West Austria and East Austria

[lordroel]

What if in 1948 the Austrian communists appealed to Stalin to partition their country along the German model came true and Soviet-occupied Austria consisting of Burgenland, Lower Austria, and the Mühlviertel area of Upper Austria, north of the Danube became the People Republic of Austria. In responds the United States, French and the United Kingdom merge their zones into one country resulting in a Soviet controlled East Austria and a West backed West Austria.

How will the future look like for both new countries and the rest of Europe.

[spanishspy]

Will Vienna be a divided city like Berlin? If so, the situation may be very similar.

Austria will be very militarized along the dividing line, and in case of war, cities such as Sankt Polten and Graz will take center stage as places of contention.

The de facto capital of West Austria would likely be Innsbruck or Salzburg; Klagenfurt, Villach, Graz, and Linz are too close to the border.

[lordroel]

Jan 12, 2016 7:07:36 GMT spanishspy said:

The de facto capital of West Austria would likely be Innsbruck or Salzburg; Klagenfurt, Villach, Graz, and Linz are too close to the border.

My guess would be Innsbruck, its located in a good location.

Jan 12, 2016 7:07:36 GMT spanishspy said:

Will Vienna be a divided city like Berlin? If so, the situation may be very similar.

As Vienna is located in Soviet backed People Republic of Austria, yes it will be divided like Berlin, the city is divided among all four Allies. The historical center of Vienna is declared an international zone, in which occupation forces changed every month (this might become a issues in the future because it can never last long this).

Map of the four sectors of occupation in Vienna.

[spanishspy]

I would imagine that the Western powers would try to petition Switzerland and maybe Liechtenstein for permission to put military bases in their territory; most likely they would not, but the West could use a base in, say, Glarus. Also, expect more military presence in Munich and more generally southern Bavaria. Likewise, the Eastern Bloc could fortify the western part of Czechoslovakia more thoroughly.

[lordroel]

Jan 13, 2016 0:46:09 GMT spanishspy said:

I would imagine that the Western powers would try to petition Switzerland and maybe Liechtenstein for permission to put military bases in their territory; most likely they would not, but the West could use a base in, say, Glarus. Also, expect more military presence in Munich and more generally southern Bavaria. Likewise, the Eastern Bloc could fortify the western part of Czechoslovakia more thoroughly.

I think Switzerland will remain neutral even whit a divided Austria, its not that they have any border with a East Bloc country, in fact they are now surrounded by NATO members.

[futurist]

Jan 10, 2016 19:17:33 GMT lordroel said:

What if in 1948 the Austrian communists appealed to Stalin to partition their country along the German model came true and Soviet-occupied Austria consisting of Burgenland, Lower Austria, and the Mühlviertel area of Upper Austria, north of the Danube became the People Republic of Austria. In responds the United States, French and the United Kingdom merge their zones into one country resulting in a Soviet controlled East Austria and a West backed West Austria.

How will the future look like for both new countries and the rest of Europe.

Question--wouldn't it be in the Soviet Union's interests for Khrushchev (after 1953) to agree to Austria's reunification in exchange for permanent Austrian neutrality?

[futurist]

Jan 13, 2016 4:05:19 GMT lordroel said:

Jan 13, 2016 0:46:09 GMT spanishspy said:

I would imagine that the Western powers would try to petition Switzerland and maybe Liechtenstein for permission to put military bases in their territory; most likely they would not, but the West could use a base in, say, Glarus. Also, expect more military presence in Munich and more generally southern Bavaria. Likewise, the Eastern Bloc could fortify the western part of Czechoslovakia more thoroughly.

I think Switzerland will remain neutral even whit a divided Austria, its not that they have any border with a East Bloc country, in fact they are now surrounded by NATO members.

Completely agreed; indeed, Switzerland didn't even join the U.N. until 2002 in our TL!

[lordroel]

Aug 26, 2016 23:57:36 GMT futurist said:

Jan 13, 2016 4:05:19 GMT lordroel said:

I think Switzerland will remain neutral even whit a divided Austria, its not that they have any border with a East Bloc country, in fact they are now surrounded by NATO members.

Completely agreed; indeed, Switzerland didn't even join the U.N. until 2002 in our TL!

But that might be different if there is a West Austria and East Austria.

