Successful Soviet-Dominated World

[Oba]

I'm sure this has come up countless times, but - not wanting to do thread necro - I thought it would be better for me to start a new thread on it; thus:

With a POD no earlier than 1923 (right after the Russian Civil War), I was wondering how the USSR could "win" the Cold War, or even avoid it altogether? I think it would be possible, but it would require Lenin's Last Will and Testament not being suppressed (and thus, no rise of Stalin).

My reasoning for this is as follows: No Stalin almost certainly means not only no Non-Aggression Pact with the Nazis but also most likely no Great Purge, leaving the Red Army in a position of strength against and a willingness to take on the Wehrmacht, thus largely butterflying the Second World War away. And Japan, if it would dare attack Manchuria, would face a similar defeat at the hands of the Red Army.

This alone would be a major turning point, as the Soviets would be seen as heroes by many if not most, especially by the world's colonized peoples. Furthermore, assuming the lack of a Holodomor or Dekulakization (both of which were atrocities of Stalin's doing), the Soviets would have still less of a Stalinist burden on them than in OTL's Postwar world. This would give the USSR much more leverage in Latin America, South Asia, Southeast Asia and Africa in proxy wars with the United States and its allies.

Also, without the crippling levels of social and political repression that existed in OTL's USSR for most of its history, Soviet soft power would be far greater than in OTL and in this ATL could possibly rival that of the Capitalist West.

Finally, IMHO, a Communist victory in China was probably bound to happen, given the corruption of the Nationalists, alongside a far greater Soviet aid in the Pacific theatre in this ATL, . Not that OTL's PRC is a bastion of anti-corruption by any means, but people as a whole generally have revolutions when things are going poorly, even if it is not the leadership's fault. Not to mention the Soviets would most certainly help the Communists in China, further weakening the nationalists. And, if we assume an ATL Communist China (let's just call it the PRC for simplicity), it is quite conceivable that the ATL PRC and the USSR may not have a Sino-Soviet split, further increasing Communist power, both hard and soft. Furthermore, China would certainly develop faster without a cut-off of Soviet aid and economic cooperation.

It seems that the majority of newly independent countries who gained independence from colonialism, along with at least a good amount in Latin America, would side with the ATL Communist bloc, further increasing said ATL Communist bloc's power.

Finally, beyond that, I don't know what else would happen.

Any thoughts? I know it's pretty sketchy, but I'm reading up on it as I write this.

 

[Red Cesar]

without stalin, the ussr will not industrialize nearly as quickly as OTL. Now while the purges are unlikely to happen, stalin also had (arguably) a large hand in winning the war.

 

[Kou Gakei]

"We are fifty or a hundred years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or they will crush us."

- Speech "The Tasks of Economic Executives" (4 February 1931) Stalin said this in 1931, at the beginning of the rapid industrialization campaign. Ten years later, Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union.

 

[The Red]

I'm sceptical that Leon 'Kronstadt' Trotsky wouldn't get around to purging the army himself at some point, neither was he particularly critical of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact:

The invasions of Poland and of the Baltic countries were the inevitable result of the alliance with Germany. It would be rather childish to think that the collaboration of Stalin and Hitler is founded on mutual confidence; these gentlemen understand each other too well. During the Moscow negotiations last summer, the German danger could and had to appear not only very real but also quite immediate. Not without Ribbentrop’s influence, as was said, the Kremlin supposed that England and France would not make a move against the accomplished fact of the subjugation of Poland and that consequently Hitler might gain a free hand for further expansion toward the east. Under these conditions the alliance with Germany was completed by material guarantees taken by Russia against its ally.

 

[Vice President Mike]

Hitler dosnt declare War on the US. America still sends lend lease to Russia. The Soviets march into Paris taking with them all of Europe except Great Britian. They also take all of Korea and invade Northern Japan. They help Mao win the Chinese Civil War, but later kill him and puts a puppet in charge of China.

The Soviet Union forces their European puppets to give their colonies independce. These African and Asian countries are now in the Soviet Bloc. Help Castro and Che in Latin America. They also beat America to the moon.

The United States later accept the Soviet Union won the Cold War......But in 2014 they are seen rising again hosting the Winter Olympics in Denver.

