What about having Britain become non-aligned (a lá Sweden or Yugoslavia) under a more left-wing Labour government.
Cold War alternative mini-scenarios thread
- Thread starter Monk78
- Start date
Well I’ve seen a couple of pre-existing threads about that I, with these two being the most developed in my eyes:
What does a Finlandized Eastern Europe look like?
Assuming a 1945 dead Stalin and a USSR with a lighter touch, maintaining a sphere of influence in eastern Europe but content to allow the countries of OTL's Warsaw Pact to maintain their political systems and so forth, what do these countries look like? Specifically Poland, Czechoslovakia...
www.alternatehistory.com
Soviets do not establish satellite states In eastern Europe post world war 2
Say after world war 2 in 1947, the soviets do not go on establish the satellite states and instead treat the states in Europe as literal buffer states, that is to say the soviets do not interfere in the internal matter of the countries of eastern Europe (Social, economic, political independence...
www.alternatehistory.com
- No post-war Stalin, either due to natural death or assassination, followed a power struggle resulting in a less ideological candidate.
- This combined with Finlandisation would lead to a much earlier form of detente/peaceful coexistence, perhaps even bypassing the Cold War.
- May lead to greater electoral success for Communists in France and Italy, who historically verged on winning power in the 40s and 50s.
- This could even allow this Soviet sphere to expand westward, perhaps allowing for the formation of a unified Soviet-leaning European Bloc.
The main issue for this alternate Soviet Union is the CPSU maintaining sole political control in the face of a neighbouring block of “allied” semi-capitalist democracies, while maintaining some form of authoritarian command economy. The most likely outcome is a partial liberalisation of economics (towards Kadarism or a Yugoslav-style system) to then combine with greater international aid and trade in order to fuel an even greater economic recovery than OTL (the USSR did keep and close in somewhat on the West during the 50s and 60s) that the CPSU then builds its political legitimacy on (a lá modern China). Conversely I’d believe that this reformed Soviet Union wouldn’t fully de-Stalinise, and instead follow something more like the CCP’s interpretation of Mao (i.e: “he did what was necessary”, “70% right, 30% wrong”).
Last edited:
Perhaps Horthy's attempt to switch sides and the Slovak National Uprising succeed forcing Stalin to deal with two more Romanias (non-communist eastern european allies who still have control over their own militaries). At which point he may decide that Finlandization is preferable to plotting three separate coups.
I think the USSR would have invaded Iran only in that scenario; the USSR supported Iraq because the Ba’athist regime, whilst different in doctrine, were secularist, vaguely “socialist” authoritarians who aligned with Soviet foreign policy (i.e: suppressing the influence of Iranian Islamism in Afghanistan and Central Asia); given that Iraq would come to blows with the USA at the other end of 80s, one would imagine the Soviets seeing Iraq better serving as plausibly deniable example of anti-imperialism than another difficult to handle satellite state.
My imagining of a version of that scenario would be as the aftermath of decisive Iraqi victory (likely in 81’ or 82’ with unbroken momentum), resulting in the annexation of Khuzestan and other border areas. Such a loss triggers mass unrest against Khomeini’s government, bringing Iran to the verge of civil war; invited by the Mojahedin-e-Khalq and supported by Iraq, the USSR launches an “intervention” into Iran in late 1981 or 82’ (or concurrent with the Iraqi invasion) with the aim of “supporting the will of the people against reactionary tyranny”, rapidly overwhelming the already ravaged Iranian armed forces and establishing an “Iranian People’s Republic” under the rule of Massoud Rajavi’s MEK, becoming a Soviet-aligned satellite state, though with more internal autonomy than the Eastern Bloc as an overture to the Islam-tinged ideologies of the MEK and Ba’athists.
Carrying on to your second point I can see a version of the USSR, but not in 1971 given that Afghanistan was still a monarchy and likely unwilling to accept the passage without an additional invasion of Afghanistan, which was unsuccessful for the Soviets even when Afghanistan’s official government was their ally. If the USSR were to invade Pakistan I would have it happen in 1984 justified as a strike against support for the Afghan mujahideen, and coordinated with a Indian invasion of Pakistan tied to the anti-Khalistan campaign of that year, which Pakistan was allegedly involved with (the casus belli for Indian involvement). I would imagine the outcome seeing Pakistan’s armed forces overwhelmed by Soviet and Indian forces, resulting in Pakistan’s partition between India (rest of Kashmir, Punjab, Sindh), Afghanistan (Pashtun areas), and perhaps Iran getting Baluchistan (you could fit this into my Iran scenario).
Last edited:
Continuing on, what about the idea of Britain being driven into some form of insurgency or civil war during the 80s, perhaps from an intensification of the Troubles and labour unrest in OTL?
Last edited:
It’s extremely unlikely for any level of “intensification” of the Troubles would destabilise the U.K. to the extent of a civil war/large scale insurgency. By the 80s the security forces pretty much know who and what the various groups have and have their people embedded in the groups.
What would it take for the constituent nations of the United Kingdom to not want to be united anymore e la For All Time?
Can USSR and India just bomb and destroy a lot of Pakistani military infrastructure but just not occupy it ?
So there were some understandable delays but this anthology is moving forward and my story got selected! I'm so excited this is my first published piece of fiction!