Crisis in the Kremlin - Our 1982 USSR

[Zireael]

1) C - a referendum
2) arms reduction and Afghanistan are the two most obvious topics

Also: tooth infections are not things to play around with! To the doctor's with you, and take all the rest you need (personally I'm fighting a cough since Tuesday, been to a doc, but medicine isn't too helpful :/ :/ )

 

[Empress_Boogalaboo]

1. Vote on the fate of Crimean Peninsula:
A) Leave Crimea in Ukrainian SSR
B) Transfer Crimea back to Russian SFSR
C) Let the people of Crimea decide their future in referendum.

2. General Secretary Romanov is about to meet American President Reagan in Reykjavík. Please write down which topics should be discussed by both leaders?

1. C) With the three options of the referendum being, 1) Remain part of the Ukrainian SSR, 2) Rejoin the Russian SFSR, and 3) Form and independent Crimean/Tartar SSR.

2. I support the plan put forward by @ruffino

 

[CountofDooku]

Soviet Union Sphere of Influence

 

[panpiotr]

Soviet Union Sphere of Influence

Soviet Union thanks you comrade!

 

[Kriss]

While my vote remains unchanged i will move to Comrade @Altlov position on Crimean question as i agree that referendum should be limited to question at hand and special situation of the transfer should be highlighted.

Otherwise my opinion on Romanov- Regans meeting remains unchanged. But once again i agree on SDI with comrade @Altlov . Project is a money dump and honestly impossible atm so we should let USA to continue throwing money on it. If it's a bluf to get us to spend more then we don't need to raise the problem as Regan could weary well search something for nothing. Not to it gives a bad PR for the us for trying to weaponize space (not that i say it's wrong, if we had the tech we should definitely weaponize it as everyone else would be doing it).
Basically SDI is a win for us so we don’t need to raise the issue over it.

 

[panpiotr]

While my vote remains unchanged i will move to Comrade @Altlov position on Crimean question as i agree that referendum should be limited to question at hand and special situation of the transfer should be highlighted.

Otherwise my opinion on Romanov- Regans meeting remains unchanged. But once again i agree on SDI with comrade @Altlov . Project is a money dump and honestly impossible atm so we should let USA to continue throwing money on it. If it's a bluf to get us to spend more then we don't need to raise the problem as Regan could weary well search something for nothing. Not to it gives a bad PR for the us for trying to weaponize space (not that i say it's wrong, if we had the tech we should definitely weaponize it as everyone else would be doing it).
Basically SDI is a win for us so we don’t need to raise the issue over it.

I would say that iTTL's U.S. is quickly developing and testing ground- and space-based missile systems to counter our nuclear capabilities and their chances of being successful are high, though on our side we are also quickly developing and testing Poseidon nuclear torpedoes, which should come into service around 1990.

 

[Reisen Storm]

Soviet Union Sphere of Influence

America is looking pretty naked. We need to support more communist party there.

 

[Altlov]

America is looking pretty naked. We need to support more communist party there.

Supporting the Communists in America right now would be a moot move, would probably only hurt us in future. The USA is going through its strongest bout of anticommunism since McCarthy and any growing communist movement would immediately be shut down by wider popular opposition, add to this that almost every leftist movement which sprang out of the instability of the 60s has been obliterated and/or completely infiltrated by the CIA and FBI. America has practically zero revolutionary potential right now and it won't for the forseeable future, things would have to drastically change in our favour (e.g Europe falling to Communism) for America to see the light within the next 50 years.

 

[Pangur]

Ok, the chapter is posted, but I put not as much effort into it as I should, as I'm fighting a tooth infection right now and yeah, I wanted to finish the chapter ASAP. There will be no update tomorrow.

Teeth infections are so nasty and painful. Take care of yourself first and this a poor second

 

[CountofDooku]

Soviet Union thanks you comrade!

 

[aurek theserian]

i call for a 4th option of spining it of as its own assr and feel the main thing to speak of is the a bomb .... and flote the idea of a joint space mition to contain any alians

1. Vote on the fate of Crimean Peninsula:
A) Leave Crimea in Ukrainian SSR
B) Transfer Crimea back to Russian SFSR
C) Let the people of Crimea decide their future in referendum.

2. General Secretary Romanov is about to meet American President Reagan in Reykjavík. Please write down which topics should be discussed by both leaders?

 

[panpiotr]

Good news comrades - I'm feeling better, so there will be an update next week, and we will start dealing more with the Eastern Bloc. In each update we will take a closer look on what is going in specific member of our camp, starting with East Germany.

 

[Altlov]

Good news comrades - I'm feeling better, so there will be an update next week, and we will start dealing more with the Eastern Bloc. In each update we will take a closer look on what is going in specific member of our camp, starting with East Germany.

Very excited, the DDR is definitely the most fascinating state of the Cold War imo.

 

[Blyatnik]

1. Vote on the fate of Crimean Peninsula:
A) Leave Crimea in Ukrainian SSR
B) Transfer Crimea back to Russian SFSR
C) Let the people of Crimea decide their future in referendum.

2. General Secretary Romanov is about to meet American President Reagan in Reykjavík. Please write down which topics should be discussed by both leaders?

1. B, the transfer of Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR was a mistake which we can rectify, and we also now have the ability to logistically connect it to Russia by land. Building a Crimean bridge and building up the shipbuilding industry would be a good way to positively influence the growth of the Russian SFSR.

