I've got to say that I'm LOVING this TL so far - I'm a sucker for a good Soviet TL and this is brilliantly written - detailed and plausible without being too complex. I'm eager to see who you've got in mind for Gorbachev's successor and what happens as we get nearer to the modern day.
Year of the Three Secretaries - A Soviet survival TL
- Thread starter Onkel Willie
- Start date
Wikipedia is your friend: Goulash Communism
As for National Communism, I use that term to refer to Poland's relatively moderate communism as exemplified, for example, by the fact that individual peasants continued to dominate agriculture rather than collective farms.
Last edited:
I start up the Wiki page for this TL
http://wiki.alternatehistory.com/do..._the_three_secretaries_-_a_soviet_survival_tl
http://wiki.alternatehistory.com/do..._the_three_secretaries_-_a_soviet_survival_tl
Questions
I have to ask, with the opening up of the USSR and the Pact, what does this mean to the various third world states like Ethiopia, Cuba or Nicaragua? Would the Soviets and the Pact invest more in local industry and send consumer goods instead of just weapons? Would these states, or states with similar centrally planned economies become more mixed like the Chinese/Soviets?
Since tensions are reduced in Europe and the Soviets have fought in Afghanistan/Iran, would we see more air mobile units and the reduction in the number of heavy tank/artillery units? How much of that technology and electronics from western owned plants is copied and ends up in Soviet equipment?
I have to ask, with the opening up of the USSR and the Pact, what does this mean to the various third world states like Ethiopia, Cuba or Nicaragua? Would the Soviets and the Pact invest more in local industry and send consumer goods instead of just weapons? Would these states, or states with similar centrally planned economies become more mixed like the Chinese/Soviets?
Since tensions are reduced in Europe and the Soviets have fought in Afghanistan/Iran, would we see more air mobile units and the reduction in the number of heavy tank/artillery units? How much of that technology and electronics from western owned plants is copied and ends up in Soviet equipment?
Chapter VII: Renewed Détente and the War on Terror, 1998-2013.
Update. Enjoy 
.
In 1996, Lukashenko finally achieved national prominence because of his promotion to Chairman of the Committee for State Security (the KGB) and it was hoped that in that position he’d be able to repeat his success in combating corruption and crime on a national level. He was indeed successful, but also maintained colossal records about just about every party member of any standing and was able to blackmail the corrupt ones into supporting him. The fact that he had such records gave him leverage over many politburo members and he managed to intimidate key members, with sway over the rest, to back him up politically. After all, he knew which ones cheated, which ones were drug addicts, which were nepotistic and so on, secrets that many didn’t want to see revealed. As a result, Lukashenko is not particularly seen as a shining example of Soviet democracy, more so because the Soviet Union has become more authoritarian and pan-Slav nationalist (exemplified by the Soviets bolstering Yugoslavia against nationalist separatism, albeit on the condition of major state reform). Opponents see Lukashenko as “Stalin-lite” or “Brezhnev 2.0” for the trials against and imprisonments of a number of political opponents and critics as well as harsh responses to peaceful demonstrations. His pan-Slavic ultra-nationalism is also heavily criticized for several reasons: for one Jews are infrequently subject to discrimination; besides that there is the fact that it is supported by a somewhat distorted view on history, particularly the neglect in history books of the other two allies in WW II; also, Russian chauvinism is seen as annoying or even insufferable by many Eastern Europeans.
Fact remains, however, that outside the USSR democratization continued in the other Eastern Bloc states such as Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania and Bulgaria. Poland organized semi-free elections, emulating Gorbachev’s 1989 election, in 1994 in which two fifths of parliament’s seat were reserved for the Polish United Workers’ Party and the other three fifths taken by others. The communists formed a coalition with Polish nationalists. In Czechoslovakia, a full-fledged state reform took place in 1993 in which the country became a confederal state wherein the central government controlled only foreign policy, defence, economic policy, fiscal policy and certain aspects of educational policy, namely the compulsory aspect and minimum requirements for qualifications. Most of the economy was privatized and that made Czechoslovakia communist in name only, resulting in completely free elections in 1996, which was fine to Moscow as long as the country remained Finlandized. Romania saw the democratic election of Iliescu and Bulgaria saw semi-free elections like Poland’s.
