Crisis in the Kremlin - Our 1982 USSR
- Thread starter panpiotr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 1980's communism soviet union ussr
Chapter Twenty: A new wave in the Soviet politics (November 1986 - April 1987)
(Soviet and American delegation during negotiations in Reykjavik)
The Reykjavík Summit was held between U.S. President Ronald Reagan and General Secretary Grigory Romanov on 11-12 October 1986, where many topics were discussed, including: current situation in Afghanistan, arms control, reduction of nuclear warheads stockpiles and weaponization of outer space. At Reykjavík, Romanov wanted to convince the Americans to stop their support for the Taliban and other rebel forces in Afghanistan, nevertheless Reagan promised to consider the Soviet request only after the last Soviet soldier left Afghanistan. Furthermore, the Soviet delegation wanted to discuss the SDI Program and weaponization of the space by the United States, which once again rebuffed by the Americans, as President Reagan accused the Soviets of working on nuclear torpedoes, which could hit America without any warning. General Secretary Romanov and the Soviet delegation were baffled on how the Americans were able to find about Soviet top secret military project. Nevertheless, both Reagan and Romanov wanted to pursue arms control and reduction of ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads. Finally, after 2 days of intense negotiations, both delegations were able to achieve a compromise:
a) the U.S. Would reduce its support to the Taliban only after Soviet forces leave Afghanistan in Spring of 1989;
b) both United States and USSR would reduce their nuclear warheads stockpile by 25%;
c) both superpowers would reduce amount of missiles in Europe;
d) formal communication channels between NATO and the Warsaw Pact would be established;
e) United States and USSR would establish a joint nuclear fusion project on condition that the Soviet government would immediately halt works on nuclear torpedoes program or hands all blueprints to the American government.
(Andrei Sakharov - a symbol of fight for freedom in the USSR - now willing to stop political activism for sake of his wife)
In the meantime, a referendum on the status of the Crimean Peninsula was held. The official result was 66% vote for transfer of the peninsula to Russian SFSR, with an 93% voter turnout. The results were met very positively in Russian SFSR, as well as among Russians living in various Soviet socialist republics. Nevertheless, the transfer of Crimea brought about large demonstrations in Western Ukraine organized by Ukrainian Nationalists, who protested against the referendum and the communist rule over Ukraine. The protest were quickly quelled, nevertheless, Ukrainian nationalist and independence organizations gained much popularity in Western Ukraine. Just as the Soviet leadership was busy with the situation in Ukraine, Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov, Soviet physicist and Nobel Prize Winner for his political activism for individual freedom, human rights, civil liberties and reforms in Russia, for which he was deemed a dissident and faced persecution from the Soviet establishment, send a letter to General Secretary Romanov a letter in which he promised to focus on the scientific work and stop public protests if his wife was allowed to go to Moscow to improve her health.
The Joint Declaration on the Question of Macau, or Sino-Portuguese Joint Declaration, was a treaty between Portugal and the People's Republic of China over the status of Macau. The full name of the treaty is Joint Declaration of the Government of the People's Republic of China and the Government of the Portuguese Republic on the question of Macao. Signed on 26 March 1987 the Declaration established the process and conditions of the transfer of the territory from Portuguese rule to the People's Republic of China. The Joint Declaration served also as the main source of fundamental rights that were implemented in the Macau Special Administrative Region Basic Law. The process was otherwise similar to the handover of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty by the United Kingdom in 1997.
The declaration provided for Portuguese administration to officially end on 20 December 1999. Although it would become a full part of the People's Republic of China, Macau would enjoy the status of a Special Administrative Region (SAR), with full autonomy and self-governance in domestic affairs, economic policy and internal security. The system of "One country, two systems" would be established, exempting Macau from the socialist system and several laws decreed by the central government in Beijing. The capitalist, legal system and liberal society enjoyed by Macau would remain unchanged for a minimum of 50 years after the transfer. The Chinese government would not levy taxes on Macau nor make laws pertaining to Macau's governance. The Macau SAR would enjoy a great degree of autonomy in all but foreign affairs and defence, which would remain under Chinese control. Bearing the name of "Macau, China," Macau would enjoy the right to conclude agreements and arrangements with Portugal and international organisations for its own development. The Chinese National People's Congress would enact a "Basic Law" that would formalise the respecting of some basic principles of Chinese government in Macau, but leaving other areas untouched.
