a third superpower during the cold war

What the hell is Czechia? There was not such country between world wars.
Czechia is an officially recognized name for The Czech Republic, I'm guessing here it was used as a short hand for Czechoslovakia or to imply that the Slovak lands also fell to the USSR.

Yes, I meant that the Soviets had overrun some of the Slovak regions to better link up with the Hungarian Soviet Republic, so the Czech rump state receives strong support from the Entente and Germany as a bulwark against further communist expansion (promoting the legacy of the Czechoslovak Legion, etc), leading to 'Czechia' (for want of a better term) becoming a key part of the Western European anti-communist bloc.

Bonus if the Finnish Reds somehow win the Finnish Civil War, leading to Sweden (with the rest of Scandinavia following soon after) joining the Western European anti-communist bloc too.
 
A WW2 where conditional surrender is allowed + less suicidal leaders., British Empire, A more successful industrial Chinese state. A Franco-British Union. And that's about it where you can go before going into alien space bats or before the 1900s, more stable and stronger WW1 members
 
Either between 1921-1924 or after abandoning gold in 1931, but I prefer the former option, as it can set a good precedence for policy-making during the Great Depression: by 1929, Keynesianism would be no longer a really radical solution for Britain. Also, practicing Keynesian economics during the early- to mid-1920s would force Britain to peg its currency to Gold at a lower rate.

So not damaging UK exports for one thing.
 
So going with your Keyesian experiment in the ealy 20s, British exports get a boost from OTL, leaving Britain better off financially and perhaps industrially
with demand stimuting productivity. More spending generally on what? Housing? Infrastructure? Both?

When the depression hits, Labour would probaly run on a Keynsian platform, leading to modernisation of British industry before the war, meaning less dependence
on finished goods from the States. If the dominions pursue similar policies we could see less dependence from the commonwealth overall on American aid.

Perhaps we'll talk about the wartime consensus rather than the post war consensus.
 
My favourite is Pan-Arab/Islamic Union concept that stretches from Gibraltar to Papua New Guinea. Needs a severely weakened India to work though
 
My favourite is Pan-Arab/Islamic Union concept that stretches from Gibraltar to Papua New Guinea. Needs a severely weakened India to work though

Problem is that Muslims, not even Arabs, can't agree about very many issues. Such alliance would collapse in weeks if not in days.
 
First, Britain adopting Keynesian economics during the interwar period and thus becoming more powerful than IOTL by 1939.

Well, have Britain being led by a pro-Europe party, and then steal the thunder from France and Germany to assume the leadership of EEC. And then Britain somehow links the EEC with its former White Dominions, creating a giant bloc excluding the US.

Either between 1921-1924 or after abandoning gold in 1931, but I prefer the former option, as it can set a good precedence for policy-making during the Great Depression: by 1929, Keynesianism would be no longer a really radical solution for Britain. Also, practicing Keynesian economics during the early- to mid-1920s would force Britain to peg its currency to Gold at a lower rate.

If we go with 1921, that's only a year before the Tories walked out of the wartime coalition that triggered the election that brought them to official power. Adopting a radical economic policy at this time would probably deepen the split between Lloyd George and Asquih unless it starts paying off very quickly.
 
The easiest option here is probably to keep the Cold War going on longer. Then you'd have China becoming an economic superpower moving like IOTL, somewhere between the other two global powers: being technically Communist, yet still a bit closer to the USA than to the Soviet Union (which remains a strong ally of India). Then, with Chomeini's Iran /Zia ul Haq's Pakistan becoming the centre ground for a Islamist revival, China supports the Islamist cause against NATO on one side and the Eastern Bloc plus India on the other.
 
Where would a fascist Italy compete with the US ?
If I were to guess, no where, but it would be the face of such an alliance until Nationalist China sets off a nuke (and only then would the alliance become something even moderately resembling a serious third contender, rather than just Mussolini's club of disturbingly authoritarian states).

Italy stays Neutral in 1940, and gets rich playing off Axis vs Allies, while making a Block with the Little Entente II: Electric Boogaloo, this time it the Italians leading Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Romania rather than the Tripartite Pact in 1940.

