What if Michael I of Romania refused to abdicate in 1947?

[Korporal Nooij]

Hi!

As you likely know, King Michael I of Romania was forced by the communists (which were backed by Stalin) in 1947 to abdicate. I know that he was under political pressure and that it wouldn't end very well for Michael, which he probably knew too. But what if he refused to?

I know that there was a gun pointed at his head and that they blackmailed him, telling that if he wouldn't abdicate, they would massacre the Romanian population...

Quote from Wikipedia

According to Time magazine,[1] the communist government threatened Michael that it would arrest thousands and steep the country in blood if he did not abdicate.

If he did not abdicate (and maybe even got shot), it would be likely for a Civil War to start.

A dead monarch on the other side of the Iron Curtain!
Now what would be the western reaction to that?

Winston Churchill is said to have counseled Michael to return because "above all things, a King must be courageous."

-Korporal Nooij.

 

[kruscica]

Hi!

As you likely know, King Michael I of Romania was forced by the communists (which were backed by Stalin) in 1947 to abdicate. I know that he was under political pressure and that it wouldn't end very well for Michael, which he probably knew too. But what if he refused to?

I know that there was a gun pointed at his head and that they blackmailed him, telling that if he wouldn't abdicate, they would massacre the Romanian population...

Quote from Wikipedia


If he did not abdicate (and maybe even got shot), it would be likely for a Civil War to start.

A dead monarch on the other side of the Iron Curtain!
Now what would be the western reaction to that?

Korporal Nooij.

About as much as for the Prince-Regent Kyril of Bulgaria, the returning Government-in-exile of Poland and the Foreign Minister (Masaryk) if not President (Benes) of Czechoslovakia - none except propaganda purposes. And as for Romania, it was one of the few uncontested areas of Soviet influence according to Jalta - 70% Russia I believe, so, no, whatever the Reds want is ok.

There would be no doubt that Michael would have died in some 'accident'. Had be attempted to openly revolt, he'd have been shot or hung publically as a fascist counterrevolutionary in a show of both Soviet strength and the basic fascism of Romania necessitating permanent Soviet control. He'd have joined a long list of titled or powerful and respected leaders under Soviet control, starting with the Tsar, his family and relatives in 1918, and he knew it.

As to a Civil War in Romania - I don't know the situation, but I would think this close to the end of the War there was already / still a low-level insurgency, round-ups, massacres, unmarked graves, liquidation of the existing political elites, potential governments and unreliable communists (ie those local resistance participants in 1943-5). The counterrevolutionaries would simply be called fascists and their collaborators, shot down even more thoroughly and easily than Hungary 1956 (where the counterrevolution at least had a 'soft' Communist face for legality), and the Leftist media in France, England and the US would trumpet this 'fact' and stymie any large public support for Romania.

 

[Slowpoke]

As to a Civil War in Romania - I don't know the situation, but I would think this close to the end of the War there was already / still a low-level insurgency, round-ups, massacres, unmarked graves, liquidation of the existing political elites, potential governments and unreliable communists (ie those local resistance participants in 1943-5). The counterrevolutionaries would simply be called fascists and their collaborators, shot down even more thoroughly and easily than Hungary 1956 (where the counterrevolution at least had a 'soft' Communist face for legality), and the Leftist media in France, England and the US would trumpet this 'fact' and stymie any large public support for Romania.

Titoists. Up until Khruschev's Secret Speech, Titoist deviationism was a valid accusation. This is what early Communists (Remus Koffler, Emil Kalmanovich, Lucretiu Patrascanu) were charged with (and subsequently executed for). As for anti-Communist resistance, the very last fighter was killed by Securitate agents in 1962.

 

[Dan1988]

Hmm, I know it might not be valid in the Romanian context, but how about something akin to the Greek Civil War where the royalists win and drive out the Communists? To get that to work would require US intervention there à la Greece, but it could be possible.

 

[Korporal Nooij]

Hmm, I know it might not be valid in the Romanian context, but how about something akin to the Greek Civil War where the royalists win and drive out the Communists? To get that to work would require US intervention there à la Greece, but it could be possible.

That would be very interesting! But what happens to the Iron Curtain?
Romania would politically be on the western side, but geographically on the eastern side of the curtain.

 

[Dan1988]

That would be very interesting! But what happens to the Iron Curtain?
Romania would politically be on the western side, but geographically on the eastern side of the curtain.

That was also the same thing with Greece post-civil war - politically it was on the western side, but geographically (and economically, if one thinks hard enough) on the eastern side.

 

[chris N]

I suppose that it might have been possible for him and his family to be smuggled out of the country and to set up a government in exile. Without a doubt he would then aways face a threat from Soviet agents trying to kill him.

 

[Onkel Willie]

I suppose that it might have been possible for him and his family to be smuggled out of the country and to set up a government in exile. Without a doubt he would then aways face a threat from Soviet agents trying to kill him.

If he does set up a government-in-exile, I wonder whether it could lead to a restoration of the monarchy once communism falls in Romania. I suppose some Romanians would want a figurehead to rally around and recognise him as head of state (as a a strictly constitutional monarch of course). I heard Michael I is still quite popular in Romania.

 

[The Kiat]

Yeah, the Reds would just take him out and shoot him if he didn't resign. I doubt the Allies would do much, not after such a devestating war. I also doubt they would overly care about Romania. Churchill might raise a fuss, but he was out of office, so who cares. If he escaped, he'd be living just like the Shah. I wouldn't put too much stock in a restoration (I think Spain was the last restoration, and that was back in the 70s).

 

[Korporal Nooij]

That was also the same thing with Greece post-civil war - politically it was on the western side, but geographically (and economically, if one thinks hard enough) on the eastern side.

Yes, but still, Greece is bordering Turkey, and if you cross the Adriatic Sea, you'll reach Italy. Basically, i suppose it was pretty western, geographically too. And the Iron Curtain stood along Greece's border too.

Romania would be surrounded by the Soviet Union; Hungary; Serbia; Bulgaria... It'd give a strange effect to the curtain.


Here's a quick picture i made to show what i mean.

It'd definitely be a pretty cool POD for an alternate Cold War.

 

[Brancaleone]

When uncle Joe wanted something , especially post-Yalta , he would get it . There was even a finnish government-in-exile to justify the '40 Winter War . No way a mere formality such as some royalty could have stood in his way .

 

[Cook]

"Isn't Siberia lovely this time of year Michael?"