AHC: "Red Belt" Soviet Rump State in the 90's

Your challenge is to have a rump USSR emerge out of an incomplete collapse of the USSR along the lines of today's "Red Belt" region of Russia. The late 80s/ early 90s can be changed as much or as little as you want, but the POD should be no earlier than after Gorbachev taking power. This rump USSR would exist alongside Russia and the other new republics (of which there may be more due to the chaos I imagine would be required for a Soviet state to re-emerge from the ashes of the collapse, if of course this is not completely ASB to begin with). The rump USSR may have relatively friendly or hostile relations with its "new neighbors," but you can decide how the politics of this plays out. good luck. BTW, the collapse itself can be as bloody or as peaceful as you like too. Minimal foreign intervention and no "Union of Soviet 'Soverign' Republics." Again, good luck, thanks for any ideas, and sorry if you find it ASB.
 
Sure, if Yeltsin does not take over with the attempted coup in 1992 was it? Slowly the appendages are carved off as more trouble than they are worth, excepting interior ones like the Tatar "independent" soviet state, which are absorbed. But it would have been a rocky road, to be sure.
 
Probably only possible in a violent dissolution, which would result in nontraditional borders and such. Peaceful dissolution would probably entail a Soviet Union encompassing Russia and many -stans, but dividing Russia itself is difficult because whomever has more power and control in regards to European Russia is essentially able to coerce the weaker state that results.

As such, a rump Soviet state would not be the Soviet Union we recognize. It would require drastic reorganization of the republics, if it retains any at all. It would go under a new name, and organize its government in a way to integrate its territory in a more unified manner.
 
Heck, maybe five years back the Ukrainians polled as in majority in favor of some kind of federative body encompassing Russia and Belarus. The Belarusians are still in favor. If you only had the right man in Moscow at the right time, you could easily get the three into a loose unit.

At least it'd be easy if you were willing to say the "capital" was in Kiev....
 
The 1977 Soviet constitution does have this:
Article 72. Each Union Republic shall retain the right freely to secede from the USSR.
Instead of dissolving the Union what if the leadership instead says that Republics may freely invoke Article 72 if they wish.

Anybody left would still be the Soviet Union.
 
The 1977 Soviet constitution does have this:
Instead of dissolving the Union what if the leadership instead says that Republics may freely invoke Article 72 if they wish.

Anybody left would still be the Soviet Union.

Well the only people who completely, unequivocally, without-a-doubt wanted out were the Baltic states. The reason the collapse went down to the SSR level at all was entirely because of Yeltsin's power grab. He had to choose whether to take either the biggest piece or maybe, eventually take it all. He chose the former. A different set of personalities and events in the chaos of the period could easily have ended in a partial rather than complete collapse. Perhaps only the Caucasus and Warpac join the Baltics in their exodus.

No way Belarus, Moldova, or even Kazakhstan would have said boo if Russia hadn't lead the charge out of the old system.
 
Transdnistra stays loyal?

As as Douth Southern Ukrain, along with a curve from the south or north to bring in Ruthenia and the militarty district around Lvov. The Russians maybe try pushing the Lithuanians back out of the Vilnius region along with getting a land connection to Kaliningrad. Abdkazia and South Ossetia may stick around, as with Adjara. Armenia or Azerbaijan might go for the Soviets if they help them get their maximum land claim. A shame I can't find that excellent colored map of the Caucasus, which seems to have been removed from Wikipedia. Anyways, use this map. Te Soviets should lay claim to all that is white and touching Russia or an ASSR.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/FRANCE_-_Caucasus_ethnic.png
 
Mostly agreed with Matt.

Even getting rid of Yeltsin alone means a U.S.S.R minus the Baltics and maybe Georgia, Armenia & Azerbaijan is highly probable.

Really the OTL events where the U.S.S.R fell were very unlikely and could be avoided even with small butterflies. So a ''rump'' U.S.S.R with 80-90% of the population and economic output of the old Union (Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Central Asia) would emerge. It couldnt really be called a ''rump'' U.S.S.R through.;)
 
that's really interesting about yeltsin. i didnt know that he had even considered some long term head of the ussr plan. i thought he was a nationalist through and through. a "rump" ussr minus the baltics (and maybe caucuses) sounds cool, and is related to what im looking for, but not exactly. im imagining the baltics, Uk/ Bel/ Mol, the caucuses, and central asia all breaking away, and possibly into smaller peices than they already did, as well as russia itself segmenting into a few large chunks as well as a few smaller bits with a land locked or nearly land locked "red belt" soviet rump state stretching right through the center of the former USSR. does anyone have any idea of how this could've come about? I guess getting yeltsin out of the picture is step one. thanks for the comments so far
 
