Can the Russian White Army, who won the civil war, resist Nazi Germany's invasion?

Could Russia have won without Stalin's industrialization?

+ I don't support Nazism or hatred of certain people.
Depends a lot on which bunch of Whites won the Civil War. And what social and economic policies they subsequently followed. Probably a wide range of OTL examples from the 1920s onwards. Ranging from attempts at integration into a global trading system through encouraging FDI and concentration on exporting minerals and agricultural products through to private monopolies and industrial development behind tariffs and NTBs.

My guess would be closer to the latter end than former, especially after 1929-31.

In either case, while agriculture should be more productive in private hands and famines avoided, there'd be less capital and labour pushed into investment in coal, steel etc. or in factories and infrastructure. So White Russia would not be as industrialised or have so many tanks and aircraft. And be potentially easier to invade though distance and poorer infrastructure will still challenge an invaders logistics.

OTOH, without the bogey of Bolshevism, as @Cregan note, the Nazis might not come to power. While I think a right wing, authoritarian and Nationalist, government is still the likeliest successor to Weimar but it need not have been seeking Lebensraum or so anti-Slav. I could see this Notzi regime as being quite happy to cooperate with a White Russia through trade (goods, especially capital goods) for minerals and foods, in armaments development and in cutting Poland down to size. (Puppet Congress Poland perhaps) A very different Europe.

On the Gripping Hand, again without the Bolshevik bogey, Socialism (or Social Democracy) may make more progress in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. Red Germany v White Russia? 😍

Inter-War PODs like a White Russia are fascinating but things would IMHO diverge very sharply from OTL by the late 1930s. So any comparison to OTL is tricky.
 
Fear and hatred of communism was such a raison d'etre of the NSDAP, that before we even ask 'could the Nazis come to power in this scenario?' we might very well ask 'will the Nazis even exist in a recognisable form, or survive the twenties in this scenario?'

There were plenty of other channels for post-Versailles aggrieved German nationalists to vent their energies into, and the Nazis came close to failure several times even without the bogeyman to the east. Fascism generally relied upon the idea that it was the 'third way' between communism and failing democracy; a whole swathe of right wing movements will develop very differently without the Soviets.

This is not to say you won't get authoritarian right-wing governments in Germany, Italy or many other countries. It's that it's likely- I would even say probable- that they are quite distinct from the ideological, party centred dictatorships that we saw in our timeline.
 
I'm not so sure that the communism thing was such a deal breaker for the nazis popularity. It seems like a small matter to transfer that hatred over to Russians in general, them being the easiest to portray as a long term enemy and threat to germany and still fitting perfectly into the subhuman category that is only fit for german subjugation.

Poland was also very much an authoritarian strongman state similar to white russia and the germans had no problem demonizing them.
 
I'm not so sure that the communism thing was such a deal breaker for the nazis popularity. It seems like a small matter to transfer that hatred over to Russians in general, them being the easiest to portray as a long term enemy and threat to germany and still fitting perfectly into the subhuman category that is only fit for german subjugation.

Poland was also very much an authoritarian strongman state similar to white russia and the germans had no problem demonizing them.

Hated of Slavs doesn't possibly substitute for a paranoia among the German middle classes and conservative elite that their entire way of life will collapse, their possessions stripped from them and their culture destroyed by the KPD and their Soviet backers.
 
Hated of Slavs doesn't possibly substitute for a paranoia among the German middle classes and conservative elite that their entire way of life will collapse, their possessions stripped from them and their culture destroyed by the KPD and their Soviet backers.
I don't think it's impossible, though. The Nazis could still rise to power on the backs of Hitler's speaking charisma and memories to the German revolution and a generalization of social democrats as Marxists (which a good amount were in the 20's).
 
I think if a non-Nazi Germany invaded Russia it would be easier going for them because of better relationships with Ukrainians etc on the one hand and the fact that the Russians aren't literally fighting for their lives and may capitulate sooner.
 
