WI Molotov or Beria leads the soviet union in WWII

After operation barbarossa started, Stalin went to his basement for weeks believing that he would be arrested for his incompetence, so much that when Molotov and Beria came to ask him to return to the government he raised his arms thinking they would shot him

What if they did had shooted him and Molotov or Beria took the position of chairmen of the party?
 
Last edited:
Beria would be the best choice and chance for the URSS. The man was insanely ambitious, totally ruthless, deviant, sadistic but also extremely competent and realistic. Hell, during the 1930's, he turned Georgia (his personal fiefdom) into the richest of the SSR. He was the man behind the organisation of partisan warfare in occupied territories and had control of the manufacture of armaments during WW2. He was also the father of soviet atomic programm, created insanely good spy rings across the world. Finally he was a pragmatic, secretly against stalin's views about economic matters, some kind of proto gorbatchev. The man was right before anyone in USSR (which led him to his doom OTL) and the country would have been better with him at its head after ww2
 

Deleted member 1487

Beria would be the best choice and chance for the URSS. The man was insanely ambitious, totally ruthless, deviant, sadistic but also extremely competent and realistic. Hell, during the 1930's, he turned Georgia (his personal fiefdom) into the richest of the SSR. He was the man behind the organisation of partisan warfare in occupied territories and had control of the manufacture of armaments during WW2. He was also the father of soviet atomic programm, created insanely good spy rings across the world. Finally he was a pragmatic, secretly against stalin's views about economic matters, some kind of proto gorbatchev. The man was right before anyone in USSR (which led him to his doom OTL) and the country would have been better with him at its head after ww2
But he also purged anyone he viewed as a threat. What happens when Zhukov gets on the chopping block? Or any other successful general he fears might replace him?
 
Beria wasn't even a full member of the Politburo at the time. Of course, his heading the NKVD gave him great power--but precisely for that reason the leaders of the Army and Party would be wary of him. It would really take a coup to get him into supreme power--and that would be an extraordinarily risky thing in 1941. Note that Beria didn't try to seize full power with a coup in 1953, even though "there were two divisions of the security police in Moscow, the Kremlin guards were under Beria's command, and even the head of Moscow's Military District, General Pavel Artemev, was a former NKVD officer..." https://books.google.com/books?id=xO5GZQiCKmUC&pg=PT288
 
But he also purged anyone he viewed as a threat. What happens when Zhukov gets on the chopping block? Or any other successful general he fears might replace him?
during WW2, Beria would leave good generals do their jobs, again the man is a realistic fellow. So Zhukov would still lead the rodina to victory. After 1945, well... Soviet military despised Beria and dreamt all the time to shoot him in the head (in what they succeed eventually) and Beria knew it (in fact, he was some Varys of epic proportions, so everything interesting was reported to him). He would be too smart to gut the red army. My opinion, he would turn some of them into his closest allies: zhukov was the sharpest tool when it came to political business so some gifts would leave him happy. And Beria would mean no Cold War or at least less Cold so the weight of the military would be lessen.
 

Deleted member 1487

during WW2, Beria would leave good generals do their jobs, again the man is a realistic fellow. So Zhukov would still lead the rodina to victory. After 1945, well... Soviet military despised Beria and dreamt all the time to shoot him in the head (in what they succeed eventually) and Beria knew it (in fact, he was some Varys of epic proportions, so everything interesting was reported to him). He would be too smart to gut the red army. My opinion, he would turn some of them into his closest allies: zhukov was the sharpest tool when it came to political business so some gifts would leave him happy. And Beria would mean no Cold War or at least less Cold so the weight of the military would be lessen.
You sure about that? He had no problem massacring most of the best leaders the Soviets had in the great purges.
 
You sure about that? He had no problem massacring most of the best leaders the Soviets had in the great purges.

Beria was also hated by literally every other member of the Politburo, and only kept his head (literally and figuratively) by the grace of Stalin.
 
You sure about that? He had no problem massacring most of the best leaders the Soviets had in the great purges.
the man was crual because he was stalin's hound. He did what he did because he was ambitious and because it would help him to boost his career. Historians agreed that the man was not a staunch communist, just a man hungry for power (during the civil he was some kind of triple-agent). If there is a purge, it would only be against those who could threaten his rule. Beria was a cold bureaucrat, not a paranoid evil mustache.
 

