A Blunted Sickle - Thread II

HJ Tulp

Donor
Decolonisation is going to be very different - the Soviets are less likely to be trying to export revolution, the US basically doesn't care, and given that India is heading for a loose federation rather than partition I suspect they might be big players in the decolonisation process.
If a federalized India would become the great example of decolonisation, would that mean that more nationalist movements would be in favour of federalism instead of unitarism?

PS: Great to see you back! I must admit that times like these made me fear the worst.
 
If a federalized India would become the great example of decolonisation, would that mean that more nationalist movements would be in favour of federalism instead of unitarism?
Possibly, although that wasn't my main thought. Satyagraha has just been shown as a very viable way of getting rid of the British (far more effectively than out and out revolts), and Congress are going to be the government. Without the external distractions arising from Partition - and indeed the fact that a weak federal government can't actually do very much - I wouldn't be surprised if spreading satyagraha around the world becomes something the Indian government is interested in.

PS: Great to see you back! I must admit that times like these made me fear the worst.
Still here, just having a rough time. Better of late, but don't expect the rate of updates to pick up any time soon.
 
  • The US aren't really involved - I'm kind of envisaging that once the Soviets get nuclear weapons they'll build up something equivalent to SAC as well as significant air defences, keep a small Navy and Marines, and more or less go back to how they were living in the 1930s otherwise. I can't envisage any troop deployments beyond small Marine garrisons outside the CONUS. That's a monstrous change.
  • Japan is still a major power, and a potential threat to everybody. They're also crazy enough and bogged down badly enough in China that something is going to kick-off sooner rather than later - the current situation isn't stable and they've got no good options.
  • Decolonisation is going to be very different - the Soviets are less likely to be trying to export revolution, the US basically doesn't care, and given that India is heading for a loose federation rather than partition I suspect they might be big players in the decolonisation process.

I would imagine that with Japan as a potential threat there would be at least some debate in both the United States and the Philippines about a post-independence (which in TTL will happen on July 4, 1945 instead of 1946) mutual defence treaty between the US and the Philippines
 
If a federalized India would become the great example of decolonisation, would that mean that more nationalist movements would be in favour of federalism instead of unitarism?
Possibly, although that wasn't my main thought. Satyagraha has just been shown as a very viable way of getting rid of the British (far more effectively than out and out revolts), and Congress are going to be the government. Without the external distractions arising from Partition - and indeed the fact that a weak federal government can't actually do very much - I wouldn't be surprised if spreading satyagraha around the world becomes something the Indian government is interested in.
Welcome back pdf27! It's good that you are feeling better and can continue on with this great timeline.

I wonder just how stable will an Indian federation actually be post-independence. The underlying religious conflicts remain and it may be that we will just see the sectarian violence arise at the level of the individual federation states rather than at the national level. Will we really see religious peace on the sub-continent?
 
I would imagine that with Japan as a potential threat there would be at least some debate in both the United States and the Philippines about a post-independence (which in TTL will happen on July 4, 1945 instead of 1946) mutual defence treaty between the US and the Philippines
1945 is a long way away. At the rate I'm writing at the moment, decades ;)

I wonder just how stable will an Indian federation actually be post-independence. The underlying religious conflicts remain and it may be that we will just see the sectarian violence arise at the level of the individual federation states rather than at the national level. Will we really see religious peace on the sub-continent?
Highly unlikely. However, the worst case is going to be vaguely similar to the 2002 Gujarat riots rather than the horrors that were seen during partition and subsequently (notably in Bangladesh in 1971).
 
1945 is a long way away. At the rate I'm writing at the moment, decades ;)


Highly unlikely. However, the worst case is going to be vaguely similar to the 2002 Gujarat riots rather than the horrors that were seen during partition and subsequently (notably in Bangladesh in 1971).

I have faith in you, pdf. Once Germany falls, the time jumps can be bigger.
 
While Poland certainly won't end up in the Soviet Camp, the soviets have definitely taken land that was Finnish and Romanian in recent memory. Whether that means the Union ends up aligning with the Entente or just as a strong Neutral and Romania could end up aligning with either the Italians or the Entente.

The other nation whose situation will change greatly without OTL's world war II is Persia. The prewar effort to play off the British and the Soviets may continue. Not sure how much the Italians want to get involved here. Could the Japanese reach out to them as an Oil source?

Still waiting for the Japanese civil war. :)
 
Here is the operations map of 9 Jan 1942:
Blunted Sickle 9 Jan 1942 v.jpg
 
I wonder if this will be seen as a “real” world war ITTL given how short the actual fighting was and the fact that neither the USA nor Japan are entangled with the European theatre.
 
