WI Russia never gets Poland and Lithuania

What if the Russian territorial acquisitions at the PLC expense never extended to Poland and Lithuania proper?

Let’s say that by the 1st partition Catherine II grabbed pretty much what she got by the 1st and 2nd (*): Belorussia and Right Bank Ukraine, the areas which are predominantly Orthodox and linguistically close to Russia. However, she is not going for a complete annihilation of the PLC and not trying to stop the ongoing reforms: it seems that in OTL closer to the end of her reign she started seeing “the Jacobines” everywhere so we are just adding a little bit of a personal sanity.

Perhaps she even withdraws the Russian troops from the PLC territory: with these acquisitions there is no practical reason for the further close control of the rump state and OTL’s final “unpleasantries” (1794 - 95) had been a byproduct of “we had been always doing this” approach rather than of a real geopolitical need.

Will Austria and Prussia go for the final partition if Russia is against it?

What the surviving state look like politically and how it’s future is impacted by the Napoleonic wars?

I repeat, the premise is that Russia is never getting these territories in OTL (personal union) or other arrangement.
____________
(*) At least southern part of what she got by the 2nd was a strategic necessity because it was securing Russian flank in the case of a war against the Ottomans.
 
Prussia will not go against Russia in the mid to late 18th century. Austria is only in to prevent more Prussian acquistion. If Russia is against Prussia on the division, Austria is supportive of Russia incase of war with Prussia and the possibility of regaining Silesia. What I assume at least

The thing is... Poland-Lithuania is very big. How long can Russia control its affairs?

The Ottoman Empire has a breathing room in this case as the existence of Poland-Lithuania will keep Russian attention on the West. But it won't be too different than OTL.

Russia might be better off with an existing Poland-Lithuania under their nominal control. No Austrian or Prussian gains.
 
Perhaps POD should be earlier death of Catherine and thus longer reign of Paul? He would not be willing to destroy PLC (allegedly, he even believed that Poniatowski is his real father, although I'm not sure about this). Catherine unintentionally raised two generations of Polonophiles-Paul, Alexander and Constantine, out of dislike of Catherine, who disliked Poles, they became Polonophiles).
Russia IMHO should do better without Polish burden and could concentrate her energy on more profitable directions, in the South.
 
Prussia will not go against Russia in the mid to late 18th century. Austria is only in to prevent more Prussian acquistion. If Russia is against Prussia on the division, Austria is supportive of Russia incase of war with Prussia and the possibility of regaining Silesia. What I assume at least

The thing is... Poland-Lithuania is very big. How long can Russia control its affairs?

The Ottoman Empire has a breathing room in this case as the existence of Poland-Lithuania will keep Russian attention on the West. But it won't be too different than OTL.

Russia might be better off with an existing Poland-Lithuania under their nominal control. No Austrian or Prussian gains.

Whatever is left of Poland proper after the 1startition and Lithuania proper (without Belorussian territories) is not too big and, as I said, in this AH Russia withdraws its troops from what’s left of the PLC. The OTL rationale was that the Right Bank Ukraine was strategically important in the case of the Ottoman war and potentially the Polish troops (regular or irregular) could create problems by acting on the Russian lines of communications. With the area annexed by Russia the issue is gone.

I suspect that an absence of an excessively rude interference like Repnin Sejm and keeping Russian troops on PLC territory could alleviate some problems. With Russia not being “oppressor #1” and with Prussia and Austria still being on the borders, probably the cool heads could prevail in the PLC. If Catherine was thinking more rationally, it was not too difficult to figure out that reasonsble reforms in the PLC are actually in the Russian interests: a stronger PLC could be a convenient buffer state and a lot of influence could be exercised in a traditional way through various types of the bribes (pensions, important Russia orders, even honorary military ranks) to the Polish aristocrats without annoying everybody by a direct military presence which made sense during the War of the Polish Succession and 7YW but not close to the end of the XVIII century. After all, IIRC, Catherine started with supporting the reforms in the PLC (it was more convenient to have a puppet capable to clean his own royal arse without crying for the Russian help) and only later drifted into the support of the Golden Freedoms, which was a complete reverse of the earlier course.
 
Perhaps POD should be earlier death of Catherine and thus longer reign of Paul? He would not be willing to destroy PLC (allegedly, he even believed that Poniatowski is his real father, although I'm not sure about this). Catherine unintentionally raised two generations of Polonophiles-Paul, Alexander and Constantine, out of dislike of Catherine, who disliked Poles, they became Polonophiles).
Russia IMHO should do better without Polish burden and could concentrate her energy on more profitable directions, in the South.