Communist states outside Europe followed suit in reforming their political and economic systems, some faster than others. North Korea, for example, remained an isolated Stalinist dictatorship based on a personality cult around Kim Il-Sung and had become fairly impoverished. In the 1970s, North Korea had been richer than South Korea, but by 1994 North Korean GDP per capita had fallen to something between that of Tuvalu and the Republic of Congo. The economy continued to stagnate and all the while Pyongyang maintained a bloated military-industrial complex. Kim Jong-Il had spent significant time in the USSR for his education and had seen first-hand the effects of economic reform, and after he came to power in 1994 he implemented similar reforms, though maintaining political dictatorship and tight censorship. The result was explosive economic growth of up to 9% annually and then Kim Jong-Il handily played into Seoul’s Sunshine Policy by negotiating the formation of a customs union. His successor since 2011, Kim Jong-Un, has continued economic liberalization and prospects for reunification seem positive since negotiations have begun on conducting foreign policy questions together.
Besides North Korea, there were also other communist states of course. Mongolia aped whatever China and the USSR did, which is unsurprising considering the country is pressed between the two. Afghanistan, since allowing Soviet and Chinese investment, has experienced up to 10% economic growth a year, starting in the early 1990s. An impoverished ruin in the 1980s, the country has since become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium”, a substance very important to the electronics industry, metallurgy and ceramics among others. Besides that, Afghanistan also exports crude oil, natural gas, copper, iron ore, lead, zinc and gold among others. In the period 1990-2010, Afghan GDP has almost increased by a factor 7. Cuba has taken a similar path to North Korea: economic liberalization while maintaining political dictatorship, using the United States as a convenient foreign bogeyman to legitimize Fidel Castro’s regime. The country is now one of the tourist hotspots of the region. Latin America has even seen the rise of a new kind of populist socialism, most notably in Venezuela where the incredibly popular Hugo Chavez uses oil money to pay for policies aimed at uplifting the poor. In Africa, Ethiopia has embraced the reformist path by overthrowing Mengistu in favour of a more sane leadership. Somalia attempted the same, but unfortunately ended up breaking to pieces, which at present manifests in the debate of whether or not Puntland and Somaliland should be recognised as independent states. Both are de facto independent and in large part responsible for combating Muslim fundamentalists (together with the Ethiopian Army, which has made it a habit to intervene and squash Islamic warlords with too much power) and propping up the government in Mogadishu. Both have requested non-member observer status, which has been approved by a United Nations General Assembly Resolution. That happened after strong lobbying by Moscow and Beijing, both of whom have investments in the Horn of Africa (Puntland’s oil comes to mind).
Lukashenko, in the meantime, continued a period of détente in East-West relations which had begun during the Presidency of George H.W. Bush, who was much less fanatically anti-communist than his predecessor Reagan out of the realization that the Soviet Union wasn’t going to go away. Bush realized – basing himself on the limited success of Reagan’s attempt at a worldwide “rollback” – that working together with Moscow would probably be more productive. This détente is also hardly surprising considering NATO and the Warsaw Pact were no longer at each other’s throats at the Fulda Gap and in Berlin. The Germans formed a neutral buffer state that put 700 kilometres between the two powers blocs, and besides that neither side had the interest or the possibility to expand their spheres of influence. The process of German reunification in itself was where better East-West relations had begun because it had required complex negotiation and cooperation between the two sides.
A visible product of this détente was nuclear disarmament talks, which were rather complicated because the USSR was more than a bit frustrated about Washington’s failure to ratify SALT II, which Moscow abided by. Lingering resentment between Gorbachev and President Bush, who had been Vice-President under Gorbachev’s arch nemesis Reagan, prevented any talks from being concretized in a binding treaty. Lukashenko talked with Clinton and rolled SALT II’s terms into a new treaty that also included the following regulations: limitation of nuclear stockpiles to 2.550 warheads atop 800 ICBMs and SLBMs for each signatory; limitation of the number of MIRVs on an ICBM/SLBM to five; an agreement to ban all nuclear tests, above ground and underground. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) went into effect in 2000 after being signed in 1996, eliminating 90% of the world’s nuclear stockpiles. It was set to expire in 2010 and was renewed by both signatories.
