A Communist Indonesia

If Indonesia goes communist, Australia is pretty much guaranteed to follow through with developing a true nuclear deterrence. Given the work and policies the Australian government followed OTL, it's not that far fetched.

This would have a lot of effects on Australian national security. I'm guessing their military would be a lot stronger in general. I wonder what would happen with Papuan independence. Australia might end up in a counterinsurgency war there, butterflying a lot of their involvement in Vietnam.

Probably a stronger naval air arm (maybe F-14s), ASW capabilities, and submarines to keep them at bay in the sea and in the air, which would be the main theaters of potential conflict.
 
It a situation like this, it seems to me like it would be necessary for the the Communists to have friends in the army (perhaps among the mid-ranking officers like the colonels and captains who in other countries proved susceptible to Communist ideology while also having the educations to be really dangerous and effective revolutionaries). A well placed major or colonel who had seen the paperwork for the (alleged) anti-Communist action could also provide the Communists warning of what was coming and enabling them to counter-act the army plot.

It would also be fun to see a TL about a Communist-Islamist alliance launching a coup and subsequently having to resist a civil war against the army (and whatever external pressure the US brought to bare). It's something I've found fascinating in Central Asia and the Middle East is how close Islamists and Communists came at some times (obviously, very different types of Islamism to that which currently makes the headlines today). A synthesis of the two into a theistic "Islamic Socialism" in Indonesia could be quite fascinating.

fasquardon

I agree with this. IOTL, we know that the army and islamist could take on the communist because they did, while we don't really know how strong the communist actually were because it was so fast and so curb-stomp-y. That's why earlier I stated that it is possible for a civil war if the communist getting stronger but not strong enough to take on the others. So, for Indonesia to be a communist state it is essential for the communist to build up their power base to the point they could take on the others.

But I must disagree that the communist and islamist could become an ally. IOTL, they were natural enemy. Before 30th september even, clashes between communist and islamist were rampant, especially after communist's attempt at unilaterally imposing land reform law of 1960, where many landlords were from santri background/islamist leaning, clashing with the communist's main base of power in the abangan people. So, if the communist won, I believe that it is almost certain that there will be mass killing as OTL, with reverse role for the perpetrator and victim.

If Indonesia goes communist, Australia is pretty much guaranteed to follow through with developing a true nuclear deterrence. Given the work and policies the Australian government followed OTL, it's not that far fetched.

This would have a lot of effects on Australian national security. I'm guessing their military would be a lot stronger in general. I wonder what would happen with Papuan independence. Australia might end up in a counterinsurgency war there, butterflying a lot of their involvement in Vietnam.

Probably a stronger naval air arm (maybe F-14s), ASW capabilities, and submarines to keep them at bay in the sea and in the air, which would be the main theaters of potential conflict.

IOTL, Indonesia did had nuclear ambition before 30th september event and regime change. Nuclear and conventional arms race between Australia and Indonesia seems possible.

About Papuan independence. IOTL, Papua New Guinea gained independence from Australia in 1975. If Indonesia goes communist, We could possibly see them staying longer, or if not, housed large number of Australian troops there. About Indonesian New Guinea/West Papua, this is where things goes really interesting. IOTL, the American pushed the Dutch to the negotiation table with Indonesia in 1963 in the hope that Indonesia will not go communist, and let the sham "act of free choice" got acknowledged because regime change put Indonesia firmly in anti-communist camp. If Indonesia goes communist, we could se the US do everything they can to avoid West Papua fall into Indonesian hand.

At risk of sounding Eurocentric, this would have interesting knock-on effects on Australian politics and pop culture. After all, Australian troops would be quite literally be fighting on Australia's border against an Asian Communist foe. Unfortunately might end up with even more pseudo-Yellow Peril feeling amongst anti-Communist publications as in OTL.


I imagine pictures like in this video, endless masses of enthusiastic Indonesian communist, will be common in Australia's television with the narration of "communist threat right next door. only you can stop it!"
 
Last edited:
What about in terms of things such as domestic policy, though?

AFAIK, he's gonna be a Maoist, as sources tell that he's more inclined to follow Maoism then Soviet communism. Dunno what would happen when the reform era comes in China.

On the other hand, however, IMO, if China is Nationalist and Indonesia becomes communist, Aidit may be inclined towards Soviet communism, but I guess it's really wide open to many butterflies.

