1997 hypothetical

[Adm.Lee]

I spent last week at a wargaming convention. Since this convention focuses on long WW2 games, we have a lot of time to debate issue big and small. One dinnertime topic sprang from, "Were the Germans insane to invade the USSR in 1941?"
One held forth that if you looked at history, the Russians were the great losers of Europe: anyone and everyone had defeated them, time and time again. By 1941, even the Finns had beaten them off. The Germans could especially look at their own experience in 1914-1918, when they had ended up overrunning Ukraine and the Baltic coast. Also, we have Hitler's famous quote that the Communist regime was fragile, and a strong push would collapse it, and the peoples would not contest German dominance.
My opinion was that yes, one could defeat the Russians (Soviets), but that's not the same thing as conquering Russia. It's too big, and there is always another Russian army. Whether or not the Germans mistreated the populace, Russia is too big to conquer in a short time. After all, it took the Russians centuries to do it.

That said, this week, I wondered about NATO and 1997 in the T2k timeline. NATO's armies, fully mobilized and well-supported by air, had crossed Poland by late summer, and stood at the Soviet border. Presumably, the flank facing Czechoslovakia was guarded by some forces. Now what? Follow the path of Napoleon? Sit tight? Find someplace defensible and dig in? Ask for terms?

We "know" that NATO advance forces crossed the Polish-Soviet frontier, but was it a full invasion, or patrol actions? Reconnaissance in force? Was NATO surprised by the strength of the Soviet riposte?

It's something to sit around the fire in the cantonment and jaw about. I'm interested in opinions, informed or otherwise. I'm not sure what I believe just yet.

[Webstral]

I have maintained for a few years that the NATO plan (meaning the official policy of the White House) was in keeping with the proposed NATO war aims of General Sir John Hackett’s The Third World War. Specifically, the goal was to occupy the USSR west of the Dvina-Dnepr line, effectively knocking the Soviet Union out of the war whether they came to terms or not.

Theoretically, this plan had a number of advantages. By occupying the westernmost slice of the Soviet Union, NATO effectively would liberate all of Eastern Europe (whether the other members of the Warsaw Pact wanted to be liberated or not). Much Ukrainian grain would be denied to the Soviets, along with the industry and raw materials of the occupied areas. All this said, the Soviet Union would not be destroyed outright. Moscow would not be threatened with occupation. The regime could continue to rule the vast Soviet territory; they would be unable to wage offensive war against the West or China in the future, however—especially if a reunited Germany and the liberated Warsaw Pact signatories maintained a military presence in Belarus and the Ukraine.

Of course, reality evolved rather differently. The regime in power in the Kremlin in mid-1997 was worried about a coup or revolution. They were right to worry about these things. Also, no matter how rational the scheme put forth by NATO might have been, it was foolish to allow any German units to cross the Soviet border.

[Benjamin]

I've always assumed that events unfolded in such a way that they became unmanageable to NATO high command. To me crossing the border into the Soviet Union herself always seemed a bit of a death wish.

Back in college, about 20 years ago, I worked on an alternate V1 timeline where NATO high command wises up a bit.

SIGINT and HUMINT gives NATO the heads up that crossing into the USSR, especially by Germans, would trigger a nuclear release. Thusly, they halt just 10-20km west of the border and put forth peace feelers though Sweden and Switzerland. Unfortunately the Italian invasion of Austria and Germany throws this idea into disarray. Backed by limited use of chemicals the Soviets launch a counter attack, but this bogs down and is never able to get more than a toe hold over the Wisla.

Come fall the majority of the fighting focuses around the Med as NATO moves to knock Italy, Greece and other Warsaw Pact allies out of the war. By the end of November 1997, Greece is wracked by civil War and northern Italy is now the pro-NATO nation of Padania. The Soviet Union too is played out but finds itself unwilling, or unable, to withdraw from China and the Middle East. The ball finally goes up on December 7th when Russian MRBMs strike multiple targets in China, including command and control bunkers outside of Beijing. NATO scrambles to avert disaster in the West and much of China and the eastern Soviet Union is irradiated.

In the West a cease-fire is reached in mid-Febrauary, and Soviet forces are withdrawn back to the USSR. Unfortunately, a coup to overthrow the Communist regime is bungled and instead sparks another Russian Civil War. The year long death throws of the Soviet Union will see a further dozen nuclear weapons used along with millions more dead. A final peace treaty isn't signed until June 15, 2000, thus bringing to an end the most destructive war in human history.

Sorry got off topic a bit there.
Benjamin

[Raellus]

Perhaps NATO had reason to believe that Ukraine and Byelorussia were looking for an excuse to secede from the Soviet Union. Perhaps NATO intended to give them a fait accompli by crossing the Soviet frontier, purportedly as "liberators". As it turned out, NATO clearly underestimated the Soviet government's response to such a move.

[Marc]

I’ve always imagined that the crossing of the Polish-Soviet border by Germans units was caused by a too eager commander on the field trying to exploit the success of a previous tactical engagement. I have not a real base to suppose this. But I always felt attracted by the concept of how uncontrollable can became the evolution of the events once war machinery is fully activated. A tactical decision taken by one individual trying not to lose the momentum to achieve a major victory in the face of a nearly collapsing enemy force. Perhaps a right decision in the field, but the worst decision once known the consequences.

On the other side there’s a nice void to be fill when talking about all the diplomatic movements of the warring and neutral countries once the war breaks out.

[The Rifleman]

Think historically. In WW1, Germany faced a 2 front war. The internal problems in Russia caused and early collapse and allowed the Germans to change from a 2 front war to a 1 front war, which resulted in their ability to mount the 1918 Offensive. However, in WW2, Germany faced a 2 front war where both fronts were not going to collapse until completely conquered. Germany was unable to even "dig in" and wait because they did not have the forces to do so. Their only hope of success was to stay on the offensive and knock nations out of the fighting.

In our WW3, its the Soviets that are fighting the 2 front war. We keep talking about Nato, but no one is thinking about the fact that the USSR is also fighting in China, Korea, Iran. Granted, in Korea and Iran there are US/Nato forces there as well, but in China the Soviets are facing a large army that is tying up lots of assets. Even trying to later supress partisians is going to take a lot of forces.

My belief is that the Nato commanders would feel that they were dragged into a war they didn't want. The goal would be, as stated above by some of the better thinkers in this forum, to make a limited attack to liberate eastern european countries, seize some important economic territory like grain producing regions, the limited warm weather seaports, and manufactuering centers. Under attack from two fronts, the USSR would be "starved out" and would settle for terms early.

Going one step further, my thought is that the NATO commanders never believed that they would completely overun all of the USSR. However, the USSR believed that they would overrun Europe, and when NATO actually started to invade their home territories, the USSR assumed that NATOs goal was complete conquest, (as that was there goal) and thus the nukes came out.