In the meantime, the two super powers were faced with a more pressing reason to work together. Their messing around in the Middle East for the past decades aroused the anger of Islamic fundamentalists everywhere. They fanatically agitated against the “atheist Soviets and imperialist American infidels”. They prepared an in their eyes appropriate “wrath of Allah”. On May 9th 2002, Victory Day in the Soviet Union, several Arab and Chechen Muslim fundamentalists boarded a Tupolev Tu-154 airliner destined for Moscow and hijacked the plane. Despite resistance from the passengers, the terrorists succeeded in crashing the plane into the Kremlin Wall on the MoskvaRiver at the height of the Victory Day celebrations. The plane ploughed on for quite a distance into the Palace of Congresses where it exploded after grinding to a halt. What was supposed to have been a national holiday turned into a national tragedy with over 3.500 casualties, many thousands wounded and tens of thousands more having lost loved ones. President Alexander Lukashenko addressed the nation at 4:00 PM, declaring that vengeance would be swift and merciless. In the meantime, the US was struck by a tragedy of its own. The day after the shocking Kremlin Attack, sarin gas was released in New York’s subway near Wall Street which killed 254 civilians, among them many influential businessmen, bankers and lawyers. The attack on such a crucial financial centre led to a drop in confidence in America’s financial stability, but President Gore – the same who had gotten elected in 2000 due to the success of his mentor Clinton – prevented any further economic damage by a resounding speech and the announcement of new investments by the US government. Retaliation was also promised by Gore.
Retaliation from both the USSR and America would come within mere weeks. A video tape leaked to the press on June 18th stated that the fundamentalist Sunni Muslim, militant Al-Qaeda organisation was behind the attacks to “punish the capitalist and atheist infidels for their heretical ways”. The movement was headed by Osama Bin-Laden and both the KGB and CIA knew very well where he was residing at this time: Sudan. Al-Qaeda and Bin-Laden had established themselves in Sudan on the invitation of Islamist theoretician Hassan al-Turabi and with the approval of President Omar al-Bashir who professed a reform of Sudan to follow radical Islamist political ideals. There had been controversy earlier because Khartoum supported the Oslo Accords and the independent Palestine state, but ultimately the Sudanese government wanted to keep Bin-Laden and his wealth in their country. Secondly, Osama didn’t have anywhere else to go and so he ignored Sudan’s “heresy” and continued to support Colonel Al-Bashir; the President of Sudan in return made his Islamist policies more rigorous by persecuting “infidels” much more vigorously and strictly applying Sharia law to appease his Arabian billionaire benefactor that financed his government and whose agents weeded out dissidents and fought separatists.
On June 20th 2002, the Soviet and American ambassadors in Khartoum jointly delivered an ultimatum to President Al-Bashir. It demanded the following: 1) extradite Osama Bin-Laden and Al-Qaeda leaders operating in the country, 2) Release all foreign nationals that have been wrongly imprisoned, 3) Protect all foreigners living, working or otherwise present in Sudan, 4) Immediately close every terrorist training camp and detain all who are found there for trail by the proper authorities, 5) Give the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics full access to terrorist and Islamic militia training camps and bases for inspection. President Al-Bashir refused to extradite Osama Bin-Laden unless evidence of his guilt was provided and also stated that if Bin-Laden was responsible he would be tried in Sudan. This was unacceptable to Moscow as well as Washington; the only obstacle was Beijing which had sizeable investments there, but both its Soviet allies and the Americans assured the Chinese that their interests would be left alone and that China would be given privileges by whatever new government would be formed.
Starting in July 2002, the CIA’s Special Activities Division (SAD), commando units of the US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), Soviet Spetznaz commandos and KGB agents infiltrated Sudan, using Soviet ally Ethiopia and US ally Egypt as staging grounds. They supplied the rebels in South Sudan with weaponry, funds and training and conducted sabotage missions against key military targets, communications lines and infrastructural targets.
Shortly hereafter, US and Soviet bombers armed with laser guided bombs bombed the capital of Khartoum, severing its electricity supply. The arrival of Soviet super carriers Ulyanovsk, her two sister ships Pyotr Velikiy and Sergey Gorshkov, USS Eisenhower, USS Ronald Reagan, British carrier HMS Invincible, French carrier Charles de Gaulle and their respective carrier groups was followed by an aerial campaign. Sudan’s most important air base Wadi Sayyidna was pulverized by heavy duty ordinance, destroying the Sudanese 2nd fighter squadron on the ground. The majority of the Sudanese air force consisted of obsolete aircraft like Chengdu J-7s (basically Chinese rip-offs of MiG-21s), Nanchang Q-5s (Chinese MiG-19 copies), Shenyang J-5s (the Chinese version of the MiG-17), MiG-23s and F5E Tiger IIs. The only modern combat aircraft in the Sudanese air force’s inventory were some MiG-29s. After the destruction of radar installations across Sudan by B2 stealth bombers and F-117 Nighthawks, the Sudanese air force was blinded and subsequently destroyed on the ground in a matter of days with almost zero losses for the Soviet-NATO allies. The pilots that did get off the ground performed poorly in dog fights and shot down only one plane, a British RAF Harrier II. Sudanese anti-aircraft defences on the ground were mostly limited to SA-7s which are man-portable, shoulder-fired, low altitude surface-to-air missiles equipped with obsolescent 1970s era infrared guidance. Hence, coalition aircraft were able to bomb command centres, supply lines, communications centres and training facilities with near impunity from high altitude. Only strafing by Mil Mi-24 gunships, Apache helicopters and ground attack planes of troop and supply columns (of the Sudanese People’s Armed Forces advancing to quell the rebellions in Darfur and South Sudan) was rather risky.
