Dewey wins TL (ex-contest entry)
- Thread starter Blochead
- Start date
1976-1978: America, the Middle East and the 2nd Taiwan Strait Crisis
Scoop Jackson’s coalition faltered in 1976 as the Democratic coalition split again under pressure on social and racial issues. George Wallace, citing Jackson’s support for civil rights (despite opposition to busing), his failure to roll back Goldwater’s policies or help Americans cope with inflation, and “weakness” abroad. The national security interest that Jackson hoped would bind fiercely anticommunist southerners to his cause failed to hold. The Republicans, on the other hand, nominated war hero William Westmoreland and New York Senator James Buckley running on a right-centrist economic platform and fairly socially libertarian message. The primary emphasis, however, was on foreign policy and “fighting inflation” by conservative means. Westmoreland’s proposals on the matter were of course nebulous, but the RNC knew they simply needed to keep the Democrats divided to win the election. Thus went summer and autumn 1976, with conservative protests at the Democratic convention and black voters unimpressed by Jackson’s increased reluctance to support progressive social policies.
Another notable election came in California, 1978, when Korean War veteran and Hollywood tough guy Clint Eastwood won the California governorship. A strong supporter of Goldwater and social progressive, Eastwood had built up political capital campaigning for Westmoreland in 1976.
Westmoreland faced an escalating geopolitical challenge when he came to the White House. Despite success in Latin America, America was losing the possibility of China as a balancer against the USSR and a rapidly changing political situation from Iran to India. At the same time, Westmoreland sensed a profound underlying weakness in the USSR – Bulganin would have to reform if he hoped to keep the economy competitive, despite increased Soviet oil revenues. The Soviets had pushed in the first half of the decade, he claimed. The second was the time to push back.
Returning to the Middle East, where he made his name, the situation was not so immediately grim as when he fought, but in some ways more frightening. While many pressured Westmoreland to throw in for the Shiite Liberationists in Iran, Westmoreland was skeptical. Having commanded American forces in Iraq and Kurdistan, Westmoreland was not interested in awakening Islamists or ethno-nationalism and knew the strength of anti-Shah movements in South Iran. This policy seemed prescient as the increasingly theocratic Liberationists proved perfectly capable of “stirring up hell on their own.” In response to Bulganin’s resettlement programs for Kurds and Azeris, the Liberationist movement began their first major campaigns of violence. The resettlement programs had stripped away many vestiges of brotherhood for Iranians – native Iranian Azeris and Kurds often suffered just as badly – sometimes worse – than resettled counterparts. Mythology sprung up about the traitors who divided Persia. Mashhad’s non-Farsi population faced brutal attacks. Bulganin, responded with force, and deployed increasing numbers of Soviet troops into the country. Westmoreland’s decision to forgo support for the Liberationists angered many South Iranians, but the Shah was relieved. South Iran faced ethnic challenges of its own – chiefly from Arabs and Baluchis – and might fall apart in similar outbursts of violence if the movement gained popularity. Nevertheless, this only increased the religious content of the movement in South Iran, where those with Liberationist sympathies fell in among the Islamist anti-Shah faction.
Westmoreland turned a blind eye to the Israeli attacks on the Syrian nuclear program in 1977, though also to Pakistan’s first efforts to research nuclear weapons as the Indian mushroom cloud loomed over regional politics. In the Middle East itself, the late ‘70s remained surprisingly quiet save for the growth of support for hardliner Israeli politicians demanding the capture of Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan. Westmoreland, while supportive of the defense of Israel, did not want another Arab-Israeli War started by “America’s side.”
Further east, China coalesced under what was effectively a Maoist military junta and provided Westmoreland with his greatest political challenge yet. As the United States increased its military support for Japan, the CCP decided to assert itself against the encirclement of the USSR and USA. The Third Taiwan Strait Crisis began in 1978, when China launched a major assault against the Quemoy and Matsu islands, using unconventional tactics to land special operations forces on the islands themselves, while suicide missions paralyzed initial ROC relief convoys. The Seventh Fleet and USAF were put on high alert. Confident the US could engage Chinese forces without beginning a nuclear war, Westmoreland nevertheless hoped the ROC could beat off the PLA and PLAN on its own. The situation, however, was not so simply resolved. The disparity in air capability that lead the ROC to victory in 1958 was no longer so noticeable. As Chinese troops took Matsu after a risky special operations mission, Westmoreland came under increasing pressure to take action in China. Because of China’s weakness, they were more likely to threaten nuclear retaliation. Yet at the same time China’s nuclear capabilities did not compare to those of the USSR – China could not hit the mainland US, nor did they have anywhere near the number of warheads. The Air Force insisted they could eliminate, with conventional arms, China’s nuclear arsenal if given authorization to hit the Chinese mainland.
For the second time in a decade, Westmoreland stared into the abyss.
