| Polish-Soviet War | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Aug 25 2011, 12:33 PM (334 Views) | |
| Basil Fawlty | Aug 25 2011, 12:33 PM Post #1 |
|
Post Tenebras Lux
|
I don't know much about this conflict (maybe Petar can fill me in), but some of the Polish people I have talked to claim it stopped the Soviets from extending their influence into Central Europe. This led me to wonder, given the way Hitler approached Germany's weaker neighbors, how would a Soviet victory in 1920 have affected the lead-up to WWII? If the Russians are right on the border I can't see him getting away with trying to reclaim Danzig. |
![]() |
|
| Petar | Aug 25 2011, 04:11 PM Post #2 |
![]()
The General
|
In short, Poles and Soviets both claimed same territories (Poles claimed territories gained by Tsarist Russia during the partitions of Poland, and Soviets claimed those territories as a naturalised part of the Motherland). Soviets did try to expand their influence into central Europe with this war, which is confirmed by words of marshal TuhaÄevskiy (Tukhachevsky) who said that over Poland's corpse leads the road to world fire of revolutions. In the end, the war was a total disaster for the Soviet Union as Poles managed to annihilate 3 Soviet armies even though the Soviets managed to reach the gates of Warsaw. While the Soviets claimed it to be a draw (and even a Soviet victory in some cases), Lenin himself privately admitted that the war was a gigantic defeat. In case of a Soviet victory, however, Soviets would have gained increased ability to exercise their influence in central Europe, and possibly southeastern Europe as well - this was most probably the main goal of the war, to gain new forward bases from which to support communist movements in other European countries, like Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Hungary etc. In case of Soviet victory early enough (ie. 1919 - early 1920), Hungarian Soviet Republic may have survived, even furtherly establishing Soviet influence in central Europe. |
![]() |
|
| Basil Fawlty | Aug 25 2011, 06:27 PM Post #3 |
|
Post Tenebras Lux
|
Interesting, it sounds like it would create something similar to the postwar (WWII) setup, only without the war. What would the potential Allied reaction be to this? By this time the U.S. has already rejected the Treaty of Versailles, I think, and Britain is bogged down in the Irish rebellion. |
![]() |
|
| Petar | Aug 25 2011, 08:04 PM Post #4 |
![]()
The General
|
The US probably wouldn't care much about the war, however European nations would definitely be wanting to help Poland. The problem is - which ones could help? The UK is handling the Irish rebellion, but in my opinion, British people probably wouldn't want to engage in another war due to horrible losses of WWI. The UK would probably sell surplus arms to Poland and give vocal support, but I don't know if they'd do much more than that. In case of Soviet victory over Poles, the UK would probably request the change of terms of the Treaty of Versailles (in my opinion, at least) as they would want a strong Germany to act as a counterbalance to increased Soviet presence. France would probably also sell arms and give vocal support to Poland, traditional French friend, however due to losses of WWI and internal problems (reconstruction etc.) French public would most certainly be vehemently opposed to entering another war. In case of Soviet victory, they might support changes of terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Italy would probably maintain the same stance as the UK and France, unless the war would be prolonged to 1922, when Benito Mussolini would probably try to send as much assistance to Poland as possible in order to support the anti-communist cause (just like he did during the Spanish Civil War). Germany, under terms of the Treaty of Versailles, has barely enough troops to defend itself and is in no position to send any soldiers to help Poland - it would probably send surplus arms. The most interesting player, in my opinion, would be Czechoslovakia. Czechoslovakia maintained one of the largest arms industries in the world, didn't suffer from destruction of it's countryside as war never reached it and it had relatively low casualties during WWI compared to other nationalities - by 1910 many Czechs and Slovaks despised the idea of dieing for Austria-Hungary and many of them deserted; the most notable such case is probably the story of Imperial and Royal 28th Infantry Regiment, based in Prague. It was sent to Galicia, where it deserted and joined the Russian Army with flags unfurled and regimental band playing music. Anyhow, while it's relations with Poland are not friendly (due to various border disputes) they are aware of the threat communism posed to central Europe as they observed the fighting in Hungary between communist and White forces, and could intervene in the conflict. Romania is another country which has a lot of potential for intervention - however, it can only enter the war by mid-to-late stages of the war since it is bogged down in Hungary, fighting Hungarian communists (Romania was the main foreign force which participated in stopping the Red Terror in Hungary.) However, it has the potential to open a new front in Ukraine, thus forcing the USSR to divide it's resources between two fronts. Hungarians are too busy fighting communists in Hungary itself, thus any intervention at all from their side is highly unlikely. Yugoslavia is busy reorganising it's armed forces, and is not willing to join another war after WWI - which is one of the main reasons why it didn't react to Italians taking parts of Dalmatia promised by the Treaty of London and sinking of Yugoslav Navy vessels (namely dreadnoughts transferred to them by Austria-Hungary). Thus, Yugoslavia is also an unlikely player in the conflict. Bulgaria also probably wouldn't help by a large margin, and other European countries are probably unwilling to join the war as well. Edited by Petar, Aug 25 2011, 08:05 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Simon Darkshade | Aug 27 2011, 02:48 PM Post #5 |
|
Nefarious Swashbuckler
|
The British would send a reinforced naval force into the Baltic, for certain, as they had done the previous year. There would also be movements of troops into the Caucasus and ships being stationed on the Caspian on a longer basis. There would be serious consideration of moving troops to Poland or Eastern Germany, along with a large boosting of the British Army of the Rhine occupation forces. In this, the epoch of strangling Bolshevism in its cradle, the victorious Entente powers are not going to do nothing in reaction to such a direct Bolshevist threat. This would not be in the form of huge deployments on the scale of all out war, but 1-2 British corps and at least double that from the French; the Italians may or may not send troops. There may be some changes to the terms of Versailles over the long term, but the type of world that emerges from such a big change may not have the familiar developments from our timeline, such as the rise of Nazism, WW2 etc. |
![]() |
|
| Petar | Aug 27 2011, 03:17 PM Post #6 |
![]()
The General
|
Well, I'd say that Simon definitely has more knowledge of the UK, and forgetting the possibility of sending a naval force into the Baltic was rather silly from me... However, yes, reinforcements are possible - just not on the Great War scale. Changes to terms of Versailles would definitely result in different developments in the long run. |
![]() |
|
| Simon Darkshade | Aug 27 2011, 03:46 PM Post #7 |
|
Nefarious Swashbuckler
|
It is simply that there is a small window of opportunity in 1920 before the big draw down of the British and French armies, and comes right on the heels of Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War. 1922 and we would see a very different response, as can be derived from the Chanak Crisis. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Alternate History · Next Topic » |








8:40 AM Jul 11