I wonder if this will be seen as a “real” world war ITTL given how short the actual fighting was and the fact that neither the USA nor Japan are entangled with the European theatre.
I think the whole concept of world wars might not be commonplace in this timeline, with just the one example of the "Great War" and then this.

Unless, of course, the Soviets come west.
 
There’s a lot of interesting US military butterflies with this. Without Pearl Harbor, Midway, and other big Pacific battles showing the pre-eminence of the carrier, the battleship might linger on longer. We might get to see BBG’s by the late 50’s/early 60’s.

I wonder if the US might end up like the French OTL, soldiering on with a WW2 service rifle (Garand vs MAS-49) long after other nations have switched to assault rifles.
 
Just to check. At this point the USSR controls land that in 1938 wasn't under their control in : Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Romania, correct? (as well as the entirety of the Baltic nations)
 
Just to check. At this point the USSR controls land that in 1938 wasn't under their control in : Finland, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Romania, correct? (as well as the entirety of the Baltic nations)
1623293980590.png

I cannot personally do anything about the translations as I found this map on the internet.
But I believe the borders of the USSR would be as depicted on this map which shows the Nazi- Soviet border before operation Barbarossa. The only difference concerns East Prussia with the Memel strip and that small area sticking out of East Prussia into Belarus having been annexed by the Soviets in PDF's timeline.
 
View attachment 658035
I cannot personally do anything about the translations as I found this map on the internet.
But I believe the borders of the USSR would be as depicted on this map which shows the Nazi- Soviet border before operation Barbarossa. The only difference concerns East Prussia with the Memel strip and that small area sticking out of East Prussia into Belarus having been annexed by the Soviets in PDF's timeline.
Bucovina is still with the Romanians rather then the Soviets ITTL
 
I read in a recent book that a lot of the postwar industrial strength of the Soviet Union came from the pillaging of Eastern Europe.

Not sure how much of it is true, but if it is, these are resources that ITTL Soviets won't get. In that case, a Soviet A-Bomb would not be anywhere near likely.
 
I read in a recent book that a lot of the postwar industrial strength of the Soviet Union came from the pillaging of Eastern Europe.

Not sure how much of it is true, but if it is, these are resources that ITTL Soviets won't get. In that case, a Soviet A-Bomb would not be anywhere near likely.
What they won't be able to take from Eastern Europe will be peanuts compared to what they won't lose to the Nazi invasion. My money's on the Soviets lasting to the modern day, albeit without their OTL empire.
 
Personally i would love to see a Habsburg restoration in Austria. In 1943-45 otl there was genuine support for Otto among the Austrians, and the French and British (the former reluctantly and the latter enthusiastically) supported the idea of one. It would certainly be a cool addition. Perhaps as a solution to the Sudeten question, Austria retains the Southern Sudeten?
 

Orry

Donor
Monthly Donor
What they won't be able to take from Eastern Europe will be peanuts compared to what they won't lose to the Nazi invasion. My money's on the Soviets lasting to the modern day, albeit without their OTL empire.

This CCCP has no anti-Nazi kudos

They are a pro-Nazi state that also invaded and subjugated the Free Peoples of Europe along side their Nazi confederates............

No great patriotic war myth to cling to - just oppression and murder to keep the people in line which may well lead to greater internal unrest with less useful idiots in the industrialised west
 
I read in a recent book that a lot of the postwar industrial strength of the Soviet Union came from the pillaging of Eastern Europe.

Not sure how much of it is true, but if it is, these are resources that ITTL Soviets won't get. In that case, a Soviet A-Bomb would not be anywhere near likely.
A lot of that is true but it also has to be remarked that the Russians lost a large number of Factory's and machine tooling during the German invasion that was not evacuated East of the Urals.

During the 30s Russia had invested a lot of effort in Kahn type modern factory's that used large well lit factory's that used large numbers of single task machine tools (on which lines the likes of the Chrysler Detroit Tank Factory and Castle Bromwich Aircraft factory where built) even bringing Albert Kahn and his team to Russia to train 1000s of engineers and draftsmen and buying lots of modern tooling from the USA.

They had before WW2 stood up a lot of what would then have been seen as 'modern industry' - so without the serious disruption and loss of factory tooling between June 1941 and the end of the war to all causes without a German invasion there would be little to no need to pillage Eastern Europe.

They would also have the other advantage of not having lost Millions of people.
 
Top