nvm
- Thread starter Aloha
- Start date
Stalin needs to feel absolutely secure in his position so that he can be much more aggressive and seem an immediate threat to European peace, while the Nazis need to at least hide their atrocities better, if not put them on hold. In this scenario, Hitler rearming and expanding Germany would be seen as the creation of a bulwark against Soviet invasion - the stronger a Greater Germany can become, the less likely the Soviets can successfully attack.
Aligning the Soviets and the Japanese Empire isn't too hard - a secure and confident Stalin could be interested in splitting China like he did Poland, and there's the prospect for a stable alliance if the Soviets encroach on Mongolia and western China while the Japanese stick to Manchuria and coastal China. The Soviets can also provide a secure source of oil for the Japanese, providing cash while further securing the alliance.
I don't see how the Italians would get involved, however - the Soviets are too far away and won't be overrunning Greater Germany in this scenario.
Nazi antisemitism would be regarded as unpleasant, but as long as they settle for ghettos and similar mistreatment, it's less than what the Axis will be doing to their minorities and could be played off as the lesser evil.
Aligning the Soviets and the Japanese Empire isn't too hard - a secure and confident Stalin could be interested in splitting China like he did Poland, and there's the prospect for a stable alliance if the Soviets encroach on Mongolia and western China while the Japanese stick to Manchuria and coastal China. The Soviets can also provide a secure source of oil for the Japanese, providing cash while further securing the alliance.
I don't see how the Italians would get involved, however - the Soviets are too far away and won't be overrunning Greater Germany in this scenario.
Nazi antisemitism would be regarded as unpleasant, but as long as they settle for ghettos and similar mistreatment, it's less than what the Axis will be doing to their minorities and could be played off as the lesser evil.
You'd have to have a (1) a non-Nazi German government that gets along tolerably well with the Western Allies (very plausible) and (2) a Russian government led by someone much crazier than Stalin (or Trotsky for that matter) who thinks that Russia can take on both Germany and the West (very implausible).
BlackDragon98
Banned
von Richthofen's Germany vs Trotsky's USSR.
MvR survives WW1 while Stalin dies in the Polish-Soviet War.
Deleted member 1487
Depending on what you want, you could have WW2 start when the USSR wins the Soviet-Polish war and Germany becomes the bulwark against Soviet expansion or it starts later if say Trotsky manages to win the post-Lenin power struggle and decides to export the revolution to Germany.
Or have the Whites win the Russian Civil War and stays allied to France and piss off Britain.
Or France and Britain fall out in the interwar and the USSR and France sign a formal alliance along with at least part of the 'little Entente' so that Germany looks like the better option for Britain than the Russo-France alliance.
You could actually have a change in fortunes between Russia and Germany, actually. There's a lot of room for parallels, and we could have had a Spartacist Germany and a !fascist Russia. Say, for example, you have a member of the black hundreds shoot Trotsky, and then have a Putsch similar to the one Kapp tried to pull iotl, but earlier (only a few months after the Kaiser runs away, similar to the Kornilov affair)- which would embolden the Spartacists and weaken the state even further. Obviously this doesn't exactly mean that the Narod Russia would then go and be the bigger threat, considering the western powers would be far more worried about Germany, but an attack on the Japanese (it'd happen under a Narod Russia, likely) might just draw the British in, and considering the doctrines of Liebkniecht and Luxemburg it's not unlikely they'd jump at the opportunity to take a bite out of Russia.
Don't forget that it's the Axis, as in multiple nations - what's changed in Italy/Finland/Japan that they'd join up with Russian Commies?
Fairly simple.
Somewhat different Soviet leadership, which
a) doesn't do the Great Purge (maybe just a Major Purge)
b) gets aggressive about regaining territories lost in 1918-1921 (and behind that, about spreading the Revolution)
and
c) Is clever enough to see that one can get away with aggression if one creates or takes advantage of ambiguous circumstances. For instance, disorder in the target country which seems to justify intervention to "restore order". A target government which is notoriously abusive. Occupation in the guise of establishing bases under a treaty of mutual defense. A territorial claim which has some historical basis and diplomatic cover. A territorial basis which can be justified by ethnic character. Inviting other countries to grab shares for themselves. Tricks like this worked for Hitler - for a while. Then he overreached and provoked war.
There were places where the Soviets could have used similar tricks. Plus the Soviets had influence through Communists in the West. And the USSR's frontiers were further away. If the USSR invaded say Estonia, what could any other power do about it? Oh, and don't annex the country, install a puppet regime.
So the Soviets embark on this program before Germany, which for whatever reason holds back a few more years. Germany even makes a surprise deal with the USSR to divvy up Poland (with the USSR doing the fighting). Since the USSR attacks first, it becomes the "aggressor state". The "Allies" fight, getting hammered by the massively equipped Red Army. The Soviets get cocky, and sneak-attack Germany (both to take out a potential foe, and to get at their enemies' homelands). But Germany hangs on, and becomes an "Allied country".
There you go.
Somewhat different Soviet leadership, which
a) doesn't do the Great Purge (maybe just a Major Purge)
b) gets aggressive about regaining territories lost in 1918-1921 (and behind that, about spreading the Revolution)
and
c) Is clever enough to see that one can get away with aggression if one creates or takes advantage of ambiguous circumstances. For instance, disorder in the target country which seems to justify intervention to "restore order". A target government which is notoriously abusive. Occupation in the guise of establishing bases under a treaty of mutual defense. A territorial claim which has some historical basis and diplomatic cover. A territorial basis which can be justified by ethnic character. Inviting other countries to grab shares for themselves. Tricks like this worked for Hitler - for a while. Then he overreached and provoked war.
There were places where the Soviets could have used similar tricks. Plus the Soviets had influence through Communists in the West. And the USSR's frontiers were further away. If the USSR invaded say Estonia, what could any other power do about it? Oh, and don't annex the country, install a puppet regime.
So the Soviets embark on this program before Germany, which for whatever reason holds back a few more years. Germany even makes a surprise deal with the USSR to divvy up Poland (with the USSR doing the fighting). Since the USSR attacks first, it becomes the "aggressor state". The "Allies" fight, getting hammered by the massively equipped Red Army. The Soviets get cocky, and sneak-attack Germany (both to take out a potential foe, and to get at their enemies' homelands). But Germany hangs on, and becomes an "Allied country".
There you go.
In 1917, the Reichstag passed a resolution stating that they were prepared to conclude peace without indemnities or annexations. Obviously, the military high command would have none of that and continued the war anyway. However, if somehow this resolution had been accepted, you could have a war ending in 1917. Germany might feel it had been cheated of victory by politicians, but it would emerge intact.
I'm not sure the US would get heavily involved in that WW2 though. I'm also not sure how the Soviets (assuming they still rose to power, which seems like it would get butterflied away) expect the French to fight Germany AND Britain in Europe.
Once again, for Trotsky, support of world revolution definitely did not mean "invade everywhere with the Red Army." See my post at https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...-was-under-stalin.486372/page-2#post-20398907