WI: Trotsky wins at Warsaw?
- Thread starter Richard Osborne
- Start date
They have been working together. Support for poles would probably come from fellow slavs.
They could try. The Red Army was hampered by over extension of logistics trying to reach Warsaw. They'd require a extended consolidation if they took the place. I'd also not see this as 'terminating' the Poles. residual armies would still be operating in the south and west & have to be neutralized before marching on to Berlin. If the Bolshivks do intend to continue, and wont negotiate anything the French are liable to go into panic mode and double down on support to the Poles still fighting. We'd also see similar panic in Germany and the 'Black Reichswehr' mobilized to build a viable defense of Germanys eastern regions.
Repulsing the Red threat would be a negotiating point for Germany. Things like the 1923 Ruhr occupation are liable to be waived away, and the half measure of the Young Plan may transmutate into a better revision of the Treaty of Versailles.
You just found one of the very few ways for Weimar to survive in this op. German rearmament to the tune of 300K men at least which I could see France agreeing to would suck up a huge amount of the angry young unemployed men from the beer halls and a larger number of men to help build tanks and planes for those troops. No way do the Nazis have a prayer at taking power under those circumstances. In fact the Nazis might end up an entirely different party ideologically anyway.
The main reason why the Battle was lost was that Stalin, overconfident in the Red Army ordered command to divert some troops to Lvov. In his mind, he thought that it would improve his own standing. However, his role is mostly disputed as he did get most of the blame for losing Warsaw. Another interesting character is Trotsky, who advocated for peace instead of war with Poland. If he doesn't manage to adapt quickly enough, then he could end up with a lot less power than he had in OTL.
It's also important to note that winning Warsaw wouldn't change much, as Russian supply lines were stretched pretty thin after a World War and a revolution. At most, Lenin has Poland under a puppet regime while the Allies shake their fists at him. At the least, it would be a huge propaganda coup for the Soviets before being pushed back to the Curzon Line, possibly inspiring communist revolts in Germany or Hungary. Either way, it's a very interesting scenario for the future of communism in Europe.
It's also important to note that winning Warsaw wouldn't change much, as Russian supply lines were stretched pretty thin after a World War and a revolution. At most, Lenin has Poland under a puppet regime while the Allies shake their fists at him. At the least, it would be a huge propaganda coup for the Soviets before being pushed back to the Curzon Line, possibly inspiring communist revolts in Germany or Hungary. Either way, it's a very interesting scenario for the future of communism in Europe.
Last edited:
Modern Imperialism
Banned
If the Soviets win the war against Poland couldn’t they just reestablish the pre-ww1 1914 borders between them and Germany? They could say it’s a sign of good faith between both nations but in actuality they hope this act encourages Germany to become an ally and become communist. How would the German public and leaders feel about that if the Soviets just offered them the land for free and no strings?
The Soviets would be still fighting the Russian Civil War, facing food shortages, localized rebellions, divisions, and at the end of their rope when they reach Warsaw. (Pushing already limited resources even further.)
Winning at Warsaw does not make them stronger. If anything, it makes them weaker as Poland becomes a resource drain and it creates more anti-Soviet feelings and opposition in Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
Winning at Warsaw does not make them stronger. If anything, it makes them weaker as Poland becomes a resource drain and it creates more anti-Soviet feelings and opposition in Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
Codswallop. An utterly contorted Trotskyite view of history.
Yegorov moved against Lvov and Stalin just so happened to be under his command. He might not be blameless, but was hardly the primary reason or factor.
Ah, apologies, I'm no expert on military history, so its always good to see someone else correct me. So, if Commander Alexander Yegorov dies after slipping down a staircase or something of the sort, would the Red Army change its tactics, or would the March to Lvov continue as in OTL? While I'm not certain if winning Warsaw would allow the Soviets to dominate Eastern Europe, it could still allow them to negotiate with Germany and the WAllies for better borders.
This Pod would have major consequences for third countries as well. The Red Army created baggage train governments for a Lithuanian-Belarussian SSR and a Galician SSR, if they last longer than OTL the status of Memel and Subcarpathian Ruthenia would probably be affected.
I'd recommend reading Robert Service's biography on Stalin and read others and go for the median of views so to say, I've found it hard to get decent unbiased or less biased books on the civil war.
The problem was the orders were all somewhat of a mix and often conflicting, Yegorov moved on Lvov essentially because he could, but also Kamanev was a incompetent regarding disciplining officers like Yegorov under him, Lenin and especially Trotsky would often flip flop on ideas, one minute saying secure Tukhachevsky's flank, and the next saying move on Romania. So, it can go any which way you like.
And, to be fair to Joe, in the civil war, he was a pretty good commander (relative to the rest).
What do you think would happen if Soviet Russia, after puppeting Poland, would give Germany a territorial corridor to unite East Prussia with the rest of Germany?