Would a White-victory Russia be able to survive operation„Barbarossa“?

IMG_0340.JPG
 
Their tactics would be different,so would they still be able to win operation „Barbarossa“
Since, as @Pyramus presented, butterflies would likely make OTL Barbarossa not happen, I'm going to assume that in TTL, Operation Barbarossa is the name of a 2004 German spec-ops mission to Arabia in order to rescue their kidnapped triathlon Olympics team from terrorists.

In which case, the answer is... probably?

(/s)
 
The possible strengths and weaknesses of a 'White' derived russian state in 1941 cover the broad spectrum.

However, one very likely outcome is a Franco Russian Alliance in 1938 that can threaten Germany with a two front war. Opposition by British and French anti Bolshivk politicians killed such a alliance in the spring/summer of 1939. With some sort of Russian republic or Czarist restoration a Franco Russian Alliance is very likely in the 1930s. As usual the nazis play a strong hand at the start, then lose the later rounds, just faster in this case.

If this Russia has a Facist government, then a French alliance is still possible, as is Russian neutrality. Given Hitlers racial views and territorial ideas a long term alliance between Facist Germany & Facist Russia is as ASB as between Stalinist Russia & Germany.
 
If the whites win the RCW and Hitler somehow still gets into power, then i'm afraid there'll be no WWII, since there would be no Molotov-Ribentropp Pact, since there would be no Stalin; instead, the white russians promise to aid Poland against the invading germans in exchange for some small territorial concessions in the east.
 

Anchises

Banned
Their tactics would be different,so would they still be able to win operation„Barbarossa“

PoD is too early for such a specific question.

However:

If we have some sort of all out war between a White Russia and right wing Germany armed to a similiar extent as OTLs Third Reich I think White Russia might loose.

I don't see the massive industrialization and massive expansion of the military that OTLs Soviets embarked on.
 

Faeelin

Banned
If the whites win the RCW and Hitler somehow still gets into power, then i'm afraid there'll be no WWII, since there would be no Molotov-Ribentropp Pact, since there would be no Stalin; instead, the white russians promise to aid Poland against the invading germans in exchange for some small territorial concessions in the east.

Counterargument: A fascist White RUssian state would be even more inclined than the Soviet Union to see the Poles as Slavic Brothers, who need to be reunited with the Soviet state.
 

Faeelin

Banned
PoD is too early for such a specific question.

However:

If we have some sort of all out war between a White Russia and right wing Germany armed to a similiar extent as OTLs Third Reich I think White Russia might loose.

I don't see the massive industrialization and massive expansion of the military that OTLs Soviets embarked on.

Well, let's unpack this a little.

First, do you believe that communist economies outperform free market economies (or even mixed economies)?

Second, would this *White state get access to capital from London, New York, and Paris that Stalin couldn't? How does this affect the economy?

Third, would this state be as blind to the German threat as Stalin, and would its purges be as thorough?
 
If von Scheubner-Richter survives in this timeline, his ideology of allying a militarist right wing Russia with a militarist right wing Germany. I could easily see a joint Russian-German invasion of Poland at some point. However I doubt Hitler would take power in such a world. I imagine the App Putsch would have been successful if the Russians had defeated the Communists.
 
I don't think you'd see even a Nazi Germany without a Red Russia/USSR. The fear of communist uprisings and invasions is what provided the space for Nazi Germany to get going. Without Russia going Red, Germany probably doesn't go brown, and the 1940s probably become a much less bloody and interesting period of history.
 

Anchises

Banned
Well, let's unpack this a little.

First, do you believe that communist economies outperform free market economies (or even mixed economies)?

Second, would this *White state get access to capital from London, New York, and Paris that Stalin couldn't? How does this affect the economy?

Third, would this state be as blind to the German threat as Stalin, and would its purges be as thorough?

1)I think a Communist state is more effective in arming and maintaining massive standing armies. I don't think that a free market/mixed Economy would afford such a massive military build up. The NATO had fewer troops for a reason.

2)I don't think that foreign capital is necessarily beneficial. The autarky of the early Soviet Union is imho a much more fertile environment for a massive military build up.

