets pushed back into the sea and consequently the Red Army has to liberate Europe.

 

[katchen]

We also have a fine TL which shows the USSR invading Western Europe in 1946. So far, they've made it to the Channel and the Pyrenees, with Sturmoviks beating the hell out of British airfields. Awaiting updates....

 

[deathscompanion1]

We also have a fine TL which shows the USSR invading Western Europe in 1946. So far, they've made it to the Channel and the Pyrenees, with Sturmoviks beating the hell out of British airfields. Awaiting updates....

It's fun to read but that TL is frankly a soviet wank. They make massive use of wonder weapons (that didn't work yet OTL) a genius that didnt exist. And the the allies repeatedly get screwed when Soviet operators somehow sabatoge vital strategic assets which they were not in a position to do so.

They also somehow keep their logistics lines running better than they did in 1945 despite being further from their bases and even more wrecked logistics net with partisans to their rear.



Which is the issue. The soviets could probably reach the rhine but logistics mean the Wallies have an easier time of it.

 

[Kongzilla]

We also have a fine TL which shows the USSR invading Western Europe in 1946. So far, they've made it to the Channel and the Pyrenees, with Sturmoviks beating the hell out of British airfields. Awaiting updates....

Yes, I'm a big fan but unfortunately I wouldn't take it seriously. It's a bit loopy but I support Hairog in his efforts. He writes better than I do anyhow.

 

[Iori]

Sans some miracle weapons I really don't see this happening, even if D-Day fails, it would simply be re-tried later one when their was less resistance on account of the Soviets and Germans killing each other in Poland and Eastern Germany.

When it comes right down to it the Warsaw Pact was very near the maximum possible reach of the Soviets at the time, and any extension of the war is going to reduce the Soviets power.