Germans were very annoyed, But Count Ciano replied that Italy would hold to the Terms of the Pact of Steel and provide direct military assistance in June, 1942. But in the meantime would continue the trade, plus what the Little Entente could provide.

Japan doesn't care for this either, and takes it out on some of Italian advisors in China,

The Moose pledges support for Chiang Kai-shek, not that he could help, with Japan blocking everything.

So years pass, Italy stays neutral, Germany and Japan gets stomped.

Italy is the third way, the weakest of the Superpowers, their strident Anti-Communist message brings in Spain and China, that wins it's Civil War against Mao.
Have Italy join the war once the Germans start facing reversals, and Italy could perhaps snag a security council seat, which when paired with Nationalist China would give it's alliance more vetos than the communist block.
 
The USA has hardly walked away from its post WW2 conflicts with a favorable Win/Draw/Lose rate has it?

And China being hardpressed in Vietnam was in good company no?

The difference being distance of the fight.
It would be like the USA failing to take Winnipeg in 1945.
I would say Cuba acted more like a Superpower than China, being able to support a credible combat force on another continent for an extended period of time

Edit: And US ground forces never tried to invade North Vietnam. If the US had decided that 'On to Hanoi'
was the plan in 1965, nothing the NVA could do in a stand up fight, to stop them.
 
Last edited:
Where would a fascist Italy compete with the US ?

I see a Fascist Italy coming out of WWII in goo Order would be supporting Anti-Communists across the Globe, with fewer strings attached to Military Aid than Uncle Sam.
Expect them to be active against insurgents in South America, Africa and Asia, given Italian Aid keep the KMT in the fight to the finish
 
Adapting Thomas1195's idea:
I doubt the Tories would go full Keynsian in the 1920s and I don't think adopting Keynsianism in 1921 would be enough to help the liberals in 1922 and would probably aggravate the split that led to the Tories coming to power the following year.
However, it may give Lloyd Geroge's policies more influence in the reunified Lliberal Party.

When the first Labour Government falls in 1924 and Asquith is ousted, perhaps Labour and the Liberals put up a unit front against the Gold Standard the following year, resulting in a compromise where the Pound returns to a Gold Standard more representative of its current value. Keyes hails the decisions as a compromise and the lesser of two evils. The resulting "Gold Sale" boosts the UK's exports somewhat, and the government invests more in civil aviation generally rather than just air ships, resulting in light infrastructure improvements and internal industrial demand.

The state sponsored investment in infrastructure gives Keyne's ideas more credibility among the British left wing, who campaign in the 1929 election on a more openly Keynsian platform. MacDonald's Government here is a formal coalition with Lloyd-George's Lliberals.
Labour adopts a watered down version of the Mosely Memorandum involving a large, if temporary Public Work schme, moderinising infrastructure and facilities, and also adopts Lloyd-George's idea of the National Investment Board (NIB), which the Tories reain after they return to power in 1934 even though they abandoned the public works schemes. Britain here has modernised its industrial plant and infrastructure prior to the outbreak WWII, including Frank Whittle renewing his jet patents through funding from the NIB.

I'll be posting more details, including the progress of the War in due course, but suffice it to say, Britain depends less on American industrial and financial aid. Finances are bad, but Britain is not completely broke, and a more modern industrial plant allows for a quicker, smoother recovery.
 
Italy stays Neutral in 1940, and gets rich playing off Axis vs Allies, while making a Block with the Little Entente II: Electric Boogaloo, this time it the Italians leading Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Romania rather than the Tripartite Pact in 1940.

Germans were very annoyed, But Count Ciano replied that Italy would hold to the Terms of the Pact of Steel and provide direct military assistance in June, 1942. But in the meantime would continue the trade, plus what the Little Entente could provide.

Japan doesn't care for this either, and takes it out on some of Italian advisors in China,

The Moose pledges support for Chiang Kai-shek, not that he could help, with Japan blocking everything.

So years pass, Italy stays neutral, Germany and Japan gets stomped.