[eurofed]

ITTL West Austria would be so small and have so little population and economic resources that its liveability would be in serious doubt. And being on the frontline of the Cold War its stability and ability to defend itself from Soviet military threats and Communit destabilization would be very important for the West. Therefore I expect sooner rather than later the Western powers (i.e. the Americans, with the British and the French following their lead) would allow West Germany and West Austria to reunify; Cold War strategic concerns would trump bad taste from a second, democratic Anschluss. Division of Austria would in all likelihood prevent post-WWII development of a separate Austrian national consciousness in the first place, and the West Austrians would welcome the increased prosperity and security the union would ensure. I expect the WG-WA union would take place sometime in the '50s, more or less at the same time West Germany recovered national sovreignty within the EU/NATO framework, rearmed, and recovered the Saar.

The WG-WA union would lessen the need to pressure Switzerland to join EU/NATO. Vienna would surely become a divided city just like Berlin, and in due time a second Wall would be built. I assume West Austria would join Germany as one Lander, to be similar in size to the other West German states. The capital of the West Austrian Lander would be Innsbruck or Salzburg. As others have pointed out, extension of the Cold War frontline to divided Austria would drive both blocs to increase the militarization of the southern portion of the Iron Curtain. Effects on Yugoslavia may vary.

[lordroel]

Nov 18, 2016 15:12:07 GMT eurofed said:

ITTL West Austria would be so small and have so little population and economic resources that its liveability would be in serious doubt. And being on the frontline of the Cold War its stability and ability to defend itself from Soviet military threats and Communit destabilization would be very important for the West. Therefore I expect sooner rather than later the Western powers (i.e. the Americans, with the British and the French following their lead) would allow West Germany and West Austria to reunify; Cold War strategic concerns would trump bad taste from a second, democratic Anschluss. Division of Austria would in all likelihood prevent post-WWII development of a separate Austrian national consciousness in the first place, and the West Austrians would welcome the increased prosperity and security the union would ensure. I expect the WG-WA union would take place sometime in the '50s, more or less at the same time West Germany recovered national sovreignty within the EU/NATO framework, rearmed, and recovered the Saar.

The WG-WA union would lessen the need to pressure Switzerland to join EU/NATO. Vienna would surely become a divided city just like Berlin, and in due time a second Wall would be built. I assume West Austria would join Germany as one Lander, to be similar in size to the other West German states. The capital of the West Austrian Lander would be Innsbruck or Salzburg. As others have pointed out, extension of the Cold War frontline to divided Austria would drive both blocs to increase the militarization of the southern portion of the Iron Curtain. Effects on Yugoslavia may vary.

I would thin the people of West Austria will not want another anschluss even if it is with West Germany and the Soviets will most defiantly not like it.

[eurofed]

Nov 18, 2016 20:07:52 GMT lordroel said:

Nov 18, 2016 15:12:07 GMT eurofed said:

ITTL West Austria would be so small and have so little population and economic resources that its liveability would be in serious doubt. And being on the frontline of the Cold War its stability and ability to defend itself from Soviet military threats and Communit destabilization would be very important for the West. Therefore I expect sooner rather than later the Western powers (i.e. the Americans, with the British and the French following their lead) would allow West Germany and West Austria to reunify; Cold War strategic concerns would trump bad taste from a second, democratic Anschluss. Division of Austria would in all likelihood prevent post-WWII development of a separate Austrian national consciousness in the first place, and the West Austrians would welcome the increased prosperity and security the union would ensure. I expect the WG-WA union would take place sometime in the '50s, more or less at the same time West Germany recovered national sovreignty within the EU/NATO framework, rearmed, and recovered the Saar.

The WG-WA union would lessen the need to pressure Switzerland to join EU/NATO. Vienna would surely become a divided city just like Berlin, and in due time a second Wall would be built. I assume West Austria would join Germany as one Lander, to be similar in size to the other West German states. The capital of the West Austrian Lander would be Innsbruck or Salzburg. As others have pointed out, extension of the Cold War frontline to divided Austria would drive both blocs to increase the militarization of the southern portion of the Iron Curtain. Effects on Yugoslavia may vary.

I would thin the people of West Austria will not want another anschluss even if it is with West Germany and the Soviets will most defiantly not like it.

Why the Wesr Austrians should ever dislike it ? Even the Nazi version of the Anschluss took place with overwhelming popular support and total lack of something like a nationalist opposition to the Nazis. All the resistance was based on ideological opposition, just like in Germany, and if anything Austria in proportion provided more support to the Nazi regime than Germany. Before WWII, the Austrians had dynastic loyalty to the Habsburg empire, while it lasted, and a regional identity within the German nation, just like Bavaria, Prussia, Hanover, Rhineland, or Saxony. The Austrians saw themselves as Germans. The rise of a separate Austrian national consciousness was a postwar, gradual process that was critically tied to Austria's Cold War status as a united neutral state, an attempt to get the Soviets off their back by embracing neutrality, and a wish to distance themselves from Nazi crimes by spreading the lie Anschluss had been an act of coercion.