The Romanov's partial restoration of the cult of Joseph Stalin was positively received by older generations, though it led to rise in popularity of the New Left among the younger population, especially of the Neo-Communist Party of the Soviet Union (NCPSU), which was a far-left group, which proclaimed that the with the power should belong to the Soviet people, not the bureaucracy. The rise of popularity of the NCPSU was followed with a rise of interest among the younger generations in works of Leon Trotsky and Mao Zedong. Leaders of the NCPSU called for destruction of the current political system, and creation of the new one, where students would become a new vanguard of the new revolution, which was more and more popular idea among the Soviet students, which lead to rise of underground New Left student groups, where students began to organize into more cohesive groups, which did not go unnoticed by the KGB.
(War of the Cities)
In the meantime, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, thanks to extensive purchase of weapons from the USSR, ordered the Iraqi army to conduct another campaign of air raids, missile attacks, artillery shelling and chemical attacks on Iranian major cities and urban areas, which resulted in a thousand of civilian deaths. Nevertheless, Iran launched retaliatory air raids on Iraq, while primarily shelling border cities such as Basra. Iran also bought some Scud missiles from Libya, and launched them against Baghdad. These too inflicted damage upon Iraq. In spite of financial and military support for Iraq from the USSR, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and other Persian Gulf states, Hussein was not able to defeat Iran. By 1986, Iran quickly expanded its air defense network, which lead to fewer Iraqi air attacks, which were used only on more important targets. By spring 1987, Iran was prevailing in the war against Iraq. Iran launched several attacks across the front against Iraqi forces, which were slowly overwhelmed. Iran's army had also reached the Meimak Hills, only 113 km (70 mi) from Baghdad. Iraq responded by launching a strategic bombing campaign. In one attack, Tehran's main oil refinery was hit, and in another instance, Iraq damaged Iran's Assadabad satellite dish, disrupting Iranian overseas telephone and telex service for almost two weeks. Civilian areas were also hit, resulting in many casualties. Iraq continued to attack oil tankers via air. Iran responded by launching Scud missiles and air attacks at Iraqi targets.
Meanwhile, Iran continued to attack as the Iraqis were planning their strike. In 1987 the Iranians renewed a series of major human wave offensives in both northern and southern Iraq. The Iraqis had elaborately fortified Basra with 5 defensive rings, exploiting natural waterways such as the Shatt-al-Arab and artificial ones, such as Fish Lake and the Jasim River, along with earth barriers. Fish Lake was a massive lake filled with mines, underwater barbed wire, electrodes and sensors. Behind each waterway and defensive line was radar-guided artillery, ground attack aircraft and helicopters, all capable of firing poison gas or conventional munitions. The Iranian strategy was to penetrate the Iraqi defences and encircle Basra, cutting off the city as well as the Al-Faw peninsula from the rest of Iraq. Iran's plan was for three assaults: a diversionary attack near Basra, the main offensive and another diversionary attack using Iranian tanks in the north to divert Iraqi heavy armor from Basra. For these battles, Iran had re-expanded their military by recruiting many new Basij and Pasdaran volunteers. Iran brought 150,000–200,000 total troops into the battles.
(Sino - Indian border dispute)
A very serious diplomatic and military incident took place in the Sumdorong Chu Valley, Tibet, where Indian and Chinese troops exchanged gunfire for several hours, sparking worldwide fears of another war between China and India. The incident was a part of a larger Sino – Indian border dispute, which was a territorial dispute over the sovereignty of two relatively large, and several smaller, separated pieces of territory between China and India – Aksai Chin and south of the McMahon Line. Both President Reagan and General Secretary Romanov offered help to mediate between China and India in order to avoid conflict between two Asian great powers, and also to gain diplomatic advantage over the other superpower in Asia.