And there is a distinct possibility that the foreign capital would flow into the pockets of corrupt white Generals...

3) Thats a pretty detailed question for such a massive PoD. That is hard to tell but I see no reason why a White Russian State should necessarily react better in case of a German surprise attack. Imho that depends entirely on the leaders that would have emerged in such a hypothetical scenario.
 
1)I think a Communist state is more effective in arming and maintaining massive standing armies. I don't think that a free market/mixed Economy would afford such a massive military build up. The NATO had fewer troops for a reason.

2)I don't think that foreign capital is necessarily beneficial. The autarky of the early Soviet Union is imho a much more fertile environment for a massive military build up.

And there is a distinct possibility that the foreign capital would flow into the pockets of corrupt white Generals...

3) Thats a pretty detailed question for such a massive PoD. That is hard to tell but I see no reason why a White Russian State should necessarily react better in case of a German surprise attack. Imho that depends entirely on the leaders that would have emerged in such a hypothetical scenario.

NATO has less troops because until the 1980s and the Reagon buildup NATO forces were a nuclear tripwire force.

There is also a very destinct possibility HItler doesn’t get into power. It is also a very destinct possibility that this Russia industrializes more successfully than the USSR. Considering what the US and the UK managed to do why should Russia be any different.

Third I doubt another leader will mistake the presence of three million troops on the border as anything other than what it is. Preparations for a massive German attack
 

Faeelin

Banned
I don't think you'd see even a Nazi Germany without a Red Russia/USSR. The fear of communist uprisings and invasions is what provided the space for Nazi Germany to get going. Without Russia going Red, Germany probably doesn't go brown, and the 1940s probably become a much less bloody and interesting period of history.

People always say this, but the Germans didn't come to power in 1924, after the Red uprisings. They came to power in the Depression, when Germans wanted jobs.
 
People always say this, but the Germans didn't come to power in 1924, after the Red uprisings. They came to power in the Depression, when Germans wanted jobs.
That was why poor people supported the Nazis. The middle class and the rich supported the Nazis because they were thought to be a vanguard against communism.
 

Anchises

Banned
NATO has less troops because until the 1980s and the Reagon buildup NATO forces were a nuclear tripwire force.

There is also a very destinct possibility HItler doesn’t get into power. It is also a very destinct possibility that this Russia industrializes more successfully than the USSR. Considering what the US and the UK managed to do why should Russia be any different.

Third I doubt another leader will mistake the presence of three million troops on the border as anything other than what it is. Preparations for a massive German attack

I really don't think that a White Russia would have a similiar build up of the heavy industries needed for the military.

Would a White Russia be more prosperous than the Soviet Union? Probably yes.

Would it be more prepared for an apocalyptic war? I don't think so.

The Soviet Union was militarized to a grotesque degree. I don't think that a capitalist oligarchy could or would pull of the same.

I don't think that the victorius Whites would build a capitalist wonderland. A corrupt state similiar ruled by a few corrupt Oligarchs would be a more likely outcome. The ruling Elite would be a more interested in luxury goods than in building T34s.

The question of Germany is a different one. I don't know if ITTL Hitler would rise to power. I do think that people overestimate the role of the Soviets in German politics though. If the Communists in Germany behave similiar to OTLs KPD/Spartakus Bund then I see no reason that would inhibit the rise of far right extremists. Especially if the Great Depression happens ITTL.
 
People always say this, but the Germans didn't come to power in 1924, after the Red uprisings. They came to power in the Depression, when Germans wanted jobs.

The Nazis tried the a coup in 1923. Didn't work. They had the tailwinds of the Weimar hyperinflation going for them but weren't an established enough option on the table to make it work. Then they were in the wilderness again for a while until the Depression re-delegitimized the establishment government.
 
It should be noted that the Nazis were anti-Slavic as well as anti-Communist. The rhetorical figures of hate that they used for Communism were domestic ones (Marx, Luxemburg, Liebknecht) rather than Russian ones, and anti-Slavic racism was a widely held viewpoint in Germany among the entire political spectrium (the right saw them as the eternal enemy of Teutonic civilization, the left saw Slavs as cheap workers used by industrialists to break unions). So don't assume that the Nazis never could have taken over without a Communist state to the east.

