What is Stalin's back up plan if Moscow was captured by the Germans?

Feb 2018
227
Manila
#1
How will the Red Army fight if Moscow was captured and Stalin was not captured?

If Stalin was captured or killed by the Germans during the invasion, do you believe USSR will be part of Nazi Germany?

P.S. I am a newbie here and I expect a nice welcome thanks :)
 

Chlodio

Forum Staff
Aug 2016
4,077
Dispargum
#3
As early as October 1941 Soviet officials were preparing to abandon Moscow and move the government to Kuybyshev, 500 miles farther east. There were also plans to destroy Moscow in a kind of scorched earth operation to deny the Germans any practical use of the city.

"Rezident: The Espionage Odyssey of Soviet General Vasily Zarubin" By Robert K. Baker


https://books.google.com/books?id=HQK9CQAAQBAJ&pg=PT403&lpg=PT403&dq=Big+scram+to+Kuybushev+1941&source=bl&ots=hFT4JkSpY4&sig=KlPPrH0yghuwdCi_m8-NR7qABU4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjKtbPu8o7ZAhUGjVQKHSoICyYQ6AEINzAF#v=onepage&q=Big%20scram%20to%20Kuybushev%201941&f=false
 
Aug 2016
977
US&A
#4
Moscow had little strategic value.

Personally, I wonder how competent Stalin was. Though the soviets suffered much due to his officer purge, he was probably paranoid out of necessity. He was a military innovator, and the adoption of things like heavy tanks and semiautomatic rifles aided the war effort.

Assuming he was somehow captured, which I agree is unlikely, I doubt his successor would be as capable. I wonder if Stalin was like Hitler, in that he made it so things in his country would've had trouble without him?
 
Aug 2015
2,359
uk
#5
It's quite possible - likely even - that if Stalin fled Moscow there would have been a coup. His purges would not be forgiven or forgotten and catching him at such a weak point would be a chance some would not fail to take. After his fall an attempt at a deal with the Germans would not be beyond comprehension.
 
Jun 2012
5,707
Texas
#6
It's quite possible - likely even - that if Stalin fled Moscow there would have been a coup. His purges would not be forgiven or forgotten and catching him at such a weak point would be a chance some would not fail to take. After his fall an attempt at a deal with the Germans would not be beyond comprehension.
Or the Soviets avoid certain Stalin ordered disasters and their counteroffensives are much more successful....
 

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
3,335
Las Vegas, NV USA
#7
Stalin had specific plans to destroy much of the city. Most war industries had been moved to just east of the Urals. He knew Germany was already overextended and vulnerable. The Urals are over 1800 km east of Moscow.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2012
1,554
#8
It's quite possible - likely even - that if Stalin fled Moscow there would have been a coup. His purges would not be forgiven or forgotten and catching him at such a weak point would be a chance some would not fail to take. After his fall an attempt at a deal with the Germans would not be beyond comprehension.
I disagree. When Germany invaded, Stalin had a nervous breakdown and ran away to his dacha. Yet instead of seizing power, so great was the fear he still exerted that instead they begged him to come back and take control of the army.
If he could literally abandon control when his own nation was being invaded, and still cow his subordinates, there's no way even losing Moscow could force them to unseat him.
 
Feb 2013
1,283
Second City
#9
Moscow had little strategic value.
The center of Soviet rail network is not a strategic objective to scoff at, though Nazi Germany and its Axis allies were already on the road to losing the war against the Soviet Union while they speared heedlessly towards Moscow, careless of unimportant things like logistics.

Personally, I wonder how competent Stalin was. Though the soviets suffered much due to his officer purge, he was probably paranoid out of necessity. He was a military innovator, and the adoption of things like heavy tanks and semiautomatic rifles aided the war effort.
Stalin wasn't a military innovator, some of the younger officers who managed to survive his purges were. That all happened in spite of Stalin, who kept incompetent cronies like Mekhlis and Voroshilov and Budyonny in the high military places well into the war, despite those last two dunderheads thinking cavalry and armored trains were still the key to warfare. Zhukov, Konyev, Malinovsky, even Timoshenko, were the ones wanting to modernize and mechanize the Red Army, despite the conservatism of higher ups.

Assuming he was somehow captured, which I agree is unlikely, I doubt his successor would be as capable. I wonder if Stalin was like Hitler, in that he made it so things in his country would've had trouble without him?
Well, that question has been answered one way or the other by history. The Stalinist system was able to survive Stalin's death, though arguably it was Stalin's policies which doomed the Soviet Union in the long-term.

In any event, the Soviet regime would survive if the Axis took Moscow, most of the Party leadership having already fled to Kuybyshev. That said, the Axis capturing and executing Stalin would be a potentially crippling propaganda blow to the Soviet war effort.
 
Last edited:

Similar History Discussions