Central Powers victory map 1920.

Why do you believe that?
If they didn't support the government too much I do not think there would be very radical opposition to it. It could be quite easily defended if the state was able to have arms and some soldiers from Germany as well as support from Lithuania. The government would not likely be hated as themajority of people would not have much reason to.
 
The government would not likely be hated as themajority of people would not have much reason to.
I can think of several reasons why the vast majority of people might not support the government.
1. It's a puppet government of a colonial power exploiting their nation for its resources
2. There is a favorable alternative (the Soviets)
3. Their country is under foreign military occupation
4. The government has no democratic mandate
I could go on but I think the point has been made.
 

Deleted member 109224

I'm not sure Belarus would extend that far east or whether there would even have been a Belarusian state. In OTL, the western borders of Soviet Russia in the Belarus area were actualy to the west of the USSR's borders in OTL under the Treaty of Riga. As I've noted elsewhere, "As for Belorussia, while it was occupied by German troops, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk did not recognize its independence (unlike Ukraine). Indeed, Germany never recognized the BNR (Bielarúskaja Naródnaja Respublika).

View attachment 667190"



The Germans were just beginning to discover the idea of Belarus (so for that matter were the Bralrusians!) and they might in the end have decided to go beyond the Brest-Litovsk Treaty and establish a Belarusian state there at Russia's expense, but it is by no means certain. Even if they did, it might not extend as far east as on your map--it was only in 1924 that "Russia returned most of territories that made up the Vitebsk and Mogilev Governorates, as well as parts of Smolensk. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byelorussian_Soviet_Socialist_Republic
Notably, Crimea also remained Russian under Brest-Litovsk.

The mideast might look something like this. The Ottomans gains the mostly muslim lands of the Caucasus and the somewhat low-density western Georgia (for contiguity purposes) with itty bitty Armenia and Georgia as captive states.

1626689483969.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I worried that I made it too big, but the lands I gave it seemed logical as those lands are occupied by finnic peoples (I think, I found it hard to find map of their distribution in that region) and the Germans would want them to have as much land as possible to weaken the Russians and to make the border more Eastern. There were powerful people in Finland who wanted to do this during the Russian civil war iotl and so I think it would happen in this timeline due to them having support from a super power (Germany.) But I may be wrong about this.

The Finns would like to have as much Finnic-inhabited land as possible. The question is what the Russians want to give up, and how much the Germans are willing to use diplomatic credits, so to speak, to prop up Finnish demands. Given how much land the Russians have lost in the Baltic Sea area, they will put a lot of significance on the connection to the sea represented by the Murmansk railway, and would not give it up to the Finns without protest. In the event, I think it is likely that the Germans would not support the most extreme Finnish demands, but would urge the Finns to accept a more limited deal. The Finns are a minor ally to the Germans, after all, and a lasting deal with Russia is more important than catering to the irredentist dreams of Finnish nationalists.
 
Last edited:
Yes... it is cliche... but there is a reason these things are cliche...

I tried to make it accurate/the most likely thing that would happen.

What do you think and what could I improve about it?
Finland OTL had strip of land to the North Sea - I think they would have it ITTL as well.

I dont think Bulgaria would annex that much of Serbia - Austria would not want it in the first place. The most I see in the north is Nis. Or if they really want an Austrian-bulgarian border a corridor along the Danube - but nowhere near Belgrade like in this map.

Also if Romania was on the allied side like OTL I think Ukraine would get Bessarabia but at the very least Odessa and Bulgaria would get the whole of Dobruja.
 
The mideast might look something like this. The Ottomans gains the mostly muslim lands of the Caucasus and the somewhat low-density western Georgia (for contiguity purposes) with itty bitty Armenia and Georgia as captive states.
I agree with the southern borders although I don't think that they would directly annex most of the Caucasus. Much less effort to control it through client states.
 
Finland OTL had strip of land to the North Sea - I think they would have it ITTL as well.

I dont think Bulgaria would annex that much of Serbia - Austria would not want it in the first place. The most I see in the north is Nis. Or if they really want an Austrian-bulgarian border a corridor along the Danube - but nowhere near Belgrade like in this map.

Also if Romania was on the allied side like OTL I think Ukraine would get Bessarabia but at the very least Odessa and Bulgaria would get the whole of Dobruja.
Only thing about the Arctic strip at Pechenga was that it had never been part of the Grand Duchy, and might have been off-the-radar as far as German negotiators were concerned...
Agree on Bulgaria - the Bulgarians had occupied Serbia atw to the Morava, and seemed intent on annexing to that line, but I think the Austrians would've talked them down from that. A strip along the Danube to the Iron Gates providing direct land access between Bulgaria and Hungary would be pretty logical, though...
Romania was on the Entente side OTL, yet still received Bessarabia at Bucharest... not a bad trade-off for a handful of passes in the Carpathians IMO...
Dobruja was originally (per Bucharest) slated for joint occupation by the CP's... after the Ottomans traded off their interest for a small slice of Bulgarian Thrace along the right bank of the Maritsa, the whole area was assigned to the Bulgarians... IMO this would cause nothing but trouble, and most likely a future war between Bulgaria and Romania over possession of Constanta...
 
I have updated the map according to your suggestions.
Main changes:
I have made Finland smaller but given it Petsamo.
I have made Serbia larger.
I have made Morocco independent istead of German.
I have extended the British border in the ME to firmly include Bagdahd but have reduced it in the Western ME to only include Jerusalem.
The Bealrusian border is further West.

Is it good now?
 

Attachments

  • cp vic map 3.png
    cp vic map 3.png
    121.3 KB · Views: 153
Top