Paul, as a heir (which means, someone without any influence :) ) was against partitions saying, quite reasonably, that Russia already has enough of a territory and has to concentrate on establishing a good order in these lands instead of grabbing the new ones. With Alexander and his brothers it is complicated but IMO both Poland and Russia would be better off without their Polonophilia. Just a complete neutrality would be much more profitable for both sides. And, while we are ona subject, no matter what we’re the emperors’ feelings, in (at least) post-1794 Russia and all the way to at least the late XIX century a prevailing feeling was a strong Polonophobia ( and the feelings were mutual).

IMO, there was some strategic sense in getting the Right Bank (to secure basis for the ant-Ottoman operations) and perhaps even Belorussia (again, as a “buffer” because its economic value was close to zero). But being saddled with the OTL arrangement definitely was the worst case scenario.

But what about the “leftover Poland”?
 
The Ukrainians (Ruthenians) in Poland-Lithuania will be more west oriented if they are not under Russian rule and will thus develop differently. On a side note, I expect over time east glacia will to go Catholic at a minimum from a combination of conversion and the polish populations settling to the east. Last thoughts for the moment on Poland and its extended future with the Ukrainians is that they could make the union mores stable by creating a federation or alternatively creating the Polish Lithuanian Ruthenian. Commonwealth https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Lithuanian–Ruthenian_Commonwealth
 
But what about the “leftover Poland”?

It is so ugly. :frown:

geschichte_polen2.gif
 
The Ukrainians (Ruthenians) in Poland-Lithuania will be more west oriented if they are not under Russian rule and will thus develop differently. On a side note, I expect over time east glacia will to go Catholic at a minimum from a combination of conversion and the polish populations settling to the east. Last thoughts for the moment on Poland and its extended future with the Ukrainians is that they could make the union mores stable by creating a federation or alternatively creating the Polish Lithuanian Ruthenian. Commonwealth https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Lithuanian–Ruthenian_Commonwealth

Very few Ukrainians would be left in AH PLC after Russia is getting the Right Bank. Ditto for the Lithuanian Ruthenians (Belorussians). The whole point of this AH is that alt-PLC has only the lands which are predominantly ethnic Polish & Lithuanian and either Catholic or Protestant.
 
Would Poles accept a country that does not include areas with Polish majority and whose two most important cities are so close to the border?

This is a completely different subject. The question was about Russia not getting Lithuania and Poland proper and not allowing a complete extinction of the PLC. What you are asking is how aggressive would that state be toward Austria and Prussia.
 
Very few Ukrainians would be left in AH PLC after Russia is getting the Right Bank. Ditto for the Lithuanian Ruthenians (Belorussians). The whole point of this AH is that alt-PLC has only the lands which are predominantly ethnic Polish & Lithuanian
750px-Partitions_of_Poland.png

The entire Russian part of the 3rd partition south of Vilnus was Belorussian/Ukrainian majority, not to mention Latvian majority in Courland. Even to the west of this line there are areas of future Cholm Governorate, which were also majority ukrainian.
With the loss of core Polish majority areas in Poznan, Pomerania and west Galicia the resulting state was by no means homogenous.
 
Whatever is left of Poland proper after the 1startition and Lithuania proper (without Belorussian territories) is not too big and, as I said, in this AH Russia withdraws its troops from what’s left of the PLC. The OTL rationale was that the Right Bank Ukraine was strategically important in the case of the Ottoman war and potentially the Polish troops (regular or irregular) could create problems by acting on the Russian lines of communications. With the area annexed by Russia the issue is gone.

I suspect that an absence of an excessively rude interference like Repnin Sejm and keeping Russian troops on PLC territory could alleviate some problems. With Russia not being “oppressor #1” and with Prussia and Austria still being on the borders, probably the cool heads could prevail in the PLC. If Catherine was thinking more rationally, it was not too difficult to figure out that reasonsble reforms in the PLC are actually in the Russian interests: a stronger PLC could be a convenient buffer state and a lot of influence could be exercised in a traditional way through various types of the bribes (pensions, important Russia orders, even honorary military ranks) to the Polish aristocrats without annoying everybody by a direct military presence which made sense during the War of the Polish Succession and 7YW but not close to the end of the XVIII century. After all, IIRC, Catherine started with supporting the reforms in the PLC (it was more convenient to have a puppet capable to clean his own royal arse without crying for the Russian help) and only later drifted into the support of the Golden Freedoms, which was a complete reverse of the earlier course.

My bad... I thought about no 1st partition. Lol
 
750px-Partitions_of_Poland.png

The entire Russian part of the 3rd partition south of Vilnus was Belorussian/Ukrainian majority, not to mention Latvian majority in Courland. Even to the west of this line there are areas of future Cholm Governorate, which were also majority ukrainian.
With the loss of core Polish majority areas in Poznan, Pomerania and west Galicia the resulting state was by no means homogenous.
That’s fine. It would not be homogenous even with just Poles and Lithuanians. The important part is that it still exists.
 