Some interesting OTL facts........
-Soviet Union built the largest army in history ( 20 million in WW2 )
-Largest Nuke ever ( Tsar Bomb )
-Best Tank, the T-34 ( according to the Military Channel )
-Best Gun, AK-47 ( according to Military Channel )
-Largest Submarine in history
-First Satellite, ship, man, women, animal, spacewalk, orbit, Rover in Space

 

[Dunning Kruger]

Some interesting OTL facts........
-Soviet Union built the largest army in history ( 20 million in WW2 )
-Largest Nuke ever ( Tsar Bomb )
-Best Tank, the T-34 ( according to the Military Channel )
-Best Gun, AK-47 ( according to Military Channel )
-Largest Submarine in history
-First Satellite, ship, man, women, animal, spacewalk, orbit, Rover in Space

And yet, OTL, they couldnt make a comfortable pair of blue jeans, a tasty cola flavored carbonated beverage, or an advanced, transistor based semiconductor.

 

[Anaxagoras]

The Soviet Union carried the seeds of its eventual destruction from the moment of its formation. Any system built upon the principles of USSR will inevitably decay and collapse, so the idea of a Soviet-dominated world is quite unrealistic.

 

[KACKO]

tasty cola flavored carbonated beverage

Well at least Czechoslovaks were making during communist era soft drink Kofola. Actually still produced. And in 70-ties even better came into production. Vinea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kofola

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinea_(soft_drink)

Shoot will have to use it in collaborative Czechoslovak ISOT timeline.

 

[Aley]

Well at least Czechoslovaks were making during communist era soft drink Kofola. Actually still produced. And in 70-ties even better came into production. Vinea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kofola

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinea_(soft_drink)

Shoot will have to use it in collaborative Czechoslovak ISOT timeline.

And what? Russian kvass delicious drink. Naturally-carbonated and non-alcoholic.

 

[Corbell Mark IV]

Hitler dosnt declare War on the US. America still sends lend lease to Russia. The Soviets march into Paris taking with them all of Europe except Great Britian. They also take all of Korea and invade Northern Japan. They help Mao win the Chinese Civil War, but later kill him and puts a puppet in charge of China.

The Soviet Union forces their European puppets to give their colonies independce. These African and Asian countries are now in the Soviet Bloc. Help Castro and Che in Latin America. They also beat America to the moon.

The United States later accept the Soviet Union won the Cold War......But in 2014 they are seen rising again hosting the Winter Olympics in Denver.

Some interesting OTL facts........
-Soviet Union built the largest army in history ( 20 million in WW2 )
-Largest Nuke ever ( Tsar Bomb )
-Best Tank, the T-34 ( according to the Military Channel )
-Best Gun, AK-47 ( according to Military Channel )
-Largest Submarine in history
-First Satellite, ship, man, women, animal, spacewalk, orbit, Rover in Space

Pretty good.

 

[Maxwell Edison II]

Hitler dosnt declare War on the US. America still sends lend lease to Russia. The Soviets march into Paris taking with them all of Europe except Great Britian. They also take all of Korea and invade Northern Japan. They help Mao win the Chinese Civil War, but later kill him and puts a puppet in charge of China.

The Soviet Union forces their European puppets to give their colonies independce. These African and Asian countries are now in the Soviet Bloc. Help Castro and Che in Latin America. They also beat America to the moon.

The United States later accept the Soviet Union won the Cold War......But in 2014 they are seen rising again hosting the Winter Olympics in Denver.

Some interesting OTL facts........
-Soviet Union built the largest army in history ( 20 million in WW2 )
-Largest Nuke ever ( Tsar Bomb )
-Best Tank, the T-34 ( according to the Military Channel )
-Best Gun, AK-47 ( according to Military Channel )
-Largest Submarine in history
-First Satellite, ship, man, women, animal, spacewalk, orbit, Rover in Space

So, do the US and Britain throw the idiot ball back and forth cross the Atlantic, or do each have their own?

 

[Corbell Mark IV]

...

My reasoning for this is as follows: No Stalin almost certainly means not only no Non-Aggression Pact with the Nazis but also most likely no Great Purge, leaving the Red Army in a position of strength against and a willingness to take on the Wehrmacht, thus largely butterflying the Second World War away. And Japan, if it would dare attack Manchuria, would face a similar defeat at the hands of the Red Army.

No Stalin certainly changes things. It could butterfly away WWII.

On the other hand WWII ended with the British and French empires in ruins, and the Red Army sitting in the middle of Europe.

This alone would be a major turning point, as the Soviets would be seen as heroes by many if not most, especially by the world's colonized peoples.

People in Africa and South America aren't going to be impressed that the Soviets defended their possessions in China.

