Russia in a late German WWI victory scenario

[WolfBear]

How would Russia have looked like in a late German WWI victory scenario? I would presume that Germany would not be able to indefinitely sustain its desired goal of imposing a puppet regime in Russia after winning in the West since by that point in time, the German workers would have already been fed by with years of non-stop warfare and would have thus wanted a quick end to the war either way. Plus, the German workers probably wouldn't have been very fond of Germany pursuing imperialist warfare and policies against other Europeans. Unless the German government can quickly win any new war in Russia that it will start, its troops will still likely have to head back home in order to prevent revolution back at home.

But what would happen to Russia afterwards? It would be severely destroyed by its civil war, though a plus side would be that the Germans would overthrow the Bolsheviks before they would leave Russia, so it won't be the Bolsheviks filling the subsequent Russian power vacuum but rather some other Russian force(s). Any idea of who might rise to power in Russia in this scenario? And Russia would still have a huge advantage in having a rapidly growing population with a lot of human capital potential; but on the flip side, it will still need to make the rest of its population (around one-third among the younger Russian age cohorts, I think) literate and also to develop its industries, manufacturing, et cetera without anywhere near as much French foreign investment as it had in the pre-WWI years. One could say that Russia in this scenario might to some extent resemble late 20th century China; as in, a country with a lot of potential but one that still needs decades of economic growth to fully realize its potential.

Anyway, any ideas? @Skallagrim @stevep @sillygoose @History Learner @Zyobot @raharris1973 @Chiron @Ricardolindo

 

[sillygoose]

Give us the specific scenario, otherwise it is hard to say, because a late war victory can be quite a bit different depending on when and the particulars of how it ends.

 

[WolfBear]

Give us the specific scenario, otherwise it is hard to say, because a late war victory can be quite a bit different depending on when and the particulars of how it ends.

Have Germany's 1918 spring offensive succeed, I suppose. Find a realistic way to make this happen. If necessary, you can also avoid having Germany resume USW in early 1917 and thus bring the US into WWI. However, this last part isn't actually a requirement for this.

 

[sillygoose]

Have Germany's 1918 spring offensive succeed, I suppose. Find a realistic way to make this happen. If necessary, you can also avoid having Germany resume USW in early 1917 and thus bring the US into WWI. However, this last part isn't actually a requirement for this.

Assuming the POD is the 1918 Spring offensive working, are we thinking May-June 1918 for a peace deal? At this point casualties are lower proportionally than they were in WW2 by mid-1944 IIRC and the German army would capture a bunch of food in France, not to mention equipment and supplies. Morale would probably be quite high on their part, so the 1918 mutinies wouldn't be an issue. With a million men still in the East plus the Habsburgers (though probably not for long for them given their domestic situation) setting up and maintaining the associate states in the East actually shouldn't be that difficult. Poland was already effectively set up, same with some of the Baltic states, Ukraine was being set up, but would probably be the hardest to manage in the long run due to how much of a political mess that region was and how large it was relative to the rest. Not sure what is going to happen in the Caucasus given the situation in the Middle East not necessarily being improved by the German victory over France. Belarus was actually pretty easy to manage all things considered given how small it is here.

Should actually be more manageable than one would think if the Allies are basically defeated and Russia is stuck fighting their civil war. The CPs have a lot of prestige and Russia would be a disaster, so occupied states would side with the guys looking like they were going to stay a while and had won over all major enemies.

List of the OTL buffer states"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War#Buffer_states

In the near term for Russia they'd be allowed to fight it out amongst each other since Germany would have more important things to do. The Whites would suffer from lack of Allied support, as I doubt after losing in France that the US would be up for another adventure or that Britain would be able to do much given their war situation and I'd imagine strong panic at home about a potential German invasion now that they sat astride the English Channel (other than in the Middle East/Central Asia). While neither side would benefit from or have to spend resources on German held territories. I think that would favor the Reds all things considered.

Contrary to the common opinion that the Germans would topple the Reds, I think they'd be too preoccupied to bother and so long as the Reds kept to the treaty and left the CPs alone and there was no uprising in Germany then the CPs would let the Reds alone to fight the Whites. After all the Bolsheviks were on their payroll. Plus they'd probably assume the Reds, even in victory over the Whites, couldn't survive without Ukraine and all the other lost territories. They might well be right given how vital Ukrainian grain and other resources were.

Assuming then that the CPs are able to hold it together at home plus keep their vassal states alive and the Bolsheviks win the civil war then rump Russia is effectively neutered given all the territory lost and what was in it, not to mention being cut off from western aid and having to effectively maintain good relations with the CPs for survival. Largely it would be a pretty ideal situation for the CPs even if the Habsburgs fall apart eventually, as all their enemies on the continent would be weakened so badly as to not threaten Germany.