Deleted member 1487

the man was crual because he was stalin's hound. He did what he did because he was ambitious and because it would help him to boost his career. Historians agreed that the man was not a staunch communist, just a man hungry for power (during the civil he was some kind of triple-agent). If there is a purge, it would only be against those who could threaten his rule. Beria was a cold bureaucrat, not a paranoid evil mustache.
And a man entirely dependent on survival by his alliance with Stalin; very quickly after Stalin's death he was purged by the survivors of Stalin's reign.

Edit: Zhukov actually ensured his death
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavrentiy_Beria
Upon Stalin's death in March 1953, Beria was promoted to First Deputy Premier, where he carried out a campaign of liberalization. He was briefly a part of the ruling "troika" with Georgy Malenkov and Vyacheslav Molotov. Beria's overconfidence in his position after Stalin's death led him to misjudge other Politburo members. During the coup d'état led by Nikita Khrushchev and assisted by the military forces of Marshal Georgy Zhukov, Beria was arrested on charges of treason during a meeting in which the full Politburo condemned him. The compliance of the NKVD was ensured by Zhukov's troops, and after interrogation Beria was taken to the basement of the Lubyanka and shot by General Pavel Batitsky.[2]
 
And a man entirely dependent on survival by his alliance with Stalin; very quickly after Stalin's death he was purged by the survivors of Stalin's reign.
indeed but not during the war. Beria is too useful to be shot when the rodina is in danger
 

Deleted member 1487

indeed but not during the war. Beria is too useful to be shot when the rodina is in danger
Ah, not really. If everyone else was afraid of him, he would go. That could mean civil war though, but fear for personal safety would trump that worry. Of course that is why Stalin couldn't be removed, because the risk of civil war was too high in a crisis moment.
 
While other Soviet bigwigs could have taken over after Stalin's demise, it is a question as to whether any of them could have unified the people like Stalin did. By that I mean willing cooperation not just fear. IMHO it all depends on how Stalin dies. If it is natural causes or in a German air raid etc, then the new leader may be able to transfer the positive feelings about Stalin to himself. If it was a coup or something of the sort, then no matter who it is they will have less true allegiance than Stalin did. In spite of the fear, the NKVD, etc the average Russian by 1941 had lived almost 20 years with Stalin as the leader/father figure and a whole generation of Russians knew nothing else.
 
Ah, not really. If everyone else was afraid of him, he would go. That could mean civil war though, but fear for personal safety would trump that worry. Of course that is why Stalin couldn't be removed, because the risk of civil war was too high in a crisis moment.
If beria is killed, the Soviet Union loses one of his best administrators. Like i said earlier, the man was behind armament production and did a freaking good job. It would be like killing Speer for the Nazis. And sure zhukov had beria's head in 1953 but we are in 1941, beria can still show some signs of good will.
 
While other Soviet bigwigs could have taken over after Stalin's demise, it is a question as to whether any of them could have unified the people like Stalin did. By that I mean willing cooperation not just fear. IMHO it all depends on how Stalin dies. If it is natural causes or in a German air raid etc, then the new leader may be able to transfer the positive feelings about Stalin to himself. If it was a coup or something of the sort, then no matter who it is they will have less true allegiance than Stalin did. In spite of the fear, the NKVD, etc the average Russian by 1941 had lived almost 20 years with Stalin as the leader/father figure and a whole generation of Russians knew nothing else.

Beria could make it look like an accident, he was very capable of thinking in a way to get rid of Stalin in that moment of weakness
 

RousseauX

Donor
Ah, not really. If everyone else was afraid of him, he would go. That could mean civil war though, but fear for personal safety would trump that worry. Of course that is why Stalin couldn't be removed, because the risk of civil war was too high in a crisis moment.
i don't know though, Beria was accepted by other members of Stalin's inner circle because, even though he was personally repulsive, it's not like anyone else didn't have blood on their hands.

