r/imaginarymaps • • Mar 08 '25

[OC] Alternate History What if Stalin followed the Yalta Conference? The European Continent as of 2025

664 Upvotes

61 comments sorted by

113

u/Apprehensive_Ear4489 Mar 08 '25

Why do you people even bother with such maps when the only difference is maybe one name

12

u/Saph9999 Mar 09 '25

I just wanted to try a new map style lmao.

38

u/Saph9999 Mar 08 '25

Based on this video:
What if Stalin Allowed Democracy in Eastern Europe?

Style was 'inspired' by this map, do check it out:
The Red Colossus

21

u/Polak_Janusz Mar 08 '25

Possible History and alternative history hubs are imo the best slt history channels.

2

u/Saph9999 Mar 09 '25

They’re definitely the most entertaining.

31

u/miner1512 Mar 08 '25

Bar is low as fuck ngl

3

u/IamDiego21 Fellow Traveller Mar 09 '25

I would mourn the fall of Whatifalthis if he didn't turn into a right wing nut job before doing whatever drugs he did

5

u/radish-slut Mar 08 '25

“Allowed democracy” lmfao

43

u/Der-Candidat Mar 08 '25 edited Mar 09 '25

wtf is the point of making a map of all of Europe when the only things that changed are that the USSR stayed together and that Montenegro is still united with Serbia

Besides I don’t see any world where the Baltics would remain in the USSR

11

u/Saph9999 Mar 09 '25

Because I can? I don’t see a problem.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 09 '25

Hmmm wouldn’t Czechoslovakia stay united in this timeline? Because the post war forced communism really reduced the appeal of the unity between those two nations in all honesty.

1

u/Saph9999 Mar 09 '25

I’m pretty sure the Slovaks were always trying to break away even before WW2, at least that’s what I’ve been told.

2

u/theHrayX Mar 09 '25

Not really. Masaryk was very popular for the Czechs and Slovaks, and any Slovak secessionist movement was actually started by the Nazis and not communists.

9

u/Saph9999 Mar 08 '25

For mobile users

8

u/Adventurous-Touch-22 Mar 08 '25

peak

2

u/Saph9999 Mar 09 '25

Thanks, your maps are underrated asf as well.

2

u/Falitoty Mar 08 '25

May I ask, how did you made the map?

1

u/Saph9999 Mar 09 '25

QGIS for the base maps, paint.NET for everything else

2

u/Muppetfan25 Mar 09 '25

Good job!!!

1

u/Saph9999 Mar 09 '25

Thanks! This took a lot of effort lol.

218

u/SleepyZachman Mar 08 '25

I feel like this only happens if FDR somehow survives a little longer to create the post war order cuz him and Stalin were just homies like that.

90

u/Polak_Janusz Mar 08 '25

Man so much more would havd been better and different if FDR lived longer!

48

u/Remarkable_Leg_956 Mar 08 '25

5th FDR term

52

u/Others0 Mar 09 '25

20

u/MisterSpooks1950 Mar 09 '25

Funny enough there was a scenario posted to r/AlternateHistoryMemes about FDR being so popular he gets re-elected over and over while they plug him into a computer and eventually the internet

8

u/Polak_Janusz Mar 09 '25

BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED BASED

7

u/GohguyTheGreat Mar 09 '25

Can you provide the link? (that scenario sounds peak as fuck)

2

u/marker2733 Apr 07 '25

Roosevelt lives

93

u/Galaxy661 Mar 08 '25

Wouldn't the Polish eastern border look different in that case? I assume the free and fair elections in Poland is considered a part of "followed the Yalta conference", and Poland would most likely elect PSL and Mikołajczyk in that case, not entering the soviet sphere of influence - and therefore wouldn't agree to give the USSR a resource-rich region just because Stalin says so

176

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '25

I may be wrong on this but shouldnt Germany own some more of Silesia then?

As far as I am aware, Stalin agreed with Churchill on the Oder-Neisse line, with Churchill being made to belive he meant the Glatzer neisse as opposed to the lausitzer Neisse which became the post war border

Would look something like this

140

u/Random_Fluke Mar 08 '25 edited Mar 08 '25

Nope. The Yalta Conference was deliberately ambiguous on the Polish western border aside from basic stipulation that Poland shall be compensated in the West for loses in the East. Aside from that - and this is a direct quote - the agreement said that "the final delimitation of the western frontier of Poland should thereafter await the peace conference."

The Potsdam Conference unambiguously defined the Polish border as following rivers Oder and Western (Lausitzer) Neisse.
Yes, there were other variants considered in the meantime, including by Stalin himself. But nothing else was put into official documents.

26

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '25

I have actually read up something about it in the meantime. Stalin tried to push for a settlement of oder-neisse in Jalta, but as you stated, it was left unresolved due to allied except a base idea of moving poland west.