Scoop Jackson’s coalition faltered in 1976 as the Democratic coalition split again under pressure on social and racial issues. George Wallace, citing Jackson’s support for civil rights (despite opposition to busing), his failure to roll back Goldwater’s policies or help Americans cope with inflation, and “weakness” abroad. The national security interest that Jackson hoped would bind fiercely anticommunist southerners to his cause failed to hold. The Republicans, on the other hand, nominated war hero William Westmoreland and New York Senator James Buckley running on a right-centrist economic platform and fairly socially libertarian message. The primary emphasis, however, was on foreign policy and “fighting inflation” by conservative means. Westmoreland’s proposals on the matter were of course nebulous, but the RNC knew they simply needed to keep the Democrats divided to win the election. Thus went summer and autumn 1976, with conservative protests at the Democratic convention and black voters unimpressed by Jackson’s increased reluctance to support progressive social policies.
Another notable election came in California, 1978, when Korean War veteran and Hollywood tough guy Clint Eastwood won the California governorship. A strong supporter of Goldwater and social progressive, Eastwood had built up political capital campaigning for Westmoreland in 1976.
Westmoreland faced an escalating geopolitical challenge when he came to the White House. Despite success in Latin America, America was losing the possibility of China as a balancer against the USSR and a rapidly changing political situation from Iran to India. At the same time, Westmoreland sensed a profound underlying weakness in the USSR – Bulganin would have to reform if he hoped to keep the economy competitive, despite increased Soviet oil revenues. The Soviets had pushed in the first half of the decade, he claimed. The second was the time to push back.
Returning to the Middle East, where he made his name, the situation was not so immediately grim as when he fought, but in some ways more frightening. While many pressured Westmoreland to throw in for the Shiite Liberationists in Iran, Westmoreland was skeptical. Having commanded American forces in Iraq and Kurdistan, Westmoreland was not interested in awakening Islamists or ethno-nationalism and knew the strength of anti-Shah movements in South Iran. This policy seemed prescient as the increasingly theocratic Liberationists proved perfectly capable of “stirring up hell on their own.” In response to Bulganin’s resettlement programs for Kurds and Azeris, the Liberationist movement began their first major campaigns of violence. The resettlement programs had stripped away many vestiges of brotherhood for Iranians – native Iranian Azeris and Kurds often suffered just as badly – sometimes worse – than resettled counterparts. Mythology sprung up about the traitors who divided Persia. Mashhad’s non-Farsi population faced brutal attacks. Bulganin, responded with force, and deployed increasing numbers of Soviet troops into the country. Westmoreland’s decision to forgo support for the Liberationists angered many South Iranians, but the Shah was relieved. South Iran faced ethnic challenges of its own – chiefly from Arabs and Baluchis – and might fall apart in similar outbursts of violence if the movement gained popularity. Nevertheless, this only increased the religious content of the movement in South Iran, where those with Liberationist sympathies fell in among the Islamist anti-Shah faction.
Westmoreland turned a blind eye to the Israeli attacks on the Syrian nuclear program in 1977, though also to Pakistan’s first efforts to research nuclear weapons as the Indian mushroom cloud loomed over regional politics. In the Middle East itself, the late ‘70s remained surprisingly quiet save for the growth of support for hardliner Israeli politicians demanding the capture of Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan. Westmoreland, while supportive of the defense of Israel, did not want another Arab-Israeli War started by “America’s side.”
Further east, China coalesced under what was effectively a Maoist military junta and provided Westmoreland with his greatest political challenge yet. As the United States increased its military support for Japan, the CCP decided to assert itself against the encirclement of the USSR and USA. The Third Taiwan Strait Crisis began in 1978, when China launched a major assault against the Quemoy and Matsu islands, using unconventional tactics to land special operations forces on the islands themselves, while suicide missions paralyzed initial ROC relief convoys. The Seventh Fleet and USAF were put on high alert. Confident the US could engage Chinese forces without beginning a nuclear war, Westmoreland nevertheless hoped the ROC could beat off the PLA and PLAN on its own. The situation, however, was not so simply resolved. The disparity in air capability that lead the ROC to victory in 1958 was no longer so noticeable. As Chinese troops took Matsu after a risky special operations mission, Westmoreland came under increasing pressure to take action in China. Because of China’s weakness, they were more likely to threaten nuclear retaliation. Yet at the same time China’s nuclear capabilities did not compare to those of the USSR – China could not hit the mainland US, nor did they have anywhere near the number of warheads. The Air Force insisted they could eliminate, with conventional arms, China’s nuclear arsenal if given authorization to hit the Chinese mainland.
For the second time in a decade, Westmoreland stared into the abyss.
Wowzers, that sounds like a more frightening crisis than anything our Cold War produced. Though your Cold War has already had its fair share of those, what with the Middle east wars.
The '80s should get pretty interesting. Clint Eastwood as Ronald Reagan analogue--fantastic. Any ideas on what happened to the Gipper himself?