Division of Austria would inevitably wreck the process of Austrian nationhood since to embrace it would only support the status quo with Soviet occupation of the East and West Austria would not look like a believable project, just like a separate Saar did not. The Austrians would reject it and vote for union with West Germany just like the Saarlanders rejected separation and voted to rejoin Germany. They would continue to think of themselves as Germans and would embrace the West German democratic project as the natural, most beneficial alternative. East Austria would become just like East Germany, a Communist puppet state with no real legitimacy or popular support, propped up by Soviet bayonets, till the fall of Communism and (Greater) German reunification. This includes the inevitable uprisings against Communist rule, a flow of refugees through the Vienna gap in the Iron Curtain, and the building of a Wall to stop it. West Vienna would become just like West Berlin. The western Austrian Lander would quickly become indistinguishable from the rest of West Germany, especially Bavaria.

Sure, the Soviets would not like a second Anschluss, but would they could ever do ? ITTL they already got as much influence in Austrian affairs as they could realistically hope for, by controlling the most popolous and valuable portion of Austria as a puppet state. To interfere in the union they would have to use military force, and that would be a suicidal disaster for them. They won't do it for the same reasons they did not invade to stop the rearmament of West Germany. Troughout the 1950s and the early 1960s the USA had an overwhelming nuclear supremacy, the West would survive WWIII with some minor damage but the USSR would cease to exist.

[lordroel]

Nov 19, 2016 2:53:00 GMT eurofed said:

Nov 18, 2016 20:07:52 GMT lordroel said:

I would thin the people of West Austria will not want another anschluss even if it is with West Germany and the Soviets will most defiantly not like it.

Why the Wesr Austrians should ever dislike it ? Even the Nazi version of the Anschluss took place with overwhelming popular support and total lack of something like a nationalist opposition to the Nazis. All the resistance was based on ideological opposition, just like in Germany, and if anything Austria in proportion provided more support to the Nazi regime than Germany. Before WWII, the Austrians had dynastic loyalty to the Habsburg empire, while it lasted, and a regional identity within the German nation, just like Bavaria, Prussia, Hanover, Rhineland, or Saxony. The Austrians saw themselves as Germans. The rise of a separate Austrian national consciousness was a postwar, gradual process that was critically tied to Austria's Cold War status as a united neutral state, an attempt to get the Soviets off their back by embracing neutrality, and a wish to distance themselves from Nazi crimes by spreading the lie Anschluss had been an act of coercion.

Division of Austria would inevitably wreck the process of Austrian nationhood since to embrace it would only support the status quo with Soviet occupation of the East and West Austria would not look like a believable project, just like a separate Saar did not. The Austrians would reject it and vote for union with West Germany just like the Saarlanders rejected separation and voted to rejoin Germany. They would continue to think of themselves as Germans and would embrace the West German democratic project as the natural, most beneficial alternative. East Austria would become just like East Germany, a Communist puppet state with no real legitimacy or popular support, propped up by Soviet bayonets, till the fall of Communism and (Greater) German reunification. This includes the inevitable uprisings against Communist rule, a flow of refugees through the Vienna gap in the Iron Curtain, and the building of a Wall to stop it. West Vienna would become just like West Berlin. The western Austrian Lander would quickly become indistinguishable from the rest of West Germany, especially Bavaria.

Sure, the Soviets would not like a second Anschluss, but would they could ever do ? ITTL they already got as much influence in Austrian affairs as they could realistically hope for, by controlling the most popolous and valuable portion of Austria as a puppet state. To interfere in the union they would have to use military force, and that would be a suicidal disaster for them. They won't do it for the same reasons they did not invade to stop the rearmament of West Germany. Troughout the 1950s and the early 1960s the USA had an overwhelming nuclear supremacy, the West would survive WWIII with some minor damage but the USSR would cease to exist.

So when the Soviet Union falls in the 1990s there will be a very small and a democratic East Austria left and a west Austria that is part of Germany.

