From Lithuania to Leningrad? Original Nazi-Soviet Pact borders in 1940

[Admiral Matt]

Search function says it hasn't been discussed, which may indicate I'm doing it wrong.

What if the Nazis occupied Lithuania - and the Soviets more of Poland - as had been the original division of the spoils in the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement?

For one, a Polish SSR is likely to be created, which I suspect wouldn't be reversible if the Union is among the eventual victorious powers.

But a more pressing question: Assuming Barbarossa occurs in a similar manner, how would the first year play out? The Germans are positioned to cut off the Baltics and attempt to snatch Leningrad sooner. The Soviets have a sort of Polish salient that would make for different planning.

Seems interesting as a counterfactual scenario.

Has this been done?

 

[raharris1973]

Has this been done?

yes (as brief discussions, not a detailed played out timeline)

will I dig it up for you?

no

was it OK to ask again?

I've got no problem with it

 

[Admiral Matt]

Has this been done?

yes (as brief discussions, not a detailed played out timeline)

will I dig it up for you?

no

was it OK to ask again?

I've got no problem with it

Good to know. Weird nothing came up in the searches, I'm used to finding a glut on any topic, even if most of the results have 0-5 replies and little useful content.

Might take a real deep dive, as you imply. Just searching every post that mentions Lithuania and Barbarossa, instead of by thread. Bleh.

Anyway, was there any gist that stuck with you? (Or do you just have an opinion?) Would the war materially change in a significant way?

 

[Admiral Matt]

Not being a fraction as versed in the requisite minutiae as many of those who write and comment in post-1900, my best guess?

The extra Polish occupation would moderately delay the Axis thrust on the southern front, but would expose the Soviets to at least as much risk of major units being isolated and surrounded, maybe more. Probably occupation details would differ - there might be no Generalgouvernment Polen, for example - though that distinction might mean little in practice. In the north, Lithuania would be on a distinctly different initial track, but I'm unsure quite how. The thrust from there would probably overrun the mainland of Latvia and Estonia faster, but I don't have a sense of by how much.

Leningrad? Anyone's guess is as good as mine, except on AH dot com in post-1900 most people's guesses will be substantially better. I've never read on the siege in any depth.

Sorry, not being lazy. I'm both interested and coping with an alternate history addiction that will affect my work if let myself loose and do a proper research deep dive. I'd appreciate the thoughts of folks here; if not, might read enough to have useful input after the holidays. Take care all.

 

[itsamegg]

Considering how badly the soviet treated the polish during ww2 (shooting all those soldiers in a mass grave, letting the nazis butcher the warsaw uprising, ect) I would be inclined to imagine that any "Polish SSR" would have a hell of a time staying integrated. If the soviets are smart they let poland go in the warsaw pact like they did OTL.

But keeping it and integrating to to the same level as the baltic states would be incredibly hard. you've got a much much larger hostile population that already has a whole laundry list of reasons going back generations to oppose moscow, no matter what flavor, and I would imagine even a lot of polish communists would be opposed to such an incorporation. I'm sure that it COULD be done if stalin really wanted it, but I would expect it to hurt the reputation of the USSR even more than it already was. It might even be enough to keep the czechoslovaks and some others out of the warsaw pact but thats harder to say.

The other option of course would be for the soviets to just incorporate the extra polish territory into ukraine and belarus and just outnumber / internally resettle / expel the existing polish population and then make a smaller post ww2 poland from the german land they take.

As a final thought, no matter what happens I can't imagine the soviets would let Lithuania be independent even if they dont get to them until 1944 / 1945. kaliningrad is too important as a warm port for them to not have a land border to it and lithuania is in the way, so its getting incorporated no matter what. Perhaps the partisan movement there is stronger, with more armed german collaborator partisans fighting the soviets for longer.

 

[thaddeus]

historically Lithuania could not be brought into the invasion of Poland (as Slovakia was), if they had been a German (jr.) partner it would be expected they fall under the German sphere of influence.

since they weren't involved in the invasion, IDK how suspicious the Soviets would become on a German insistence to occupy (or control) their territory?

The extra Polish occupation would moderately delay the Axis thrust on the southern front, but would expose the Soviets to at least as much risk of major units being isolated and surrounded, maybe more. Probably occupation details would differ - there might be no Generalgouvernment Polen, for example - though that distinction might mean little in practice. In the north, Lithuania would be on a distinctly different initial track, but I'm unsure quite how. The thrust from there would probably overrun the mainland of Latvia and Estonia faster, but I don't have a sense of by how much.

IDK that Leningrad can be made more central to the German planning, as they expected a collapse of Soviet defenses across a broad front? there was something of a bottleneck just getting so many forces across the Vistula River anyway (my understanding) and here it is a border with Soviet forces on the other side, so there is that issue (OTOH the Soviets might move even more forces there and they would be fighting in a more advantageous region for the Germans?)

 

[Iranoutofnames]

Does Finland still prevent the Soviets from annexing them In this timeline's Winter War?