Not a great situation for Soviet Russia, but if it avoids the mass slaughter of WW2 and the worst of Stalin's crimes then things would be much better in the long run. They'd be forced to develop all the other areas of the country to have any economy especially given the lack of Baku oil ITTL.

 

[WolfBear]

Assuming the POD is the 1918 Spring offensive working, are we thinking May-June 1918 for a peace deal? At this point casualties are lower proportionally than they were in WW2 by mid-1944 IIRC and the German army would capture a bunch of food in France, not to mention equipment and supplies. Morale would probably be quite high on their part, so the 1918 mutinies wouldn't be an issue. With a million men still in the East plus the Habsburgers (though probably not for long for them given their domestic situation) setting up and maintaining the associate states in the East actually shouldn't be that difficult. Poland was already effectively set up, same with some of the Baltic states, Ukraine was being set up, but would probably be the hardest to manage in the long run due to how much of a political mess that region was and how large it was relative to the rest. Not sure what is going to happen in the Caucasus given the situation in the Middle East not necessarily being improved by the German victory over France. Belarus was actually pretty easy to manage all things considered given how small it is here.

Should actually be more manageable than one would think if the Allies are basically defeated and Russia is stuck fighting their civil war. The CPs have a lot of prestige and Russia would be a disaster, so occupied states would side with the guys looking like they were going to stay a while and had won over all major enemies.

List of the OTL buffer states"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War#Buffer_states

In the near term for Russia they'd be allowed to fight it out amongst each other since Germany would have more important things to do. The Whites would suffer from lack of Allied support, as I doubt after losing in France that the US would be up for another adventure or that Britain would be able to do much given their war situation and I'd imagine strong panic at home about a potential German invasion now that they sat astride the English Channel (other than in the Middle East/Central Asia). While neither side would benefit from or have to spend resources on German held territories. I think that would favor the Reds all things considered.

Contrary to the common opinion that the Germans would topple the Reds, I think they'd be too preoccupied to bother and so long as the Reds kept to the treaty and left the CPs alone and there was no uprising in Germany then the CPs would let the Reds alone to fight the Whites. After all the Bolsheviks were on their payroll. Plus they'd probably assume the Reds, even in victory over the Whites, couldn't survive without Ukraine and all the other lost territories. They might well be right given how vital Ukrainian grain and other resources were.

Assuming then that the CPs are able to hold it together at home plus keep their vassal states alive and the Bolsheviks win the civil war then rump Russia is effectively neutered given all the territory lost and what was in it, not to mention being cut off from western aid and having to effectively maintain good relations with the CPs for survival. Largely it would be a pretty ideal situation for the CPs even if the Habsburgs fall apart eventually, as all their enemies on the continent would be weakened so badly as to not threaten Germany.

Not a great situation for Soviet Russia, but if it avoids the mass slaughter of WW2 and the worst of Stalin's crimes then things would be much better in the long run. They'd be forced to develop all the other areas of the country to have any economy especially given the lack of Baku oil ITTL.

Are you sure that Russia would avoid Stalin in this scenario? Also, it's quite interesting: Russia's Brest-Litovsk losses were said to be crippling, but in real life, over 100 years later, Russia appears to be doing just fine without these territories, other than perhaps mentally.

 

[sillygoose]

Are you sure that Russia would avoid Stalin in this scenario? Also, it's quite interesting: Russia's Brest-Litovsk losses were said to be crippling, but in real life, over 100 years later, Russia appears to be doing just fine without these territories, other than perhaps mentally.

Butterflies, you can never be sure. Thing is even if Stalin gets in he won't have the option to starve people the same way as the export market would be saturated by Ukraine, so it has to be done the hard, but less mass murdery way.

 

[WolfBear]

Butterflies, you can never be sure. Thing is even if Stalin gets in he won't have the option to starve people the same way as the export market would be saturated by Ukraine, so it has to be done the hard, but less mass murdery way.

Saturated by Ukraine in what sense?

 

[sillygoose]

Saturated by Ukraine in what sense?

From what I recall much of the grain Stalin exported to pay for industrialization came from Ukraine. So without collectivization and Soviet inefficiency Ukraine would be a major exporter of grain, so the market for exports that Stalin used IOTL would already be filled by Ukraine, since it would have a much higher amount to export to satisfy German dominated Europe, which had been pre-war Russia's main export market IIRC. Without having to suffer Stalin, Lenin, or the Russian Civil War Ukraine would probably recover much more quickly and be able to build up production to levels the Soviets couldn't compete with.

