What would be the effects of the whites winning civil war??
The problem with this question is that there was no unified "white" side. There were a number of factions in the anti-Bolshevik camp, running the whole width of the political spectrum from monarchists to Socialist-Revolutionaries. After achieving victory, they would probably start going at each other in a civil war 2.0.What would be the effects of the whites winning civil war??
Nitpick: during Weimar it was called the Reichswehr.The Russian military would probably maintain a large behind the scenes role like the German Wehrmacht did in the Weimar Republic,
The problem with this question is that there was no unified "white" side. There were a number of factions in the anti-Bolshevik camp, running the whole width of the political spectrum from monarchists to Socialist-Revolutionaries. After achieving victory, they would probably start going at each other in a civil war 2.0.
There is also the problem that most White military leaders were Great Russian nationalists and opposed the independence of Ukraine, Finland, Poland, the Baltic States, etc. If they win the result may be a new series of offensives to reclaim secessionist territories, or at the very least a strong irredentist ambition that would make Russia a hostile neighbor for years to come.
Nitpick: during Weimar it was called the Reichswehr.
Short version: the Whites would not remain civil for long.What would be the effects of the whites winning civil war??
There is also the problem that most White military leaders were Great Russian nationalists and opposed the independence of Ukraine, Finland, Poland, the Baltic States, etc. If they win the result may be a new series of offensives to reclaim secessionist territories, or at the very least a strong irredentist ambition that would make Russia a hostile neighbor for years to come.
The Hungarian reactionaries were able to avoid a civil war of their own after they overthrew Bela Kun's Communist regime, though.Short version: the Whites would not remain civil for long.
But not anyone else's independence?Actually, Denikin was willing to recognize Poland's independence, read https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/denikin-vs-poland-who-wins.468412/post-18982700.
But not anyone else's independence?
Did I fix it now? It sure looks like I did.Read https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...in-the-russian-civil-war.445641/post-17159678. They probably would have also recognized Finland and the Baltic states' independence. However, only Kornilov was willing to recognize Ukraine's independence and it's very unlikely that he would have prevailed.
Regardless, sorry if this sounds strange, but could you, please, edit the quote to remove the first thing, like I did?
Did I fix it now? It sure looks like I did.
Anyway, David T doesn't actually mention anything about Baltic independence here. It's worth noting that recognizing Baltic independence would have cut off Russia from most of the Baltic Sea.
I imagine it'd end up a lot like China around the same time, with its own Warlord Era on the cards, though I'm not sure if any of the generals would try to declare themselves Tsar like Yuan Shikai did.I'm not sure how plausible it is for the Boshelvists to lose with a POD after November 11th 1918. They weren't in a great position in Summer 1919, but still held Moscow, St. Petersburg, Smolensk and Kiev. But if it did happen I imagine Russia would be a failed state for quite a long time, and I find it exceedingly doubtful that what would emerge at the end would be anything approaching a 'democracy'.
I imagine it'd end up a lot like China around the same time, with its own Warlord Era on the cards, though I'm not sure if any of the generals would try to declare themselves Tsar like Yuan Shikai did.
It would depend which faction(s) actually retook Moscow and St Petersburg as to who came out on top , t least in the sense of controlling the capitals - and whoever took them might well not be on good terms with the leaders of the main military force in other parts of Russia. For instance, I can see a more strongly-backed Deniken managing to take Moscow from the South in autumn 1919,perhaps if Lloyd George had listened more confidently to Churchill and sent in more Allied troops to garrison major towns on the rail routes of Ukraine to the rear of the White army (so Deniken could spare more men for the advance), Deniken had had a large Cossack cavalry force, and D and his political allies had managed to keep all the suspicious Ukrainian factions (eg Nestor Makhno) on side for longer. Deniken's large army would sweep into Moscow from the S with opposition too weak to stop them, in the same way as major Mongol/ Crimean Turk raids in earlier centuries, and the Bolsheviks would have to evacuate their govt to Tver.
Cavalry armies are famously bad at taking major urban areas, especially post machine gun. Correct me if I'm wrong but no horsetribe managed to do anything to Moscow post the mongol invasion in the 13th century.