WI: Soviets don't annex the Baltic states?

orwelans II

Banned
What if the USSR, upon installing friendly governments in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and moving it's troops into them didn't proceed to make them constituent SSRs of the Union, but kept them de jure independent.

They could keep their own colours on their flags and wouldn't have to call themselves SSRs, although the new communist governments might still change the official names of the countries. The relations between Moscow and Tallinn, Riga and the newly Lithuanian Vilnius would be handled using international agreements. The presence of the RKKA would be justified with a defence pact.

What could be the reason for this change? More importantly; how would this change WW2 and the post war world?
Would the peoples of the three countries be more inclined to resist the Germans? Would there be less Russian migration to the Baltic? Anything else?
 

orwelans II

Banned
Well, the Soviets have three more votes in the UN.
6 instead of 3, but with the capitalists in power all across Latin America they still won't be dominant in the General Assembly untill African and Asian states start joining. When they were taking over the three countries there was no UN.

Without as many Russians there and no annexation would the anti-Moscow movements in those countries be weaker?
 
I see no major butterflies until late 1980s, when there are three less nationalist movements trying to break away from the Soviet Union.

It would make Gorbachev's job much easier, you may see repression in the Caucasus to try to keep the Soviet Union together.
 
It's an imaginable outcome, I suppose. Apparently Beria wanted to make the Baltics independent again, as part of his post-Stalinist program to repair ties with the West.

It's conceivable that, without the Balts advancing the idea of national independence while within the Soviet Union, Soviet nationalist and especially separatist movements might be delayed. Might: It could easily start elsewhere. Everything depends on what, exactly, ends up happening to lead the Baltics towards independence as satellite states.
 
Would the peoples of the three countries be more inclined to resist the Germans?

Yes. When the Baltics were taken over by the USSR, people were relieved at first - not because they wanted anything of the sort, but because they believed being taken over by Germany would be far worse based on their previous experiences. Up to that point, Russia was viewed as a "lesser evil"; the Baltic nations (especially Latvia and Estonia) were much more anti-German than anti-Russian. It took the full brunt of Stalin's repression to erase that.
 
The Baltic States were part of the former Russian Empire. If Ukraine was annexed and incorporated into the USSR, surely the Baltic states would fall victim, too.
 

orwelans II

Banned
The Baltic States were part of the former Russian Empire. If Ukraine was annexed and incorporated into the USSR, surely the Baltic states would fall victim, too.

Poland was also part of the empire, but wasn't annexed, nor was Finland. Ukraine wasn't annexed prior to being incorporated into the USSR, it was one of the four signatories of the Union Treaty that formed the country.
 

orwelans II

Banned
Another questin that might come up is the fate of East Prussia after the war. If Lithuania isn't a part of the USSR, then Konigsberg isn't adjecent to it. Would it still be incorporated into RSFSR?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
It's an imaginable outcome, I suppose. Apparently Beria wanted to make the Baltics independent again, as part of his post-Stalinist program to repair ties with the West.

Didn't he also want to return Kaliningrad Oblast to a reunified Germany, though?

It's conceivable that, without the Balts advancing the idea of national independence while within the Soviet Union, Soviet nationalist and especially separatist movements might be delayed. Might: It could easily start elsewhere. Everything depends on what, exactly, ends up happening to lead the Baltics towards independence as satellite states.

To elaborate on your point here--couldn't the Caucasian peoples and/or Moldovans take the role/place of the Balts in the 1980s and 1990s in this TL?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Another questin that might come up is the fate of East Prussia after the war. If Lithuania isn't a part of the USSR, then Konigsberg isn't adjecent to it. Would it still be incorporated into RSFSR?
Frankly, it might be put into Lithuania instead in this TL.
 
Poland was also part of the empire, but wasn't annexed, nor was Finland. Ukraine wasn't annexed prior to being incorporated into the USSR, it was one of the four signatories of the Union Treaty that formed the country.
But the Soviets technically didn't win the war with Finland. After suffering massive casualties, Finland and the USSR agreed to peace and Finland ceded land. But had the Soviet Union performed better, it would have opted for full annexation. As for Poland, the Soviets did annex Eastern Poland, as prescribed in the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The Soviets made no plans for a puppet Poland until later in the war.
 

James G

Gone Fishin'
Poland was also part of the empire, but wasn't annexed, nor was Finland. Ukraine wasn't annexed prior to being incorporated into the USSR, it was one of the four signatories of the Union Treaty that formed the country.

We should all be aware though that the accession of the Ukraine was very far from the will of the people there. Bolshevik action to take power in Russia and then create an empire was never about letting anyone else have a say.
 
Yes. When the Baltics were taken over by the USSR, people were relieved at first - not because they wanted anything of the sort, but because they believed being taken over by Germany would be far worse based on their previous experiences. Up to that point, Russia was viewed as a "lesser evil"; the Baltic nations (especially Latvia and Estonia) were much more anti-German than anti-Russian. It took the full brunt of Stalin's repression to erase that.

