Interesting, although I'd like to know I don't think too highly of Kornilov as you describe here. What do you believe will happen in a Kornilov-led Russia?
WI - Kornilov's Military Dictatorship?
- Thread starter twistedirregular
- Start date
A Kornilov-Kerensky coup could be interesting. I suspect that Kerensky would be the dominant force in such a partnership though, so probably such a team wouldn't answer the OP's challenge.
A mess? But to be honest, Kornilov needs so much help to get into that position that the weight of secondary "helping" PoDs would outweigh Kornilov's influence on the shape of Russia.
fasquardon
Wasn't Kerensky becoming quite unpopular by the time of the OTL attempted Kornilov coup?
Had the same idea, never got far with it, but I did come up with the name, Drenched In Blood.
Can I use for that a potential Kornilov TL I might write? With credit to you, of course.
I think I made clear what I thought: it wouldn't happen or would happen only briefly. You can't govern a vast country (and win a war with a still formidable Germany, as Kornilov was determined to do) with officers alone, especially when the army was in as advanced a state of decay as the Russian army was by this time.
It sounds like the Russian equivalent of a Freikorp or Kapp Putsch. Strong enough to raise hell and maybe provide military muscle to win the civil war/suppress a revolution, but too weak and unstable to hold long-term power.
To continue the analytical tool of a Weimar comparisons, enough Mensheviks may survive the civil war to scrape together the popular support for a shaky, somewhat leftist, but relatively democratic state. Ex-Menshevik supporters could be the Russian equivalent of the Weimar era SPD.
I think geography is the best rule of thumb to analyze the social conditions necessary for democracy in post-1900 Europe TLs. Representative government had its deepest European roots in the British isles. Parliamentary rule can last in the UK come hell or high water, and the same is generally true for Scandinavia and the low countries (with the exception of outside shocks like a foreign occupation).
The farther East and/or South you go from the UK, the less developed ready for democracy (w/ the perennial exception of Switzerland). On the spectrum of readiness for democracy, if Weimar can be seen as "catching up" to the UK then Russia would be playing catchup with Germany. Compared to Germany after Prussia, post-Czarist Russia as a whole would likely be even more agrarian, aristocratic, and undeveloped than the Junkers' strongholds in Prussia.
Democracy in Russia at the stage seems like it could only be a brief experiment. Without the bolsheviks, a developmentalist dictatorship on the model of Ataturk or Deng Xiaoping seems like a more realistic medium to long term government for Russia in an 1900s AH.
If they were peasants, like most Russian soldiers, they would welcome the chance to divvy up the land. And I doubt if they were any keener on continuing the war than anyone else. My guess is that he's dictator of Petrograd for a few days, but that his authority never extends much beyond the city limits.
If you give me credit on the name, sure. Might as well get some use out of it.
Could k perhaps form an alliance with another warlord? Wrangel and Denkin seem the most likely.
If Kornilov launches "coup" with support of Kerensky, then it isn't a coup or military dictatorship, just Russian equivalent of Ebert–Groener pact.
Ebert, even though leftist, was keenly aware that German revolution could spiral out of control, so he came to an agreement with military establishment. That agreement amounted to "military establishment accepts new republican government and constitutional assembly, and government agrees to stop any further revolutionary activity".
There was no evidence that Kornilov wanted to seize power, he just wanted to crush Soviets and end "Dual Power", seemingly at instigation of Kerensky. If Kerensky didn't back off at last moment, Provisional government would gain full control of country.
Ebert allied with right-wing militia to defend french-style republic, whereas Kerensky released and armed those who wanted to replace it with soviet style republic. With "leader" like this at helm, there was no chance that Bolsheviks won't launch their coup.
If Kerensky doesn't backstab Kornilov, Bolsheviks stay in jail, and no further revolution takes place, or at worst is suppressed over week or two, like in Germany. Russian army won't disintegrate if government doesn't purge officer corps in aftermath of Kornilov affair.
Ebert, even though leftist, was keenly aware that German revolution could spiral out of control, so he came to an agreement with military establishment. That agreement amounted to "military establishment accepts new republican government and constitutional assembly, and government agrees to stop any further revolutionary activity".
There was no evidence that Kornilov wanted to seize power, he just wanted to crush Soviets and end "Dual Power", seemingly at instigation of Kerensky. If Kerensky didn't back off at last moment, Provisional government would gain full control of country.
Ebert allied with right-wing militia to defend french-style republic, whereas Kerensky released and armed those who wanted to replace it with soviet style republic. With "leader" like this at helm, there was no chance that Bolsheviks won't launch their coup.
If Kerensky doesn't backstab Kornilov, Bolsheviks stay in jail, and no further revolution takes place, or at worst is suppressed over week or two, like in Germany. Russian army won't disintegrate if government doesn't purge officer corps in aftermath of Kornilov affair.
THE SURVIVAL of the tsarist officer corps, would stimulate better alternatives for the anti communist Russians.
Wasn't the Tsarist officer corps pretty much gutted at this point? How effective would it be?
It was gutted, but the few remainders could have proud some order to the anti communist movement.