WI: The Soviet Union survived as a rump state in Central Asia?

[qazse]

In OTL, Kazakhstan was the last of the Soviet republics to secede from the Union, doing so on 16 December 1991, four days after Russia did. In addition, a Gallup poll in 2013 showed that 61% of Kyrgyzstani respondents said the dissolution of the Soviet Union did more harm than good.

So what if the Soviet Union remained as a rump state in Central Asia? Obviously their superpower status is gone, and they are only a regional power at best. Might they adopt a more Turkic national identity? How would their relations with the newly independent Russia be?

 

[Vassonx]

If I remember correctly, referendums showed that the entirety of Central Asia was overwhelmingly in support of keeping the Union together. It would probably be dominated by Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, and the other three remain as junior members. Even if a more Turkic identity/aesthetic becomes more in fashion, I reckon the lingua franca and official documents would still be in Russian since there is no way these 5 have enough power to coerce each other into adopting new languages.

The state would have about 72-75 million people by 2021 if it still held itself together. If they kept themselves together with piecemeal reforms for the populace and implement OTL Belarus' Lukashenkist market socialism that managed to prevent the mass privatization that happened under Russia and Ukraine, they probably would arguably do far better than Belarus by virtue of the population numbers and natural resources that Belarus had to make do without.

A lot of the infrastructure like roads and rail lines in Central Asia were built with the logic of "there is no way these 5 would become separate countries". So an overwhelming number of these infrastructures became unusable in OTL due to them gaining independence and establishing border controls. They arguably wouldn't have the civil conflicts that plagued them in OTL either. But it still will be authoritarian, though. Not a single country there in OTL is a functioning democracy. But there arguably would be a lot of checks-and-balances by nature of there not being a single SSR too dominant over the other.

I'm guessing/hoping that Nursultan Nazarbayev would be General Secretary. Since he is by far one of the more competent leaders that Central Asia had, even if he was rather autocratic. After his tenure, probably a moderate like Shavkat Mirziyoyev.

But, the real juicy part is here. Part of the reason why Russia and Belarus had been accelerating the Union State process to reunify both countries in the 1990s was the fact that Lukashenko was extremely popular in Russia compared to Yeltsin. Since Belarus didn't go through economic shock therapy like Russia and Ukraine while managing to keep the economy stable, Lukashenko's policy in Belarus was seen by a lot of Russians as "what Russia should have done instead".

Lukashenko was very aware of his popularity in Russia, and there was a lot of speculation that he could very successfully run for President of the Union State of Russia and Belarus once the unification deal was finalized. This all stopped when Putin came into power, reined in the Union State talks, and stabilized the Russian economy. So if the government of the USSR still existed in the 1990s in Central Asia as a stable market socialist regime like Belarus, there actually might be an overwhelming interest by the Russian populace to rejoin that version of the USSR. Belarus too, probably. But this is all up for speculation.

There might be a lot more Stanistan memes in this timeline too.

 

[Vassonx]

To be on the pessimisstic side, there probably will be a lot of arguments over where does the USSR's treaty obligations go to. Where would the nukes go to? And where would the USSR's Permament Security Council seat go to? Russia or the Centrasian USSR?

 

[GuildedAgeNostalgia]

To be on the pessimisstic side, there probably will be a lot of arguments over where does the USSR's treaty obligations go to. Where would the nukes go to? And where would the USSR's Permament Security Council seat go to? Russia or the Centrasian USSR?

I think realistically every country in the world would be smart enough to recognize Russia as the true inheritor of all of this.

 

[qazse]

If I remember correctly, referendums showed that the entirety of Central Asia was overwhelmingly in support of keeping the Union together. It would probably be dominated by Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, and the other three remain as junior members. Even if a more Turkic identity/aesthetic becomes more in fashion, I reckon the lingua franca and official documents would still be in Russian since there is no way these 5 have enough power to coerce each other into adopting new languages.

The state would have about 72-75 million people by 2021 if it still held itself together. If they kept themselves together with piecemeal reforms for the populace and implement OTL Belarus' Lukashenkist market socialism that managed to prevent the mass privatization that happened under Russia and Ukraine, they probably would arguably do far better than Belarus by virtue of the population numbers and natural resources that Belarus had to make do without.

A lot of the infrastructure like roads and rail lines in Central Asia were built with the logic of "there is no way these 5 would become separate countries". So an overwhelming number of these infrastructures became unusable in OTL due to them gaining independence and establishing border controls. They arguably wouldn't have the civil conflicts that plagued them in OTL either. But it still will be authoritarian, though. Not a single country there in OTL is a functioning democracy. But there arguably would be a lot of checks-and-balances by nature of there not being a single SSR too dominant over the other.

I'm guessing/hoping that Nursultan Nazarbayev would be General Secretary. Since he is by far one of the more competent leaders that Central Asia had, even if he was rather autocratic. After his tenure, probably a moderate like Shavkat Mirziyoyev.

