Well when did Russia 'detach it'?
Like I said I have no qualms giving it to Mongolia if it should be. Although as with all things in this thread it would be GW's call.
Carving up Russia and China
- Thread starter Grey Wolf
- Start date
Well when did Russia 'detach it'?
Like I said I have no qualms giving it to Mongolia if it should be. Although as with all things in this thread it would be GW's call.
Its a pity I can only read things online, and then only when the library is open and the machines are free. I'm unlikely to get anywhere into this until well into next week at the earliest. My remaining memories from 05 are very fragmentary and were largely destroyed by things that happened straight afterwards to me.
I do know that Tannu Tuva's independent identity is tied up in the events of OTL 1912 in China, but I have no idea if that is relevant to my own timeline !
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Hey I understand. Take your time we're not going anywhere. I've been waiting since late '05 for this TL to come back a few days or weeks more doesn't really matter. (Besides I need to give it another read through anyways).
Hmm...was it? Well the title of the TL is 'Carving up Russia and China' so carving bits off to make little statelets sounds like a good idea to me. But as AM says maybe it should rightfully belong to Mongolia. Ah well one of the things about AH is figuring these things out.
The Russians annexed Tuva in 1944, but it was detached earlier than that from Mongolia.
Soviet troops captured Tuva in 1920, and it gained its independence in 1921.
See here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuvinian_People's_Republic
Yeah I read that the other day. Sadly though it doesn't mention how Russia got the territory in the first place.
They got it in 1912 by the tested "settle, separate, annex" system. Russians had been there since the 1860s, IIRC.
If it has Russians there since the 1860s then a case might be made that it gained independence when Russia was carved up. However it could as AM said just as well have reverted to Mongolia during the carving up period. Guess it comes down to whether it was in the Europeans interests to have a small client state deep in Siberia to keep a check on Mongolia.
Well I just reread through this most fabulous TL and realized that I forgot to include Aceh (Atjeh?) on the map as British as they did not sell it to the Dutch in exchange for some port or another in Africa.
Where the hell was the division of that territory on Sumatra during that time period?
Where the hell was the division of that territory on Sumatra during that time period?
Well I just reread through this most fabulous TL and realized that I forgot to include Aceh (Atjeh?) on the map as British as they did not sell it to the Dutch in exchange for some port or another in Africa.
Where the hell was the division of that territory on Sumatra during that time period?
Atjeh was independent into the 1870's. There was a small effort, according to Wikipedia, to gain Ottoman supervision over the sultanate IOTL.
That's interesting I didn't know that. But since the TL is well past the 1870s the matter of them being independent is unlikely given the increased interest in China (and Asia as a whole). Since their territory also lies right along the straits of Malacca I don't foresee them remaining independent too long as the European powers are going to want to ensure ease of shipping through that important sealane.
That could work. As could adding Batak and the Batak lands, but all of this would be contrary to agreements between the British and Dutch.
Incidentally, that could be why it would nominally NOT be under European rule. Perhaps the Ottomans get it, but the British govern it, in an arrangement similar to Cyprus or Egypt?
That it would.
Well according to the information GW posted way back when Aceh actually was British claimed territory but was sold to the Dutch for 47000 Guilders and for a port on the African west coast (on the Gold coast IIRC).
It's possible I suppose that it could work out that way, really its GW's call. It depends on how some of the particulars of the scramble for Asia were worked out.
I'm sorry but I couldn't get my head around it. I tried reading it from the start but it was like reading someone else's timeline - both a question of the time that has passed, and that a lot of my memory from this time was more or less deleted by what happened. I don't like to dwell on this point, but much of September/October 2005 is a blur looking back, and this falls rather solidly into that.
I'd be quite happy for someone else to take it up, if they were interested
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Tis a shame GW but most understandable. I frankly don't know enough about this era to continue it but maybe someone else does. If not there are lots of good ideas in this thread for others to use. (I particularly like the Chinese president of an independent Philippines.)
I also have some objections regarding Manchuria. In OTL, Russia gained the part of Manchuria north of the Amur River in the Treaty of Aigun (1858), and the remainder of Outer Manchuria in the Convention of Peking (1860). Since the PoD of this timeline is during the Crimean War (1854-1856), I'm not sure that the rump Russia is going to still pursue this course of action (though I could be mistaken).