And yes, commie Indonesia will force Australia to take up arms. But don't forget, there's SEATO as well. They'll get a big share, maybe even more than Australia's, as they're the nearest to Indonesia.

I could see Malaysia and Singapore joining ITTL. Dunno about Burma though.

But I could imagine that it would really be an albatross on the neck of the incumbent US President, similar to the "Who Lost China" thing in the early 1950s. Whether it be Nixon or Kennedy or Johnson or whatever , it'll hurt them really, really bad.

P.S. Butterflies including a Vietnam situation ×100 if the US intervenes.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
AFAIK, he's gonna be a Maoist, as sources tell that he's more inclined to follow Maoism then Soviet communism. Dunno what would happen when the reform era comes in China.

On the other hand, however, IMO, if China is Nationalist and Indonesia becomes communist, Aidit may be inclined towards Soviet communism, but I guess it's really wide open to many butterflies.

And yes, commie Indonesia will force Australia to take up arms. But don't forget, there's SEATO as well. They'll get a big share, maybe even more than Australia's, as they're the nearest to Indonesia.

I could see Malaysia and Singapore joining ITTL. Dunno about Burma though.

But I could imagine that it would really be an albatross on the neck of the incumbent US President, similar to the "Who Lost China" thing in the early 1950s. Whether it be Nixon or Kennedy or Johnson or whatever , it'll hurt them really, really bad.

P.S. Butterflies including a Vietnam situation ×100 if the US intervenes.
Thanks for all of this information! :)

Also, Maoist means promoting the value of peasants over urban works as well as not federalizing the country based on ethnic lines, correct?
 
But I must disagree that the communist and islamist could become an ally. IOTL, they were natural enemy. Before 30th september even, clashes between communist and islamist were rampant, especially after communist's attempt at unilaterally imposing land reform law of 1960, where many landlords were from santri background/islamist leaning, clashing with the communist's main base of power in the abangan people. So, if the communist won, I believe that it is almost certain that there will be mass killing as OTL, with reverse role for the perpetrator and victim.

I didn't say I thought it was likely - I said such an alliance would make for a fun ATL.

fasquardon
 
IOTL, Indonesia did had nuclear ambition before 30th september event and regime change. Nuclear and conventional arms race between Australia and Indonesia seems possible.

About Papuan independence. IOTL, Papua New Guinea gained independence from Australia in 1975. If Indonesia goes communist, We could possibly see them staying longer, or if not, housed large number of Australian troops there. About Indonesian New Guinea/West Papua, this is where things goes really interesting. IOTL, the American pushed the Dutch to the negotiation table with Indonesia in 1963 in the hope that Indonesia will not go communist, and let the sham "act of free choice" got acknowledged because regime change put Indonesia firmly in anti-communist camp. If Indonesia goes communist, we could see the US do everything they can to avoid West Papua fall into Indonesian hand.

I suppose things could go either way. There was just under four years between the plebiscite and the OTL 30th of September Coup. The economic implosion that was happening under Sukarno was an issue but they were a hell of a lot better off than Zimbabwe and North Korea in the 90s and 2000s, both of whom made it. They could probably muddle on for that long and an Indonesia that included West Papua/Irian Jaya could go Communist.

And then it could also happen as you say. Reader's imagination, I guess.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Really cool scenario Asp!

Although I do wonder, even if we wank the Indonesian Communists and prevent them from getting slaughtered by the military-Islamist alliance [which I suppose was the most likely outcome all along], what is the second most likely outcome? A) the Communists can build momentum and consolidate power over Java and most of the islands except possibly outlying territories like Papua or Timor, or B) there is a full-blown civil war in which the US (and Commonwealth) intervenes on the anti-communist side?

After all, Indonesia and Malaysia are far more strategically and economically valuable to the west and Japan than South Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Thailand are.

Maybe we would see a more dispersed "Southeast Asia War" in the late 60s, with a 100,000 or 200,000 US troops holding coastal enclaves in South Vietnam while other US ground forces of similar strength intervene in Indonesia or around its periphery in places like Papua, the Malayan mainland and Malaysian Borneo? With a wider crisis and possible need for more coalition troops, maybe the US would recruit forces from Taiwan to participate in the island fronts.

I would think that for geographic reasons, if not political reasons, the US and its allies would be more likely to prevail in Indonesia and the Malaya peninsula than in Indochina.