But, the real juicy part is here. Part of the reason why Russia and Belarus had been accelerating the Union State process to reunify both countries in the 1990s was the fact that Lukashenko was extremely popular in Russia compared to Yeltsin. Since Belarus didn't go through economic shock therapy like Russia and Ukraine while managing to keep the economy stable, Lukashenko's policy in Belarus was seen by a lot of Russians as "what Russia should have done instead".

Lukashenko was very aware of his popularity in Russia, and there was a lot of speculation that he could very successfully run for President of the Union State of Russia and Belarus once the unification deal was finalized. This all stopped when Putin came into power, reined in the Union State talks, and stabilized the Russian economy. So if the government of the USSR still existed in the 1990s in Central Asia as a stable market socialist regime like Belarus, there actually might be an overwhelming interest by the Russian populace to rejoin that version of the USSR. Belarus too, probably. But this is all up for speculation.

There might be a lot more Stanistan memes in this timeline too.

Very nice analysis. Another question has suddenly popped into my mind. Do you think the USSR would adopt a new, more Turkic flag, or maintain the hammer and sickle?

 

[Vassonx]

I think realistically every country in the world would be smart enough to recognize Russia as the true inheritor of all of this.

We still need to remember that Taiwan still had China's permanent seat in the UN Security Council and kept it until the 1970's by using legalese black magic fuckery.

While I don't think the exact same scenario would happen, if the government of the USSR still technically exists, the Russian Federation could still be argued as a nation seceding from the USSR in legal terms. Only after every single of the 15 republics threw off their Soviet system could OTL Russia finally have the legal carte blanche to take up on the Soviet Union's legal obligations.

Very nice analysis. Another question has suddenly popped into my mind. Do you think the USSR would adopt a new, more Turkic flag, or maintain the hammer and sickle?

It's honestly up in the air, but its possible to make more Belarus comparisons to take a stab at what could happen. Belarus is what you would call a reactionary leftist regime.

While the economic system has mostly stayed top-down socialist (with the market being allowed to fill certain economic holes and bottlenecks that the state can't), the socionational presentation of the regime has been a mix of nationalism and Soviet nostalgia.

Belarus sees its period of existence in the USSR as its glory days, like how an Italian nationalist would look back on the Roman Empire. It is a quasi-fascist regime that is nostalgic for socialism.

So the actual existent Centrasian USSR would probably still try to foment the same nostalgia for its glory days, and implement that idea in its national identity. But the glorification of its pre-Soviet past is still not out of the question.

Once the Centrasian USSR government finally accepts that the gang isn't getting back together, maybe then would it start promoting Turkestani nationalism and renaming itself to something more Turkic-oriented to preserve the cohesion of what it already has. But there is no way they're letting go of their Soviet identity, it would still be seen as their glory days.

So you might see an amalgamation of socialist realism and traditional Centrasian culture prop up in the government only starting in the 2000s when the regime has found its footing. Maybe they'll choose to have the Bukharan SSR flag instead. Or even the Basmachi flag. That I don't know. But they absolutely can't keep the socialist heraldry forever.

 

[Vassonx]

This might actually also seriously piss off China if the Uyghurs start fantasizing about joining the Union of Turkestani Socialist Republics.

 

[Polish Eagle]

To be on the pessimisstic side, there probably will be a lot of arguments over where does the USSR's treaty obligations go to. Where would the nukes go to? And where would the USSR's Permament Security Council seat go to? Russia or the Centrasian USSR?

Depends on where the nukes go, I think. IOTL, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan retained nuclear arms until the Budapest Memorandum (and the Ukrainians have come to rue that treaty since 2014...). Kazakhstan surrendered its to Russia in April of 1995. Would it still do so ITTL? It would be expensive to maintain, and there would be some argument for yielding the bombs to reduce expenditures. BUT they do share borders with Russia and 1/5 of Kazakhstan's population (potentially even more in the 1990s?) was Russian--so they have a vested interest in not surrendering that important deterrent. It's not like the Rump USSR has any plausible friends nearby--China is on the other side of a big desert, Afghanistan is a mess, Iran generally a pariah. But they would strongly be pressured by the US to yield the nukes and security council seat to Russia.

What about the First Chechen War? That's going to be fought very near the borders of the Rump USSR--indeed, ITTL Chechnya might be trying to re-join the Rump USSR as a Chechen-Dagestani SSR. And the largely-Muslim population of the USSR will have a certain affinity for the Chechens--and possibly a corrupt-enough military that a lot of Soviet military gear can find its way to Grozny.

The Chechen War might be the event that throws a wrench in the attempt to de-fang the USSR. A sudden chill in relations between Russia and the USSR might be enough for the USSR to withdraw from TTL's negotiations for the Budapest Memorandum.

(EDIT: This could lead to one of the greatest possible historic ironies--see, in the 1990s, Chechnya found support for its independence among the other post-communist countries of eastern Europe, with Estonia voting to recognize it and Polish and Ukrainian parties also supporting it. ITTL, then, you could see a pro-Soviet Chechnya receiving vocal support from people who spent the 1980s opposing the USSR).