(Honecker's hardline stance led to his forced resignation)
Grigory Romanov's reforms and reorganization of the Soviet system were negatively received by the leader of German Democratic Republic – Erich Honecker, who perceived all the changes as a threat to the stability of the East German political system. Under the pressure from Romanov, Honecker introduced only very limited changes and reforms. Initially under Honecker's leadership, East Germany adopted a program of "consumer socialism", which resulted in a marked improvement in living standards already the highest among the Eastern bloc countries – though still far behind West Germany. More attention was placed on the availability of consumer goods, and the construction of new housing was accelerated, with Honecker promising to "settle the housing problem as an issue of social relevance". His policies were initially marked by a liberalization toward culture and art. While 1973 brought the World Festival of Youth and Students to East Berlin, soon dissident artists such as Wolf Biermann were expelled and the Ministry for State Security raised its efforts to suppress political resistance. Honecker remained committed to the expansion of the Inner German border and the "order to fire" policy along it. Nevertheless, Honecker refused to introduce any changes to economy similar to the ones introduced in the USSR and other socialist counties, which hampered the East German development. Furthermore, Honecker continuously pursued a line of totalitarian rule in East Germany, where every citizen was under constant surveillance of the state security service (Stasi). As a result of Honecker's unwillingness to pursue the new political line set up by Romanov, a decision was made in Moscow to replace Honecker with someone more compliant.
(Protest in Estonian SSR against opening of large phosphorite mines)
The Phosphorite War was the name given to a late-1980s environmental campaign in the then-Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic, against the opening of large phosphorite mines in the Virumaa region. The campaign, peaking in 1987, strengthening the Estonian nationalist movement. The campaign focused on two major issues. The large-scale environmental degradation that the new mines would cause was the most common subject in the public discussion. The other, more covert issue was the fear that the new mines' need for a workforce would start a wave of migration, bringing tens of thousands of workers from other parts of the Soviet Union to Estonia. In the view of Estonians this would have greatly worsened the already fragile demographic balance.
Phosphorite deposits (Obolus sandstone at the Upper Cambrian/Lower Ordovician boundary) could be found in several places in Northern part of the Estonian SSR. The Rakvere deposit, lying mostly in Lääne-Viru County, is the largest phosphorite deposit in Europe. Phosphorite mining in Estonia started in 1924 near Maardu. In 1940 a new larger mine was opened, which operated together with a factory producing low-grade phosphorus fertilizers.The central government of the Soviet Union in Moscow took interest in exploiting the phosphorite deposits in Lääne-Viru County in the early 1970s. The first proposals suggested mining the Toolse deposit (north of Rakvere), but in the early 1980s, plans for the Toolse mine were cast aside and instead mining the Rakvere deposit was seen as more favourable. The plans were not made public, but among Estonian scientists and environmentalists involved in the decision-making there was considerable opposition to the plan. Notably, there were people in the Estonian Academy of Sciences, like Endel Lippmaa, who were aware of and opposed to the plan.
The phosphorite issue became known to the general public on 25 February 1987, which is often used to mark the start of the Phosphorite War. On this day Moscow’s plans to expand phosphorite mining in Northern Estonia were revealed on Estonian TV. Although the Estonian Communist Party publicly held a position that the decision about mining had to be made by Estonians, it appeared that the central government had already finalized the plans. Numerous protests broke out and petitions were signed against the new mines. The question came to a head in spring 1987 in an unprecedented public debate. In April students from Tartu University held a meeting in the main hall of the university and unanimously condemned the actions of the leadership of the Estonian SSR. At traditional May Day demonstrations, students carried slogans against phosphorite mining and wore yellow T-shirts with the text "Phosphorite – no thanks", which became extremely popular. On May 8, against the orders from Moscow, a cartoon by Priit Pärn was published in the newspaper Sirp ja Vasar (Hammer and Sickle). Entitled Just shit (Estonian: Sitta kah!), the cartoon showed a peasant shoveling on his field a piece of manure shaped like Estonia. The cartoon was widely discussed and was probably the most famous cartoon ever published in Estonia.
Sino-Portuguese Joint Declaration - Wikipedia
Phosphorite War - Wikipedia
Attachments
What was the nuclear torpedo program about? Because the Soviets had nuclear torpedoes already by the 60s.
1. Should Andrei Sakharov be allowed to return to Moscow with his wife?
A) Yes, we could score diplomatic points with the West;
B) No, he needs to stay under our surveillance.
2. Should be the agreement reached with the Americans in Reykjavík respected and implemented by the Soviet government?
A) Yes, it's a great step for peace in the world;
B) No, the Americans demand too much and offer not much enough.
3. Should be the Western film allowed to be screened in the USSR and Eastern Bloc?
A) Yes, understanding with the West could be reached via culture;
B) No, we don't need American propaganda in the Soviet cinemas.