The '80s should get pretty interesting. Clint Eastwood as Ronald Reagan analogue--fantastic. Any ideas on what happened to the Gipper himself?
He's still a Democrat, actually. The different political conditions created by Dewey's victory (and the lack of Eisenhower) kept him in the wing of the party that would become the Scoop Jackson Democrats. Perhaps he'll show up in his own right...
As I briefly mentioned in the Democratic Ronald Reagan thread it was his series of GE corporate events through the 1950s that made him a conservative, and not really the changing Democratic Party.
The easiest way to keep him in the Democratic Party is to give him the House Seat he sought in LA in 1952, where he was turned because he was viewed as too liberal (heh).
Fair enough idea. If the changed political systems do not alter Reagan himself, perhaps they've influenced the electorate enough.
November 11, 1978
“Well, the Republicans have had their goddamn majority, but I still need a green light. Can we get our thumbs out of our asses now?”
Captain John S. McCain III was not in a good mood, as seemed the usual for those under this command. The airmen of CVW-9 had seen little action during their deployment to the Strait, held back by political considerations as the Chinese pounded Quemoy and stormed Matsu. But no more. No sooner had McCain asked than the orders came.
He had rehearsed his men over the plan for days now. Satellite reconnaissance indicated a number of Chinese ballistic missiles – most likely with nuclear warheads – waiting for fuel on the western side of the Strait. More were aimed at Japan and South Korea, but those weren’t the target of the Enterprise or her CBG. Further inland, storage sites, bomber bases and other strategic targets of opportunity would face air force attacks. Even with the rekindling of the COMDEF-PRC partnership after Deng’s fall, many defense analysts predicted China would not be a much more difficult target than Syria or Egypt – certainly not as challenging as penetrating the USSR.
You had to hope the eggheads were correct, McCain thought, and watched as another ordnance AF-17 screeched off the Enterprise’s deck into the uncertain haze of dawn. He checked his watch. Somewhere in Washington men were biting their nails down to the quick, and a priority message was reaching Bulganin in some backwater bunker complex.
Further ahead, American fighters skimmed the surface of the waves, approaching the smoky, war torn coast of China. Even now shells still flew back and forth between Quemoy and the mainland, hundreds of thousands complementing the exchange twenty years’ ago. As Hegel remarked, the only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history.
The fighters were already in missile range, but precision and thoroughness were of the utmost importance today. The margin of error was thin and the penalty for exceeding it was potentially unthinkable. Targets locked. Weapons released.
The sirens ahead had already been blaring, though.
--
“I think the question remains – how could it not, inevitably we wish, we know there could have been a better way – why did this happen? Why would the junta, the generals and Hua, make another grab at Taiwan? Firstly, guessing about any of the PRC’s motives is just that, guessing. We don’t know what they actually said. I doubt even the Soviets really know what they were up to. But China was in crisis – its move to gain UN recognition had failed, the economic policies of the hardliners had failed, Deng and the reformers had failed. The Taiwan independence movement took up steam, but so did those who hoped to legitimately restore claim to mainland China. Taiwan was changing, and those on the east side of the strait who favored the status quo were simply left behind.”
--
McCain and the rest of the men in the room found a brief release as the kill confirmations came in from squadron after squadron. They’d destroyed every rocket capable of reaching Taiwan, and the USN now had free hand in the strait. Within minutes, Chinese striking power in the immediate theater would evaporate. Marines had already begun the retaking of Matsu.
Inland, though, not all was going as planned. At an airfield in southeastern China, not every aircraft at the base could be accounted for before the USAF shrouded it in smoke.
--
Every major alert system was on maximum, at least regionally in some cases. The guns of Quemoy thundered fair beyond the Straits, however. A furious Bulganin, informed that the American strategic bombers were not nuclear armed and not targeted at the USSR only after they entered Chinese airspace ordered a full military mobilization in Eastern Europe. Yet he made no statements as to what conditions would trigger Soviet military action against NATO. Rumors spread that maybe Bulganin was dead from a medical condition exacerbated by the crisis. That he was hunkering down.
Under curfew and sheltered in basements, revolt began to bubble again. Nobody knew it yet, but the physical and emotional claustrophobia and terror would not allow many to emerge, if they did, with much patience for the political isolation and control of Soviet occupied Europe.
“Well, the Republicans have had their goddamn majority, but I still need a green light. Can we get our thumbs out of our asses now?”
Captain John S. McCain III was not in a good mood, as seemed the usual for those under this command. The airmen of CVW-9 had seen little action during their deployment to the Strait, held back by political considerations as the Chinese pounded Quemoy and stormed Matsu. But no more. No sooner had McCain asked than the orders came.