What if a more competent version of the White Russians formed an alliance with their fellow dictatorial right wing regimes in the Axis?
Lets say:

- the Whites win the Russian Civil War, defeating and crushing the Reds, quelling peasant uprisings and quashing separatists in the Caucasus, Central Asia, Ukraine and Belarus
- however, Poland, Finland and the Baltic States manage to win their independence and the Whites are unable to reconquer them (for now)
- the Whites establish a far-right fascist/reactionary dictatorship over Russia, likely a military junta headed by a Supreme Leader (aka Vozhd)
- Romania draws the ire of White Russia for opportunistically annexing Bessarabia during the Russian Civil War
- White Russia also loathes Turkey and Persia for being longtime neighbouring Muslim enemies
- in contrast, White Russia forms a strong alliance with Yugoslavia and maintains friendly relations with Greece, Hungary, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia
- White Russia also forms a good relationship with Germany and helps it to remilitarise and circumvent the Treaty of Versailles
- when the Nazis eventually rise to power in Germany, they maintain good relations with White Russia as they recognise them as ideological brethren. White Russia approves of Nazi Germany’s Anschluss of Austria.
- in contrast, White Russia and Imperial Japan become enemies and clash over North Asia, eventually fighting each other to a stalemate in the Far East. This forces Imperial Japan to redouble its efforts in China and look southwards for expansionism, while maintaining a tense peace with White Russia (like IOTL after the Battle of Khalkin Ghol)
- White Russia backs various Chinese warlords as proxies, but is eventually compelled to switch its support to the KMT after it ends the Warlord Era and reunifies China. White Russia and the Western countries, particularly the United States, cooperate to back China against Imperial Japan. This has the knock-on effect of the Nazis continuing German support for China (instead of switching sides to Imperial Japan like IOTL). The Chinese Communist Party remains minuscule and insignificant, going nowhere without the Soviet aid and guidance it received IOTL.
- White Russia propagates Great Russian chauvinism, Russian ultranationalism, Russification, Orthodox Christian supremacism, anti-Semitism, anti-Muslim sentiment, anti-communism, anti-liberalism and revanchism against Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, Turkey and Persia
- White Russia carries out official discrimination, mass deportations, forced labour, katorgas, purges and pogroms against Jews, Muslims and other minorities
- White Russia also promotes militarisation, crash industrialisation and technological modernisation, and receives heavy investment from sympathetic capitalists in Western countries like Britain, France, Germany and the United States
- White Russia, being right-wing, pro-capitalist, supportive of European colonialism, anti-communist and anti-revolutionary, is not a communist boogeymen to the West, so it is not an international pariah and ostracised like the Soviets were IOTL
- however, Western democracies like Britain and France are still somewhat wary of White Russia due to its revanchism against Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, Turkey and Persia, and the burgeoning alliance between the Nazis and the Whites
- ostensibly, White Russia has conflicting interests with Fascist Italy over the Balkans, Greece and Ethiopia, and competing interests with Nazi Germany over Poland, Czechoslovakia, Finland and the Baltic States
- cynicism, politicking and naked self-interest prevail however and an Axis Pact is signed between White Russia, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy
- as part of the secret provisions of the Axis Pact, White Russia gains a free hand (much like in the OTL Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact) to annex the entirety of Finland and the Baltic States, as well as swathes of Poland and Romania. Nazi Germany gets to occupy Czechoslovakia and the remainder of Poland and Romania, and carve up the Balkans and Greece with Fascist Italy. Their allies Hungary and Bulgaria also get their pounds of flesh. White Russia also accepts the Fascist Italian conquest of their Orthodox brethren in Ethiopia.
- naturally, Imperial Japan does not join the Axis ITTL because it hates White Russia. However, Imperial Japan keeps getting more and more bogged down in China, further alienating the West, especially the United States
- the Axis - White Russia, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy - support Franco’s Nationalists in the Spanish Civil War, who win much faster because (in the absence of the Soviets ITTL) nobody really helps the Republicans
- WW2 eventually breaks out when Nazi Germany pushes too aggressively against Czechoslovakia or Poland, prompting Britain and France to finally take a stand
- Nazi Germany occupies nearly all of Czechoslovakia, most of Poland and most of Romania, whilst White Russia gets the rest of Poland and Romania. Hungary also gets bits of Czechoslovakia and Romania
- White Russia annexes the Baltic States and attacks and conquers Finland (suffering heavy casualties in the process)
- fuelled by White Russian resources, Nazi Germany attacks and overruns Western Europe (France, the Low Countries, Denmark and Norway)
- Sweden is maintained as a neutral buffer state between Nazi-occupied Denmark/Norway and White Russian-occupied Finland
- Fascist Italy joins the war by carving up the Balkans and Greece with Nazi Germany, Hungary and Bulgaria. The Fascist Italians also attack the British in North Africa but are driven back, forcing Nazi Germany to send the Afrika Korps to help them
- White Russia launches an invasion of Turkey and Persia, whom the British scramble to support. Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Bulgaria help White Russia by invading Turkey from the Balkans and Greece
- essentially, the Axis is now focusing on the Mediterranean, North Africa and the Middle East to defeat the British Empire. There is no real Blitz or Battle of Britain.
- Imperial Japan, growing increasingly hungry for resources and desperate to conquer China, rashly attacks the Southern Resource Area, starting a war with the United States and British Empire like IOTL, but this Pacific War will be an even more distinct theatre from the rest of WW2 as Imperial Japan and the Axis are not allies, (with China in the awkward position of being aided by both the Axis and Allies, although Axis support will taper off).
- I think the combined might of the Axis probably defeats the British Empire in the Mediterranean, North Africa and Middle East, forcing London to seek peace and precipitating the collapse of the British Raj in India
- this will be an absolute horror for those under Axis occupation, particularly the Jews as Nazi Germany and White Russia will cooperate to complete the Holocaust in occupied Europe, North Africa and the Middle East
- the United States will eventually lead the West to prevail over Imperial Japan, ending the Pacific War and liberating the Asia-Pacific region, but the Axis controls Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, the British Empire is bloodied and exhausted, China is battered and devastated, and India is engulfed in bloodshed and chaos
 