4. Please write down who should be the next leader of East Germany?
5. Please write down how should the Soviet government react to rise of nationalist movement in Western Ukraine?
6. Please write down how should the Soviet government to the ongoing Phosphorite War in Estonian SSR?
7. Please write down how should the Soviet government deal with ongoing tensions between China and India, as well as Sino - Indian border disputes?
8. Please write down how should the Soviet government deal with the rise of the NCPSU and the New Left among the younger population and students across the USSR?
A) Yes, we could score diplomatic points with the West;
B) No, he needs to stay under our surveillance.
2. Should be the agreement reached with the Americans in Reykjavík respected and implemented by the Soviet government?
A) Yes, it's a great step for peace in the world;
B) No, the Americans demand too much and offer not much enough.
3. Should be the Western film allowed to be screened in the USSR and Eastern Bloc?
A) Yes, understanding with the West could be reached via culture;
B) No, we don't need American propaganda in the Soviet cinemas.
4. Please write down who should be the next leader of East Germany?
5. Please write down how should the Soviet government react to rise of nationalist movement in Western Ukraine?
6. Please write down how should the Soviet government to the ongoing Phosphorite War in Estonian SSR?
7. Please write down how should the Soviet government deal with ongoing tensions between China and India, as well as Sino - Indian border disputes?
8. Please write down how should the Soviet government deal with the rise of the NCPSU and the New Left among the younger population and students across the USSR?
Last edited:
Yes, but we are working on new one, which are much more advanced than the previous ones:
Crisis in the Kremlin - Our 1982 USSR
Chapter 1: The End of an Era (November '82)
www.alternatehistory.com
We had a vote on this after chapter three.
Oh man we’re getting close to where we will replace leaders in the ussr that need it
I see. Well, the Americans can go empty handed then. They refuse to budge on SDI because we are doing our torpedo program while forcing us to abandon it for a joint civilian free energy project.
We should do something mean for that. Refuse it and invite every single NATO member except for the US to a joint fusion project that is 50% funded by us. Even if the US will strong arm NATO to refuse, someone will certainly ignore the US.
We should do something mean for that. Refuse it and invite every single NATO member except for the US to a joint fusion project that is 50% funded by us. Even if the US will strong arm NATO to refuse, someone will certainly ignore the US.
Oh and also looks like we need to reform the KBG again so they don’t let the Americans know what we have again
In this one the KGB is not to be blamed, as the info was leaked by someone in the Top Soviet leadership, but I won't say by whom.
Wouldn't they have managed even without this supposed top guy leaking it? The scope of the program is big enough in the likes of the N-1 rocket, the most secretive program in a similar scale and that also got leaked to the CIA. There's just too many people, too much noise, and too big in size to close the lid on espionage.
Yes, the Americans were aware of the program for some time, but said person leaked also technical data from the program, though not everything was leaked. That's why the U.S. wants to get their hands on the rest of the data.
B) No, he needs to stay under our surveillance.
B) No, the Americans demand too much and offer not much enough. Reagan seems to be forgetting that the Soviet Union, despite the problems bubbling to the surface in recent years, is still a peer superpower. We will not be bullied into making more concessions, we stopped nuclear testing after outcry from the West and got nothing in return, and now the West tries to offer a pittance to stop even more important programs.
B) No, we don’t need American propaganda in the Soviet cinemas. I’m actually somewhat okay with allowing movies, I just voted no that way Soviet cinema has a chance to catch up to its western counterpart and become an icon of the Soviet state.
I don’t know enough about any of these things to make concrete plans about them, I would like to see what others post on the topic before I say much. The only thing I want is to side with India over China in the disputed territories, but I’m always willing to change my mind for good plans.
1 - A; but not because of what the West may say, we do it because it is the right thing to do, because despite the discrepancies, no one deserves to be denied treatment for their thoughts (with this declaration, we will not only achieve internal publicity, but we will also achieve that the dissidence lose their character as anti-communist martyrs)
2 - B; Although I have supported détente in the past, we cannot continue to accept the olive branch if our rivals are not willing to accept it. If the USA wants us to accept the agreement, it must implement a measure, either it immediately ceases its support for the rebels in Afghanistan or abandons the SDI project, otherwise it will be like the other times, in which we have complied, and our rival did not .
3 - A; We can allow some Western films, but with limits on the number of films, but it would benefit the cinema of nations that, without being communist, are friendly like India, granting them facilities in their broadcast.
