WI Somebody else succeeds Stalin

WI, after Stalin's death on March 5th 1953, someone else succeeds Stalin? Possible successors could be Molotov who was a party big wig and a Stalinist to the bone. He died in 1984 which would make his regime even bloodier and possibly remembered even more than Stalin's. From what I gathered he was similarly ruthless as his boss. Then there's Lavrenti Beria who is a sexual predator, a pervert, a rapist. He, however, in the last few years of Stalin's reign came to the conclusion that communism wasn't going to work in the form it was in. Maybe we'd see Gorbachev/Deng Xiaoping style reforms although I pity all the extra victims of his perversions. He'd be better for the USSR IMHO. A plus side for him gaining power is his NKVD power base. The least likely, but still interesting, are smaller figures like Malenkov, Bulganin and Kaganovich. The latter died in 1991, a mere weeks before the fall of the Soviet Union.

So what could have happened? Thoughts/Ideas?
 
Who would be the most likely successor, aside from Kruschev? I would say Molotov, but that seems a bit cliche. If Baria didn't go off and get himself shot, he might have. What about a Red Army coup?
 
Who would be the most likely successor, aside from Kruschev? I would say Molotov, but that seems a bit cliche. If Baria didn't go off and get himself shot, he might have. What about a Red Army coup?

Zhukov as leader of the USSR? Seems unlikely, but he was popular with the troops. Stalin thought of him as a threat for just that reason. In a Red Army coup, he seems the obvious choice as leader (even if he's uninvolved himself, he is a good one to put in charge).
 
Who's that chap who was president whose name began with P ? Always seemed underutilised and could be a good front for a different band of men

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Though Beria as a successor is often considered cliched, very few realize how almost ASB such a scenario would be.

It would involve the murder/imprisonment/abduction of countless high-powered courtiers (all aligned against Beria) and, on the off chance that it is successful, it would undoubtedly invite a counter-coup from Zhukov and the Red Army, and I don't have to tell you who would win in a fight between the NKVD and the Red Army.

In my opinion, Malenkov would probably be the best successor to hope for. He was in favor of gradual agricultural and industrial reform, esp. shifting from heavy industry to consumer goods. He was acceptable to both the liberals and conservatives within the Party, but was unfortunately tainted by association with the worst of both factions (Beria for the liberals, Molotov and Kaganovich for the conservatives). And all the while he stood steadfastly (post-Stalin, of course) against purges, brutalistic dictatorship, etc.

I suppose if Khrushchev and the rest of the anti-Beria clique are less successful at cleaning house, he might have been kept on as Premier, something that could have major butterflies.
 
Malenkov would've been an acceptable successor to the Generals, because there was no way they would've allowed Beria or anyone else closely associated with him to get anywhere near power. He may have also been acceptable to Khruschchev if the Army hadn't been as successful in "cleaning house" as they were in actuality. (it's been said that when the Lubyanka was cleared, Marshal Rokossovosky and a parachute battalion went in with a list of names (300 single-spaced typed pages of names of those they wanted). The lucky ones were summarily shot. The unlucky ones were tossed into the cells after they'd been emptied of their previous occupants (who were allowed to go home), subjected to frightful torture, and then shot.(the GRU did the torturing) The really unlucky ones were sent to the Gulag. And if the NKVD tries anything, the Army's on alert and waiting-and has a chance to settle many old scores in the process. And then Khruschchev and Malenkov, et al, are beholden to the Army (Zhukov, Koniev, Rokossovosky, etc.) for quite a while.
 
The army seems to lose out every possible power struggle from before the Russian revolution to present day.
 
Molotov ruling would pretty much be a continuation of Stalinist rule most likely. Nothing like the secret speech, anything like the Prague Spring is crushed immediately so it can't develop, continued harsh collectivization Industrial development and so on.

I doubt the army would seize power on its own. They didn't really do anything to protect themselves during the Great Purge,so why seize power and institute a military dictatorship just because you can?
 
Chuikov has always struck me as someone how could rise to the top in a Red Army coup (he and Zhukov were almost equally popular and hated the hell out of each other)
 
Top