After thoroughly laying waste to Sudan’s air defences, air force, communications, radar installations and other military infrastructure, a coalition of US, Soviet, French, British and Ethiopian soldiers invaded and overran the country quite quickly. The Sudanese army – when it didn’t cower after the coalition’s demonstration of air supremacy – was little of a challenge. It’s tank force consisted mostly of T-54/55s, Type 59s, Type 62 light tanks, T-72Z variants and a licensed version of the Chinese Type 85M-II. Among its anti-tank weapons RPG-7s could be found which were mostly harmless to the Soviet T-90 and the American M1 Abrams, and its artillery consisted of 1960s era multiple rocket launchers and some old heavy calibre Soviet guns. Only in Khartoum did loyalists to the regime put up a fierce resistance and inflict serious casualties, but by then the regime was collapsing. The Darfur Liberation Front with weapons and air support from the coalition seized the capital of North Darfur Al-Fashir and declared the People’s Republic of Darfur. In the southern city of Juba, the Republic of South Sudan was declared and both it and Darfur were immediately recognised by the USSR, Britain, France and the US, most NATO countries (excluding Spain and Italy), Israel, Palestine, India, Afghanistan and Mongolia; China waited future events before deciding to recognise them or not while Yugoslavia, Spain and Italy didn’t want to encourage separatism, however small, in their own countries. Whatever resistance remained was pummelled by aerial bombardment, cruise missiles from Soviet Oscar and American Los Angeles-class submarines and armoured attack.
Democratic elections were organised in October 2002 although until then the administrative structure and remaining military forces of Sudan were not dismantled. They ran the country under foreign supervision which ensured stability in the transitional period despite Al-Qaeda attempts to ignite an insurgency with numerous terrorist attacks and a guerrilla effort. Al-Qaeda was repressed, and the coalition left “interrogating” prisoners to the Soviet Army and the KGB who could afford to use interrogation techniques that were less than legal in the West. Osama bin-Laden managed to evade capture until 2005 when he was sent to The Hague and sentenced to life in prison, putting an end to the threat of Muslim fundamentalism, at least for now.
.Chapter VII: Renewed Détente and the War on Terror, 1998-2013.
The question now was who would succeed Gorbachev and a potential heir was Alexander Lukashenko, a rising star in the communist party and Soviet government. He was born in 1954 in Kopys, Vitebsk Oblast, in the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic as the child of an unmarried mother which earned him bullying as a child. After graduating from the Mogilev Pedagogical Institute, he served in the border guard from 1975 to 1977 and in the 120th Motorised Rifle Guard Division from 1980 to 1982. He then graduated from the Byelorussian Agricultural Academy in 1985 and became deputy chairman of a collective farm in 1982 and 1985 before becoming director of both a collective farm and also a construction materials plant in the Shklov district. By 1990, he was a member of the Byelorussian Supreme Soviet and the Byelorussian politburo. Due to his ruthless efficiency he was made Chairman of an anti-corruption research commission in late 1991 and he accused over a hundred people of corruption, shady financial dealings and outright embezzlement; his powers were expanded to fight organised crime in Belarus. In 1993 he became Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the Byelorussian SSR and General Secretary of the Byelorussian branch of the Communist Party because of his excellent work.
In 1996, Lukashenko finally achieved national prominence because of his promotion to Chairman of the Committee for State Security (the KGB) and it was hoped that in that position he’d be able to repeat his success in combating corruption and crime on a national level. He was indeed successful, but also maintained colossal records about just about every party member of any standing and was able to blackmail the corrupt ones into supporting him. The fact that he had such records gave him leverage over many politburo members and he managed to intimidate key members, with sway over the rest, to back him up politically. After all, he knew which ones cheated, which ones were drug addicts, which were nepotistic and so on, secrets that many didn’t want to see revealed. As a result, Lukashenko is not particularly seen as a shining example of Soviet democracy, more so because the Soviet Union has become more authoritarian and pan-Slav nationalist (exemplified by the Soviets bolstering Yugoslavia against nationalist separatism, albeit on the condition of major state reform). Opponents see Lukashenko as “Stalin-lite” or “Brezhnev 2.0” for the trials against and imprisonments of a number of political opponents and critics as well as harsh responses to peaceful demonstrations. His pan-Slavic ultra-nationalism is also heavily criticized for several reasons: for one Jews are infrequently subject to discrimination; besides that there is the fact that it is supported by a somewhat distorted view on history, particularly the neglect in history books of the other two allies in WW II; also, Russian chauvinism is seen as annoying or even insufferable by many Eastern Europeans.