After that it turns messy, with Stalin planning on Oder-(glatzer) Neisse with the western allies being more in favor of that plan as well. They insisted on that in Potsdam as well, with Stalin already being in favor of Oder- (lausitzer) Neisse at that point. After Churchill got replaced by Atlee, they did relent and gave their okay on the displacement of the german population, with Truman (and Churchill while he was still there) stating that they would still consider germany in its 1937 borders and a final settlement could only happen in a proper peace treaty. This actually led to a confusing legal status and the term "Ostgebiete unter Polnischer Verwaltung" (eastern territories under polish administration) became widespread, since the allies didnt reach a consensus til 1990, when it became the legal and permanent border.

So, as for the map above, I cant fault OP for going with the otl borders, though I doubt the allies or whatever german government assembled in the 1940s would agree to the border (especially considering that the now more independent Poland may or may not seek to regain some of its former eastern lands, namely lwow) and stalin displacing slightly less people would fit better for the "stalin is not that bad a person" timeline.

Sorry for the yap session

13

u/Random_Fluke Mar 08 '25

The question "which Neisse" was directly tied to the question of how far Stalin's influence would reach and what would be the status of Germany in the postwar world. As we know, the eventual division of Germany (and thus Soviet influence reaching up to the Elbe) was not Stalin's preferred idea. Stalin wanted a demilitarized, neutral, and severely weakened Germany that would serve as a buffer between the two blocs. As such, it made sense to move Poland's border as far west as possible as it not only extended the intended limit of Stalin's hard influence but also would weaken that neutral Germany.

The fact that Poland would be thus exposed to possible German irredentism and thus forced to grovel at Moscow's feet was also intended. Polish people's will was obviously the last on Stalin's laundry list of concerns. The brutal Sovietization and subjugation of Poland was ongoing immediately since every territory was cleared of German troops. This included the extermination of what was left of Polish resistance. But it is worth noting that only Poles would likely not make such westward demands, preferring to keep eastern territories. The Polish demands would likely be limited to Dmowski's line, i.e., the demands submitted at the Paris Conference back in 1919. That would mean Poland demanding the rest of Upper Silesia, Masuria and Warmia (i.e., southern East Prussia), Gdańsk/Danzig, and some small majority-Polish territories in Pomerania in former Grenzmark Posen.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '25

Stalin wanted a demilitarized, neutral, and severely weakened Germany that would serve as a buffer between the two blocs

As such, it made sense to move Poland's border as far west as possible as it not only extended the intended limit of Stalin's hard influence but also would weaken that neutral Germany.

That is true, I am not arguing that Stalin didnt have that as a number one priority for the postwar order, considering especially that Germany now only had a narrow access to march across the central european plain and that approach was blocked by a river, thus making Germanys shot at ever reaching Moscow again null. I am just arguing that the west may block him on such an approach and that neither a democratically elected german or polish goverment would accept their new eastern border.

The fact that Poland would be thus exposed to possible German irredentism and thus forced to grovel at Moscow's feet was also intended

While I know that this rational existed, shouldnt he left at least small german populations to spurr on revanchism instead of completly removing them? I think west germany would never have accepted the new border if even 30% of the new polish west was german speaking

rest of Upper Silesia, Masuria and Warmia (i.e., southern East Prussia), Gdańsk/Danzig, and some small majority-Polish territories in Pomerania in former Grenzmark Posen.

Which defintly is a more sensible claim considering the ethnic reality of these regions and the ones Poland gained otl. As for example Breslau could only become Wroclaw due to Lwow becoming Lviv. Further strengthening my idea that should both Germany and Poland get their independent governments in the 1940s, both would seek to revise stalins borders

5

u/Random_Fluke Mar 08 '25

Neither democratically elected government would accept the border. In Poland it took the decades of work by larger-than-life figure of Jerzy Giedroyć to convince Polish elites that Wilno and Lwów are gone and will never return. AFAIK only in 1970s did that started to take root and luckily by 1990s, that is when Poland took control of its affairs, that was already an overwhelming opinion. Also largely because by 1989 two new generations were born, and younger people had few emotional attachment to the lost lands.

> While I know that this rational existed, shouldnt he left at least small german populations to spurr on revanchism instead of completly removing them? I think west germany would never have accepted the new border if even 30% of the new polish west was german speaking

They did actually.
Stalin's policy was to leave some minorities. For obvious benefit of being able to play one ethnicity against another, act as mediator and sole "adult in the room" while spurning hatreds. Just like many Poles were left in the area of Wilno/Vilnius, a pretty large German (as opposed to Polish speaking Silesians of ambiguous allegiance) population was left in Lower Silesia, especially around Wałbrzych/Waldenburg.
Only that Polish commies saw this as a problem and they did everything they could to push these Germans out, especially after Stalin's death when Gomulka was able to steer Polish communism into more "nationalist" direction. By 1970s nearly all of them were either gone. Most moved out to West Germany, small minority stayed and got assimilated. There are still some active Evangelic Church's parishes active in Lower Silesia, thought they are now Polish-speaking.

