WI: Cold-war in 1934?

What if the cold-war came about much earlier then after World war 2? Would Hitler have a free hand in taking europe due to the british alliance (later known as allied soldiers.) being occupied with stalin, Would hitler and the british alliance take russia together, and Most of all, Would the swastika banner fly over red square?
 
So, you're basically asking whether the British ad French would join Hitler on a grand anti-Communist alliance? Very unlikely, at least with Hitler in the picture. To get Europe to unite against the Communists, you need a much stronger Soviet Union (as in, Romania, Finland, and Poland as little more than puppets) and a much weaker and less belligerent Germany. The second condition is hard to fulfill with Hitler at the helm of Germany. Maybe if Hitler gets deposed in a generals' coup in 1936 after the French tell them to get out of the Rhineland and Hitler doesn't listen.

There's no way that Britain would join a Germany that dominated the Continent in attacking the Soviets. British policy from the Hundred Years War onward had been to support the weaker powers in Europe to prevent it from becoming united against Britain. That's how you get a lot of the diplomacy of the 18th century, the Napoleonic Wars, and Britain teaming up with its age-old enemy in WWI. They are not going to abandon this policy just because a German warlord is asking them to.

Also, keep in mind that Britain and France are deep in the Great Depression in 1934. The French, for example, were scared of the cost of briefly mobilizing their army to keep Germany out of the Rhineland, despite it being a flagrant violation of the Treaty of Versailles. Why would they embark on a hare-brained scheme on the other side of Europe for no tangible gain for themselves?

EDIT: Also, you appear to misunderstand the term "Cold War". The Cold War came about from a very unique set of circumstances following WWII, since the US and the USSR were the two biggest powers standing from the war. The main reason it didn't degenerate into open warfare sometime in the 1960s was the threat of nukes (and that was barely enough at times). You cannot simply wave your hand and start the Cold War.
 
Well the implication of a Cold War is that it is well... cold, a hot war would be the West and the Soviet Union slugging it out for Europe, like imp said nobody was about ready to do that because everyone was afraid of the big nuclear trump card that both sides possessed.

So we had the Cold War, where two sides that obviously were in conflict found different ways to fight each other. It was less the time of the soldier and the pilot and more the time of the spy and the diplomat. Instead of fighting the US in the Middle East the Soviet Union backed the enemies of US allies, namely the Arab states, against Israel. The US backed Israel and intervened in several Middle Eastern nations to ensure cooperative pro-US governments, which met with limited and mostly temporary success followed by some catastrophically bad failures.

Your proposal's kind of an early version of Operation Unthinkable, a plan Churchill developed to invade the Soviet Union. However an AH Cold War would perhaps involve a three-way scramble between Nazi Germany, the West, and the Soviet Union for hegemony in Europe. Again, nothing like a nuclear trump card to keep all three groups afraid.

Edit: Also, the historical Cold War was because of a falling-out between the USA and the USSR after the alliance of convenience that they made in World War Two. An earlier split would have to be so early as to very possibly butterfly the Soviet Union's existence, given that...

a. WWI and Czar Nicholas' incompetent leadership during said war lead to the Russian Revolution, none of the issues with the Russian monarchy were new, it's just that Nick provided the catalyst by dragging Russia into a massive war and promptly got his ass handed to him trying to use the old Russian steamroller. An earlier falling-out between the Western powers and Russia may have involved a profoundly different WWI (i.e. possibility of Russia reluctantly joining the Central Powers out of necessity despite Austria-Hungary's involvement).

b. Britain and France would've probably dealt with Hitler first anyway. For Britain the Soviet Union was a threat, but a relatively distant one, it didn't have the naval power as of yet to challenge Britain. Germany was a threat looming right on their doorstep (it could take Belgium and springboard into Britain, which is historically a reason for the British to fight on behalf of Belgian neutrality as was policy of keeping any one power from majorly consolidating in the continent), for France it was even more so. Attacking the USSR while leaving Germany alone would be ignoring a huge elephant in the room and opening them up for the possibility of the Germans forming an opportunistic alliance with the Soviet Union to gain support against Britain and France.

c. Nazi Germany never had the capacity to fully conquer Russia. Steamroll their armies and extract a humiliating peace from the defeated Soviets but never occupy them, even with British help any long-term holding of significant portions of Soviet territory is difficult to conceive.
 
Last edited:
Top