WI: USSR transforms Eastern Bloc into SSRs?

As we all know, the end of World War II determined that the USSR install communist governments in the nations of Eastern Europe and gain a sphere of influence over them. For something I'm working on, though, what would it take for the USSR to invade the Eastern Bloc nations during the Cold War to establish them as SSRs?
 
As we all know, the end of World War II determined that the USSR install communist governments in the nations of Eastern Europe and gain a sphere of influence over them. For something I'm working on, though, what would it take for the USSR to invade the Eastern Bloc nations during the Cold War to establish them as SSRs?
Stalin lives on and descends into batshit madness.
c21b4578c615fb0809e31d55f1c35c06.jpg
 
As we all know, the end of World War II determined that the USSR install communist governments in the nations of Eastern Europe and gain a sphere of influence over them. For something I'm working on, though, what would it take for the USSR to invade the Eastern Bloc nations during the Cold War to establish them as SSRs?

Supposedly Todor Zhivkov offered to have Bulgaria join the USSR but was turned down. https://books.google.com/books?id=fCx1DgAAQBAJ&pg=PA100 https://books.google.com/books?id=G6iBAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA88 I'm a little bit skeptical of that (maybe if Zhivkov did it, it was in the full expectation that he would be turned down, so that this was a safe way of demonstrating his loyalty to Moscow). But in the unlikely event the USSR wanted the east European nations to join the USSR it would not have to "invade" to do so (after all, it already had troops there); it would just pressure the local leaders to "request" incorporation into the USSR.

There are many reasons it was unlikely to do so--it was unnecessary, it would upset the local populations, it would alienate Third World countries the USSR had tried to woo with "anti-imperialist" rhetoric, and it would probably lose a lot of UN seats--it was one thing for the West to accept two Union Republics in the UN but they were unlikely to accept a half dozen more...
 
Ok here's a rough scenario:

Instead of carving up Poland with Stalin, Hitler allies with the Poles and effectively vassalizes them (return of Danzig and the Corridor in return for a Polish lease on the port, etc). There is no Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, but Stalin does invade Finland and grab the Baltic states, which Hitler and the Poles ignore for now, but the Soviets don't make moves on Romania. The Germans and Soviets strike a trade deal.

War in the west is sparked by Hitler demanding Belgian territory. Goes roughly as IOTL.

With no MR-Pact, Stalin is more wary of Hitler, but he is too cautious to strike first as he would have to go through the Eastern Axis "bulwarks" of Poland, Hungary, and Romania first. German-Soviet trade continues.

Operation Barbarossa (this time with the support of Axis Poland). Even though the Soviets are more well-prepared, it is still a devastating blow. The Axis get further into and smash up more of the USSR. The Holocaust is more horrific in Eastern Europe due to the cooperation of the Polish state, and the Arrow Cross and Iron Guard coming to power earlier in Hungary and Romania, respectively

By the time the Soviets have turned the tide and pushed back the Axis, the Allies have gotten much further into Germany and taken most of Austria, have liberated Czechoslovakia themselves, and have landed in the Balkans to liberate Albania and occupy Bulgaria too. Tito's Partisans liberate Yugoslavia mostly by themselves.

At war's end, the Soviets 'only' occupy Romania, Hungary, Poland, and a small (nonviable) part of Eastern Germany and an even tinier (non-viable) part of Austria.

Stalin withdraws from eastern Germany and Austria, in return for them being demilitarised and neutral. He decides to break up Poland, Hungary, and Romania into smaller constituent regions and directly annex them as SSRs into the Soviet Union, as punishment for their fascist governments and Axis belligerence, full-bore Holocaust participation, and to more fully absorb their resources.

Tito-Stalin split happens. Due to being occupied by the Allies, Albania, Bulgaria, and Czechoslovakia become free-market, democratic, capitalist states that join NATO. Germany and Austria are forced to remain neutral and demilitarised. Finland is still Finlandised.
 
Wanda Wasilewska, the president of the Soviet-controlled government Union of Polish Patriots, advocated for Poland becoming a Soviet Republic (sadly she is the only politician I found that held such opinions - maybe an expert of Polish history might help us find other major players in the USSR and in eastern Euruope who wanted an outright annexation of Poland into the Union).