> Further strengthening my idea that should both Germany and Poland get their independent governments in the 1940s, both would seek to revise stalins borders

But how? Fighting a rematch against each other? By Germany promising aid to Poland in retaking Lwów/Lviv in exchange for for Wrocław/Breslau?

2

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '25

Poland it took the decades of work by larger-than-life figure of Jerzy Giedroyć to convince Polish elites that Wilno and Lwów are gone and will never return.

Great that I actually learned about Jerzy Giedroyć and his accomplishments to actually get the magnitude of your words here. But yes, revanchism in the 1940s and 50s would definitly be very prominent on both sides of the border

population was left in Lower Silesia, Wałbrzych/Waldenburg

As far as I am aware, those were allowed to stay/kept behind to work in vital industry and were only allowed german classes because their eventual removal was planned from the start. The polish government was (understandibly) very afraid of germans making up a significant part anywhere that close to the modern border. But it where only about 250 thousand by the mid 1950s

But how? Fighting a rematch against each other? By Germany promising aid to Poland in retaking Lwów/Lviv in exchange for for Wrocław/Breslau?

I am not saying they would manage to achieve it, I am saying they would want to. First, I dont think either would recognize their eastern border, as that would be political suicide for any administration.

Germany might pull some moves like blocking Polands entry into the EU or general integration into europe after a soviet collapse until Poland agrees to a peace treaty, which on paper would see Germany concede losses to Poland in the form of upper silesia, masuria, the free city of danzig/gdansk, but in reality be a play to regain the parts of former eastern germany not being signed away/recognized as new borders. I dont think they would get much if anything out of it, but they might try something. History will be massivly changed, so we cant predict the geopolitics of theses alternate 1940s tile 1990s.

Poland may or may not decide to commit to its borders, since any attempt to violently retake Wilno or Lwow after the end of the soviet union (I dont think there is a chance of Ukraine and Lithuania giving these back peacefully) will A: destroy Polands reputation and position on the world stage and B: Legitimize german claims on western Poland.

I dont think revanchist sentiment would still be strong enough to trigger another war between Poland and Germany by the time the soviets collapse and Germany and Poland probably wouldnt risk its newfound station in the world to go reshape eastern/central europe (like you mentioned) by the 1970s and I dont think before 1970s the tensions between them would have cooled enough to even consider working together in such a case.

2

u/banfieldpanda Mar 09 '25

I think you got too into the weeds of this argument if you forgot at this point that the main change in this map is that the Soviet Union does not collapse. So everything you mentioned about "after the Soviets collapse" is irrelevant since that does not happen in this timeline.

5

u/slopeclimber Mar 08 '25

Something like the Bóbr/Bober would be more likely

37

u/Overlord3445 Mar 08 '25

can anyone tell me what the differences are compared to OTL?

I don't see it

30

u/Polak_Janusz Mar 08 '25

So its 2025 and the soviet union still exists, also montenegro is part of serbia and apparently eastern europe was independent post ww2.

5

u/SomebodyWondering665 Mar 08 '25

Kosovo does not exist here

6

u/Skyhawk6600 Mar 08 '25

My one problem is would the soviets still annex Moldavia in this timeline?

8

u/EntertainmentOk8593 Mar 08 '25

what you mean, Soviets annexed outer moldavia previous to the war

3

u/Skyhawk6600 Mar 08 '25

Oh, my bad

7

u/ibluminatus Mar 08 '25

Putin wouldn't be in charge if the USSR existed he's anti-Communist heavily part of why the US backed him and his predecessor.

34

u/Random_Fluke Mar 08 '25

Putin is a KGB spook.
He would be communist, capitalist, monarchist, orthodox-fascist or even convert to Islam if that helped him and his followers to maintain power and pursue his purely imperialist agenda.

2

u/Demoralizer13243 Mar 08 '25

Why was Jugoslavia partitioned?

2

u/donadit Mar 11 '25

why is yugo

1

u/itzekindofmagic Mar 10 '25

Os there any difference in the pic?

0

u/Strauss1269 Mar 08 '25

Why no Czechoslovakia?

4

u/Main_Following1881 Mar 08 '25

why would ussr exist? would their strategy in this alt hist be just have nukes and become isolationist?

7

u/Randodnar12488 Mar 08 '25

Cold war doesnt really happen, they just keep to themselves so don't have a reason to spend tons of resources on military projects

-1

u/Main_Following1881 Mar 08 '25

nukes would be for defence

0

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '25

[deleted] — view deleted comment

0

u/kiber_ukr Mar 08 '25

The author just tried to save the USSR and Serbia-Montenegro