4 -Willi Stoph is a man with experience, and although he is the current head of the Council of Ministers, someone can be found to replace him in this position. I modify my choice to Egon Krenz, after the information provided by @Altlov , he is the best candidate
5 - For now, let's keep an eye on them, and try a two-pronged approach, on the one hand, adopt some improvement policies in Ukraine, while empowering non-nationalist associations to take away their supporters.
6 - Let's reach an agreement, offer a substantial part of the mine's income and the promise that it will be on a smaller scale so as not to encourage the massive arrival of immigrants. If you refuse, please kindly advise that refusal will imply a decrease in investments and improvements in Estonia.
7 -Let's negotiate a ceasefire and a 30-day truce. After which, we will offer an agreement, by which the region will be demilitarized, adjustments will be made by which India will take over 70% of the Aksai Chin territory, in exchange for Chia obtaining a similar percentage south of the McMahon Line , except the city of Tawang, with the obligation of whoever obtains the most territory to compensate for this cession, and allowing the population that wishes to leave in peace, with compensation for the losses. I will support @Kriss's position, it is more beneficial and more plausible to achieve
7 - Let's integrate them, adopt some measures and accept some leaders in positions, both in universities and in government bodies
2 - B; Although I have supported détente in the past, we cannot continue to accept the olive branch if our rivals are not willing to accept it. If the USA wants us to accept the agreement, it must implement a measure, either it immediately ceases its support for the rebels in Afghanistan or abandons the SDI project, otherwise it will be like the other times, in which we have complied, and our rival did not .
3 - A; We can allow some Western films, but with limits on the number of films, but it would benefit the cinema of nations that, without being communist, are friendly like India, granting them facilities in their broadcast.
4 -
5 - For now, let's keep an eye on them, and try a two-pronged approach, on the one hand, adopt some improvement policies in Ukraine, while empowering non-nationalist associations to take away their supporters.
6 - Let's reach an agreement, offer a substantial part of the mine's income and the promise that it will be on a smaller scale so as not to encourage the massive arrival of immigrants. If you refuse, please kindly advise that refusal will imply a decrease in investments and improvements in Estonia.
7 -
7 - Let's integrate them, adopt some measures and accept some leaders in positions, both in universities and in government bodies
Last edited:
1. Should Andrei Sakharov be allowed to return to Moscow with his wife?
A) Yes, we could score diplomatic points with the West;
As long as he keeps his word and keeps to scientific matters. Politics are possible but only in accord with Communist party.
2. Should be the agreement reached with the Americans in Reykjavík respected and implemented by the Soviet government?
C) Yes, to all points except to point e. We cannot give up Poseidon without Americans giving up weaponization of outerspace. Doing so will endanger our security and our American counterparts should understand that.
3. Should be the Western film allowed to be screened in the USSR and Eastern Bloc?
C) Only Films that are deemed harmless to the public by security services. Otherwise apply censorship.
5. Please write down how should the Soviet government react to rise of nationalist movement in Western Ukraine?
Make sure to discredit any notion of independence in Ukrainian history and highlight it's historic links to Soviet Union and it's republics in schools, television and in general. Suppress and purge any nationalistic elements, or pro independence elements, but at the same time keep our current reforms of national policies and allow partial return of Ukrainian national identity (similar to what happened under Kruschchev). But emphasize multiculturalism and Ukraines place in USSR.
6. Please write down how should the Soviet government to the ongoing Phosphorite War in Estonian SSR?
I'll go with @ruffino here with some extra steps taken.
Let's reach an agreement, offer a substantial part of the mine's income and the promise that it will be on a smaller scale so as not to encourage the massive arrival of immigrants. If you refuse, please kindly advise that refusal will imply a decrease in investments and improvements in Estonia.
But nationalistic and rebellioous element of these protests are completely different matter. Investigate Estonian academy of science, media and arrest and jail all involved (including the cartoonist). Disobedience towards the state won't be tolerated .
7. Please write down how should the Soviet government deal with ongoing tensions between China and India, as well as Sino - Indian border disputes?
This is a hard one as China won't give up Aksai Chin which is a corridor that connects Tibet and Xinjiang , not to mention it effectively controls the province and it already offered to give all of its claims in dispute as long as India accepts its control of Akasi Chin which India refused and i don't see either side moving back on their red line without some extras.
So here's modified attempt of Chinese package offer to India in 1960/80/85.