that's really interesting about yeltsin. i didnt know that he had even considered some long term head of the ussr plan. i thought he was a nationalist through and through. a "rump" ussr minus the baltics (and maybe caucuses) sounds cool, and is related to what im looking for, but not exactly. im imagining the baltics, Uk/ Bel/ Mol, the caucuses, and central asia all breaking away, and possibly into smaller peices than they already did, as well as russia itself segmenting into a few large chunks as well as a few smaller bits with a land locked or nearly land locked "red belt" soviet rump state stretching right through the center of the former USSR. does anyone have any idea of how this could've come about? I guess getting yeltsin out of the picture is step one. thanks for the comments so far

You cant really divide Russia any smaller that it already is. Ethnic Russians make up over 80% of the population in Russia itself, with tens of millions in the former SSR's too. Only tiny border republics like Chechnya would seriously try to break away.

There is no non-ASB chance of Russia falling into civil war, and thus forming several rump states. There would also be no support for any local regime to do such a thing. A ''Red Belt'' or ''Anti-Communist Belt'' would last about a day.

If anything you're far more likely to see ''Red Belts'' in Ukraine, Kazakstan & all of Belarus joining the RSFSR (Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic). In the event of a Communist goverment clinging onto power in Moscow, despite the major teritorial losses of the other SSR's.
 
that's really interesting about yeltsin. i didnt know that he had even considered some long term head of the ussr plan. i thought he was a nationalist through and through. a "rump" ussr minus the baltics (and maybe caucuses) sounds cool, and is related to what im looking for, but not exactly. im imagining the baltics, Uk/ Bel/ Mol, the caucuses, and central asia all breaking away, and possibly into smaller peices than they already did, as well as russia itself segmenting into a few large chunks as well as a few smaller bits with a land locked or nearly land locked "red belt" soviet rump state stretching right through the center of the former USSR. does anyone have any idea of how this could've come about? I guess getting yeltsin out of the picture is step one. thanks for the comments so far

Nationalist nothing. He was, if anything, an opportunist through and through.

As for your goal, you've picked one that's really far out there. I hope you realize that. I mean, it's on the scale of "WI only Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama secede to form the CSA?"

You'd have to alter the fundamental structure of the USSR from day one, and even then I can't even imagine how this would come about. Russia's a geographic, cultural, economic, and ethnic unit. You can't just split it wherever you want in the long run - it'll just reform to its natural shape. In OTL it's gradually regained ties with Belarus, reasserted dominance in the Caucasus, and "cleared things up" with Kazakhstan. Heck, even the Ukraine is vaguely associated with Russia, despite decades of idiocy from the latter.

It's not like it's special to the recent Russian leaders - it's natural. Distinct geographic regions tend to link up; large states tend to assert themselves in their hinterlands.
 
You cant really divide Russia any smaller that it already is. Ethnic Russians make up over 80% of the population in Russia itself, with tens of millions in the former SSR's too. Only tiny border republics like Chechnya would seriously try to break away.

There is no non-ASB chance of Russia falling into civil war, and thus forming several rump states. There would also be no support for any local regime to do such a thing. A ''Red Belt'' or ''Anti-Communist Belt'' would last about a day.

I agree, broadly, but I'd give it a month or so. The situation was quite fluid for a little bit, and silly little pseudo-states had what seemed like an opportunity.
 
I agree, broadly, but I'd give it a month or so. The situation was quite fluid for a little bit, and silly little pseudo-states had what seemed like an opportunity.



Is there anyway the late 80s/ early 90s could've become far more "fluid" so that the Russian "unit" can break apart? On the face of it, the collapse of the USSR seems like an opportunity for civil war to me, but do you think cooler heads would've prevailed 9 times out of ten? and if so, how does one create the conditions for that tenth time when they dont?
 
Is there anyway the late 80s/ early 90s could've become far more "fluid" so that the Russian "unit" can break apart? On the face of it, the collapse of the USSR seems like an opportunity for civil war to me, but do you think cooler heads would've prevailed 9 times out of ten? and if so, how does one create the conditions for that tenth time when they dont?

It can absolutely break apart. What I can't envision is it's failure to come back together. The inevitable end of a civil war would be the formation of states along logical geographic lines. That's how military struggles work. That means, maybe, maybe you could peel Siberia off, but a serious division of European Russia just isn't in the cards.
 
Top