# Could the USSR have survived defeat at the gates of Moscow: December 1941?



## michaelmaltby (Feb 18, 2012)

The Russians have always been masters of trading land for time. 
The Party leadership of the USSR had demonstrated that it could fight and ultimately win a war on many fronts (Civil War - post 1917). 
The Military leadership had demonstrated that it could mobilize and successfully conduct combined arms in the East (Nomonhan, 1939). 
Major industrial resources had been moved East of the Ural Mts. by December, 1941.

It is my view that, if Moscow had fallen in December, 1941, the Soviet leadership would have withdrawn East of the Ural Mountains and continued the fight against Hitler, and, in the end, would have prevailed with the assistance of massive LL aid pouring in from the USA across the Bering Strait (just as LL aid poured in that way for the August, 1945 offensive against Japan.)

I do not believe Japan would have jumped into the fray. By December, 1941, Japan was at war with the USA and had no resources to spare.

Here's the lay of the land.


----------



## imalko (Feb 18, 2012)

I agree. In my opinion the Germans had only one chance in defeating the Soviet Union and that is to overrun western areas before any industry could be evacuated to the Urals. Since they failed to do that not even the fall of Moscow in December 1941 would give them ultimate victory in the war.


----------



## davebender (Feb 18, 2012)

That's what Stalin would do if he's still in power. But would he be?


----------



## michaelmaltby (Feb 18, 2012)

"....that's what Stalin would do if he's still in power. But would he be?"

Good question, db. 

I think the danger period for Stalin's leadership was the first couple of weeks immediately after June 22. He vanished for almost a week and then returned. By December 21, 1941 it is my view that those immediately around him were resigned to the necessity of Stalin's "way" in order to survive and prevail. The average Russian in the street was inoculated to Stalin's methods by 1941 - there would never be a popular uprising - and the leadership around the leader had been curry-combed relentlessly by Stalin's paranoia. By 1941 no one was being eliminated or sent to the gulag for real offences - they were simply sacrificial to send the message that Stalin was not going soft, and "knew" everything.

So - in short - my money is on Stalin prevailing as leader and the withdrawal east of the Urals.

MM


----------



## davebender (Feb 18, 2012)

> By 1941 no one was being eliminated or sent to the gulag for real offences - they were simply sacrificial to send the message that Stalin was not going soft


Therein lies the problem. 

The Russian people are not stupid nor are they sheep. Millions of older Russians remembered the German occupation of 1918 and they know it was a lot less harsh then life under Stalin. They also know that thousands of Russians fled Soviet rule to live in Germany and those ethnic Russians were not being mistreated. For instance one of the more famous German night fighter pilots (Helmut Lent) married the daughter of a Russian refugee.

So why wouldn't Russians take the first good opportunity to kill Stalin and negotiate with Germany to end the war?


----------



## Vincenzo (Feb 18, 2012)

because they were untermensch* also without Stalin so i think fight is a best option


*for nazis


----------



## stona (Feb 19, 2012)

I don't think the USSR would have survived. The USSR was not Russia. Many parts of the union saw the Germans as liberators before the "liberators" messed that up for themselves. It must be plausible that large chunks in the west of the USSR (Ukraine,Belarus etc) which were already occupied by the Germans might come to some arrangement with the occupiers independently of the Soviet leadership who now,Stalin or no Stalin,have disappeared over the Urals.
It's a long way from Siberia to,say,Minsk which is much closer to Berlin than the Urals
Cheers
Steve


----------



## michaelmaltby (Feb 19, 2012)

"... The USSR was not Russia. ..... It's a long way from Siberia to,say,Minsk which is much closer to Berlin than the Urals"

All very true. IMHO if the Soviets withdrew government behind the Urals - the front line would have advanced east much further, so certainly all the territories you mention would have plenty of first hand experience being occupied by the Nazis. I'm not sure how valid the comparison between WW1 German occupation and the WW2 version of the same is, Stona. The Germans really messed up their chances in the slavic regions they occupied, very quickly. They may have been greeted as liberators but that view didn't last. Certainly ... it would have been a much longer war, more along the timeline of the Peninsular War in Spain (1807-14) at the very least. But if America is providing aid from the Pacific - and with Soviet manpower and mobilization - time and space would be the Soviet's friend. 

MM


----------



## stona (Feb 19, 2012)

I didn't mean to bring in WWI,I was referring to Western areas already occupied by the Germans as they pushed on to Moscow,sorry for the confusion 

The Germans certainly did mess up their initial welcome fairly quickly,driven by their idiotic racial ideology as alluded to by Vicenzo above. 