I think saying that the people in the Baltics were "relieved" to be conquered by the Soviets instead of the Germans is not really supported by the evidence. The occupation and the repression that came along with it was not compared by the locals to a theoretical German occupation, it was compared to the reality of these nations' independent existence in 1920-40. Some might have been worried about a German occupation pre-1940, but Soviet aggression was a much bigger worry. After all, it was the Communists led from Moscow who had already staged attempts to overthrow the government in these states the interwar, not Germany or German agents. The Baltics before 1940 were anti-German, sure - only somewhat less than they were anti-Soviet. The Stalinist repression in 40-41 reinforced the very real anti-Soviet feelings in these states, it did not create them.
 

orwelans II

Banned
Frankly, it might be put into Lithuania instead in this TL.
Lithuania's population would then be like 40% German before they drive the Germans out of their new conquest. And they wouldn't have anyone to settle there instead. I think Poland would be a more likely candidate to take over both halves of East Prussia instead. This could have further effects on the post-war Polish-German border. Another option is just to have it be part of the RSFSR like in otl.

We should all be aware though that the accession of the Ukraine was very far from the will of the people there. Bolshevik action to take power in Russia and then create an empire was never about letting anyone else have a say.
There were Bolshies in the Ukraine as well. You don't win a long civil war without having some local support. They didn't have it in Poland in 1920 and they didn't have it in the Baltics in 1940, not to the extent that they did have it in Ukraine.

If the Germans did occupy the Baltics (which would be soviet allies in this scenario) would they simply replace their governments or incorporate them into RK Ostland like in OTL?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Lithuania's population would then be like 40% German before they drive the Germans out of their new conquest. And they wouldn't have anyone to settle there instead. I think Poland would be a more likely candidate to take over both halves of East Prussia instead. This could have further effects on the post-war Polish-German border. Another option is just to have it be part of the RSFSR like in otl.
Actually, I think that Lithuania had a large rural population during this time--rural people who can become urbanized and settle in various urban areas, including in the former East Prussia.
 
I think saying that the people in the Baltics were "relieved" to be conquered by the Soviets instead of the Germans is not really supported by the evidence. The occupation and the repression that came along with it was not compared by the locals to a theoretical German occupation, it was compared to the reality of these nations' independent existence in 1920-40. Some might have been worried about a German occupation pre-1940, but Soviet aggression was a much bigger worry. After all, it was the Communists led from Moscow who had already staged attempts to overthrow the government in these states the interwar, not Germany or German agents. The Baltics before 1940 were anti-German, sure - only somewhat less than they were anti-Soviet. The Stalinist repression in 40-41 reinforced the very real anti-Soviet feelings in these states, it did not create them.

The Germans most certainly did try to overthrow a Baltic government in the interwar. In fact, they temporarily succeeded: the Latvian government was overthrown by the Germans in April 1919 (the "Liepaja Putsch") and replaced by a reactionary puppet regime under the collaborationist Andrievs Niedra. The Latvians eventually ousted the unpopular Niedra and restored their legitimate government, forcing out his German masters with Estonian and British help.

The experience of WWI and the early interwar years made the Baltic nations fear and resent the possibility of German occupation more than the possibility of Soviet occupation. Certainly the anti-Soviet feelings were not created by Stalin's repression; but this unexpected and extraordinary high level of repression is what made them stronger than the anti-German feelings...I don't see what would be so strange about that. For the record, I came across this assertion in War Land On The Eastern Front by Vejas Liulevicus (a Lithuanian-American historian whose family left their homeland to escape Soviet rule. So - putting it mildly - not a person likely to hold some kind of pro-Russian bias).
 
I suspect that a Soviet occupation of the Baltics that was more sensitive to local concerns might have been more successful, but then expecting sensitivity from Stalin is a bit much.

Lithuania, unlike Latvia and Estonia, did experience rapid population growth after the Second World War without immigration. In Latvia and Estonia, absent immigration national populations might never have recovered to their 1940 peaks, and the populations of the titular nationalities never did recover. Lithuania, in marked contrast, saw its ethnic Lithuanian population grow by nearly half during the Soviet era. A Lithuanian colonization of at least part of East Prussia might well have been doable.
 
The Germans most certainly did try to overthrow a Baltic government in the interwar. In fact, they temporarily succeeded: the Latvian government was overthrown by the Germans in April 1919 (the "Liepaja Putsch") and replaced by a reactionary puppet regime under the collaborationist Andrievs Niedra. The Latvians eventually ousted the unpopular Niedra and restored their legitimate government, forcing out his German masters with Estonian and British help.

The experience of WWI and the early interwar years made the Baltic nations fear and resent the possibility of German occupation more than the possibility of Soviet occupation. Certainly the anti-Soviet feelings were not created by Stalin's repression; but this unexpected and extraordinary high level of repression is what made them stronger than the anti-German feelings...I don't see what would be so strange about that. For the record, I came across this assertion in War Land On The Eastern Front by Vejas Liulevicus (a Lithuanian-American historian whose family left their homeland to escape Soviet rule. So - putting it mildly - not a person likely to hold some kind of pro-Russian bias).

Well, I think I know pretty well the Estonian case and to say that they would have been, of all the words in the world, "relieved" about the brutal Stalinist occupation is purely abhorrent. They were as much relieved as the hanged man is relieved by the rope. I'm sorry but that's how it is and I cannot imagine how you could even begin to argue anything else. It was the Germans that were greeted with relief in the summer of 1941, but of course that changed quickly when it emerged that they were just as bent on destroying Estonia's national existence.
 
Top