Fact remains, however, that outside the USSR democratization continued in the other Eastern Bloc states such as Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania and Bulgaria. Poland organized semi-free elections, emulating Gorbachev’s 1989 election, in 1994 in which two fifths of parliament’s seat were reserved for the Polish United Workers’ Party and the other three fifths taken by others. The communists formed a coalition with Polish nationalists. In Czechoslovakia, a full-fledged state reform took place in 1993 in which the country became a confederal state wherein the central government controlled only foreign policy, defence, economic policy, fiscal policy and certain aspects of educational policy, namely the compulsory aspect and minimum requirements for qualifications. Most of the economy was privatized and that made Czechoslovakia communist in name only, resulting in completely free elections in 1996, which was fine to Moscow as long as the country remained Finlandized. Romania saw the democratic election of Iliescu and Bulgaria saw semi-free elections like Poland’s.
Communist states outside Europe followed suit in reforming their political and economic systems, some faster than others. North Korea, for example, remained an isolated Stalinist dictatorship based on a personality cult around Kim Il-Sung and had become fairly impoverished. In the 1970s, North Korea had been richer than South Korea, but by 1994 North Korean GDP per capita had fallen to something between that of Tuvalu and the Republic of Congo. The economy continued to stagnate and all the while Pyongyang maintained a bloated military-industrial complex. Kim Jong-Il had spent significant time in the USSR for his education and had seen first-hand the effects of economic reform, and after he came to power in 1994 he implemented similar reforms, though maintaining political dictatorship and tight censorship. The result was explosive economic growth of up to 9% annually and then Kim Jong-Il handily played into Seoul’s Sunshine Policy by negotiating the formation of a customs union. His successor since 2011, Kim Jong-Un, has continued economic liberalization and prospects for reunification seem positive since negotiations have begun on conducting foreign policy questions together.
Besides North Korea, there were also other communist states of course. Mongolia aped whatever China and the USSR did, which is unsurprising considering the country is pressed between the two. Afghanistan, since allowing Soviet and Chinese investment, has experienced up to 10% economic growth a year, starting in the early 1990s. An impoverished ruin in the 1980s, the country has since become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium”, a substance very important to the electronics industry, metallurgy and ceramics among others. Besides that, Afghanistan also exports crude oil, natural gas, copper, iron ore, lead, zinc and gold among others. In the period 1990-2010, Afghan GDP has almost increased by a factor 7. Cuba has taken a similar path to North Korea: economic liberalization while maintaining political dictatorship, using the United States as a convenient foreign bogeyman to legitimize Fidel Castro’s regime. The country is now one of the tourist hotspots of the region. Latin America has even seen the rise of a new kind of populist socialism, most notably in Venezuela where the incredibly popular Hugo Chavez uses oil money to pay for policies aimed at uplifting the poor. In Africa, Ethiopia has embraced the reformist path by overthrowing Mengistu in favour of a more sane leadership. Somalia attempted the same, but unfortunately ended up breaking to pieces, which at present manifests in the debate of whether or not Puntland and Somaliland should be recognised as independent states. Both are de facto independent and in large part responsible for combating Muslim fundamentalists (together with the Ethiopian Army, which has made it a habit to intervene and squash Islamic warlords with too much power) and propping up the government in Mogadishu. Both have requested non-member observer status, which has been approved by a United Nations General Assembly Resolution. That happened after strong lobbying by Moscow and Beijing, both of whom have investments in the Horn of Africa (Puntland’s oil comes to mind).
Lukashenko, in the meantime, continued a period of détente in East-West relations which had begun during the Presidency of George H.W. Bush, who was much less fanatically anti-communist than his predecessor Reagan out of the realization that the Soviet Union wasn’t going to go away. Bush realized – basing himself on the limited success of Reagan’s attempt at a worldwide “rollback” – that working together with Moscow would probably be more productive. This détente is also hardly surprising considering NATO and the Warsaw Pact were no longer at each other’s throats at the Fulda Gap and in Berlin. The Germans formed a neutral buffer state that put 700 kilometres between the two powers blocs, and besides that neither side had the interest or the possibility to expand their spheres of influence. The process of German reunification in itself was where better East-West relations had begun because it had required complex negotiation and cooperation between the two sides.
