WI: NATO accepted the USSR's application to join in 1954?

The_Persian_Cat

The_Persian_Cat

In 1954, Soviet officials suggested the USSR ought to join NATO to protect the peace in Europe. This was obviously rejected by NATO members, who feared the USSR would weaken the alliance, and because NATO's unofficial-official purpose was to contain Soviet influence. If the Soviet Union had become a NATO member, though, I foresee 1) a unified Germany soon after, and 2) a stronger and more militarised UN, which would be more militant in enforcing the will of the Big Five.

But this is an INCREDIBLY unlikely scenario. I wasn't sure if I should post this here, because I want to discuss how it could have happened as well, but it's so unlikely that I'm willing to handwave that part. So, what would have happened?
 

Zireael

It's so unlikely I can't help with how it would have happened. But regarding the consequences:
1) a unified Germany probably happens, since both halves are being propped up by what is now NATO members and allies, at least on paper
2) yep, a more militarised UN probably happens, up to and including a special forces branch sort of like Deus Ex's UNATCO (yes, UN stands for United Nations) or Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six
3) USSR needs a new target for their propaganda... the USA is in NATO too, so it's a problem... I dunno, China, Japan?

Further down the line, you probably get earlier space exploration (because unlike IOTL, US and USSR will probably cooperate on that, both seeing immense prestige gains from putting a man in space or on the Moon, and yes, Cronkite's expectations of a man on Mars by 1980s will probably come true ITTL)
 
The_Persian_Cat

The_Persian_Cat

What about Communism in Western countries? I know Italy, France, and Spain had strong leftist movements. I don't imagine the US would have a much stronger leftist movement in this timeline, since signing a treaty with the USSR wouldn't be the same as supporting Communism at home. But without US intervention, Communists might be elected to power in Italy.
 

marackomarac33

The_Persian_Cat said:
What about Communism in Western countries? I know Italy, France, and Spain had strong leftist movements. I don't imagine the US would have a much stronger leftist movement in this timeline, since signing a treaty with the USSR wouldn't be the same as supporting Communism at home. But without US intervention, Communists might be elected to power in Italy.
Click to expand...
There would have to be some quid pro quo if the Soviets were to join NATO, such as the USSR stopping aid to communists outside their established sphere in exchange for economic aid or something.
 

Zireael

marackomarac33 said:
such as the USSR stopping aid to communists outside their established sphere in exchange for economic aid or something.
Click to expand...

I fully expect the USSR to officially stop providing aid, but unoficially still support grassroots movements - after all, worldwide revolution is Communism's whole raison d'etre.
 

El Pip

If Kruschev makes the Secret Speech condemning Stalin earlier, and more publicly, and manages to convince the West that he wants to forge a different path from Stalin, then maybe there is a small opportunity. I believe Kruschev waited in OTL till he had fought internal battles and secured his position, if he goes early he will be more vulnerable so maybe the West might think it is better to give him a 'win' to secure his position than risk a more hard line figure getting into power. If Kruschev makes some secret deals around less support for the global revolution that might sweeten the pot as well, given he genuinely thought the Soviet system would win out ( "We will bury you!" ) he might be able to say that there is no need for overt Soviet support as there system will so obviously be superior.

On the future enemy that would obviously be China, the Sino-Soviet split would be really hyped up with Mao as the deviationalist traitor to the revolution.

For Space, I dunno. I cannot see a co-operative space race, because what is the point? There is no actual reason to go to the Moon beyond the natinal prestige, but if it's a shared achievement that doesn't happen. Maybe a few more joint missions and dockings, because there is a reason to go into orbit for satellites and mirco-gravity experiments, etc. But that would be it.
 

HalfRottenHerring

El Pip said:
For Space, I dunno. I cannot see a co-operative space race, because what is the point? There is no actual reason to go to the Moon beyond the natinal prestige, but if it's a shared achievement that doesn't happen. Maybe a few more joint missions and dockings, because there is a reason to go into orbit for satellites and mirco-gravity experiments, etc. But that would be it.
Click to expand...
If the US and USSR aren't going to military fight each other I'd expect the focus to shift propaganda stuff like sports and the space-race.

I'd expected a massive boost the quality of life across the US and USSR as absurd about of money isn't plowed into the military-industrial complex.
 

Pelranius

Then a new alliance (without the Soviet Union) is created, perhaps the Western Cooperation Agreement Association?
 

Veiovis

NATO ends up another toothless forum for both blocks to talk with each other without commiting to anything, probably focused on security stuff like regulating strategic weapons. The Western states create another Anti-Soviet alliance to satisfy the rampant "protect us from the soviets" desire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top