China will give up its claims in Eastern and Central sector in favor of India in exchange for India accepting its control of Akasi Chin. Further more China will acknowledge Nepal, Bangladesh and Bhutan as being in Indian sphere of influence, not to mention cease support for the Sinhalese-dominated Sri Lanka government and back Indian position in regards to Tamil question.
It will also support bilateral talks between India and Pakistan regarding Kashmir dispute. In exchange India will accept one China principle.
Generally i believe it to be a nice deal. Its something China offered, but taken on more multilateral level so India has lighter time to accept it. China gets to maintain its control of Akasi Chin while India gets rest of the border resolved allowing both countries to focus elsewhere. Not to mention China will accept border countries to be in Indian sphere which would enhance Indian security. We also aren't forcing China to give up its relationship with Pakistan, but we are still having them take more pro Indian position by promising not to interfere in the dispute and they promise to back Indian position in Shri Lanka (we endorsed this position as well).
A) Yes, we could score diplomatic points with the West;
As long as he keeps his word and keeps to scientific matters. Politics are possible but only in accord with Communist party.
2. Should be the agreement reached with the Americans in Reykjavík respected and implemented by the Soviet government?
C) Yes, to all points except to point e. We cannot give up Poseidon without Americans giving up weaponization of outerspace. Doing so will endanger our security and our American counterparts should understand that.
3. Should be the Western film allowed to be screened in the USSR and Eastern Bloc?
C) Only Films that are deemed harmless to the public by security services. Otherwise apply censorship.
5. Please write down how should the Soviet government react to rise of nationalist movement in Western Ukraine?
Make sure to discredit any notion of independence in Ukrainian history and highlight it's historic links to Soviet Union and it's republics in schools, television and in general. Suppress and purge any nationalistic elements, or pro independence elements, but at the same time keep our current reforms of national policies and allow partial return of Ukrainian national identity (similar to what happened under Kruschchev). But emphasize multiculturalism and Ukraines place in USSR.
6. Please write down how should the Soviet government to the ongoing Phosphorite War in Estonian SSR?
I'll go with @ruffino here with some extra steps taken.
Let's reach an agreement, offer a substantial part of the mine's income and the promise that it will be on a smaller scale so as not to encourage the massive arrival of immigrants. If you refuse, please kindly advise that refusal will imply a decrease in investments and improvements in Estonia.
But nationalistic and rebellioous element of these protests are completely different matter. Investigate Estonian academy of science, media and arrest and jail all involved (including the cartoonist). Disobedience towards the state won't be tolerated .
7. Please write down how should the Soviet government deal with ongoing tensions between China and India, as well as Sino - Indian border disputes?
This is a hard one as China won't give up Aksai Chin which is a corridor that connects Tibet and Xinjiang , not to mention it effectively controls the province and it already offered to give all of its claims in dispute as long as India accepts its control of Akasi Chin which India refused and i don't see either side moving back on their red line without some extras.
So here's modified attempt of Chinese package offer to India in 1960/80/85.
China will give up its claims in Eastern and Central sector in favor of India in exchange for India accepting its control of Akasi Chin. Further more China will acknowledge Nepal, Bangladesh and Bhutan as being in Indian sphere of influence, not to mention cease support for the Sinhalese-dominated Sri Lanka government and back Indian position in regards to Tamil question.
It will also support bilateral talks between India and Pakistan regarding Kashmir dispute. In exchange India will accept one China principle.
Generally i believe it to be a nice deal. Its something China offered, but taken on more multilateral level so India has lighter time to accept it. China gets to maintain its control of Akasi Chin while India gets rest of the border resolved allowing both countries to focus elsewhere. Not to mention China will accept border countries to be in Indian sphere which would enhance Indian security. We also aren't forcing China to give up its relationship with Pakistan, but we are still having them take more pro Indian position by promising not to interfere in the dispute and they promise to back Indian position in Shri Lanka (we endorsed this position as well).
Last edited:
1. A
2. B
3. A, with conditions related to prescreening of the movies for anti Soviet propaganda
6. Propose a sweeping environmental protection laws, especially focused on mining and heavy industry. Points to Estonia's arguments as the inspiration behind and make this Soviet republic into a true protector of the environment(it will decrease Estonia's political power outside of its borders as environmental concerns were really unpopular at that time, especially in USSR) and generally make sure to make the fight seem to be only about the environment, ignoring and not commenting on nationalistic concerns. In the end continue the construction of the mine just under the new stricter regulations, praising the Estonians for their care for environment, and bribing some of them with extra profit shares from the mine for the republic in return for the new environmental course of the Union as a whole. In general make it about environment and not immigration or sovereignty.