If the pro-integretion faction prevailed within the communist parties of Poland and the Soviet Union, Poland would have become a Soviet Republic. To preserve the democratic facade, Stalin would possibly wait until the 1946 Three Times Yes Referendum or even until the rigged communist electoral victory in the 1947 parliamentary elections. Then the communist government of Poland might have applied for membership in the USSR, request the USSR would have accepted.

This in turn might set a precedent for Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania and even the GDR to eventually become members of the Soviet Union. Effects on the civil war in Greece, Mongolia, Korea and other third world countries are to be expected. Since in most African and Asian countries Communism was popular because it was perceived as a possibility of liberation from (capitalist) western imperialism/colonialism, Communism might not be that popular if the Soviet Union itself is blatantly expansionist. Without Communism, there is maybe room for a powerful third way in the Third World, like Titoism or Baathism.

Also expect an even more raging anti-communism in the west, especially in West Germany if East Germany becomes part of the Soviet Union. This means radicalization on the right, radicalization on the left, revolutions, coups and a potentially very interesting TL!
 
Last edited:
Supposedly Todor Zhivkov offered to have Bulgaria join the USSR but was turned down. https://books.google.com/books?id=fCx1DgAAQBAJ&pg=PA100 https://books.google.com/books?id=G6iBAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA88 I'm a little bit skeptical of that (maybe if Zhivkov did it, it was in the full expectation that he would be turned down, so that this was a safe way of demonstrating his loyalty to Moscow). But in the unlikely event the USSR wanted the east European nations to join the USSR it would not have to "invade" to do so (after all, it already had troops there); it would just pressure the local leaders to "request" incorporation into the USSR.
You're right about the offer not being serious. I've read the Politburo resolution on this question and while it contains lots of panegyrics about Bulgarian-Soviet friendship and based on that friendship, lots of detailed information about how the Soviets could help Bulgaria right now but basically no explanation of what steps should be taken for Bulgaria to actually join the USSR. It was basically a very elaborate way to flatter the Soviet leaders and it worked, considering how many concessions Bulgaria received from the Soviets.

The source by the way makes an unjustified connection between Bulgarian Russophilia and the offer to the Soviets. The offer was actually kept strictly secret but when it leaked out anyway, it caused quite an outrage. Bulgarians might be Russophilic but they certainly wouldn't want Bulgaria to be annexed by the Soviets. As you correctly point out, this would alienate the Eastern Europeans - including the most Russophile of them.
 
Wanda Wasilewska, the president of the Soviet-controlled government Union of Polish Patriots, advocated for Poland becoming a Soviet Republic (sadly she is the only politician I found that held such opinions - maybe an expert of Polish history might help us find other major players in the USSR and in eastern Euruope who wanted an outright annexation of Poland into the Union).

If the pro-integretion faction prevailed within the communist parties of Poland and the Soviet Union, Poland would have become a Soviet Republic. To preserve the democratic facade, Stalin would possibly wait until the 1946 Three Times Yes Referendum or even until the rigged communist electoral victory in the 1947 parliamentary elections. Then the communist government of Poland might have applied for membership in the USSR, request the USSR would have accepted.

This in turn might set a precedent for Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania and even the GDR to eventually become members of the Soviet Union. Effects on the civil war in Greece, Mongolia, Korea and other third world countries are to be expected. Since in most African and Asian countries Communism was popular because it was perceived as a possibility of liberation from (capitalist) western imperialism/colonialism, Communism might not be that popular if the Soviet Union itself is blatantly expansionist. Without Communism, there is maybe room for a powerful third way in the Third World, like Titoism or Baathism.

Also expect an even more raging anti-communism in the west, especially in West Germany if East Germany becomes part of the Soviet Union. This means radicalization on the right, radicalization on the left, revolutions, coups and a potentially very interesting TL!

Problem with Poles is that there was still people who remembered time before independence and there was much willing to keep that. Even Baltic republics didn't accept SSR status easily so just can imaginate what kind of job is with Poland.
 
Problem with Poles is that there was still people who remembered time before independence and there was much willing to keep that. Even Baltic republics didn't accept SSR status easily so just can imaginate what kind of job is with Poland.

Yes was my guess too. Even convinced communists like Gomułka wanted to preserve Polnish indepdence (within the communist block). However, when the going gets tough, the USSR has the military ressources to destroy such a Polish independence movement and integrate Poland into the Soviet Union, just like it annexed parts of Poland in 1939.
 
