1944: Soviet Halt

[Sam R.]

Have we discussed a Soviet Halt done purposefully to press a finger on the scales of blood and politics yet?

If you mean the Soviets halting to pressure or punish the WAllies in some way then the answer is not to my knowledge though I haven’t read every WW2 thread.

What if the Soviet Union strategically halts their advances in order to politically discipline the Western Allies? We normally have discussions about Western Allied attempts to politically discipline the Soviet Union. Why don't we discuss the inverse. Obviously the timing would need to be of best advantage, so limited advances or if AGC collapses sure. But when difficulty arises delay.

Have we previously discussed this?

yours,
Sam R.

 

[Finbarr the Fair]

Don’t think so but where and when?

The Bagration operation stoped before Warsaw but that was probably far more outrunning supply lines rather than political choice. The advance into the Balkans could be delayed but why? Churchill would be relieved not upset by a lack of Soviet pressure there. Would possibly seek to move British troops from Italy and the Middle East to Greece and northward from there.

The biggest political pressure point Stalin had was the WAllied wish to have the USSR declare war on Japan. So perhaps decide that after the 1944 summer offensives further operations require more Lend Lease aid or would be have to be postponed. And of course that attacks on Manchuria would be impossible.

Letting the WAllies fail with Market Garden, Hurtgen (sic) forest then be hit by the Bulge Offensive without any moverment on the Eastern Front. Until they cough up with more aid and political concessions.

Feasible?

Edited for clarity