He had rehearsed his men over the plan for days now. Satellite reconnaissance indicated a number of Chinese ballistic missiles – most likely with nuclear warheads – waiting for fuel on the western side of the Strait. More were aimed at Japan and South Korea, but those weren’t the target of the Enterprise or her CBG. Further inland, storage sites, bomber bases and other strategic targets of opportunity would face air force attacks. Even with the rekindling of the COMDEF-PRC partnership after Deng’s fall, many defense analysts predicted China would not be a much more difficult target than Syria or Egypt – certainly not as challenging as penetrating the USSR.
You had to hope the eggheads were correct, McCain thought, and watched as another ordnance AF-17 screeched off the Enterprise’s deck into the uncertain haze of dawn. He checked his watch. Somewhere in Washington men were biting their nails down to the quick, and a priority message was reaching Bulganin in some backwater bunker complex.
Further ahead, American fighters skimmed the surface of the waves, approaching the smoky, war torn coast of China. Even now shells still flew back and forth between Quemoy and the mainland, hundreds of thousands complementing the exchange twenty years’ ago. As Hegel remarked, the only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history.
The fighters were already in missile range, but precision and thoroughness were of the utmost importance today. The margin of error was thin and the penalty for exceeding it was potentially unthinkable. Targets locked. Weapons released.
The sirens ahead had already been blaring, though.
--
“I think the question remains – how could it not, inevitably we wish, we know there could have been a better way – why did this happen? Why would the junta, the generals and Hua, make another grab at Taiwan? Firstly, guessing about any of the PRC’s motives is just that, guessing. We don’t know what they actually said. I doubt even the Soviets really know what they were up to. But China was in crisis – its move to gain UN recognition had failed, the economic policies of the hardliners had failed, Deng and the reformers had failed. The Taiwan independence movement took up steam, but so did those who hoped to legitimately restore claim to mainland China. Taiwan was changing, and those on the east side of the strait who favored the status quo were simply left behind.”
--
McCain and the rest of the men in the room found a brief release as the kill confirmations came in from squadron after squadron. They’d destroyed every rocket capable of reaching Taiwan, and the USN now had free hand in the strait. Within minutes, Chinese striking power in the immediate theater would evaporate. Marines had already begun the retaking of Matsu.
Inland, though, not all was going as planned. At an airfield in southeastern China, not every aircraft at the base could be accounted for before the USAF shrouded it in smoke.
--
Every major alert system was on maximum, at least regionally in some cases. The guns of Quemoy thundered fair beyond the Straits, however. A furious Bulganin, informed that the American strategic bombers were not nuclear armed and not targeted at the USSR only after they entered Chinese airspace ordered a full military mobilization in Eastern Europe. Yet he made no statements as to what conditions would trigger Soviet military action against NATO. Rumors spread that maybe Bulganin was dead from a medical condition exacerbated by the crisis. That he was hunkering down.
Under curfew and sheltered in basements, revolt began to bubble again. Nobody knew it yet, but the physical and emotional claustrophobia and terror would not allow many to emerge, if they did, with much patience for the political isolation and control of Soviet occupied Europe.
Yeah, I've decided to make more of a point of having a good cast of OTL characters in this... If anyone wants me to do a 'Where Are They Now' I can whip one up pretty easily.
Wow, this is an pretty impressive TL, I must say after sitting down and fully reading through it a much darker but very realisitc Cold War. I am kinda interested on what are some of the whearabouts on some of OTL Political Leaders like the Kennedy Brothers, Shirley Chisholm, George Mcgovern, Jimmy Carter, Nixon, and others
First up, the Kennedy brothers...
JOHN KENNEDY returned to the Senate after his 1968 Presidential primary run, which was marred by allegations of corruption. However, he worked closely with the Rockefeller-Goldwater administration to support the American space program and worked across the aisle on some of his foreign policy initiatives. After serving as Henry Jackson’s Secretary of State, he retired from politics due to increasing complications from his Addison’s disease.
EDWARD KENNEDY, Representative and later Senator from Massachusetts, is marked by many as McGovern’s successor for leadership of the antiwar Democrats. Appalled by the lack of significant treaties on nuclear weapons that has marked most of the Cold War so far, Kennedy is a vociferous arms control advocate, but this is not to overlook his other major contributions to the Democrats on other pieces of legislation. He is a likely competitor for the 1980 Democratic Presidential nominee, and has found increasing national appeal with the setbacks to the Jackson Democrats and the Taiwan Strait Crisis.
ROBERT KENNEDY, unable to secure a seat in the New York Senate in 1964, instead became a civil rights activist and lawyer, gaining significant political acclaim and success. His illustrious career was culminated in his selection to be a Supreme Court Justice in 1976, towards the end of Henry Jackson’s administration.
JOHN KENNEDY returned to the Senate after his 1968 Presidential primary run, which was marred by allegations of corruption. However, he worked closely with the Rockefeller-Goldwater administration to support the American space program and worked across the aisle on some of his foreign policy initiatives. After serving as Henry Jackson’s Secretary of State, he retired from politics due to increasing complications from his Addison’s disease.