Ruffino options works for me when it come to the other points
2. B
3. A, with conditions related to prescreening of the movies for anti Soviet propaganda
6. Propose a sweeping environmental protection laws, especially focused on mining and heavy industry. Points to Estonia's arguments as the inspiration behind and make this Soviet republic into a true protector of the environment(it will decrease Estonia's political power outside of its borders as environmental concerns were really unpopular at that time, especially in USSR) and generally make sure to make the fight seem to be only about the environment, ignoring and not commenting on nationalistic concerns. In the end continue the construction of the mine just under the new stricter regulations, praising the Estonians for their care for environment, and bribing some of them with extra profit shares from the mine for the republic in return for the new environmental course of the Union as a whole. In general make it about environment and not immigration or sovereignty.
Ruffino options works for me when it come to the other points
1. A - Yes let's prove to the West that a new wave is coming!
2. A - Yes let's continue an era of detente!
3. A - A lil cultural exchange never hurt nobody
4. Willi Stoph
5. Emphasize multiculturalism.
6. Let's move forward with the mine.
7. Let's act as a mediator and call for a truce.
8. Encourage and endorse the movement.
To simplify Sino Indian dispute I'll use this map
Basically it's quite unlikely that India will give up its territories in the eastern sector that are claimed by China, but part of India, nor will China give up Aksai Chin which it controls.
So beat solution is to modify Chinese otl plans that saw China making concessions in the east in exchange for India making concessions in the West with center remaining managed (more, or less neutral proposal where no one losses, or gains anything).
In modified version same happens and line of actual control is respected, only difference being that small pockets of territories in centre go to India (small gain for India).
Not to mention China backs India in Shri Lanka.
Besides that plan offers international matter as well, by acknowledging Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh as being in Indian sphere this secures Indian border in Northeastern section (China still can do business with these countries but should respect Indian position here like it respects Russian interests in Central Asia otl).
In exchange Pakistan remains unchanged and China will still maintain good relations with it (China needs that so it can avoid being surrounded), not to mention its territorial integrity is acknowledged by India.
But honestly as long as border deal is reached with China backing India in Shri Lanka other international question can be further negotiated. Generally I'm doing it because China took similar position vis a vis USSR when it normalized relations with us, back then they insisted on international questions, so same should apply to Indian border security).
Basically it's quite unlikely that India will give up its territories in the eastern sector that are claimed by China, but part of India, nor will China give up Aksai Chin which it controls.
So beat solution is to modify Chinese otl plans that saw China making concessions in the east in exchange for India making concessions in the West with center remaining managed (more, or less neutral proposal where no one losses, or gains anything).
In modified version same happens and line of actual control is respected, only difference being that small pockets of territories in centre go to India (small gain for India).
Not to mention China backs India in Shri Lanka.
Besides that plan offers international matter as well, by acknowledging Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh as being in Indian sphere this secures Indian border in Northeastern section (China still can do business with these countries but should respect Indian position here like it respects Russian interests in Central Asia otl).
In exchange Pakistan remains unchanged and China will still maintain good relations with it (China needs that so it can avoid being surrounded), not to mention its territorial integrity is acknowledged by India.
But honestly as long as border deal is reached with China backing India in Shri Lanka other international question can be further negotiated. Generally I'm doing it because China took similar position vis a vis USSR when it normalized relations with us, back then they insisted on international questions, so same should apply to Indian border security).
Last edited:
Western films aren't forbidden, they are regularly bought and screened. Some US films were quite popular in the USSR - Mackenna's Gold, The Deep, Kramer vs. Kramer, Seven Days of the Condor, Tootsie, Orca, New Centurions, Capricorn One, Fun with Dick and Jane. Soviet cinemas would be happy to get more - but there's the question of price. American blockbusters are too expensive, and the USSR has too little hard currency (some of us remember that Some Like It Hot was bought for enourmous sum of $139.000 only because Brezhnev loved it). So we are buying a lot of Indian films instead - they are much cheaper, and they are at least entertaining, unlike most Soviet films.