A visible product of this détente was nuclear disarmament talks, which were rather complicated because the USSR was more than a bit frustrated about Washington’s failure to ratify SALT II, which Moscow abided by. Lingering resentment between Gorbachev and President Bush, who had been Vice-President under Gorbachev’s arch nemesis Reagan, prevented any talks from being concretized in a binding treaty. Lukashenko talked with Clinton and rolled SALT II’s terms into a new treaty that also included the following regulations: limitation of nuclear stockpiles to 2.550 warheads atop 800 ICBMs and SLBMs for each signatory; limitation of the number of MIRVs on an ICBM/SLBM to five; an agreement to ban all nuclear tests, above ground and underground. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) went into effect in 2000 after being signed in 1996, eliminating 90% of the world’s nuclear stockpiles. It was set to expire in 2010 and was renewed by both signatories.
In the meantime, the two super powers were faced with a more pressing reason to work together. Their messing around in the Middle East for the past decades aroused the anger of Islamic fundamentalists everywhere. They fanatically agitated against the “atheist Soviets and imperialist American infidels”. They prepared an in their eyes appropriate “wrath of Allah”. On May 9th 2002, Victory Day in the Soviet Union, several Arab and Chechen Muslim fundamentalists boarded a Tupolev Tu-154 airliner destined for Moscow and hijacked the plane. Despite resistance from the passengers, the terrorists succeeded in crashing the plane into the Kremlin Wall on the MoskvaRiver at the height of the Victory Day celebrations. The plane ploughed on for quite a distance into the Palace of Congresses where it exploded after grinding to a halt. What was supposed to have been a national holiday turned into a national tragedy with over 3.500 casualties, many thousands wounded and tens of thousands more having lost loved ones. President Alexander Lukashenko addressed the nation at 4:00 PM, declaring that vengeance would be swift and merciless. In the meantime, the US was struck by a tragedy of its own. The day after the shocking Kremlin Attack, sarin gas was released in New York’s subway near Wall Street which killed 254 civilians, among them many influential businessmen, bankers and lawyers. The attack on such a crucial financial centre led to a drop in confidence in America’s financial stability, but President Gore – the same who had gotten elected in 2000 due to the success of his mentor Clinton – prevented any further economic damage by a resounding speech and the announcement of new investments by the US government. Retaliation was also promised by Gore.
Retaliation from both the USSR and America would come within mere weeks. A video tape leaked to the press on June 18th stated that the fundamentalist Sunni Muslim, militant Al-Qaeda organisation was behind the attacks to “punish the capitalist and atheist infidels for their heretical ways”. The movement was headed by Osama Bin-Laden and both the KGB and CIA knew very well where he was residing at this time: Sudan. Al-Qaeda and Bin-Laden had established themselves in Sudan on the invitation of Islamist theoretician Hassan al-Turabi and with the approval of President Omar al-Bashir who professed a reform of Sudan to follow radical Islamist political ideals. There had been controversy earlier because Khartoum supported the Oslo Accords and the independent Palestine state, but ultimately the Sudanese government wanted to keep Bin-Laden and his wealth in their country. Secondly, Osama didn’t have anywhere else to go and so he ignored Sudan’s “heresy” and continued to support Colonel Al-Bashir; the President of Sudan in return made his Islamist policies more rigorous by persecuting “infidels” much more vigorously and strictly applying Sharia law to appease his Arabian billionaire benefactor that financed his government and whose agents weeded out dissidents and fought separatists.
On June 20th 2002, the Soviet and American ambassadors in Khartoum jointly delivered an ultimatum to President Al-Bashir. It demanded the following: 1) extradite Osama Bin-Laden and Al-Qaeda leaders operating in the country, 2) Release all foreign nationals that have been wrongly imprisoned, 3) Protect all foreigners living, working or otherwise present in Sudan, 4) Immediately close every terrorist training camp and detain all who are found there for trail by the proper authorities, 5) Give the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics full access to terrorist and Islamic militia training camps and bases for inspection. President Al-Bashir refused to extradite Osama Bin-Laden unless evidence of his guilt was provided and also stated that if Bin-Laden was responsible he would be tried in Sudan. This was unacceptable to Moscow as well as Washington; the only obstacle was Beijing which had sizeable investments there, but both its Soviet allies and the Americans assured the Chinese that their interests would be left alone and that China would be given privileges by whatever new government would be formed.