This is a completely different subject. The question was about Russia not getting Lithuania and Poland proper and not allowing a complete extinction of the PLC. What you are asking is how aggressive would that state be toward Austria and Prussia.
As I understand Russia there's only the first partition after which Poland is left to do as she please, having borders guaranteed by Russia, but Russia takes the lands of 1st and 2nd partition? Given that Russia was the most hated partitioner after the otl first, much more moderate partition I guess it remains Poland's main enemy (naturally, the landgrab was not the only reson for that resentment).
Poland would have little opportunity to do anything until Napoleon, unless she does something monumentally stupid (not impossible given the quality of Polish elites of that period) or perhaps Prussian-Polish alliance becomes more than a way to provoke another partition (unlikely, where Prussia could grow except on expense of Poland?).

Perhaps better option would be a different Kaniów meeting, in exchange for another slice of PLC, maybe the remaining part of Ukraine, and an expeditionary corps, Catherine allows for limited reforms in Poland, and it rolls on from that.
 
As I understand Russia there's only the first partition after which Poland is left to do as she please, having borders guaranteed by Russia, but Russia takes the lands of 1st and 2nd partition? Given that Russia was the most hated partitioner after the otl first, much more moderate partition I guess it remains Poland's main enemy (naturally, the landgrab was not the only reson for that resentment).
Poland would have little opportunity to do anything until Napoleon, unless she does something monumentally stupid (not impossible given the quality of Polish elites of that period) or perhaps Prussian-Polish alliance becomes more than a way to provoke another partition (unlikely, where Prussia could grow except on expense of Poland?).

Perhaps better option would be a different Kaniów meeting, in exchange for another slice of PLC, maybe the remaining part of Ukraine, and an expeditionary corps, Catherine allows for limited reforms in Poland, and it rolls on from that.

As far as I can tell, one of the reasons for Russia being enemy #1 was a rather hamfisted approach to the Russian-Polish relations which lasted at least since the War of the Polish Succession. Russian troops were permanently placed on Polish territory, Russian ambassadors had been openly dictating the Polish policy and during the 7YW the PLC territory was used as Russian operational and supply base (I’m not sure that permission was ever asked). Of course, election of Catherine’s former boyfriend was an additional master stroke of the Russian diplomacy. As a result, even if the 1st partition was initialized by Maria Theresa (who got the biggest and best chunk) and pushed through by Old Fritz, Catherine got the blame. So if we remove factor of a military presence and open diplomatic pressure, the whole attitude may be cooling down to a level when the brains start playing some role. Anyway, an open war against Russia is unlikely and it is rather difficult to rebel against non-existing Russian military presence.
Poland may use the Napoleonic wars to get back territories from Austria and Prussia but it would be more difficult to do similar thing with the Russian-held lands just because, unlike Prussia and Austria, Russia is not being occupied by victorious France.
 
. Anyway, an open war against Russia is unlikely and it is rather difficult to rebel against non-existing Russian military presence.

If Russia wants to put her fingers in Napoleonic wars it will likely have to her armies marching through Poland - athough at least initially as an ally as Poland would be pushed to take part in anti-Napoleon coalitions (it would be an opportunity to get more reforms done and get some subsidy from the British, and let's say that in spirit of Russia being nice to Poland, they would refrain from pillaging, pressing recruits into military service, kidnapping peasants and so on), and possibly change sides only after Nappy having marched through Polish territory and smashed whatever army Poles had managed to raise.

There is also the question of who would be the king of Poland after Stanisław August's death.
 
If Russia wants to put her fingers in Napoleonic wars it will likely have to her armies marching through Poland - athough at least initially as an ally as Poland would be pushed to take part in anti-Napoleon coalitions (it would be an opportunity to get more reforms done and get some subsidy from the British, and let's say that in spirit of Russia being nice to Poland, they would refrain from pillaging, pressing recruits into military service, kidnapping peasants and so on), and possibly change sides only after Nappy having marched through Polish territory and smashed whatever army Poles had managed to raise.

There is also the question of who would be the king of Poland after Stanisław August's death.

You are talking about a different time and rather hypothetical situation. I was talking about realties of the XVIII: most of the time since the War of the Polish Succession and all the way to the 3rd Partition there was a direct Russian military presence on the PLC territory. Quite different from a situation where the allied troops are marching through the land to fight a common enemy. Of course, if the Russians are marching across Poland as the allies they are not forcibly recruiting the locals, this was not how their military system worked (recruits were raised only from the Russian empire) and I’m not quite sure why would they be kidnapping the peasants (well, female peasants would at least make some practical sense but what to do with the males? :) ).

As for the future king, probably anybody as long as he is not French.
 
Top