Stalin lives on and descends into batshit madness.
Problem with Poles is that there was still people who remembered time before independence and there was much willing to keep that. Even Baltic republics didn't accept SSR status easily so just can imaginate what kind of job is with Poland.
Pretty much. Stalin did have absolute power, full controll of the flow of information and the means to carry it out but it's rather extreme.

To create this stable union you'd have to deport about 150 million people, village after village to everywhere else, to create one huge union where no region has a clear ethnic majority. It's easily done with the smaller countires, 3 million Estonians can easily be diluted in the 300 million union, it gets harder with 40 million Poles and 50 million Ukrainians.
 
Problem with Poles is that there was still people who remembered time before independence and there was much willing to keep that. Even Baltic republics didn't accept SSR status easily so just can imaginate what kind of job is with Poland.
Especially when you would have to deal with the Polish borders with the Lithuanian, Belarussian, and Ukrainian SSRs. And let us not get started with East Germany...
 
Yes was my guess too. Even convinced communists like Gomułka wanted to preserve Polnish indepdence (within the communist block). However, when the going gets tough, the USSR has the military ressources to destroy such a Polish independence movement and integrate Poland into the Soviet Union, just like it annexed parts of Poland in 1939.

Sure, the endgame will be never be in doubt, nevertheless it will be a PR knightmare (losing a lot of support in the west and third world) and a costly effort regarding occupation and suppression of rebellion...basically it will be a ton of problems for no advantage respect to OTL
 
Sure, the endgame will be never be in doubt, nevertheless it will be a PR knightmare (losing a lot of support in the west and third world) and a costly effort regarding occupation and suppression of rebellion...basically it will be a ton of problems for no advantage respect to OTL
Yep. The Yugoslavs would break from Moscow far quicker and the Arabs might become hostile, especially if the Soviets pushed for Armenian and Georgian claimed land from Turkey and supported the Kurds as they would see them expanding without any sign of stopping. Yes, the Soviets didn't push too hard against Turkey and Iran IOTL as the Americans and British wouldn't stand for it, while trying to annex those European countries would have made this.... I can't really think of the words, as the Soviets doing all of this would have been so dangerous to themselves.

Let's back up, perhaps. The Soviets build up a lot of buffer states around themselves in Europe. These countries had different languages and cultures, and the decade leading up to WWII and the war itself saw most of these states invade their neighbors. Many were states that went to war with the Soviets or were invaded by them. What happens? Now the Soviets can't quite take their stuff as reperations in the same way as they have to rebuild them (Eastern Europe was a drain leading up to the fall of Communism, but the reparations and loot might have been sizable early on). How do you organize them? Do you do massive population transfers? Do you draw the lines so that the Hungarians still retain land seized from the Slovaks? What about Szekleyland? We saw how well the situation went with Nagorno-Karabakh in the Caucasus. Would it be given to the Hungarians to be treated like Nakhichivan?(Ecen though that arrangement was only due to the autonomy for them and Adjara.) And of course, what about the Germans?

One last thing. The Soviet Union did mostly overlap with the Russian Empire sure, though I don't think it should be thought of as just a Russian centered state. Still, near the end of the union, Russians only make up around half the population. They weren't entirely happy with this. How much worse if they have loads of culture Catholics, Protestants, and non-Slavs around with their own socialists and nationalists who all want out. Unlike in the Baltics, the Russians wouldn't be able to simply deport all the Germans and send the remaining Baltic leadership and their families to Siberia and replace them with Ukranians and Russians. They can't stretch that far.
 
Sure, the endgame will be never be in doubt, nevertheless it will be a PR knightmare (losing a lot of support in the west and third world) and a costly effort regarding occupation and suppression of rebellion...basically it will be a ton of problems for no advantage respect to OTL

Yes but that's why it would be interesting.
 
Yes but that's why it would be interesting.
One that turns their War of Liberation into a War of Conquest. Well, maybe having a different sort of Warsaw Pact might work, as a sort of Comintern with SSRS participating with various People's Republics. Of course there is the problem that the Eastern Bloc was allowed to have parties that were not the Communist Party. Sometimes even multiple owns, acting as coalitions. Maybe Lvov would be a good capital for this sort of thing. Or maybe move the capital of Russia to Leningrad, and make a large area around Moscow be the capital district.
 

oberdada

Gone Fishin'
Unlikely, but a Polish SSR with 1935 borders in the east and 1945 borders in the west + the northern half of Eastern Prussia would be huge...
 
Top