Last edited:

Garrison

Donor
Without the USSR the whole dynamics of politics in the 1920s and 30s will be different. Without the threat of communism will the establishment in Britain be so willing to entertain appeasement? Will Germany's Junkers and industrialists feel the need to embrace such an extreme figure as Hitler with no threat of a communist takeover? I suspect that the landscape would be so different that the particular set of circumstances that provided an unlikely route to power for the Nazis will just not happen.
 
n either case, while agriculture should be more productive in private hands and famines avoided,
Worth keeping in mind how much the Whites were hated by the rural peasantry for their land seizures and suppression, how much of a hotbed Ukraine was for groups such as Anarchists, and the factional regionalism of the White forces. I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw a White Holodomor with the right person in charge.
 
An old post of mine at https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/would-a-white-victory-russia-be-able-to-survive-operation„barbarossa“.433527/#post-16279796

***


Faeelin said:
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 ground 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.
 
I think if a non-Nazi Germany invaded Russia it would be easier going for them because of better relationships with Ukrainians etc on the one hand and the fact that the Russians aren't literally fighting for their lives and may capitulate sooner.
Why wouldn't the Russians still be fighting for their lives? Hitler was an anti-communist, sure, but he was also a rabid anti-Slav. He committed genocides against multiple non-Communist Slavic groups; Poles, Czechs, Serbs, &c.

Worth keeping in mind how much the Whites were hated by the rural peasantry for their land seizures and suppression, how much of a hotbed Ukraine was for groups such as Anarchists, and the factional regionalism of the White forces. I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw a White Holodomor with the right person in charge.
I also wouldn't be surprised; it might actually be worse. The famine itself is unavoidable, mind you, as it began with a drought in Ukraine from 1932-1933.
 
An old post of mine at https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/would-a-white-victory-russia-be-able-to-survive-operation„barbarossa“.433527/#post-16279796

***




(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 ground 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.
Well, now I’m really tempted to write a Communist Germany vs Fascist White Russia story.
 
Why wouldn't the Russians still be fighting for their lives? Hitler was an anti-communist, sure, but he was also a rabid anti-Slav. He committed genocides against multiple non
As I said I meant with a non-nazi Germany, which would be the consequence of a white Russia.
 
Why wouldn't the Russians still be fighting for their lives? Hitler was an anti-communist, sure, but he was also a rabid anti-Slav. He committed genocides against multiple non-Communist Slavic groups; Poles, Czechs, Serbs, &c.
And the jews of course.
So there's plenty people left to hate, or shift blame to for everything bad that happened to Germany.
 
And the jews of course.
So there's plenty people left to hate, or shift blame to for everything bad that happened to Germany.
Jews aren't Slavs, which is why I excluded them. Of course Hitler committed genocide against the Jews but I was specifically including Slavic groups.
 
That depends on a lot, but Russia before WW1 was already on path to surpass Germany industrially. I don't think Stalin was necessarily. If anything, they just have more men I reckon.
 
Top