Furthermore, assuming the lack of a Holodomor or Dekulakization (both of which were atrocities of Stalin's doing), the Soviets would have still less of a Stalinist burden on them than in OTL's Postwar world. This would give the USSR much more leverage in Latin America, South Asia, Southeast Asia and Africa in proxy wars with the United States and its allies.

Marxism defines just about everyone not dirt poor in a non-communist society as a bad guy. It is anti all religion in a world where most people are religious.

The biggest change so far in your scenario is the stronger colonial empires. WWII could be replaces with a series of brushfire wars, that drag on for quite a while.

Also, without the crippling levels of social and political repression that existed in OTL's USSR for most of its history, Soviet soft power would be far greater than in OTL and in this ATL could possibly rival that of the Capitalist West

.


THat seems a radical shift with such a late POD.

Finally, IMHO, a Communist victory in China was probably bound to happen, given the corruption of the Nationalists, alongside a far greater Soviet aid in the Pacific theatre in this ATL, . Not that OTL's PRC is a bastion of anti-corruption by any means, but people as a whole generally have revolutions when things are going poorly, even if it is not the leadership's fault. Not to mention the Soviets would most certainly help the Communists in China, further weakening the nationalists. And, if we assume an ATL Communist China (let's just call it the PRC for simplicity), it is quite conceivable that the ATL PRC and the USSR may not have a Sino-Soviet split, further increasing Communist power, both hard and soft. Furthermore, China would certainly develop faster without a cut-off of Soviet aid and economic cooperation.

Mao was not a reasonable person. The Soviets and the Chinese had conflicts of interest. China, the largest nation is the world, is not going to play second fiddle to a domineering USSR, which has never been that great at diplomacy with it's neighbors, for long.

It seems that the majority of newly independent countries who gained independence from colonialism, along with at least a good amount in Latin America, would side with the ATL Communist bloc, further increasing said ATL Communist bloc's power.

You had that tendency here. The brushfire wars could make it more so.

Finally, beyond that, I don't know what else would happen.

Any thoughts? I know it's pretty sketchy, but I'm reading up on it as I write this.

It's certainly possible to have a soviet dominated world. Even plausible.

But getting rid of Stalin doesn't fix communism. And the SU won WWII. Came out of it is a strong position.

 

[Corbell Mark IV]

So, do the US and Britain throw the idiot ball back and forth cross the Atlantic, or do each have their own?

Britain doesn't need an idiot ball in this scenario. They aren't in a position to stop it.


The US just needs to stay isolated.


Hell, with nuclear weapons, they can secure themselves from direct attack.

 

[Henriksson]

I'm actually thinking of writing a TL along these lines, with Stalin dying around 1936 or so...

 

[Perfidious Albion]

Vice President Mike's scenario is perhaps a little exaggerated, but if we modify it slightly it could happen.

The PoD could be political differences in the United States that lead to no President FDR in 1940 (or at least a less confident FDR) and therefore no American oil embargo on Japan. That means that the Pacific War is fought between the British Empire and Imperial Japan, and probably won outright by Japan, with the Empire only retaining Australia and New Zealand. Japan's attention turns back to China, and it tries to assure its own power over the whole of China. Once Germany is collapsing under Soviet pressure and the Soviets are marching into the Japanese-occupied parts of Asia, the British Empire and the Free French, with American financial but not military support, will probably launch a mini-Operation Overlord and liberate a little bit of Europe (obviously with less success than OTL's Operation Overlord). Imperial Japan probably surrenders to the British Empire in order to avoid surrendering to the Soviets, and with insufficient naval power to fight Britain and Japan together the Soviets will probably accept this… but mainland Asia is theirs.

So most, perhaps all, of France stays capitalist after the war (given that Germans are far likelier to surrender to capitalist French and British forces than to vengeful advancing Soviets) and Spain and Portugal remain in the capitalist camp, while the Soviets get the rest of Europe, including most, perhaps all, of Germany. Alarmed at rising Soviet power, the USA has been rearming, sufficiently for the USSR to accept peace with the Anglo-American alliance rather than taking France. But the UK and France, due to the lack of American military support for them in the war, are far less willing to obey American instructions to give up their colonial empires. This enormously strengthens the Soviet Union in its bid to co-opt anti-imperialist movements across the globe, so most of Africa is likely to become communist.

So the communist bloc gets the majority of Asia and of Africa and of Europe, and is therefore much likelier to win the Cold War.