After all, look at where they got their votes. They were not racking up votes in the firmly anti-Communist Catholic regions of the Rhineland or Bavaria (those areas kept voting for the Zentrum and the BVP until the end). Rather, there were two areas that they did very well in. One was in East Prussia and along the Polish border. The militaristic nature of the party obviously appealed to Prussian voters distraught over the loss of land.The other was in small town Protestant Northern Germany, often in areas where the old Liberal Party used to do very well in. However, the Nazi Party didn't do totally terrible in areas with lots of industrial voters with some amount of Marxist sentiment. In fact, they were accused in the 1933 election of trying to out-Marx the Marxists.

As for the scenario at hand, it depends on borders and the form of Russian government. Fascism had not yet developed for a Fascist White state to form; Kolchak was more of a military dictator whose pretensions towards eventual elections may or may not have been genuine (recent scholarship actually indicates that it might have been) while Wrangel and the Volunteer Army were monarchists that were varying levels of tolerant towards reform. Its likely that a White Russia does not have a Tsar ruling absolutely; that ship had sailed. Another attempt at a parliament, or military rule, are the choices.
 
People always say this, but the Germans didn't come to power in 1924, after the Red uprisings. They came to power in the Depression, when Germans wanted jobs.

(1) I assume that by "the Germans" you mean the Nazis.

(2) While the Nazi party did come to power during the Great Depression, they came to power only with the aid of German conservatives who feared that the Depression might otherwise lead Germany into "Bolshevism." Without the fear of Communism generated by the existence of the Soviet Union, German politics in the 1930's might have been very different, *even assuming* that Hitler would still be leading a mass movement.

(3) In any event, while the NSDAP grew dramatically during the 1930's, it did not come out of nowhere. The party did first have to exist in 1919-29 and Hitler become a well-known figure for it to grow in the 1930's. And the early history of the NSDAP simply cannot be separated from the fear of Bolshevism. In fact, anti-Bolshevik emigres from Russia (including Baltic Germans) played a critical role in formulating the NSDAP's ideology linking Jews to Bolshevism. http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/groups/scr/kellogg.pdf There are also indirect effects. For example, it is quite likely that without the Beer Hall Putsch, Hitler would never have come to power, both because of the publicity he got at his trial, and because the failure of the Putsch convinced him that the NSDAP must seek a "legal" path to power. Now the Putsch was modeled after Mussolini's March on Rome (or a misunderstood version of it). So without Mussolini's success, Hitler's eventual success might have been impossible. And what made Mussolini's success possible was in part his role in opposing the factory occupations that were largely inspired by the triumph of Bolshevism in Russia.

Or take the SPD-KPD split. It is true that the SPD originally split on the issue of the War, even before the 1917 Russian revolutions. Yet this split might have been temporary if not for the Bolshevik Revolution and the creation of the Comintern. An undivided SPD could have received 40 percent of the vote in 1928 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_1928 and might have served as the basis for a stable left-center government instead of the instability of the next few years in OTL. And that would obviously affect the prospects of the NSDAP--even assuming it would exist as we know it--coming to power.

Anyway, we don't even have to rely on such indirect effects. Bolshevism clearly had a large direct effect on Hitler personally. It is simply not possible to read *Mein Kampf* without seeing a genuine obsession of Hitler's on the subject of Bolshevism--one which was hardly unique to him. Yet we are asked to believe that German politics without a Bolshevik Russia will be unchanged--everything from Hitler's initiation in politics (as a German intelligence officer whose original task was to investigate the radical groups that had sprung up largely as a result of the Bolshevik Revolution) to his rise to power (where fear of Communism was a key part of his appeal) to his decision to invade Russia in 1941 (something advocated as far back as *Mein Kampf* on the groud that "the Jew" through Bolshevism had caused Russia's "decomposition" and made it ripe for conquest by *Lebensraum*-seeking Germany), etc. All this seems very implausible to me. I think that a world where the Whites won in 1918 or 1919 would in 1941 be so different from the world as we know it that talking about Hitler, Barbarossa, etc. would simply be meaningless.
 
Last edited:
Top