\u201cThere would have been huge celebrations in the Soviet Union,\u201d says Dr Thomas Ellis, teaching fellow at the University of Birmingham, \u201cwith parades and ceremonies symbolically linking the space heroes to the Communist Party\u2019s role as the unquestioned guiding force.\u201d<\/p>\n
- On the podcast | Dr Thomas\u00a0Ellis responds to listener questions on the great Cold War rivalry that saw the US and the Soviet Union battle for dominance in space<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>
By cementing their superiority in space \u2013 having taken the lead with Sputnik 1 and never losing it on their way to the Moon \u2013 the Soviet Union<\/a> would have secured a decisive blow in the political economic battle against US capitalism. \u201cSputniks 1 and 2 in 1957, and the flight of Yuri Gagarin<\/a> in 1961, were held up as proof that Soviet claims of communism being the wave of the future weren\u2019t entirely empty,\u201d says Dr Ellis.<\/p>\n
In context: the Space Race<\/h4>\n
The Space Race was a Cold War battle of the US and Soviet Union\u2019s technological, military, political and economic superiority \u2013 without the world-ending implications of nuclear weapons.<\/p>\n
The Soviets seized an early lead on 4 October 1957 with the first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, and followed with the first human in space, Yuri Gagarin, on 12 April 1961. But when chief rocket engineer Sergei Korolev died in 1966, Soviet efforts stalled and the US caught up.<\/p>\n
In 1961, President John F Kennedy<\/a> had announced the goal of putting a man on the Moon and returning him safely \u201cbefore this decade is out\u201d. Thanks to greater finances, technological breakthroughs and a focused, unified commitment at NASA, this goal was achieved on 20 July 1969 with Apollo 11.<\/p>\n
As Neil Armstrong spoke the immortal words, \u201cOne small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind\u201d, the US effectively declared victory in the Space Race.<\/p>\n
<\/p><\/div> <\/section>
The continuing \u2018firsts\u2019 in space demonstrated Russia\u2019s transformation from a \u201ctechnologically backwards medieval despotism to a Space Age socialist society\u201d. For a successful Moonshot, though, they needed to improve administration of their space programme.<\/p>\n
While the US efficiently focused efforts towards a single project, Apollo, the Soviets contended with multiple bodies competing for funding and resources. \u201cIt was a byzantine system beset by internal rivalry, nepotistic patronage and wasteful duplication,\u201d says Dr Ellis. Such disorganisation had to be resolved and significant investment made to the longer-term prize of a Moon landing rather than the short-term prestige of collecting \u2018firsts\u2019.<\/p>\n
- Read more | The history of the Moon landing: everything you need to know<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>
In essence, says Dr Ellis, the Soviets\u2019 programme had to behave \u201clike the American image of it\u201d \u2013 centrally directed, well-funded and with the full backing of the Communist Party.<\/p>\n
This may have been more attainable had Sergei Korolev lived. As \u2018Glavny Konstruktor\u2019 (Chief Designer), Korolev had built the rocket that put Sputnik and Gagarin into orbit and was of such importance to the space programme that his name was only made public after his death in 1966. Had he lived longer, Korolev would have continued to be a crucial cog in the machine to achieve crewed space flight and in developing the N1 rocket (the Soviet version of the Saturn V).<\/p>\n
Soviet Neil Armstrong<\/h3>\n
The US Apollo project used a three-man crew, weight restrictions meant the Soviet lander could accommodate only one cosmonaut. So who would have been destined to be the Soviet Neil Armstrong? Alexei Leonov, who in 1965 became the first person to conduct a spacewalk, is widely believed to have been the likely candidate for the solo trip to the Moon\u2019s surface.<\/p>\n
- On the podcast | Stephen Walker delves into the supercharged battle between the US and Soviet Union to put the first person into space<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>
Dr Ellis says, \u201cIn 1966, he was assigned to lead a group of cosmonauts to train for lunar landing flights,\u201d among them Vostok 4 cosmonaut Pavel Popovich, potentially the second crew member. Their Moon landing would have been a \u201chuge, much-needed prestige boost for the Soviet Union both at home and abroad\u201d, and been immediately accompanied with a propaganda drive as Leonov and Popovich received the ticker-tape parades and adulation.<\/p>\n
Alexei Leonov, who in 1965 became the first person to conduct a spacewalk, is widely believed to have been the likely candidate for the solo trip to the Moon\u2019s surface <\/blockquote> <\/div> <\/div> <\/div>\n<\/div>
\u201cLike the Apollo astronauts, these lunar cosmonauts would have followed a hero\u2019s welcome in the homeland with a victory lap tour around the world. Within a year, they\u2019d grow sick of banquets where they had to explain \u2018what it felt like\u2019 to be on the Moon to presidents, monarchs and celebrities,\u201d says Dr Ellis. As the Soviets revelled in the acclaim, a sober, downtrodden and defeated mood would likely have pervaded the US.<\/p>\n
![\""President\"]( "\\"\"President\\"\/")
<\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/picture><\/div>President John F Kennedy championed the US goal to put a man on the Moon in an iconic speech at Rice University in September 1962 (Photo by Bettmann\/Contributor\/Getty Images)<\/span><\/figcaption><\/div>\n \u201cPublicly, there would be gracious congratulations and invites to the White House. Privately, President Richard Nixon<\/a> would have been seething,\u201d says Dr Ellis. And in NASA itself, the atmosphere was likely to be one of \u201cmisery and frustration\u201d. The politicians already calling for a reduction in NASA\u2019s budget might have greeted a Soviet Moon landing with a \u201csour grapes response that disparaged space racing as the sort of propagandistic spectacle best left to the communists\u201d.<\/p>\n
Did you know?<\/h4>\n
From school to the stars<\/h6>\n
In 1958, the same year that NASA was founded, President Dwight Eisenhower invested heavily in schools and universities with the National Defense Education Act to ensure the US was producing the brightest minds to win the Space Race.<\/p>\n
<\/p><\/div> <\/section>
Across the US, there may have been a surge of righteous anger at the colossal amounts being spent on space exploration \u2013 and for nought if they kept coming behind the Soviets \u2013 especially in the face of Americans of colour living with discrimination and poverty. Dr Ellis says: \u201cDefeat in the race to the Moon combined with the more serious crises of legitimacy prompted by the Vietnam War<\/a> and the Watergate scandal<\/a> would have made the 1970s an even gloomier decade.\u201d<\/p>\n
Endless one-upmanship<\/h3>\n
The US could have either backed down and accepted defeat, which would have been unthinkable to many given the Cold War implications, or redoubled its commitment to catch up, resulting in an endless cycle of one-upmanship.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Soviets would undoubtedly have continued exploring space,\u201d says Dr Ellis, and would have likely still spent the 1970s focusing on developing their space station programme. There may have been pressure for even more impressive missions, including an eventual circumnavigation of Mars.<\/p>\n
More from our alternate history series<\/h4>\n
- What if\u2026 the Cuban Missile Crisis had escalated?<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n
- What if\u2026 Napoleon had defeated Russia?<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n
- What if\u2026 George III had not \u2018lost\u2019 the colonies?<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n
- What if\u2026 the Spanish Armada had landed in England?<\/strong><\/a><\/li>\n
- What if\u2026 Alexander the Great hadn\u2019t died so young?<\/strong><\/a><\/li>\n
- What if\u2026 Argentina had won the Falklands War?<\/strong><\/a><\/li>\n
- What if\u2026 Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon\u2019s first son had lived?<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n
- What if\u2026 Japan hadn\u2019t attacked Pearl Harbor?<\/strong><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>
<\/p><\/div> <\/section>
But the more they worked to maintain their superiority in space, the more pressure would build on the Soviet economy. \u201cA successful Moonshot might well have provided a new potent diplomatic and propaganda tool, and led to an uptick in membership for Third World communist parties,\u201d says Dr Ellis. \u201cPrestige is powerful, but it wouldn\u2019t have invalidated the economic and political weaknesses.\u201d<\/p>\n
In fact, a Soviet Moon landing may have ended up underlining the Soviet economy\u2019s deep-rooted structural problems. Dr Ellis concludes, \u201cIt is difficult to imagine a Moonshot preventing the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union.\u201d<\/p>\n
- What if\u2026 Napoleon had defeated Russia?<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n
- What if\u2026 the Cuban Missile Crisis had escalated?<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n
- On the podcast | Stephen Walker delves into the supercharged battle between the US and Soviet Union to put the first person into space<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>
- Read more | The history of the Moon landing: everything you need to know<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>
![\""President\"](\""https:\/\/images.immediate.co.uk\/production\/volatile\/sites\/7\/2023\/06\/GettyImages515280294-5c5888c.png?quality=90&resize=620%2C411"\" "\\"\"President\\"\/")
<\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/source><\/picture><\/div>