{edit} Upon seeing recently posted comments, I have to disagree with most of them. Getting rid of Stalin is a good way to make the Soviet Union lose; if it happens long before the war, the USSR will never be industrialised to the same extent, but if it happens recently before the war, there will be (at worst) a power struggle or (at best) a lack of clarity and confidence in the chain of command. And yes, the UK would need an idiot ball there; the Soviets can't get to France before defeating Germany and if German resistance is collapsing (as it surely will) the Germans are far likelier to surrender to forces from the Free French and the British Empire (which would be weaker than OTL's joint Anglo-Franco-American force but far from totally impotent) than to the Soviets, as the example of OTL demonstrated. And how are the Soviets going to get Japan with their naval strength as weak as it is? The Japanese will get off better than they did IOTL; once Imperial Japan has lost its possessions on mainland Asia to the USSR, the British and Americans can hardly press them for an unconditional surrender in this situation and will be eager to retain any capitalist influence that they can, so the Japanese will probably be able to smoothly switch allegiance to the Anglo-American bloc.

 

[Ameise]

The Soviet Union carried the seeds of its eventual destruction from the moment of its formation. Any system built upon the principles of USSR will inevitably decay and collapse, so the idea of a Soviet-dominated world is quite unrealistic.

And just what 'principles' are those?

On the aside, I am having difficulty perceiving the Soviet Union as the dominant force in the world. They were forged out of an Empire that was decades if not more behind other countries, meaning that they are being opposed by more powerful capitalist and fascist countries. They also managed to be in the situation where without Stalin (or an equally dictatorial leader) they could not have modernized as rapidly as they had and would have been completely overwhelmed, but with one the basic foundation of the system becomes corrupted (which is what happened). They were really in a lose-lose position.

 

[Corbell Mark IV]

Vice President Mike's scenario is perhaps a little exaggerated, but if we modify it slightly it could happen.

The PoD could be political differences in the United States that lead to no President FDR in 1940 (or at least a less confident FDR) and therefore no American oil embargo on Japan. That means that the Pacific War is fought between the British Empire and Imperial Japan, and probably won outright by Japan, with the Empire only retaining Australia and New Zealand.

Very good.

Japan's attention turns back to China, and it tries to assure its own power over the whole of China. Once Germany is collapsing under Soviet pressure and the Soviets are marching into the Japanese-occupied parts of Asia,

OTL the Soviets didn't invade Manchuria until the US had put Japan on the ropes.

the British Empire and the Free French, with American financial but not military support, will probably launch a mini-Operation Overlord and liberate a little bit of Europe (obviously with less success than OTL's Operation Overlord).

I don't see this happening without US forces.

Imperial Japan probably surrenders to the British Empire in order to avoid surrendering to the Soviets, and with insufficient naval power to fight Britain and Japan together the Soviets will probably accept this… but mainland Asia is theirs.

Can the British defeat the Japanese? Can the Soviets without Japan having been crushed by the US?

Not short term.


Now, China turning into a decades long Vietnam on mega STEROIDS, with the Soviets funneling in weapons and the Japanese responding with horrific levels of brutality with an eventual Soviet win, and with this vastly weaker China turning into a dependent Soviet Client?


Yes.

So most, perhaps all, of France stays capitalist after the war (given that Germans are far likelier to surrender to capitalist French and British forces than to vengeful advancing Soviets) and Spain and Portugal remain in the capitalist camp, while the Soviets get the rest of Europe, including most, perhaps all, of Germany.

I could see a Soviet Union, devastated by war, on the out skirts of Paris, agreeing to a free France in fears of a fresh, and undamaged USA entering the War at that point.

It would play into the Soviet paranoia of how the world operates. The US lets the Nazis beat on the Soviets for 4 years, and then jumps the winner.


Any more and it would take a war.

Italy could go communist too.

Alarmed at rising Soviet power, the USA has been rearming, sufficiently for the USSR to accept peace with the Anglo-American alliance rather than taking France. But the UK and France, due to the lack of American military support for them in the war, are far less willing to obey American instructions to give up their colonial empires. This enormously strengthens the Soviet Union in its bid to co-opt anti-imperialist movements across the globe, so most of Africa is likely to become communist.

Well, communist friendly anyways.

So the communist bloc gets the majority of Asia and of Africa and of Europe, and is therefore much likelier to win the Cold War.

Agreed.

 

[JVM]

There is no Soviet-dominated world and there won't be under a Ford administration

 

[King of the Uzbeks]

Hitler dosnt declare War on the US. America still sends lend lease to Russia. The Soviets march into Paris taking with them all of Europe except Great Britian. They also take all of Korea and invade Northern Japan. They help Mao win the Chinese Civil War, but later kill him and puts a puppet in charge of China.