 

[ATP]

From what I recall much of the grain Stalin exported to pay for industrialization came from Ukraine. So without collectivization and Soviet inefficiency Ukraine would be a major exporter of grain, so the market for exports that Stalin used IOTL would already be filled by Ukraine, since it would have a much higher amount to export to satisfy German dominated Europe, which had been pre-war Russia's main export market IIRC. Without having to suffer Stalin, Lenin, or the Russian Civil War Ukraine would probably recover much more quickly and be able to build up production to levels the Soviets couldn't compete with.

Ukrainian state made by germans in 1918 need german army to survive,becouse most of locals considered themselves locals,not ukrainians.So,it would belong to either Russia/probably/ or Poland/very unlikely/

 

[sillygoose]

Ukrainian state made by germans in 1918 need german army to survive,becouse most of locals considered themselves locals,not ukrainians.So,it would belong to either Russia/probably/ or Poland/very unlikely/

It's complicated, but the locals did view themselves as Ukrainian. The issue was more internal matters and whether wealthy landowners would be allowed to run the show:

Ukrainian State - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What the Ukraine government needed the German army for was to keep the Bolsheviks out as they didn't have a significant enough army to survive an invasion. Of course that came with it's own unpopularity as the CPs were requisitioning grain that the Ukrainian farmers didn't want to give, but having an army, a victorious one at that, as a backer would ensure the regime survived until the post-war period when it could actually develop into a proper state.

 

[WolfBear]

It's complicated, but the locals did view themselves as Ukrainian. The issue was more internal matters and whether wealthy landowners would be allowed to run the show:

Ukrainian State - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What the Ukraine government needed the German army for was to keep the Bolsheviks out as they didn't have a significant enough army to survive an invasion. Of course that came with it's own unpopularity as the CPs were requisitioning grain that the Ukrainian farmers didn't want to give, but having an army, a victorious one at that, as a backer would ensure the regime survived until the post-war period when it could actually develop into a proper state.

How long would it have taken Ukraine to build a sufficiently competent army of its own?

Also, what do you think that the borders in Central Europe will look like once Austria-Hungary will implode?

 

[ATP]

It's complicated, but the locals did view themselves as Ukrainian. The issue was more internal matters and whether wealthy landowners would be allowed to run the show:

Ukrainian State - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What the Ukraine government needed the German army for was to keep the Bolsheviks out as they didn't have a significant enough army to survive an invasion. Of course that came with it's own unpopularity as the CPs were requisitioning grain that the Ukrainian farmers didn't want to give, but having an army, a victorious one at that, as a backer would ensure the regime survived until the post-war period when it could actually develop into a proper state.

No,farmers wanted gentry lands,and thus supported Lenin.They considered themselves as locals,that is why ukrainain armies could not stop anybody,even polish children in polish city Lwów.
Becouse almost nobody considered himself as ukrainian.

Polish farmers fought for polish state,ukrainian farmers do not fought for ukrainian one - becouse tey considered themselves as locals.That is why polish state survived,and ukrainian not.

You should read memories of polish gentry Zofia-Kossak Szczucka 'Pożoga" - local farmers destroyed gentry property and supported Lenin,becouse he let them do so.They fought to grab land,not for some nation or ideology.

 

[sillygoose]

How long would it have taken Ukraine to build a sufficiently competent army of its own?

A while. Though I don't fully agree with ATP's take on Ukrainian nationalism there are elements of truth in what he is saying. At the time Belorussian and Ukrainian nationalism didn't exist for most people as they were all part of the Russian empire; it was the Ukrainians in Galicia that had the most developed sense of being Ukrainian (Ruthenian) due to their conflicts with the Poles. Given that in the modern day it seems that despite a much better developed sense of nationalism it took 8 years of war and NATO support to develop a competent army, it would probably take at least a decade in peacetime in addition to building a competent state and education system. Realistically I'd expect at least a generation assuming all goes well.

Also, what do you think that the borders in Central Europe will look like once Austria-Hungary will implode?

Good question. Depending on how it goes down I'd expect Germany would try to create a bi-sected empire of Hungarians and Austrians under a personal union of Kaiser Karl, but failing that absorb Austria and as much of the Czech lands as feasible as another kingdom in the German empire. The Hungarian lands probably would fracture as the Aster Revolution ended up with communism IOTL. The Habsburgs were not particularly well liked, but in victory they'd probably persist as figureheads. Best case scenario (for the existing elites) is two separate countries, Austria and Hungary, with the same monarch but separate policies and an alliance. Likely Hungary breaks up into core Hungary and perhaps the Romanian dominate bits joining Romania and the Balkan Slavs forming their own states based around the religious divide. Yugoslavia isn't happening and Serbia is going to be pretty neutered. I'd imagine Slovenia says Austrian, but Croatia becomes its own state with perhaps Bosnia.

