Communist Indonesia

I was told that in the 1960s before the September Movement in 1965, the Indonesian Communist Party was the largest outside China and the USSR. So what if instead of involved in the Movement, the PKI decided to take power legally through general election?
What would a communist Indonesia? What about the other political movements (the Islamic and nationalist)?

And how would this affect the balance of the Cold War and the survivability of the Soviet Union?
Would this Indonesia be hostile to Australia?
I guess they would get nukes soon.
Thanks in advance!
 
Could the PKI end up ruling some Indonesian islands in the aftermath of a prolonged civil war that balkanized the Country?
 
Keep in mind too that between 1963 and 1966 Indonesia was involved in a Confrontation with the British Commonwealth over the formation of the Federation of Malaysia. While the actual fighting was at a very low level the British had deployed aircraft carriers and V Bombers to the area in order to secure escalation dominance. This casts a shadow over the activities of 1965, if things turn too sour Indonesia might find itself in a gigatic pile of shit.
 
Another issue that would preclude the adoption of communism throughout the archipelago is Islam. Communism was rightly seen as a threat to Islam, so Communism would need to loosen their ideological constraints to be adopted. Although a Communist Indonesia would face a hostile environment from Malaya, Australia, Dutch Papua and the Philippines. This is before we factor in the United Kingdom and the United States.
 

Cook

Banned
Could the PKI end up ruling some Indonesian islands in the aftermath of a prolonged civil war that balkanized the Country?
PKI were primarily in Java. However, with greater involvement in Konfrontasi they would have had significant strength in parts of Borneo, see below.

These two are connected:
For that, you'd need to arm many of the Communists…
Keep in mind too that between 1963 and 1966 Indonesia was involved in a Confrontation with the British Commonwealth over the formation of the Federation of Malaysia.
In 1965 Aidit received approval from Sukarno to arm a PKI Militia for use in the insurgency against Malaysia and while this was opposed by the Army it actually was approved of by the Air Force and Navy. So a more intense Konfrontasi, with a more serious, but still insurgent, effort to Ganyang Malaysia using militia instead of the TNI and their strength could have grown.
 
And how would this affect the balance of the Cold War and the survivability of the Soviet Union?
Would this Indonesia be hostile to Australia?
I guess they would get nukes soon.
Thanks in advance!

Others have handled the part of a communist take over in Indonesia well enough. But for your latter questions and comments, it could spell a harder slog for communism, not easier. The reason is snap back. The potential for civil war if not total anti communism is high. Muslim countries did play footsie with the USSR, but with the exception of a port country (Yemen) which had a long standing trade union tradition via British presence, there was not a single case that comes to mind.

An early Afghanistan type situation sounds possible, of an oblong sort.

It would initially be hostile to Australia, but clearly would be preoccupied under nearly the ideal conditions (for a communist state), thus no where nearly the threat of Japanese Occuppied Indonesia. Multiple islands are terribly hard to stomp out rebellion, as the Dutch found out in 1946-49.

Nukes are very unlikely. No technical tradition, still to this day Malay people are great caregivers (Filippino nurses in every US metro hospital ER rooms, Bruce Lockhart's observation of Malays have dependibility &heart/Chinese have industry) and seagoing merchant sailors, but not of engineers. Same goes for Lucent, HP spinoff, developing plants there.

And no help. USSR did not help the PRC with its nukes, and I doubt PRC or USSR would help Indonesia get theirs and be less dependent. Communists have always been great, tough negotiators, and a tough negotiator in particular tries to make their opposite need them more. Nukes would negate this.
 

Cook

Banned
Muslim countries did play footsie with the USSR, but with the exception of a port country (Yemen) which had a long standing trade union tradition via British presence, there was not a single case that comes to mind.

Really?
Nasser’s Egypt, Assad’s Syria, Saddam’s Iraq, Gaddafi’s Libya, Somalia…none of these range any bells?
 
Really?
Nasser’s Egypt, Assad’s Syria, Saddam’s Iraq, Gaddafi’s Libya, Somalia…none of these range any bells?
These were officially socialist, to be sure, and they did gut the rich pure and simple (tearing the gizzards out of the local economies, too. So much to effect that I hear pre Nasser is presently looked on longingly as a quiet time, blessed time, and Nasser's spell is hesitant by all classes, especially the rich. At the end, the rich were at the end of their teather, ushering in Sadat. In Eastern Europe, the most blended sort, there was the polar opposite effect post 1947, other true communist countries more an abrupt change.

But communist is a good step further. Ethiopia was the real thing for quite a few starving years, but most of them are Christian, not Muslim. For a communist society, all Middle East never went to the lengths to qualify, nor was the Stalinist/Maoist level of thought control in effect, especially based upon socialist/marxist principals. Nor has it been used in sub saharan africa to those lengths, though it has come vaguely close (Zimbabwe/Tanzania/Etc). Kleptocracies, not Communist. Algeria would be the most severe large case, but while this was secular, it never went to the lengths either. Mostly it was lip service and a socialist branding.

At worst we have later Yugoslavian types of mixed economies, though strongmen were nearly everywhere as you mention. Even in Yemen, the government left the majority, hill people, alone and never did anything like collectivization that I am aware of.

I stand by my statement, that we have no precedent for this untraveled ground to base a good AH upon.
 
Really?
, Somalia…none of these range any bells?

Somalia, like the others, most of all wanting the weapons, which rang large outside of the area as well. India practically became a client state to get USSR weapons, and did socialist things as well. Was it communist? Never.

In the case of Somalia, the Dictator then (Barre?) was heartlessly and quickly cast aside by the USSR when people actually willing to institute the real thing by Somali enemies, the Ethiopian (Mengistu) showed up. The barest surface matters of communism disappeared and Barre gushingly offered to become something of a supply sider to get western support (yawn).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogaden_War

Somali structure is kritarchy, rule by the judges, specifically clan law. Communism will never scratch that, and other Muslim and Sub Sarahan villiage systems are (Christian or Muslim) are to lesser, yet great extents not prone to allow true Communist level of interference. Industrialized societies seem most prone in the 20th century. In Somalia it was commonly joked locally that Bin Laden would never dare set foot in the country as one clan or another would kidnap him for the ransom money.
 
The real communist Islamic countries were those inside pre1914 Russia
(the Central Asian countries like Kazakstan or near the Caucasus) or
Afghanistan.

Afghanistan had huge impacts on the Islamic world towards a negative
reputation and was short lived. The Central Asian "republics" were
less of an issue but still prominent. The point was Indonesia, and the
damage would be enormous IMO to communism in AH take over. It
would have been heavily PRC oriented, as the great majority were ethnic
Chinese in the effective infrastructure at the time.

Apologies on my oversight.
 
Top