EDWARD KENNEDY, Representative and later Senator from Massachusetts, is marked by many as McGovern’s successor for leadership of the antiwar Democrats. Appalled by the lack of significant treaties on nuclear weapons that has marked most of the Cold War so far, Kennedy is a vociferous arms control advocate, but this is not to overlook his other major contributions to the Democrats on other pieces of legislation. He is a likely competitor for the 1980 Democratic Presidential nominee, and has found increasing national appeal with the setbacks to the Jackson Democrats and the Taiwan Strait Crisis.
ROBERT KENNEDY, unable to secure a seat in the New York Senate in 1964, instead became a civil rights activist and lawyer, gaining significant political acclaim and success. His illustrious career was culminated in his selection to be a Supreme Court Justice in 1976, towards the end of Henry Jackson’s administration.
Some more figures from the Western hemisphere.
JIMMY CARTER is serving in the US Senate, after finishing his term as Governor of Georgia. Many believe he is trying for a US Presidential run, as it seems impossible these days to lead the United States without any foreign policy or national security expertise. He will be watched in 1980.
FIDEL CASTRO was the Partido Orthodoxio Prime Minister of Cuba after the political reforms. From 1960 to 1971, he implemented a variety of reforms, initially with the help and guidance of the Stevenson administration. Though some of his leftist sympathies drew suspicion from Goldwater, Castro finished his term peacefully after the PO lost the election to liberals. While still an important figure in his party, he has effectively retired from politics and spends much of his time visiting his brother Raul, a successful businessman, in Miami to watch baseball games.
SHIRLEY CHISHOLM represents New York’s 12th District in the House as a Democrat. While she drew national attention during her 1972 Presidential campaign run, party divides on race and foreign policy have hurt her chances of advancing to a more powerful position. Nevertheless, she is an active campaigner for social justice and has done much to bring black votes to the Democrats.
CHE GUEVARA has been dead and buried in Peru since 1952 after a motorcycle accident.
BUDDY HOLLY remains a popular rock-and-roll artist, keeping pace with his many followers on both sides of the Atlantic. While inextricably linked with the sounds of the fifties, Holly’s maturation as an artist has been accompanied with stylistic changes. While certainly not as involved with the counterculture as many other artists, Holly’s later works have strayed into more political territory.
GEORGE MCGOVERN, Senator from South Dakota, is winding down his formal political career. After a strong run against Henry Jackson in 1972, McGovern has continued his strong opposition to American intervention abroad. The leading critic of the Iraq War, George has helped forge a strong noninterventionist wing of the Democrats that may yet outlast Scoop Jackson’s influence. While strongly with the left on most issues, McGovern was notable for leading Democratic support for Goldwater’s Earned-Income Tax Credit and has lately sided with Republicans on other economic issues like small-business regulation. McGovern was also one of the leading proponents of the Equal Rights Amendment.
RICHARD NIXON won the California Senate seat he so coveted in 1952. Though he made multiple runs for the Presidency and was the vice Presidential nominee in 1956, political gaffes and Republican disapproval of his communist scaremongering kept him from advancing much further on a national scale. In California, however, he did manage to secure the governorship in 1966, and won reelection in 1970. He then retired from politics, though he was a staunch supporter for Clint Eastwood in his 1978 run for Governor of California.
AUGUSTO PINOCHET is a Chilean war hero. Commander of Chile’s military forces during the Patagonian War, an assassination attempt by Argentinean provided one of the war’s most dramatic moments. Pinochet personally rescued a wounded civilian from the fires of the carbomb which nearly took his life. He is currently Defense Minister of the Chilean government, working closely with the United States to procure military aid for his country.
COLIN POWELL is a Brigadier General stateside, but a leading mind in modern warfare. Operating as an advisor in Iraq and then in frontline combat units in Iraq, Syria, Mahabad and North Iran, Powell is likely to rise further up the chain of command. He has attracted the personal attention of General, and then President, Westmoreland for his actions on and off the battlefield.
RONALD REAGAN, former Representative and now Democratic Senator from California, is one of the more conservative members of his party, at least discounting economics. While not quite as fiery as in his early political career, “Regulate-‘em Ron” has battled Goldwaterite Republicans for years. Nevertheless, he’s as hawkish as any Scoop Jackson Democrat. After JFK’s exit from the Senate, he’s come to take his place as the leading Democratic advocate of space militarization. There are some who would like him to take on Edward Kennedy for the Presidential nomination in 1980, but the shifting of the political tides and his age are working against him.
JIMMY CARTER is serving in the US Senate, after finishing his term as Governor of Georgia. Many believe he is trying for a US Presidential run, as it seems impossible these days to lead the United States without any foreign policy or national security expertise. He will be watched in 1980.