Galicia is undoubtedly gone and probably split between Poland and Ukraine. Question is whether the Pilsudski faction seizes power in Warsaw.

I wonder what happens with Italy in defeat though. They might go Socialist. In France the left might well take power too if defeated. The conservatives would probably be discredited for a generation. Britain too would be interesting given how they'd be freaked about Germany being parked on the Channel; Ireland might be able to force concessions ITTL. The US would be quite interesting too and probably would lapse into isolationism after defeat. Morgan would probably be ruined financially as a result which has interesting implications going forward. Economically a recession might well result especially if France, Italy, and Russia can't or won't repay their loans. Britain would be a mess financially as they borrowed from the US for everyone since they had the best rates.

IMHO there won't be a WW2 as the Allies would be too weak as a result of defeat to challenge a victorious CP alliance even if A-H breaks up.

 

[WolfBear]

A while. Though I don't fully agree with ATP's take on Ukrainian nationalism there are elements of truth in what he is saying. At the time Belorussian and Ukrainian nationalism didn't exist for most people as they were all part of the Russian empire; it was the Ukrainians in Galicia that had the most developed sense of being Ukrainian (Ruthenian) due to their conflicts with the Poles. Given that in the modern day it seems that despite a much better developed sense of nationalism it took 8 years of war and NATO support to develop a competent army, it would probably take at least a decade in peacetime in addition to building a competent state and education system. Realistically I'd expect at least a generation assuming all goes well.


Good question. Depending on how it goes down I'd expect Germany would try to create a bi-sected empire of Hungarians and Austrians under a personal union of Kaiser Karl, but failing that absorb Austria and as much of the Czech lands as feasible as another kingdom in the German empire. The Hungarian lands probably would fracture as the Aster Revolution ended up with communism IOTL. The Habsburgs were not particularly well liked, but in victory they'd probably persist as figureheads. Best case scenario (for the existing elites) is two separate countries, Austria and Hungary, with the same monarch but separate policies and an alliance. Likely Hungary breaks up into core Hungary and perhaps the Romanian dominate bits joining Romania and the Balkan Slavs forming their own states based around the religious divide. Yugoslavia isn't happening and Serbia is going to be pretty neutered. I'd imagine Slovenia says Austrian, but Croatia becomes its own state with perhaps Bosnia.

Galicia is undoubtedly gone and probably split between Poland and Ukraine. Question is whether the Pilsudski faction seizes power in Warsaw.

I wonder what happens with Italy in defeat though. They might go Socialist. In France the left might well take power too if defeated. The conservatives would probably be discredited for a generation. Britain too would be interesting given how they'd be freaked about Germany being parked on the Channel; Ireland might be able to force concessions ITTL. The US would be quite interesting too and probably would lapse into isolationism after defeat. Morgan would probably be ruined financially as a result which has interesting implications going forward. Economically a recession might well result especially if France, Italy, and Russia can't or won't repay their loans. Britain would be a mess financially as they borrowed from the US for everyone since they had the best rates.

IMHO there won't be a WW2 as the Allies would be too weak as a result of defeat to challenge a victorious CP alliance even if A-H breaks up.

Does the Italian monarchy survive? Anyway, sounds pretty realistic.

 

[sillygoose]

Does the Italian monarchy survive? Anyway, sounds pretty realistic.

Good question. Not sure, but my gut says barely.

 

[WolfBear]

Good question. Not sure, but my gut says barely.

With or without a referendum?

 

[sillygoose]

With or without a referendum?

Without. I'd imagine the lower classes would try to force it, but enough powerful people at top would want to maintain it, so it wouldn't come to a vote.

 

[WolfBear]

Without. I'd imagine the lower classes would try to force it, but enough powerful people at top would want to maintain it, so it wouldn't come to a vote.

Gotcha. Also, would Romania get all of Transylvania or only the southern part? It's the difference between 1919/1947 borders and 1940 borders.

 

[sillygoose]

Gotcha. Also, would Romania get all of Transylvania or only the southern part? It's the difference between 1919/1947 borders and 1940 borders.

No idea. It would depend on rebellions, Romanian recovery after defeated in the war, how much the Germans want to repress them after Hungary breaks up the empire, etc.

 

[WolfBear]

No idea. It would depend on rebellions, Romanian recovery after defeated in the war, how much the Germans want to repress them after Hungary breaks up the empire, etc.

Repress Hungary or Romania?