The real problem with Beria is the same problem that Trotsky had: he was that guy at your class or office who acted like he was the smartest guy in the room and didn't tone it down. And he tried to act w/o consulting anyone else, which incidentally was what got Khrushchev removed.
 
I posted a similar scenario in another thread, and yeah I don't think Beria would last long at all without Stalin, even in the midst of Operation Barbarossa. He was just too hated and threatening to his colleagues.

Stalin eats a self-inflicted bullet when he has a mental breakdown after scurrying away to his dacha in the opening stages of Operation Barbarossa. The Soviet government plunges into confusion and infighting, as the various magnates struggle with each other to establish a new chain of command. Eventually a Red Army and CPSU-backed Troika of Molotov, Voroshilov (?) and Zhukov stabilises a post-Stalin Soviet government, purging Beria and neutering the NKVD in the process.

The Germans make greater gains into the USSR than IOTL amidst the chaos of Stalin's suicide, but eventually the Soviets rally under the Troika and begin pushing them back. Lend-Lease from the WAllies begins flowing to the Soviets once the Troika shows its determination to continue fighting the Axis.

Since Soviet lines are pushed further back, the Red Army is much more damaged, and the Axis has captured more Soviet territory, Anglo-American landings occur in Greece and the Balkans (in addition to the landings in France, Italy, the Low Countries and Scandinavia from IOTL). At great cost in blood and material, the WAllies liberate the Balkans and most of Austria and Czechoslovakia, while the Bulgarian, Hungarian, and Romanian governments defect to them. Hungary and Romania descend into civil war pitting the German-backed fanatics of the Arrow Cross and Iron Guard parties (respectively) against the more moderate government forces, which assists the WAllies in securing both countries. The WAllies also occupy most of Germany once the Third Reich falls.

Meanwhile, the Soviets have only managed to liberate their own territory, while also driving into Poland, East Prussia, parts of eastern Germany proper and a small portion of eastern Romania (where they meet WAllied troops, halt and don't advance any further into Romania), before the war ends. The Soviets also don't have the capability to drive the Japanese Kwantung Army out of Manchuria, and so only make a minor impact in the closing stages of the war in the Far East; (Imperial Japan still surrenders due to American atomic bombing, but the entire Korean Peninsula is occupied by the WAllies, while the Kuomintang get to reoccupy all of China - with WAllied assistance - after the war ends, leaving Mao's Communists bereft of the massive postwar Soviet support they received from the Red Army in Manchuria IOTL; instead, the Troika pursues good relations with the ROC and Korea is unified under a democratic government).

In exchange for huge Marshall Plan aid to help rebuild their destroyed country, the demilitarization of Germany, thorough de-Nazification and war crimes trials for fascists across all the former Axis nations, and demilitarised Polish and Romanian borders, the Troika agrees to withdraw from Poland (where the Polish government-in-exile returns from London and is restored to power) and the small portion of eastern Germany occupied by the Red Army. However, the Troika annexes East Prussia into the USSR and expels the German population from there, and also annexes part of eastern Poland and eastern Romania. (The Soviets also sign their OTL peace treaty with Finland, and were incapable of joining the British in occupying Iran ITTL).

Democratic governments are established in Poland (which is smaller than its post-war size IOTL), Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Albania, and Yugoslavia, while Germany is reunified under a democratic government but demilitarized (much like Japan IOTL). The Chinese Civil War sputters out due to no Soviet aid to Mao's Communists, allowing the Kuomintang to reunify the country, and there is no Korean War. The Soviets have made minor territorial gains from eastern Poland and eastern Romania, in addition to annexing East Prussia, and receive much needed Marshall Plan aid.

The Cold War basically doesn't happen ITTL.
 
Stalin being couped is pretty much a no go. Everyone was too afraid of him to attempt it, and they knew that in the middle of a war it is too risky to change horses. However if Stalin dies of natural causes some sort of collective leadership (probably with Molotov in charge) would take over. They would give the generals much more leeway, both because they lack Stalin's personality defects and their position would be too precarious to micromanage the war. The war probably goes worse for the Soviets at first, but they might do better without Stalin leaning over everyone's shoulders.
 
Top