FIDEL CASTRO was the Partido Orthodoxio Prime Minister of Cuba after the political reforms. From 1960 to 1971, he implemented a variety of reforms, initially with the help and guidance of the Stevenson administration. Though some of his leftist sympathies drew suspicion from Goldwater, Castro finished his term peacefully after the PO lost the election to liberals. While still an important figure in his party, he has effectively retired from politics and spends much of his time visiting his brother Raul, a successful businessman, in Miami to watch baseball games.
SHIRLEY CHISHOLM represents New York’s 12th District in the House as a Democrat. While she drew national attention during her 1972 Presidential campaign run, party divides on race and foreign policy have hurt her chances of advancing to a more powerful position. Nevertheless, she is an active campaigner for social justice and has done much to bring black votes to the Democrats.
CHE GUEVARA has been dead and buried in Peru since 1952 after a motorcycle accident.
BUDDY HOLLY remains a popular rock-and-roll artist, keeping pace with his many followers on both sides of the Atlantic. While inextricably linked with the sounds of the fifties, Holly’s maturation as an artist has been accompanied with stylistic changes. While certainly not as involved with the counterculture as many other artists, Holly’s later works have strayed into more political territory.
GEORGE MCGOVERN, Senator from South Dakota, is winding down his formal political career. After a strong run against Henry Jackson in 1972, McGovern has continued his strong opposition to American intervention abroad. The leading critic of the Iraq War, George has helped forge a strong noninterventionist wing of the Democrats that may yet outlast Scoop Jackson’s influence. While strongly with the left on most issues, McGovern was notable for leading Democratic support for Goldwater’s Earned-Income Tax Credit and has lately sided with Republicans on other economic issues like small-business regulation. McGovern was also one of the leading proponents of the Equal Rights Amendment.
RICHARD NIXON won the California Senate seat he so coveted in 1952. Though he made multiple runs for the Presidency and was the vice Presidential nominee in 1956, political gaffes and Republican disapproval of his communist scaremongering kept him from advancing much further on a national scale. In California, however, he did manage to secure the governorship in 1966, and won reelection in 1970. He then retired from politics, though he was a staunch supporter for Clint Eastwood in his 1978 run for Governor of California.
AUGUSTO PINOCHET is a Chilean war hero. Commander of Chile’s military forces during the Patagonian War, an assassination attempt by Argentinean provided one of the war’s most dramatic moments. Pinochet personally rescued a wounded civilian from the fires of the carbomb which nearly took his life. He is currently Defense Minister of the Chilean government, working closely with the United States to procure military aid for his country.
COLIN POWELL is a Brigadier General stateside, but a leading mind in modern warfare. Operating as an advisor in Iraq and then in frontline combat units in Iraq, Syria, Mahabad and North Iran, Powell is likely to rise further up the chain of command. He has attracted the personal attention of General, and then President, Westmoreland for his actions on and off the battlefield.
RONALD REAGAN, former Representative and now Democratic Senator from California, is one of the more conservative members of his party, at least discounting economics. While not quite as fiery as in his early political career, “Regulate-‘em Ron” has battled Goldwaterite Republicans for years. Nevertheless, he’s as hawkish as any Scoop Jackson Democrat. After JFK’s exit from the Senate, he’s come to take his place as the leading Democratic advocate of space militarization. There are some who would like him to take on Edward Kennedy for the Presidential nomination in 1980, but the shifting of the political tides and his age are working against him.
Very nice. I espeically like the moderate success enjoyed by the Kennedy brothers...as opposed to meteoric success and assassination. JFK as Sec State is very interesting indeed. RFK as SC Justice also very unique as is EMK the front-runner for the Democratic Nomination in 1980.
Regulate 'Em Ron is Fantastic.
Regulate 'Em Ron is Fantastic.
1976-1980: The China Crisis, Europe, and the Wider World
Two unaccounted for Chinese bombers were the inevitable flaw in Westmoreland’s plan. One was intercepted over the East China Sea and shot down by F-14 interceptors without incident. The other, flying low, released some of its payload near Quemoy island before being shot out of the sky by the USAF. The 80kt bomb exploded on the shore facing the mainland side, killing 8,000 ROC soldiers instantly. It was the first time a nuclear device had been used in anger since Nagasaki. The pressure on Westmoreland to respond was overwhelming – China had to “lose,” or at least be “checked.” Accordingly, he began perhaps the most concentrated bombing campaign in American history – round the clock conventional bombing of Chinese military infrastructure and deployments lasted until January of 1979, when it became clear there was no longer a People’s Republic of China to bomb – in the strict sense.