[eurofed]

Nov 19, 2016 8:48:30 GMT lordroel said:

Nov 19, 2016 2:53:00 GMT eurofed said:

Why the Wesr Austrians should ever dislike it ? Even the Nazi version of the Anschluss took place with overwhelming popular support and total lack of something like a nationalist opposition to the Nazis. All the resistance was based on ideological opposition, just like in Germany, and if anything Austria in proportion provided more support to the Nazi regime than Germany. Before WWII, the Austrians had dynastic loyalty to the Habsburg empire, while it lasted, and a regional identity within the German nation, just like Bavaria, Prussia, Hanover, Rhineland, or Saxony. The Austrians saw themselves as Germans. The rise of a separate Austrian national consciousness was a postwar, gradual process that was critically tied to Austria's Cold War status as a united neutral state, an attempt to get the Soviets off their back by embracing neutrality, and a wish to distance themselves from Nazi crimes by spreading the lie Anschluss had been an act of coercion.

Division of Austria would inevitably wreck the process of Austrian nationhood since to embrace it would only support the status quo with Soviet occupation of the East and West Austria would not look like a believable project, just like a separate Saar did not. The Austrians would reject it and vote for union with West Germany just like the Saarlanders rejected separation and voted to rejoin Germany. They would continue to think of themselves as Germans and would embrace the West German democratic project as the natural, most beneficial alternative. East Austria would become just like East Germany, a Communist puppet state with no real legitimacy or popular support, propped up by Soviet bayonets, till the fall of Communism and (Greater) German reunification. This includes the inevitable uprisings against Communist rule, a flow of refugees through the Vienna gap in the Iron Curtain, and the building of a Wall to stop it. West Vienna would become just like West Berlin. The western Austrian Lander would quickly become indistinguishable from the rest of West Germany, especially Bavaria.

Sure, the Soviets would not like a second Anschluss, but would they could ever do ? ITTL they already got as much influence in Austrian affairs as they could realistically hope for, by controlling the most popolous and valuable portion of Austria as a puppet state. To interfere in the union they would have to use military force, and that would be a suicidal disaster for them. They won't do it for the same reasons they did not invade to stop the rearmament of West Germany. Troughout the 1950s and the early 1960s the USA had an overwhelming nuclear supremacy, the West would survive WWIII with some minor damage but the USSR would cease to exist.

So when the Soviet Union falls in the 1990s there will be a very small and a democratic East Austria left and a west Austria that is part of Germany.

Yep, although just like democratic East Germany, democratic East Austria would only last the one year or so it takes to implement democratization and negotiate reunification. Nobody would want the former Communist states to exist longer than that. Just like Berlin, Vienna would most likely become a separate Lander, but otherwise eastern Austria would in all likelihood join the (western) Austria Lander. Post-Cold War Germany within the EU/NATO framework and NATO as a whole would be significantly but not radically stronger by including Austria; the EU would lack one small, formerly neutral member state; Vienna would develop the same political and cultural atmosphere as Berlin. The South Tyrol and eastern German border issues would be settled just like OTL; German-Italian economic ties would be even stronger through the (western) Austrian connection; German and Western European economic and political influence in Central Europe would be even stronger. The southern (Bavarian-Austrian-Italian) theater would get increased importance in NATO and WarPact strategic planning.

It is possible a more aggressive Soviet policy in Central Europe, as indicated by the division of Austria, might drive Yugoslavia to grow closer to the Western bloc, although probably not to the point of formally dropping non-aligned status and joining EU/NATO. I'm dubious this would significantly change the fate of Yugoslavia, however. For the same reasons, Italy might annex the whole Free Territory of Trieste, including Capodistria. Division of Austria would indicate Stalin embracing a more aggressive foreign policy that gives priority to direct territorial and sphere of influence expansion of the Soviet bloc rather than an attempt to weaken and divide the Western bloc. Unless he suffers a serious personality change, in all likelihood this would not go all the way to accepting a dire risk of WWIII. However possible butterflies might involve various early Cold War flashpoints, including Iran, the Titoist split and the Greek Civil War, the Berlin blockade (ITTL being extended to Vienna), the Korean War, Indochina, and the Suez crisis.  

[lordroel]

Nov 19, 2016 14:39:41 GMT eurofed said:

Nov 19, 2016 8:48:30 GMT lordroel said:

So when the Soviet Union falls in the 1990s there will be a very small and a democratic East Austria left and a west Austria that is part of Germany.

Yep, although just like democratic East Germany, democratic East Austria would only last the one year or so it takes to implement democratization and negotiate reunification. Nobody would want the former Communist states to exist longer than that. Just like Berlin, Vienna would most likely become a separate Lander, but otherwise eastern Austria would in all likelihood join the (western) Austria Lander. Post-Cold War Germany within the EU/NATO framework and NATO as a whole would be significantly but not radically stronger by including Austria; the EU would lack one small, formerly neutral member state; Vienna would develop the same political and cultural atmosphere as Berlin. The South Tyrol and eastern German border issues would be settled just like OTL; German-Italian economic ties would be even stronger through the (western) Austrian connection; German and Western European economic and political influence in Central Europe would be even stronger. The southern (Bavarian-Austrian-Italian) theater would get increased importance in NATO and WarPact strategic planning.

