Earliest year the Soviet Union can fall?

[Zajir]

There have been lot's of disscusions about how the Soviet Union can survive longer but I don't think this question has ever been asked, so what is the earliest date from 1945 onward that the Soviet Union can fall?

NOTE: I mean fall as in OTL from within conquest or total destruction from nuclear war is not applicable.

 

[Twin City Lines]

I would say 1956. De-Stalinisation and the crisis in Hungary could have been a toxic mix with a few more Khrushchev mistakes.

 

[LeX]

I would say that if Stalin dies at an unideal time, you could have a civil war.

 

[Alexius]

I would say 1956. De-Stalinisation and the crisis in Hungary could have been a toxic mix with a few more Khrushchev mistakes.

Could it have gone in '53 with a civil war between supporters of Khruschev/Malenkov and Beria?

 

[BlairWitch749]

It could be very early... just have a few back to back years of absolute failure in terms of grain crops (it happened at least periodically under the soviet agriculture system)... but make it worse than otl till the populace revolts

 

[Michel Van]

how about 1968 ?
in eastblock Prague Spring sprawled out
but USSR cant not scotched that, because there in full war with China
because Sino-Soviet border conflict wend out of controll.

 

[archaeogeek]

It could be very early... just have a few back to back years of absolute failure in terms of grain crops (it happened at least periodically under the soviet agriculture system)... but make it worse than otl till the populace revolts

It happened periodically in Russia, period; there had been major famines in the 19th and early 20th century too during the empire, there were three in all under the soviets, one being so early you might as well blame the war.

 

[LastEmperor]

The earliest possible? Probably where the USSR joins the Korean War and it goes nuclear. The nuclear "gap" was far in the US's favor at that time, and the US had the ability to strike at the interior of Russia, while Russia didn't.

 

[archaeogeek]

The earliest possible? Probably where the USSR joins the Korean War and it goes nuclear. The nuclear "gap" was far in the US's favor at that time, and the US had the ability to strike at the interior of Russia, while Russia didn't.

Strike at the interior of Russia for a certain value of "interior"? How do you plan to deliver nukes if the planes carrying them are getting chopped up on the way?

 

[Typo]

Strike at the interior of Russia for a certain value of "interior"? How do you plan to deliver nukes if the planes carrying them are getting chopped up on the way?

The thing is not that many planes need to survive when their payload are nuclear

 

[jakewilson]

Anyway, the OP precludes war as an option.
That said, I think there's a post-war window where collapse could have happened. A power vacuum because of the changed up priorities of the state, sluggish growth because of the massive damage to the workforce and infrastructure, geopolitical instability because of their lack of a bomb, and perhaps a few more satellite regimes try to take the Yugoslavia rout. This all clusters in a massive crisis leading to collapse, especially if Stalin dies for any reason.

 

[The Dude]

Hmm, perhaps if Stalin dies, oh say, just before German surrender,and a power struggle ensues, things could get very hairy. Also, if Lenin were to die just after the revolution, collapse is all but guaranteed.

 

[B_Munro]

The earliest possible? Probably where the USSR joins the Korean War and it goes nuclear. The nuclear "gap" was far in the US's favor at that time, and the US had the ability to strike at the interior of Russia, while Russia didn't.

Well, perhaps that why it didn't OTL.

Bruce

 

[B_Munro]

Frankly, I think people were just too damn scared by 1945 to rebel. And a genuinely Stalinist system can survive a few famines. Look at N. Korea. Look at Mao's China. I can imagine the Soviet Union falling apart in the late 60's in a world where Krushchev gets the drop on his opponents and really opens the floodgates of change, but in the shadow of Stalin, even if he dies in 1945, the system will continue to continue by momentum for quite a while.

Bruce

 

[Shawn Endresen]

Conversely, I see it happening in the 70s if Khruschev fails to get out his miracle vote in '57 and loses out to Molotov (this may be paired with Hungary going pear-shaped). Molotov ought to be able to wreck international relations and run the economy into the ground badly enough that when he dies or becomes too old to function, the politburo elects...no one at all...to succeed him, rather like OTL.

 

[Monty Burns]

Frankly, I think people were just too damn scared by 1945 to rebel. And a genuinely Stalinist system can survive a few famines. Look at N. Korea. Look at Mao's China.

Very true - but you also mentioned a strong condition: a "true" Stalinist system such as Mao's China or North Korea - or Stalinist SU. All three have a strong "freat leader" at the top. A Stalinist system without a great leader is not that stable anymore, particularly if the Paladins of the deceased great leader struggle for power and famine sets in.

So I say the earliest time is about 1947 - Stalin dies 1945, power struggle sets in with the military strongly involved, two years of bad harvests, done.

 

[Dan]

Conversely, I see it happening in the 70s if Khruschev fails to get out his miracle vote in '57 and loses out to Molotov (this may be paired with Hungary going pear-shaped). Molotov ought to be able to wreck international relations and run the economy into the ground badly enough that when he dies or becomes too old to function, the politburo elects...no one at all...to succeed him, rather like OTL.

Molotov is a potential, but too ineffectual.
I'd say the start of the fall could be 1953 if Beria takes over instead of Khruschev. Not for the reasons above, quite the opposite. If you read In the court of the Red Tsar, by Simon Sebag Montefiore, Beria, in his post Stalin plans is painted as really quite liberal in his approach, I can't remember specifics at the moment, (I'm naughtily posting from work, so I'll re-read the passages when I get home later), but had he gotten into power, you could have seen a Peristroika type shift very early, possibly followed by a hardline NKVD/KGB coup attempt maybe defeated with the help of the Army and a Communist government more in alignment in style with the French or Italian communists rather than the Chinese or North Korean model.

 

[B_Munro]

So I say the earliest time is about 1947 - Stalin dies 1945, power struggle sets in with the military Obeying Orders, two years of bad harvests, done.

Fixed a bit for you.

Bruce