I certainly agree that the capture and occupation of the territories of the European USSR would have extended the war considerably,irrespective of aid from the Western allies,just look at the lack of infrastructure East of the Urals. 
If we ignore the possibility of the Western allies pushing much further East after their eventual invasion we must remember that the Russians were not the only ones who could trade space for time. Mannstein was probably the undisputed master of the fighting retreat and with the Soviets starting East of the Urals he would have had a lot more space to bleed the Red Army in. 
It's no coincidence that the NATO allies,facing the Red Army at the beginning of the cold war sprung Mannstein from prison after barely 4 years of his 18 year sentence and consulted him on the best way of stopping it! I imagine the Soviet members of the Nuremberg court were less than impressed. It's a good job he was in the hands of the British.
Cheers
Steve


----------



## michaelmaltby (Feb 20, 2012)

Sorry stona, I misrepresented your thoughts on WW1 .... I was, in fact, cued by davebender's post ...: 

" .... Millions of older Russians remembered _the German occupation of 1918_ .." 

Chairs,

MM


----------



## michaelmaltby (Feb 20, 2012)

"... sprung Mannstein from prison after barely 4 years of his 18 year sentence and consulted him on the best way of stopping it!"

Interesting .... 

"... the Russians were not the only ones who could trade space for time"

I do agree - especially in the context of WW2. The slow withdrawal up the boot of Italy being a prime example .... the flooding of Holland being another .... both of which Canadian troops experienced in a very first-hand and costly way.

Trading space for time is a much different game when you're contesting over flat plains with only major rivers as natural defensive barriers.

Once east of Moscow ..... what becomes the retreating Soviet's next defensive line .... Stalingrad ....?

MM


----------



## Shortround6 (Feb 20, 2012)

stona said:


> I certainly agree that the capture and occupation of the territories of the European USSR would have extended the war considerably,irrespective of aid from the Western allies,just look at the lack of infrastructure East of the Urals.



Quite true, not all land is the same. The relative lack of roads, and railroads east of Moscow would have placed a huge logistic burden on the Soviet army. Both in defense and offense. The further east you go the less suitable the terrain and climate are for food production which means, even (or because of?)with large scale relocation of factory workers, importation of food becomes even more important. 

If the Soviets retreat to the Urals do they keep the southern oil fields? and if the Germans get the western shore of the Caspian sea what does that do to the southern lend lease route? The Northern one is a done deal. 

While the Soviets may very well stay in the game by retreating to Urals it would delay any offensive moves of any size for several years.


----------



## Juha (Feb 20, 2012)

Yes!
I'm with Imalko
Why
1) Germans lost much of their equipment when they were forced to retreat in Dec. 41 because they simply couldn't move them, why you think that they would have been capable to advance much east of Moscow? Farther east one went the harsher winter comes, more forest etc. 
2)Heer wasn't good in winter warfare or in forest fighting in 41/42 winter. 
3)If Germans would have been able to stay in Moscow to March I guess that their communications to the west would have been very perilous because of the weather and activities by Soviet cavalry, airborne troops, partisans and Soviet troops staying behind German lines in the forests.

Juha


----------



## stona (Feb 20, 2012)

Juha said:


> Yes!
> I'm with Imalko
> Why
> 1) Germans lost much of their equipment when they were forced to retreat in Dec. 41 because they simply couldn't move them, why you think that they would have been capable to advance much east of Moscow? Farther east one went the harsher winter comes, more forest etc.
> ...



Russia had been plunged into civil war barely twenty years previously. If the Germans had played their cards right they could have split the USSR down the middle.
There were plenty of people in the Western territories of the USSR who were happy to see the Germans arrive,it was the Germans who messed up that opportunity.
War is famously an extension of politics. Luckily the Nazi regime lacked astute politicians with an understanding of foreign affairs,in fact most of them were over promoted croneys and thugs who had never left Germany and it showed.
Cheers
Steve


----------



## Juha (Feb 20, 2012)

IMHO the racistic ideology was essential part of Nazi Germany, and that incl Heer, so rational policy towards Slavs was out of question.

Juha


----------



## michaelmaltby (Feb 20, 2012)

".... While the Soviets may very well stay in the game by retreating to Urals it would delay any offensive moves of any size for several years..."

I thorough agree on that -- and ves, I see the Russians losing their Caspian oil fields - and the LL route through Iran. But Britain and the USA would fly airstrikes against German forces IF it came down to that.

The oil fields would be destroyed by the retreating Soviets as much as possible - burning Kuwait on the Caspian. And those same fields would be within bomber range from Iran.

The land east of the Urals_ is_ vast, empty and harsh ... but there is a railroad ... a railroad that has been absolutely _historic_ in the history of modern Russia. It will be easier for the Soviets to bring up LL-USA material from east of them and push it west than it will be for the German military to support themselves through a western "rear" that is a former war-zone ... now constantly subject to communist _guerillas_ ....