Italy is the third way, the weakest of the Superpowers, their strident Anti-Communist message brings in Spain and China, that wins it's Civil War against Mao.

Are there any TLs like this? I’ve seen Fascist Italy leading a Cold War fascist alliance in WI and DBWI threads before, and someone went so far as to call it a cliche, but I haven’t seen a single TL featuring it.

Problem is that Muslims, not even Arabs, can't agree about very many issues. Such alliance would collapse in weeks if not in days.

Would make for a kickass WW3 scenario, though.

After decades of shaky, unstable unity, the Union of Arab Republics is on the verge of collapse. The constituent republics are in open revolt against Cairo, and some (like Syria and Iraq) are in open combat with one another. Ethnic sepratists wreak havoc across the Middle East, and Shiite rebels raise hell in the Gulf. Reactionary Islamists seek a return to hardcore Sunni theology, and Soviet-supported far-leftists fight to spread communism. Wide-scale fighting breaks out across the Union, heralding the start of the Arab Civil War.

Washington and Moscow watch the UAR’s implosion with growing concern. Not only is the world’s oil supply threatened; the Arab Union’s nuclear arsenal, 400 weapons in total, is at stake. Should they fall into the hands of terrorists, or if the regime lets them loose against the rebels, millions could die. Even if no nuclear annihilation occurs, there is still the issue of who will dominate the Middle East after the fall of the UAR. Both the Soviets and the Americans view any situation where the other controls the Middle East as completely unacceptable.

As the War worsens, the United States and Soviet Union move in on their dying peer in the Mideast, citing “legitimate interests” and “severe national security concerns.” Naval vessels soon fill the Med and the Persian Gulf. The US soon issues a statement that it will not tolerate Soviet intervention in the UAR. The Soviets issue a similar warning about American intervention.

The panicking Arab military regime in control of the UAR fears that the other two superpowers seek to dismember the UAR and carve it into spheres of influence. The regime threatens that “any foreign intervention in the internal affairs of the UAR will be met with overwhelming military force,” ordering their nuclear forces to the highest state of readiness.

Tensions are at a breaking point, and the world waits with bated breath.

Suddenly, it all happens at once. A rouge leftist faction of the Arab military attempts a coup, but is quickly crushed. The Arabs find evidence of substantial Soviet involvement, including documents that indicate the plotters collaborated with the KGB and intended to request Soviet military intervention once they were in power. The Arabs retaliate by attacking a Russian cruiser in the Persian Gulf, killing many sailors and leaving the craft dead in the water.

Soon, the Soviets respond with strikes against Arab government targets and military installations across the UAR. Air and naval battles between the two powers soon develop in the Med and Gulf. In an unfortunate twist of fate, US naval assets in the area soon find themselves dragged into the malestrom, engaging both Soviet and Arab targets.

Now, a multi-sided battle that will decide the future of the Mideast, and perhaps the world, rages in the pre-dawn darkness of the Mediterranean. The Third World War has begun.
 
Last edited:
It also seemed too weak, I mean it more or less backed down to the US doing the Suez crisis.
Had to as it was heavily in debt to the US and wasn't letting the pound flow freely as a convertible currency. The US was able to exert immense influence. No ww2, no loss of Malaysia and its rubber during ww2, a different shorter ww2 or "Operation Robot" going ahead in 1952 and Britain could have told the US to sod off.

First, Britain adopting Keynesian economics during the interwar period and thus becoming more powerful than IOTL by 1939.
Or even going off the Gold Standard without going full-blown Keynesian. McKenna wanted to do it on a permanent basis and Horne and Runciman were prepared to consider it as a temporary measure (which would have been one of those "temporary" measures that continue on for seventy -odd years). So, if the Lloyd George coalition had hung on into the slump, if McKenna had accepted Baldwin's invitation to be chancellor, if the Liberals had been strong enough to demand a full blown coalition with McDonald or if the King had asked McKenna to become Chancellor of the National Government on patriotic grounds as he did Ramsay McDonald to stay on as PM....
 
Top