It is possible a more aggressive Soviet policy in Central Europe, as indicated by the division of Austria, might drive Yugoslavia to grow closer to the Western bloc, although probably not to the point of formally dropping non-aligned status and joining EU/NATO. I'm dubious this would significantly change the fate of Yugoslavia, however. For the same reasons, Italy might annex the whole Free Territory of Trieste, including Capodistria. Division of Austria would indicate Stalin embracing a more aggressive foreign policy that gives priority to direct territorial and sphere of influence expansion of the Soviet bloc rather than an attempt to weaken and divide the Western bloc. Unless he suffers a serious personality change, in all likelihood this would not go all the way to accepting a dire risk of WWIII. However possible butterflies might involve various early Cold War flashpoints, including Iran, the Titoist split and the Greek Civil War, the Berlin blockade (ITTL being extended to Vienna), the Korean War, Indochina, and the Suez crisis.  

Still think that West Austria with a population of around 4 million in 1951 has a better change to remain independent than East Austria which i more likely would see absorbed by Hungary ore Czechoslovakia.

[eurofed]

Nov 19, 2016 15:45:05 GMT lordroel said:

Nov 19, 2016 14:39:41 GMT eurofed said:

Yep, although just like democratic East Germany, democratic East Austria would only last the one year or so it takes to implement democratization and negotiate reunification. Nobody would want the former Communist states to exist longer than that. Just like Berlin, Vienna would most likely become a separate Lander, but otherwise eastern Austria would in all likelihood join the (western) Austria Lander. Post-Cold War Germany within the EU/NATO framework and NATO as a whole would be significantly but not radically stronger by including Austria; the EU would lack one small, formerly neutral member state; Vienna would develop the same political and cultural atmosphere as Berlin. The South Tyrol and eastern German border issues would be settled just like OTL; German-Italian economic ties would be even stronger through the (western) Austrian connection; German and Western European economic and political influence in Central Europe would be even stronger. The southern (Bavarian-Austrian-Italian) theater would get increased importance in NATO and WarPact strategic planning.

It is possible a more aggressive Soviet policy in Central Europe, as indicated by the division of Austria, might drive Yugoslavia to grow closer to the Western bloc, although probably not to the point of formally dropping non-aligned status and joining EU/NATO. I'm dubious this would significantly change the fate of Yugoslavia, however. For the same reasons, Italy might annex the whole Free Territory of Trieste, including Capodistria. Division of Austria would indicate Stalin embracing a more aggressive foreign policy that gives priority to direct territorial and sphere of influence expansion of the Soviet bloc rather than an attempt to weaken and divide the Western bloc. Unless he suffers a serious personality change, in all likelihood this would not go all the way to accepting a dire risk of WWIII. However possible butterflies might involve various early Cold War flashpoints, including Iran, the Titoist split and the Greek Civil War, the Berlin blockade (ITTL being extended to Vienna), the Korean War, Indochina, and the Suez crisis.  

Still think that West Austria with a population of around 4 million in 1951 has a better change to remain independent than East Austria which i more likely would see absorbed by Hungary ore Czechoslovakia.

Neither the West Austrians themselves nor the Americans would see an independent West Austria as a better solution in political, economic, and strategic terms than a West German-West Austrian democratic union. The alternative would only be seen as preferable if the Western powers see screwing the Germans for the sake of their endless punishment as paramount and more important than Europe's security and stability. That mindset had already gone of fashion in the early-mid '50s, and would do so even faster with a more aggressive USSR that Sovietized East Austria. As it concerns uniting East Austria with Czechoslovakia or Hungary, sure the Soviets could do something like that, but it would have to be implemented by coercion (of course, not a real problem for Stalin), since the East Austrians would not like it. Especially if it involves the Czechs which the East Austrians would fear and resent after they ethnically cleansed the Sudetenland Germans. It would probably make the East Austrians one of the most rebellious nations in the Soviet bloc. And of course, once Communism falls, this union would be as hopelessly tainted by its legacy as the others it created or restored, and it would be swiftly dissolved the same way. Surely, once they recover democracy, the East Austrians would vote to dissolve the union and reunify with Germany. As long as it lasts, however, this kind of union would allow a good joke about how Stalin restored a poor man's version of the Habsburg empire with Red trappings.