The US had made every effort to avoid destroying civilian targets – the bombing campaign was aimed at destroying China’s immediate military capability. What the United States had not fully accounted for was the importance of the PRC military in maintaining order in the country. The CCP had no effective reserves to call upon when disorder and protests grew in the closing months of 1978, and instead had to rely upon the fanatical Red Guards, whose excesses only further encouraged revolutionary movements. In the south, a vaguely pro-democratic movement emerged, clashing with the Red Guards and PLA remnants. While the Chinese government could still command enormous amounts of manpower, its capability to mobilize and supply them was weak. In Tibet, a new round of independence protests sprung up while the USSR eyed the restless Xinjiang province. Westmoreland was reluctant to openly deploy ground forces anywhere in China, but the CIA nevertheless began heavy operations in the southern and eastern regions. Bulganin, for his part, wanted to ensure the entire country would not go over to Western hands, not wanting any further encirclement of the USSR. Fighting would continue to rage through the end of 1979, but it became increasingly clear that some kind of partition would occur under the terms of a superpower agreement.
The Chinese Civil War also put considerable strain on Euro-American relations. Portugal and the United Kingdom had to deploy military forces to their respective holdings in the area to hold back tides of refugees, angering their publics. Additionally, European countries felt the US lacked an appreciation for the problems of communism in Europe – America, it seemed, no longer felt the Iron Curtain to be the most important theater of confrontation between West and East. While this view had some support – after all, existing conflicts hold more importance than hypothetical ones – the elections from 1979 to 1980 all reflected some degree of backlash against the United States. The long-running string of British Conservative governments ended in 1979 with the victory of Michael Foot’s Labour government, promising action on a stagnating economy and a reduction in British overseas military commitments – British troops began withdrawals from residual Baghdad Pact commitments in South Iran, the broader Persian Gulf, and other locations, forcing the US to shoulder more of the burden. Economically, Foot’s government locked in promises it could no longer afford to keep to the trades unions and public servants – in order to pull the economy out of recession, a wage-price spiral formed under Foot’s government that exploded the UK budget deficit to greater and greater proportions. This was widely held as the final nail in the coffin of Euro-British integration. The EEC now had clear evidence of fiscal irresponsibility and nationalist economic intervention to warrant denying Britain a place in the broader European economy.
While Britain’s political shift had a distinctly leftist, anti-militarist tone, it was hardly a fair indicator of elections to come. Francois Mitterrand’s 1974 victory had brought France some short-term economic stability, but it was likely a more rightist and militarist candidate would present themselves in 1981. In Germany in 1976, Helmut Kohl had begun his conservative government. While Kohl was still very supportive of the United States, the 1978 crisis lead him to begin the German nuclear program, in the spirit of the past CDU leader Adenauer. Germany’s concerns over the modernized tactical nuclear arsenals of the French and Soviets, while leftist governments dismantled strategic deterrence systems (and indeed strategic deterrence systems proved increasingly ineffectual in the Middle East and China) resulted in a program for an independent German nuclear deterrent. While France was angry, the US tacitly accepted Germany’s decision, hoping to reduce some of its own military commitments in Europe for other theaters. Increasingly paranoid about Europe’s direction, Switzerland’s AAA finalized its own nuclear program, having long suspected Germany would attempt the same.
In Eastern Europe, December brought mass uprisings in Eastern Germany and Poland. Surprisingly to some, it was the local governments of these states, rather than the USSR troops, which were most eager to put down resistance. For decades, Eastern European governments had bought into Molotov and Bulganin’s Stalinist system – securing independence would likely encourage democratization, and that would mean the end of their rule.
Japan amended its Constitution to allow military action in support of its allies in 1979, though it stopped short of pursuing its own nuclear weaponry. Nevertheless, a significant military buildup, fueled by Japan’s booming exports, would help Japan secure itself for the dark decades ahead. South Korea continued to struggle with democratization, but many were optimistic – with the Soviet Union never endeared to the DPRK and the PRC no longer capable of supporting it, hopes of reunification seemed within reach. The question, of course, was how to do it without giving Asia another war.
The fall of China committed the USSR to its partnership with India, resulting in significant military cooperation and the basing of Soviet forces in the latter half of the 1970s. The Indian Ocean was no longer an uncontested Western domain, and consequently the United States stepped up its support of Thailand and Pakistan. An open question was what to do with the Burmese socialist junta. Formerly a client of the PRC as a balancer against India, there were now concerns of its new position. India, increasingly paranoid about the ambitions of its neighbors and wary of secret talks between the US and Burma’s government, began preparing for a pre-emptive strike on the Burmese government, mobilizing soldiers to the Burmese border. As this occurred, the paranoid Burmese government blamed India for a variety of ethnically motivated uprisings in 1979. By 1980, exchanges of gunfire had become common across the border. It seemed only a matter of time before war broke out there. Meanwhile, India pondered taking advantage of lawlessness in China to take the areas it had lost during the war, despite the fact that the USSR had mediated that same dispute in the 1960s.