If the western powers are prepared to engage militarily against Red Indonesia at all, they can likely destroy any Navy or Air Force they have. Even if there is no intervention on Indonesian soil, just a supercharged Konfrontasi, Indonesia is likely to lose any ships or aircraft that venture into contested space.
 
Last edited:

It depends on a lot of different variables. I think it is possible that the Communists could gain control of the whole country. I would say Iran is a good example. It was about as strategically important as Indonesia but when it fell, it fell decisively, quickly, and completely before the U.S. could get a chance to intervene. The biggest thing is probably whether or not the PKI's peasant militia has been formed. If it has, then that and the Communist friendly-elements of the armed forces would probably be enough to allow them to assume control.

The places you named are pretty squarely in the British sphere of influence; the U.S. wouldn't get involved there in a very significant way. It would be a Commonwealth thing as IOTL.
 
I think A stronger British commitment, in Indonesia might save Saigon. The British would be listed to more. They understood counterinsurgency better than the us. Australia and New Zealand has forces in nam anyway this would lead to a stronger commitment.
Marcos would remain a democratic leader as the NPA would be crushed sooner
 

CaliGuy

Banned
It depends on a lot of different variables. I think it is possible that the Communists could gain control of the whole country. I would say Iran is a good example. It was about as strategically important as Indonesia but when it fell, it fell decisively, quickly, and completely before the U.S. could get a chance to intervene. The biggest thing is probably whether or not the PKI's peasant militia has been formed. If it has, then that and the Communist friendly-elements of the armed forces would probably be enough to allow them to assume control.

The places you named are pretty squarely in the British sphere of influence; the U.S. wouldn't get involved there in a very significant way. It would be a Commonwealth thing as IOTL.
What about if Britain asks for U.S. aid, though?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
I think A stronger British commitment, in Indonesia might save Saigon. The British would be listed to more. They understood counterinsurgency better than the us. Australia and New Zealand has forces in nam anyway this would lead to a stronger commitment.
Marcos would remain a democratic leader as the NPA would be crushed sooner
NPA?
 
Sorry New people's army in the Philippines. Marcos became a dictator because of their armed uprising . He wouldn't have the excuse
 
I think A stronger British commitment, in Indonesia might save Saigon. The British would be listed to more. They understood counterinsurgency better than the us. Australia and New Zealand has forces in nam anyway this would lead to a stronger commitment.
Marcos would remain a democratic leader as the NPA would be crushed sooner

I would question that part. It's hard to say exactly how much of the strategy was British COIN excellence and how much was a series of advantages they had. The appeal of Communism was limited mostly to one minority group (Chinese Malaysians), they didn't have easy staging areas to operate out of analogous to North Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, etc.

What about if Britain asks for U.S. aid, though?

It would cause them to lose even more of their prestige as an independent power in the wake of the Suez Crisis if they did. The only way I see the U.S. getting involved in a significant way is if there is an actual conventional war between the PKI-dominated Indonesia and Malaysia/the Commonwealth. Britain wouldn't be able to bring enough air and naval power to bear that far away from their home isles, so the U.S. would defend them with carrier groups and expeditionary forces as the case may be.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
The places you named are pretty squarely in the British sphere of influence; the U.S. wouldn't get involved there in a very significant way. It would be a Commonwealth thing as IOTL.

But could the Commonwealth forces have the infantry numbers and budget to deal with a war across the entire Indonesian archipelago and not just its edges? Would Canada even participate?
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
...and, would a Britain that had been in a larger scale war in the 60s with more casualties have dealt with Northern Ireland any differently?

I wonder if the Commonwealth could have quelled Communist resistance in Indonesia by the time of Bloody Sunday?
 
But could the Commonwealth forces have the infantry numbers and budget to deal with a war across the entire Indonesian archipelago and not just its edges? Would Canada even participate?

We might be talking about different things. I pre-assumed the PKI has quickly and completely seized control of all of Indonesia a la the 1979 Iran Revolution (used that example earlier in the thread). I was thinking about the effect of this on Konfrontasi, the Sarawak Insurgency, and the Second Malayan Emergency. As long as it remains below the threshold of open war they can handle anything within those boundaries.

If it somehow turns into a wider conflict encompassing parts of Indonesia, then yes, you're right, they would need to either give up or seek U.S. support.
 
The question that I have is: how will the communists extend their control over all of Indonesia. There are over 900 inhabitated islands in Indonesia and at least 17,000 all together. Surely this is ripe for an anti-communist insurgengcy to emerge.
 
Top