Starting in July 2002, the CIA’s Special Activities Division (SAD), commando units of the US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), Soviet Spetznaz commandos and KGB agents infiltrated Sudan, using Soviet ally Ethiopia and US ally Egypt as staging grounds. They supplied the rebels in South Sudan with weaponry, funds and training and conducted sabotage missions against key military targets, communications lines and infrastructural targets.
Shortly hereafter, US and Soviet bombers armed with laser guided bombs bombed the capital of Khartoum, severing its electricity supply. The arrival of Soviet super carriers Ulyanovsk, her two sister ships Pyotr Velikiy and Sergey Gorshkov, USS Eisenhower, USS Ronald Reagan, British carrier HMS Invincible, French carrier Charles de Gaulle and their respective carrier groups was followed by an aerial campaign. Sudan’s most important air base Wadi Sayyidna was pulverized by heavy duty ordinance, destroying the Sudanese 2nd fighter squadron on the ground. The majority of the Sudanese air force consisted of obsolete aircraft like Chengdu J-7s (basically Chinese rip-offs of MiG-21s), Nanchang Q-5s (Chinese MiG-19 copies), Shenyang J-5s (the Chinese version of the MiG-17), MiG-23s and F5E Tiger IIs. The only modern combat aircraft in the Sudanese air force’s inventory were some MiG-29s. After the destruction of radar installations across Sudan by B2 stealth bombers and F-117 Nighthawks, the Sudanese air force was blinded and subsequently destroyed on the ground in a matter of days with almost zero losses for the Soviet-NATO allies. The pilots that did get off the ground performed poorly in dog fights and shot down only one plane, a British RAF Harrier II. Sudanese anti-aircraft defences on the ground were mostly limited to SA-7s which are man-portable, shoulder-fired, low altitude surface-to-air missiles equipped with obsolescent 1970s era infrared guidance. Hence, coalition aircraft were able to bomb command centres, supply lines, communications centres and training facilities with near impunity from high altitude. Only strafing by Mil Mi-24 gunships, Apache helicopters and ground attack planes of troop and supply columns (of the Sudanese People’s Armed Forces advancing to quell the rebellions in Darfur and South Sudan) was rather risky.
After thoroughly laying waste to Sudan’s air defences, air force, communications, radar installations and other military infrastructure, a coalition of US, Soviet, French, British and Ethiopian soldiers invaded and overran the country quite quickly. The Sudanese army – when it didn’t cower after the coalition’s demonstration of air supremacy – was little of a challenge. It’s tank force consisted mostly of T-54/55s, Type 59s, Type 62 light tanks, T-72Z variants and a licensed version of the Chinese Type 85M-II. Among its anti-tank weapons RPG-7s could be found which were mostly harmless to the Soviet T-90 and the American M1 Abrams, and its artillery consisted of 1960s era multiple rocket launchers and some old heavy calibre Soviet guns. Only in Khartoum did loyalists to the regime put up a fierce resistance and inflict serious casualties, but by then the regime was collapsing. The Darfur Liberation Front with weapons and air support from the coalition seized the capital of North Darfur Al-Fashir and declared the People’s Republic of Darfur. In the southern city of Juba, the Republic of South Sudan was declared and both it and Darfur were immediately recognised by the USSR, Britain, France and the US, most NATO countries (excluding Spain and Italy), Israel, Palestine, India, Afghanistan and Mongolia; China waited future events before deciding to recognise them or not while Yugoslavia, Spain and Italy didn’t want to encourage separatism, however small, in their own countries. Whatever resistance remained was pummelled by aerial bombardment, cruise missiles from Soviet Oscar and American Los Angeles-class submarines and armoured attack.
Democratic elections were organised in October 2002 although until then the administrative structure and remaining military forces of Sudan were not dismantled. They ran the country under foreign supervision which ensured stability in the transitional period despite Al-Qaeda attempts to ignite an insurgency with numerous terrorist attacks and a guerrilla effort. Al-Qaeda was repressed, and the coalition left “interrogating” prisoners to the Soviet Army and the KGB who could afford to use interrogation techniques that were less than legal in the West. Osama bin-Laden managed to evade capture until 2005 when he was sent to The Hague and sentenced to life in prison, putting an end to the threat of Muslim fundamentalism, at least for now.