 

[Veiovis]

We still need to remember that Taiwan still had China's permanent seat in the UN Security Council and kept it until the 1970's by using legalese black magic fuckery.

This had absolutly nothing to do with any "legalese". Recognition of countries and their obligations and privileges is a purely political consideration. Taiwan was allowed to sit on the council as long as it was politically beneficial for the others, and dropped the second this was no longer true.

 

[Vassonx]

The Chechen War might be the event that throws a wrench in the attempt to de-fang the USSR. A sudden chill in relations between Russia and the USSR might be enough for the USSR to withdraw from TTL's negotiations for the Budapest Memorandum.

(EDIT: This could lead to one of the greatest possible historic ironies--see, in the 1990s, Chechnya found support for its independence among the other post-communist countries of eastern Europe, with Estonia voting to recognize it and Polish and Ukrainian parties also supporting it. ITTL, then, you could see a pro-Soviet Chechnya receiving vocal support from people who spent the 1980s opposing the USSR).

The prospect of the Rump USSR offering SSR membership to Russia's disaffected ethnic minorities like the Chechens, Dagestanis and Tatars as a soft power weapon they can use to destabilize the Russian Federation is such an interesting concept. Azerbaijan was also extremely supportive of maintaining the USSR. If the Rump USSR can secure Azerbaijani membership, that can be an incredible starting-off point to fund Communist/Islamist insurgencies in Southern Russia.

 

[Vassonx]

This had absolutly nothing to do with any "legalese". Recognition of countries and their obligations and privileges is a purely political consideration. Taiwan was allowed to sit on the council as long as it was politically beneficial for the others, and dropped the second this was no longer true.

Which could mean that an attempt to further split apart Soviet strength by recognizing the Rump USSR as the Soviet successor, which pushes the far stronger Russian Federation away from UNSC influence is absolutely something that states could consider. Some post-socialist states like Latvia or Poland might even actively advocate for it.

Of course Western strategists couldn't really have been able to predict that Russia would end up becoming a dangerous regime that requires containment 30 years later.

But it just shows that the choice of giving which regime the Permanent UNSC seat can be far more negotiable than just handing it to Russia.

My bad for making it come off as Taiwan using legal loopholes to preserve its own power. What I should've meant is that as long as there is interest in preserving Taiwan's UNSC seat, the practical effort to make them hold on to that position of influence would always involve the usage of obscure legal, judicial or bureaucratic justification.

 

[Derek Pullem]

Might you not end up with a super-Chechnya style conflict if Kazakhstan seeks to retain some of the status of the old Soviet Union including nukes. I don't believe the Russian Army would allow control of the nukes to pass to the "new" Soviet Union so you could end up with a military conflict between Russia and the 'stans. And to be honest I don't think NATO would really approve of a new nuclear islamic power either.

 

[Polish Eagle]

Which could mean that an attempt to further split apart Soviet strength by recognizing the Rump USSR as the Soviet successor, which pushes the far stronger Russian Federation away from UNSC influence is absolutely something that states could consider. Some post-socialist states like Latvia or Poland might even actively advocate for it.

Of course Western strategists couldn't really have been able to predict that Russia would end up becoming a dangerous regime that requires containment 30 years later.

The western strategists' voices will be rather more important than those of ex-Warsaw Pact countries. I think the US will be inclined to try to make an ally (hopefully subservient) of the Russian Federation rather than marginalize it.

 

[Comte de Dordogne]

The Americans (and more generally the Westerners) did everything to liquidate communism (the dictatorial aspects as well as the elements to which the populations were attached).The transition from a plan economy to a capitalist economy was terribly effective.
It is even amazing to what extent this has disappeared.
So no, it is not possible. If the Americans (as well as the ex-Soviet elites) have the same means as OTL to make all traces of communism disappear they will do it.

 

[Cudymcar]

retained nuclear arms

Without codes they are useless scrap metal. And all the codes were kept in Moscow.

 

[raharris1973]

Would its media actually resemble the Kazakhstan media as portrayed in 'Borat'?

 

[mial42]

There'd be some sort of legal clusterf*** for a few years while successor state rights/obligations are negotiated. I suspect the most likely outcome being the US bribing the USSR (which will be in desperate need of any source of money it can get much like OTL) to allow Russia to be considered a successor state.

 

[Analytical Engine]

Does the rUSSR reorganise its constituents?

Does the Karakalpak ASSR get promoted to a full SSR?

Does the Gorno-Badakhshan AO get promoted into a Pamir ASSR? Or even a full Pamir SSR?

Does the Kazakh SSR form a Russian ASSR? Or is there a Russian SSR formed from northern Kazakhstan?

 

[Strategos' Risk]

Kokanistan lives!

Would be interesting if the Centrasian USSR and Soviet Belarus remained in union with each other, in a territorial gap that would make West and East Pakistan blanch.

I'm also amused at how in the GURPS Transhuman Space setting the villain was a militarized Neo-Stalinist Kazakhstan, which could fit with this idea.

 

[Glory2Cabinda]

Islamic neo stalinism let's go