2. In the matters of nuclear control, there should be a limit placed on the number of warheads and the American support to anti-Soviet movements. We outgun the Americans in both Nuclear and land-conventional forces, we should pressure them to stop supporting anticommunist movements in our sphere of influence and we will take the pressure off in Europe, and we can both agree to slowly disarm our nuclear stockpiles.

 

[panpiotr]

Next chapter Friday/Saturday

 

[The End But Soon]

2. General Secretary Romanov is about to meet American President Reagan in Reykjavík. Please write down which topics should be discussed by both leaders?

Absolutely nuclear disarmament, reduction of arms supplies to Afghanistan, and a promise not to engage in any further 'cowboy actions' like the Star War's program. Any further discussions will need to come in further summits.

1. Vote on the fate of Crimean Peninsula:
A) Leave Crimea in Ukrainian SSR
B) Transfer Crimea back to Russian SFSR
C) Let the people of Crimea decide their future in referendum.

OOC: I feel a lot of peoples responses to this issue are heavily influenced by current events. As it stands, the authority of the Soviet Union is paramount, and as such A) is the only clear answer. C) as an option is rather silly considering the state of the USSR ITTL, and there's no point giving it back to the RSFSR. Reactionary nationalism will only rise if we let it and this will definitely open the door for further claims (like Nagorno-Karabakh)

 

[The End But Soon]

Supporting the Communists in America right now would be a moot move, would probably only hurt us in future. The USA is going through its strongest bout of anticommunism since McCarthy and any growing communist movement would immediately be shut down by wider popular opposition, add to this that almost every leftist movement which sprang out of the instability of the 60s has been obliterated and/or completely infiltrated by the CIA and FBI. America has practically zero revolutionary potential right now and it won't for the forseeable future, things would have to drastically change in our favour (e.g Europe falling to Communism) for America to see the light within the next 50 years.

Support for the CPUSA will come merely through osmosis as this point; until the US state is powerful enough to enforce the Communist Control Act of 1954, we should continue to fund the party until its death. At some point in the near future, the USA's economy will implode like OTL, and with the right support our sister parties will be there to pick up the pieces.

Perhaps not all of them, but we will be able to strike while they're at their weakest.

 

[zuzaman89]

1. C a vote allowed to the people would show that the Soviet Union does listen to its citizens and can be used as political munition against opponents.

2. The talks should put public pressure on the US to reduce the amount of nukes. The Soviet Union was reminded by Chernobil how deadly nuclear fallout can be, so it should fight for a de-nuclearized world. Saving on the tremendous costs of such systems of course and investing the same money on national project can only be a better alternative.

 

[Imp]

Lovely timeline you have going on here @panpiotr

1
C - A vote would allow for the fairest way to represent the will of the people, and can allow us to show the world how true democracyTM functions. Although it might displease hardliners, it would show the Soviet people things were changing and there may be potential new freedoms on the way if they hold the course and trust the government.

2
I'm going to be echoing other commentators with this one.

We should discuss the reduction of nuclear arsenal - perhaps look to further cut it by upto half from current levels. Freeing up such huge amounts will enable greater funding and allow us to ensure deficit does not spiral out of control. We should also consider bringing up limiting the number of nuclear warheads in other nations, a move that may prove popular in Europe - if not with their governments.

We should also, in upmost secrecy, look to have an honest and frank discussion on safety regulations regarding nuclear reactors - bringing up the partial meltdown on Three Mile in '79. Optionally could tell the Americans the real reason behind Chernobyl but that would only apply if a need is seen for it. Also agree with the proposal of ITER.

And we definitely do need to attempt to cut American funding to the Taliban and Mujahideen. The first offer in return for this would be offering to co-operate against Iran (even though they are engaged in war against Iraq - looking to contain them would still be beneficial). If that fails, we could potentially assure the Americans that despite the rhetoric, we would tone down the aid and supplies we are obtaining from Libya in exchange. The last proposal would be that Soviets would use their newfound influence to reduce global oil prices - which might be a nice boost to a govt that has just come under fire for Iran-Contra and would be against short-term interests of the Soviet Union, but in exchange the Soviets would be allowed to carry out strikes against Taliban camps in Pakistan proper to break the back of the resistance against the Najibullah govt along with the Americans cutting support for rebels in Afghanistan. Additionally, best not to mention anything about SDI, as mentioned by @Altlov.

All this may not be possible to obtain or come to a solution to, but it is time to negotiate hard comrades.

(OOC: I'd have presumed the extra spending by the US in defence would begin to impact the American economy surely? Or is the only real difference from OTL going to be a bigger deficit?)

 

[Blyatnik]

(OOC: I'd have presumed the extra spending by the US in defence would begin to impact the American economy surely? Or is the only real difference from OTL going to be a bigger deficit?)

If you can undercut the US financial system and their allies dependence on it, then it won't just be a bigger deficit, it will be the same situation as OTL Soviet Union. Also, I would imagine, like many actual projects IRL, that the increased defense spending doesn't make the US military that much more potent than it was historically. A lot of money goes into funding projects that lose competitions, or end up going nowhere (See; YF-23, Iowa battleship recommissioning). Now this of course happens with the USSR too, but since the defense spending is comparatively lower, and the leadership better than OTL, they can still maintain the same amount of their top of the line equipment, but cut back on the tens of thousands of derelict weapons they have to maintain and provide space for, meaning the loss in efficiency is not as much. It's when you cut defense spending to absolutely destitute levels (like OTL 1999 Russia, who spent just $6B on the military) that the efficiency and maintenance becomes a problem.