Last edited:
Very impressive. Hope you're able to start and finish more TL's soon. Loving this a lot.
Good timeline.
Plaussible the theme of finlandization of Eastern Europe and the gradual reunification of Germany.
What happens with Africa in TTL? Mobutu Sese Seko or his son continues to govern in Congo or is Laurent Kabila at command? No Arab Spring I suppose, so Gaddafi continues to be an ally of the USSR? and I suppose no Syrian Civil War?
Plaussible the theme of finlandization of Eastern Europe and the gradual reunification of Germany.
What happens with Africa in TTL? Mobutu Sese Seko or his son continues to govern in Congo or is Laurent Kabila at command? No Arab Spring I suppose, so Gaddafi continues to be an ally of the USSR? and I suppose no Syrian Civil War?
Future
Mobutu died in the 90's so I can see Congo/Zaire falling apart. Maybe a more activist UN with Soviet support to prevent Rwanda. As for Libya I could see the Soviets start to withdraw support since Gaddafi is unstable. Since Syria has a big naval base for the Soviets you might see pressure for Assad to reform the system by denying him money and arms.
Good timeline.
Plaussible the theme of finlandization of Eastern Europe and the gradual reunification of Germany.
What happens with Africa in TTL? Mobutu Sese Seko or his son continues to govern in Congo or is Laurent Kabila at command? No Arab Spring I suppose, so Gaddafi continues to be an ally of the USSR? and I suppose no Syrian Civil War?
Mobutu died in the 90's so I can see Congo/Zaire falling apart. Maybe a more activist UN with Soviet support to prevent Rwanda. As for Libya I could see the Soviets start to withdraw support since Gaddafi is unstable. Since Syria has a big naval base for the Soviets you might see pressure for Assad to reform the system by denying him money and arms.
Constantinople
Banned
This is great. I love the idea of the Soviets and Americans working together in such a way. Really fun timeline. You should provide some country profiles and details after it's done if you get the chance. Im sure the population decline in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union will not be as much of an issue in TTL. Maybe even reversed!
I wonder if we will see the extent of populist socialism in Latin America initiated by Hugo Chavez from Venezuela; as the possibility of creating a sort of Eurasian Union to join the European Economic Community with the COMECON (what would be a geopolitical nightmare for the US); or if Saddam risked by invading Kuwait (after the Soviet-Iranian War not surprise me that he attempts to create a new state panarabist, but formed more similarly to the current European Union, perhaps by sponsoring the overthrow of the Arab monarchies of Kuwait and Jordan for that future pan-Arab state is a republic).
I don't know what Onkel Willie will say, but I think an extension of NATO can't happen in this Eastern Europe. Especially considering that NATO and the Warsaw Pact (organization seems to exist in some form, perhaps under another name) agreed to the reunified Germany had its own armed forces in exchange for it was not a member of any of the two supranational organizations of military character.
Simply, the ideological Cold War is giving way to a new reissue of the Great Game. I wonder how it would affect an international stage with a strong and united Soviet Union the outbreak of the current economic crisis, especially in Southern Europe and Middle East.
Constantinople
Banned
I wish this had happened. The USSR still being around would be pretty awesome.
The USSR still being around would be pretty awesome.I wish this had happened.
And at least it had not produced those bloody ethnic conflicts in the Caucasus and Ukraine, plus the USSR surely would have prevented the bloody disintegration of Yugoslavia.
Unfortunately, Brezhnev didn't die in the late 60s and ruled the country for others 15 years more, instead of be replaced by reformist leaders that might prevent future Soviet disintegration without using a Stalin-style repression.
PS: A crucial element in the OTL economic collapse of the Soviet Union often forgotten was the sudden drop in oil prices in 1985 and 1986, encouraged by the US and Saudi Arabia to harm the Soviet economy in the beginning of perestroika, greatly helping the economic collapse of communist Europe.
However, a Western economic attack like that would have produced a crisis in the Soviet economy of this AH, but not as severe as in OTL because the Soviet Union was not involved in a bloody war in Afghanistan; it was reforming its economy to state capitalism with instruments free market, because had diversified its economy; and hadn't entered into a crazy arms race to respond to the US project called "Star Wars".
PS2: Incidentally, the last chapter provides a period between 1998 and 2013. What happens in 2013? Maybe see how Lukashenko is replaced by Putin? Or will we see finally a Soviet president who comes from an ethnic group in Central Asia? After all, since the 70s was seen the demographic slowdown of the European population of the USSR while keeping the baby boom of the Asian population of the USSR.
Last edited:
