The Most Plausible "Three Superpowers" Scenario

Inspired by various "Three Superpowers" threads...

United States, British Imperial Federation, Soviet Union
Much earlier Nazi failure during Barbarossa, liberation of Western Europe by UK and Commonwealth forces.

United States, Anglo-French Union, Soviet Union
UK and France successfully created a post-WWII Union.

United States, French-led European Federation/Union, Soviet Union
France was much more active instead of executing OTL Sitzkrieg, the Nazis were defeated before or during 1939, and France becomes leader of continental military and economic alliance aimed against Soviets.

United States, British Imperial Federation, German-led Nazi/Fascist Europe
Earlier, successful Barbarossa, cease fire between the Nazis and Western Allies.

United States, German-led Nazi/Fascist Europe, Soviet Union
UK surrendered before or during Battle of Britain, Hitler died earlier and his successors avoid war with Soviet Union.

United States, Japanese-led Asian Co-Prosperity Zone, German-led Nazi/Fascist Europe
USA was even more isolationist and maintained neutrality, Japan didn't get embargoed and focused on Asia and USSR, Eurasia divided by Japan and Germany

United States, German-led Nazi/Fascist Europe, Nationalist China
CCP (Communist Party of China) was defeated much earlier, USSR collapsed, a much stronger and less-devastated China get massive helps from Germany to modernize, ATL Sino-German split.

United States, German-led Nazi/Fascist Europe, Communist China
KMT (Kuomintang) was defeated much earlier, sizeable number of Communist Russians fled to China after successful Barbarossa, PRC becomes the world's Communist stronghold.

United States, Soviet Union, Nationalist China
The West didn't turn its back when Nationalist Chinese requesting helps, CCP (Communist Party of China) was defeated much earlier, much more united and modernized China successfully repelled the Japanese.

Without world war 2 would the US become a superpower?

I voted "United States, Soviet Union, Nationalist China", but I'd put the ideal PoD further back, with the Fifth Encirclement Campaign (1934)...

I voted for the one with Nat. China too. Simply because there was a chance for the Nationalists to beat the communists in 1947

personally I've always liked the idea of the Suez Crisis working out differently, UK and France hang on to some colonially power and they and they Israelis stay close forming a center-left counter weight to the right-wing Americans and the far left Soviets, maybe pull West Germany in to

How the hell did China end up on the poll option in three places? How far back are your PoDs allowed to be? China in the first half of the 20th century was a disunited, poverty-wracked hellhole. It had almost no industry, and a third-rate army. Even if China can avoid the damage of the civil war, Second Sino-Japanese War, or disastrous Maoist policies, it still needs decades of economic growth just to have the industrial base needed to build a navy or modern army. China simply does not have the ability to send force far abroad in this time period. A country with no ability to project power is not a superpower by definition.

Anyway, my personal favorite superpower candidates are a strong Anglo-Japanese Alliance or a Europe-dominating non-Nazi Germany, although I don't think either is too plausible. I think it is possible, if not easy, to make the Empire of Japan or a victorious WWI Germany a superpower. However, the way to do this is not with some kind of Axis victory world. The PoD has to be earlier, IMHO.

mcdo said:

How the hell did China end up on the poll option in three places? How far back are your PoDs allowed to be? China in the first half of the 20th century was a disunited, poverty-wracked hellhole. It had almost no industry, and a third-rate army. Even if China can avoid the damage of the civil war, Second Sino-Japanese War, or disastrous Maoist policies, it still needs decades of economic growth just to have the industrial base needed to build a navy or modern army. China simply does not have the ability to send force far abroad in this time period. A country with no ability to project power is not a superpower by definition.

Click to expand...

Read the OP. Last scenario POD is the Koumintang ending the civil war much earlier, defeating the communists. Meaning a much less damaged China. Their economic growth(with much help from the USA, which the communists did not recieve) would have boomed much earlier as well i amm sure.

lionhead said:

Read the OP. Last scenario POD is the Koumintang ending the civil war much earlier, defeating the communists. Meaning a much less damaged China. Their economic growth(with much help from the USA, which the communists did not recieve) would have boomed much earlier as well i amm sure.

Click to expand...

I read it. I don't think it matters. The war didn't damage a China that was somehow on the edge of superpower-dom. Even before the war, even with no damage, China was completely lacking in industry. The German and American aid thing should help, but my point still stands-- China needs decades to catch up to the point where it can even support a modern army at home, much less send one abroad. That means, if you start the Chinese boom of OTL's 1978 in, say, 1940, it would still be 30 years before China can even start projecting power abroad. The wars China went through in this time period delayed China's rise, sure. But the point is, even before them, China had yet to even *start* on the road to superpower status. It can't become a superpower overnight, even if it does have a big population.

mcdo said:

I read it. I don't think it matters. The war didn't damage a China that was somehow on the edge of superpower-dom. Even before the war, even with no damage, China was completely lacking in industry. The German and American aid thing should help, but my point still stands-- China needs decades to catch up to the point where it can even support a modern army at home, much less send one abroad. That means, if you start the Chinese boom of OTL's 1978 in, say, 1940, it would still be 30 years before China can even start projecting power abroad. The wars China went through in this time period delayed China's rise, sure. But the point is, even before them, China had yet to even *start* on the road to superpower status. It can't become a superpower overnight, even if it does have a big population.

Click to expand...

I think this partly depends on what is meant by "projecting power abroad" -- if you mean throwing enough troops on another continent to make a difference in a civil war there, than yeah that could take awhile.

But that's not to say that if China starts it's boom 30 years ahead of OTL, it couldn't take a strong leadership role in the non-aligned movement while also projecting occasional military power in Southeast Asia, say during the 1960's. Then, as the Soviet Union feels its power slip, this sphere of influence can in turn grow, complicating the later stages of the Cold War a good deal...

John Fredrick Parker said:

But that's not to say that if China starts it's boom 30 years ahead of OTL, it couldn't take a strong leadership role in the non-aligned movement while also projecting occasional military power in Southeast Asia, say during the 1960's. Then, as the Soviet Union feels its power slip, this sphere of influence can in turn grow, complicating the later stages of the Cold War a good deal...

Click to expand...

You are right, if China starts their economic boom earlier, then they will be a power earlier. If it happens during an OTL Cold War, it will make balance-of-power issues more delicate. However, we are talking about waiting 30 years for China to have the ability to influence countries in its near-abroad. This is something that Germany and Japan could do in the late 1930's. For that matter, if Brazil had 30 years of Chinese or Japanese style economic growth, they could project power into their near-abroad, too.

I just think, when looking for a country that could have become a superpower in this time period, it makes sense to start with a country that was already considered a Great Power. This means the UK, the US, Germany, the USSR, Japan--not simply countries with future potential.

France was a potential great power, that is being considdered. So why not China? With a victorious Germany Italy could also have been considderd.

With a 1900 POD you could very easily get a Russian Empire/Soviet Union, USA+Britain, and Wilhelmian German dominated Europe.

USA + Western Democracies vs Alliance of Fascist states led by Italy and Japan vs Soviet Union?

lionhead said:

France was a potential great power, that is being considdered. So why not China? With a victorious Germany Italy could also have been considderd.

Click to expand...

Italy could not be a superpower. Even if they are a strong ally of a superpower Germany, they would just be a Great Power. Superpower is supposed to be different from just a Great Power. I agree that France is a stretch, although at least it had the ability to intervene far abroad, and a far-flung empire. If France was listed three times, I would be complaining about that as well.

United States, China and India.

1800s POD, Maxwell Jameson writes The March to Unity, alt-1911 Xinhai Revolution has Chinese adherents of his work fusing it with Confucianism, and thus Unionist/Absolutist China becomes a reality.

No collectivization of Mao, an ideology that would lead to better political cohesion than Chiang, "official" egalitarianism for pro-Western modernists and actual hierarchy (in the form of Electors) for old-school Confucians, and so on. The international revolutionary fervor of the CCP is channeled towards supporting similar Unionist movements in the formerly colonized world, eventually establishing the Conference of Global Unity. Consider this.

Oh, and the other two blocs would be NATO and the Warsaw Pact.

USA, Nazi Europe, Nationalist China.

Though the USSR could be in place of Nazi Europe I suppose.

Chinese led Unionist Eastern bloc? Go for it, butterflies will be humungous.

These are too WW2 centric.

United States, German Empire dominated Europe, British Empire

Since I believe a German victory in WW1 is more plausible than WW2, I pushed the PoD back to 1916-17 In this scenario:

Germany wins WW1, after the revolutionary collapse of Russia (a bit earlier than in OTL) but before US entry. With all powers near exhaustion, a last-ditch German offensive leads to French collapse, similar to German collapse in OTL, and near-Dunkirk situation for Britain. US helps broker an armistice that leads to the Washington Treaty of 1918. In exchange for a virtually "white" peace with Germany elsewhere, Britain accedes to German dominance in Europe, including crippling reparations and limitations on French power and a free hand for Austria-Hungary in the Balkans north of Greece. Belgium is partitioned along lingusitic lines, with the French speaking areas merged with demilitarized eastern France as the potential nation of "Burgundy", whose future status (return to France or independence) will be decided by plebiscite in 1925. Austrian forces occupy considerable portions of northern Italy with the future status of Italy left undecided. The future status of eastern Europe is unsettled, but Poland, Finland, and the Baltic States are self-governing independent duchies under German dominance. Ottoman rule collapses, but Turkey emerges as a strong nationalist state in a position to eventually restore its authority in the newly nominallly-independent Arab and North African states via bilateral treaties.

Britain suffers no reparations and retains both its Empire as well as former German colonies occupied during WW1. By Treaty, Britain is forced to acknowledge it's guilt for expanding the war by virtue of creating the naval arms race with Germany(!) and its intervention in WW1. Having lost its chief ally in Europe, Britain clamps down on the non-self governing colonies in the Empire and strengthens its ties with Japan. Closer ties with the USA is ruled out because of resentment against the Americans because of their non-entry into WW1, American support for Irish independence, and their role in negotiating the "humiliating" Washington Treaty.

The United States comes out as a globally dominant economic power able to use its powerful navy to protect its interests world-wide. Although because of linguistic ties and a common democratic tradition, the US isinitially more favorably disposed to Britain than Imperial Germany, this changes as the British-Japanese alliance solidifies against US ecomomic interests in China and the Far East.

By 1940, these three power blocks have evolved into superpowers (the USA, German-dominated Europe, and the Anglo-Japanese alliance) that are to differering degrees mutually hostile. The greatest possibility for "hot" war involves the US and Britain/Japan, centering on conflicting interests in China as well as clumsy US diplomatic and economic attempts to neutralize the Dominion of Canada as a potential base for British military power. Although German and US geopolitical interests somewhat coincide, a peacetime alliance between the democratic US and the increasingly autocratic German Empire is politically impossible. Further, brutal German and Austro-Hungarian behaviour in the pacification of eastern Europe and the Balkans has made Germany a pariah in the USA.

War breaks out in 1942 between the United States and Japan. Britain immediately enters the war as an ally of Japan. Germany bides its time, knowing that research underway at the Kaiser Willhelm Institute involving the leading physicists in Germany, Austria and Hungary may soon provide the Empire with a means of dictating a peace that will ensure German global dominance for a thousad years.