And what of the Northern Front. When Moscow folds does Leningrad fall too ..... making the Baltic truly "Mera Germania" (or should that be "Mera Adolphia")

MM


----------



## davebender (Feb 20, 2012)

The Heer performed just fine in Northern Norway during April 1940. So it's safe to say German Army units understood how to fight under winter conditions.

Historically the Heer gave priority to ammunition and fuel shipments during the fall of 1941. That's why they didn't have winter clothing and equipment for the advance on Moscow. The Waffen SS made different logistical choices so their soldiers had proper winter clothing and equipment during December 1941. That paid big dividends for SS Totenkopf Division when encircled at Demyansk.

The Heer could have made a logistical pause during November 1941 to bring winter equipment forward. That would have delayed further advance towards Moscow two or three weeks. However when the advance resumed Heer soldiers would have been properly equipped rather then half frozen.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Feb 20, 2012)

".... The Waffen SS made different logistical choices so their soldiers had proper winter clothing and equipment during December 1941." 


Ain't it the truth.

MM


----------



## tyrodtom (Feb 20, 2012)

The invasion of Norway from Apr.40 to Jun 40 hardy gives the Heer winter fighting credentials,. Norway is warmed by the Allantic current, it doesn't experience the extreme cold of the interior of Russia. It takes more than just fighting in snow .


----------



## michaelmaltby (Feb 20, 2012)

"... the racist ideology was essential part of Nazi Germany, and that incl Heer, so *rational* policy towards Slavs was out of question."

Yep.

MM


----------



## tyrodtom (Feb 20, 2012)

When I was stationed in Germany in the early 70s we were given briefings by Bundeswier officers who were veterans of the WW2 eastern front. They tried to impress on us that winters in Russia was a whole different magnitude of cold, and misery from what we would encounter elsewhere. He said you could hear trees and rocks exploding in the coldest nights, from the little bit of moisture in them freezing, that you could die from not using the exact correct proceduers for going to the bathroom, weapons cleaning, etc. stuff the Russians had lived with all their lifes, but the Germans had to learn as they encountered them, because they hadn't encountered them before.

Maybe they thought they were true winter fighters after Norway, but it's evident they weren't prepared for the winter they encountered in Russia.


----------



## davebender (Feb 20, 2012)

How about 4 years of fighting on the Russian Front during WWI? Fighting in northern Italy during WWI? Fighting in Romania during WWI? Fighting in Finland during WWI?

I don't think the climate changed too much between 1918 and 1941.


----------



## Juha (Feb 20, 2012)

davebender said:


> How about 4 years of fighting on the Russian Front during WWI? Fighting in northern Italy during WWI? Fighting in Romania during WWI? Fighting in Finland during WWI?
> 
> I don't think the climate changed too much between 1918 and 1941.



Somehow Germans seems to have forgot all that, if the fact that it took many losses to learn how to make fairly sure that MG 34 will fire when the gunner pulled the trigger. After all the principal firepower of German squad. The troops had to learn that during the winter after they had learned, those who survived, that odds were that the MG 34 would not fire in cold weather if they had maintained it by the book. Finns had the teach Germans even the simplest things here in Finland when they found out how hapless Germans were in winter warfare. Finns began to give crash courses "How to survive outdoors during the winter" and "How to keep sentries combat effective during the winter" and had to sent small teams along the Eastern Front to teach the basics to selected groups of German officers and NCOs who then could teach other Germans. And Finns found out that some German high ranking officers were totally out of reality and saw survival of winter weather as "discipline question" ie if field regulations ordered something that should be done even if that meant dead or invalided sentry etc. Some of German troops understand some basics, especially those coming from East-Prussia where winters were sometimest rather harsh.

Juha


----------



## Shortround6 (Feb 20, 2012)

michaelmaltby said:


> I thorough agree on that -- and ves, I see the Russians losing their Caspian oil fields - and the LL route through Iran. But Britain and the USA would fly airstrikes against German forces IF it came down to that.
> 
> The oil fields would be destroyed by the retreating Soviets as much as possible - burning Kuwait on the Caspian. And those same fields would be within bomber range from Iran.



It is not a question so much of the Germans getting working oil fields as it is the Russians loosing them. What other large sources did the Russians have at the time or would they be almost entirely reliant on LL oil products? 


michaelmaltby said:


> The land east of the Urals_ is_ vast, empty and harsh ... but there is a railroad ... a railroad that has been absolutely _historic_ in the history of modern Russia. It will be easier for the Soviets to bring up LL-USA material from east of them and push it west than it will be for the German military to support themselves through a western "rear" that is a former war-zone ... now constantly subject to communist _guerillas_ ....



There are railroads and there are railroads. Some of the American railroads (tracks and trackbeds) never fully recovered from the punishment they endured in WW II just from the amount of traffic they carried and the lower time/manpower available for maintenance. Some major east-west US routes were four tracked in places, two sets of tracks dedicated to each direction and using 132lb to the yd rail. Just because a railroad exists doesn't mean it can handle an unlimited amount of traffic. 

How much of the Trans-Siberian RR would have have to have been upgraded (better roadbed, heavier rails, more parallel tracks in places and or more/longer passing sidings, newer bridges) to handle a much increased flow of traffic? yes it could have been done and most likely would have been done but then without the Moscow rail hub distribution of material and men to the northern and southern parts of the front would have been much more difficult or the rapid transfer of forces of to reinforce defenders from attacks or to reinforce a successful local attack. These problems could be over come but, again, it is going to take a considerable amount of time, effort and aid.


----------



## davebender (Feb 20, 2012)

Yes but not the Heer.

Sep 8, 1941. German offensive near the Litsa River. 
9th SS Infantry Regiment participated in this attack. A Soviet counter attack routed the poorly trained Waffen SS unit. Heer soldiers from 2nd Mountain Division had to recapture the lost ground.


----------



## Juha (Feb 20, 2012)

Now even if also in Northern Finland the worst unit was the half-trained 6th SS Mountain Division, which was at first really hopeless, not even the German mountain divisions particularly shined there. And ordinary Heer infantry divs were in trouble in forest fighting. Finns had to send their own units to help them in flank protection and in long flanking attacks through wilderness because the environment was too difficult to Germans. But I was talking on winter warfare and also Heer was poorly prepared for that, not only was equipment side lacking but also training. But Germans were rather fast to learn right tactics. During autumn and winter 44 when Finns were pushing Germans out from Northern Finland Germans did fairly well, sometimes their infantry and artillery co-operation was excellent and they always tried very hard to get their surrounded units out of pockets.

Juha


----------



## davebender (Feb 20, 2012)

The OHLs own evaluation stated 1939 Heer infantry were more poorly trained then their WWI era counterparts. What do you expect when over 90% of the army consisted of new conscripts who have just completed initial entry training?


----------



## Juha (Feb 20, 2012)

dp


----------



## Juha (Feb 20, 2012)

davebender said:


> ...What do you expect when over 90% of the army consisted of new conscripts who have just completed initial entry training?



Now that was impossible on 1 Sept 39 and even more so in Dec 41

Juha


----------



## michaelmaltby (Feb 20, 2012)

".... It is not a question so much of the Germans getting working oil fields as it is the Russians loosing them. What other large sources did the Russians have at the time or would they be almost entirely reliant on LL oil products? "

None, at the time. Once the Caspian fields are lost the USSR will be dependent on the USA for all their gas, diesel and lubricants - but with other priorities shifted, the USA has the capacity to supply, IMHO. 

"... How much of the Trans-Siberian RR would have have to have been upgraded (better roadbed, heavier rails, more parallel tracks in places and or more/longer passing sidings, newer bridges) to handle a much increased flow of traffic? yes it could have been done and most likely would have been done but then without the Moscow rail hub distribution of material and men to the northern and southern parts of the front would have been much more difficult or the rapid transfer of forces of to reinforce defenders from attacks or to reinforce a successful local attack. These problems could be over come but, again, it is going to take a considerable amount of time, effort and aid."

In 1945 when the August Storm build up began - the Soviets left most everything in place in the West except Medical, Engineering and Communications units - they ran 100 trains a 24 hour cycle east (according to David Glantz), IIRC, in addition to trains running from the Pacific westwards carrying LL materials shipped from the USA.

The Russians build wider scale railroads for a reason .... .

MM


----------



## tyrodtom (Feb 20, 2012)

The Finns even schooled the Russians in winter warfare in the Winter War. And they applied those recently learned lessons to the battle of Moscow.

It seems that most armies of the period didn't retain much of the leasons learned in WW1. That might have been particularily true of the Russians, thanks to Stalin's purges of the 30s.


----------



## tyrodtom (Feb 21, 2012)

I should have said thanks to their civil war and Stalin's purges of the 30s, Russia didn't have many or any WW1 experienced officers. 
I'm not sure if that's a disadvantage or a advantage.

Most of Germanies WW2 generals had been mid grade officers in WW1, but how many WW2 Russian generals had WW1 experience?


----------



## Juha (Feb 21, 2012)

tyrodtom said:


> I should have said thanks to their civil war and Stalin's purges of the 30s, Russia didn't have many or any WW1 experienced officers.
> I'm not sure if that's a disadvantage or a advantage.
> 
> Most of Germanies WW2 generals had been mid grade officers in WW1, but how many WW2 Russian generals had WW1 experience?



At least CoS of red army during most of GPW, Shaposhnikov, was ex-tsarist officer
Zhukov and some others were ex-tsarist NCOs

Juha


----------