The Soviet Union forces their European puppets to give their colonies independce. These African and Asian countries are now in the Soviet Bloc. Help Castro and Che in Latin America. They also beat America to the moon.

The United States later accept the Soviet Union won the Cold War......But in 2014 they are seen rising again hosting the Winter Olympics in Denver.

Some interesting OTL facts........
-Soviet Union built the largest army in history ( 20 million in WW2 )
-Largest Nuke ever ( Tsar Bomb )
-Best Tank, the T-34 ( according to the Military Channel )
-Best Gun, AK-47 ( according to Military Channel )
-Largest Submarine in history
-First Satellite, ship, man, women, animal, spacewalk, orbit, Rover in Space

After Pearl Harbor we were going to war with Hitler. Even if he sent declare war

 

[Perfidious Albion]

Very good.

Thanks. And thank you for the thoughtful comments, which I will speak about below.

OTL the Soviets didn't invade Manchuria until the US had put Japan on the ropes.

IOTL, yes. But IOTL, by the time Germany was defeated and the enormously experienced and powerful Red Army could move to the Far East en masse, the Japanese were already mostly defeated. ITTL that won't be the case—and for reasons that I'll discuss below, I don't think the IJA would have done well against the Red Army.

I don't see this happening without US forces.

I do. With the military (as well as financial) aid of the United States, the British Empire and the Free French were capable of launching an assault on France at such a time when it actually mattered to the outcome of the war. In this scenario, Germany will eventually collapse under Soviet power, and OTL proved that Third Reich military units, and even the Nazi government, much preferred to surrender to British and American forces than to Soviet forces. So there will still be a D-Day equivalent, but at a time when lots of German forces have been stripped from France to fight the Red Army that's busily marching into Germany… which will leave Vichy France much more vulnerable to invasion.

This is a scenario where the USA still gives lots of financial aid to the British and Free French (as it did before it entered the war IOTL) but doesn't give military aid. The Free French and the British Empire weren't so few in number as to be incapable of liberating France even when the vast majority of the Wehrmacht has been withdrawn from the west and is in the east, fighting the more hated and more threatening enemy: the USSR.

Can the British defeat the Japanese? Can the Soviets without Japan having been crushed by the US?

Not short term.

Now, China turning into a decades long Vietnam on mega STEROIDS, with the Soviets funneling in weapons and the Japanese responding with horrific levels of brutality with an eventual Soviet win, and with this vastly weaker China turning into a dependent Soviet Client?

Yes.

I think you severely underestimate the Red Army. This is the most powerful army in history; it threw back the Wehrmacht from the USSR, it's incredibly experienced in warfare against other technologically advanced armies (unlike the IJA in this scenario, which has fought a few minor victorious land battles against British possessions and most of it is only used to fighting guerrillas), it has excellent armoured forces rather than infantry charges and warrior spirit (unlike the IJA) and, late in the war, it has exceedingly competent leadership. The IJA did moderately well IOTL despite these disadvantages because it was fighting on various Pacific islands on the sort of terrain where, often, its infantry focus actually worked. That won't be the case when the Red Army is marching into China.

And against that force, Japan is going to hold out for decades? Not a chance. And OTL's Manchurian campaign proved that the Soviets can successfully supply and win major campaigns in the Far East against Japanese opposition.

The British Empire won't defeat Japan in this scenario; I said that. But just as IOTL Japan surrendered to the USA because otherwise it would have to surrender to the Soviets, ITTL Japan will surrender to the Empire to avoid surrendering to the Soviets, not because the Empire has defeated it. Yes, the IJN is strong enough to prevent a Soviet invasion of the home islands, but that won't last forever, so it's obviously in Japan's interests, after losing its empire on mainland Asia, to align itself with the capitalist Anglo-Franco-American alliance.

I could see a Soviet Union, devastated by war, on the out skirts of Paris, agreeing to a free France in fears of a fresh, and undamaged USA entering the War at that point.

It would play into the Soviet paranoia of how the world operates. The US lets the Nazis beat on the Soviets for 4 years, and then jumps the winner.

Any more and it would take a war.

Italy could go communist too.

Italy will go communist in this scenario whether it wants to or not, when Soviet troops "liberate" the country while marching through Europe.

And yes, the Soviets wouldn't see it very nicely at all.

Well, communist friendly anyways.

Ah yes, the time-honoured phenomenon of nationalist resistance movements that are actually not communist at all calling themselves communist in order to attract the support of the Soviet Union. Agreed.