In Africa, the end of supply flows to Maoist insurgencies created ‘growth opportunities’ for the USSR’s African policy. Military equipment flowed in from the USSR and revolutionary movements now worked towards pro-Soviet ends. In Libya, the Jamahiriya waged a successful war of aggression against Chad and the Islamic Legion marched throughout the Sahel in hopes of creating the “Islamic Sahel state.” Algerian political destabilization brought about similar violence there. In response, France deployed troops to Francophone countries (though not Algeria itself) beginning in 1974, though not necessarily in frontline combat roles. Elsewhere in Africa, the Ambazonian region of Cameroon revolted, as Tuareg revolts sprung up in the Sahel. A resurgence in mercenary movements appeared due to the uptake in demand, drawing out the conflicts. Apartheid South Africa continued combat operations in Angola with some success, though the Soviets were likely to back another push to force the RSA back to Namibia. The South Africans also accelerated the pace of their nuclear program, and made secret appeals to the US about cooperating against communism, especially now that India had essentially joined COMDEF.
Back in the United States, the gears began turning for the 1980 elections. Westmoreland would likely face an energized Democratic party. Fears of economic trouble in the US had not materialized thanks mainly to the diligence of the Federal Reserve, but many felt 1980 could see the end of Westmoreland’s Presidency. Democratic contenders included Edward Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and a variety of others. Even if the Democrats did not win the Presidency, the nomination, it seemed, would be transformative in itself.
Two unaccounted for Chinese bombers were the inevitable flaw in Westmoreland’s plan. One was intercepted over the East China Sea and shot down by F-14 interceptors without incident. The other, flying low, released some of its payload near Quemoy island before being shot out of the sky by the USAF. The 80kt bomb exploded on the shore facing the mainland side, killing 8,000 ROC soldiers instantly. It was the first time a nuclear device had been used in anger since Nagasaki. The pressure on Westmoreland to respond was overwhelming – China had to “lose,” or at least be “checked.” Accordingly, he began perhaps the most concentrated bombing campaign in American history – round the clock conventional bombing of Chinese military infrastructure and deployments lasted until January of 1979, when it became clear there was no longer a People’s Republic of China to bomb – in the strict sense.
The US had made every effort to avoid destroying civilian targets – the bombing campaign was aimed at destroying China’s immediate military capability. What the United States had not fully accounted for was the importance of the PRC military in maintaining order in the country. The CCP had no effective reserves to call upon when disorder and protests grew in the closing months of 1978, and instead had to rely upon the fanatical Red Guards, whose excesses only further encouraged revolutionary movements. In the south, a vaguely pro-democratic movement emerged, clashing with the Red Guards and PLA remnants. While the Chinese government could still command enormous amounts of manpower, its capability to mobilize and supply them was weak. In Tibet, a new round of independence protests sprung up while the USSR eyed the restless Xinjiang province. Westmoreland was reluctant to openly deploy ground forces anywhere in China, but the CIA nevertheless began heavy operations in the southern and eastern regions. Bulganin, for his part, wanted to ensure the entire country would not go over to Western hands, not wanting any further encirclement of the USSR. Fighting would continue to rage through the end of 1979, but it became increasingly clear that some kind of partition would occur under the terms of a superpower agreement.
The Chinese Civil War also put considerable strain on Euro-American relations. Portugal and the United Kingdom had to deploy military forces to their respective holdings in the area to hold back tides of refugees, angering their publics. Additionally, European countries felt the US lacked an appreciation for the problems of communism in Europe – America, it seemed, no longer felt the Iron Curtain to be the most important theater of confrontation between West and East. While this view had some support – after all, existing conflicts hold more importance than hypothetical ones – the elections from 1979 to 1980 all reflected some degree of backlash against the United States. The long-running string of British Conservative governments ended in 1979 with the victory of Michael Foot’s Labour government, promising action on a stagnating economy and a reduction in British overseas military commitments – British troops began withdrawals from residual Baghdad Pact commitments in South Iran, the broader Persian Gulf, and other locations, forcing the US to shoulder more of the burden. Economically, Foot’s government locked in promises it could no longer afford to keep to the trades unions and public servants – in order to pull the economy out of recession, a wage-price spiral formed under Foot’s government that exploded the UK budget deficit to greater and greater proportions. This was widely held as the final nail in the coffin of Euro-British integration. The EEC now had clear evidence of fiscal irresponsibility and nationalist economic intervention to warrant denying Britain a place in the broader European economy.
While Britain’s political shift had a distinctly leftist, anti-militarist tone, it was hardly a fair indicator of elections to come. Francois Mitterrand’s 1974 victory had brought France some short-term economic stability, but it was likely a more rightist and militarist candidate would present themselves in 1981. In Germany in 1976, Helmut Kohl had begun his conservative government. While Kohl was still very supportive of the United States, the 1978 crisis lead him to begin the German nuclear program, in the spirit of the past CDU leader Adenauer. Germany’s concerns over the modernized tactical nuclear arsenals of the French and Soviets, while leftist governments dismantled strategic deterrence systems (and indeed strategic deterrence systems proved increasingly ineffectual in the Middle East and China) resulted in a program for an independent German nuclear deterrent. While France was angry, the US tacitly accepted Germany’s decision, hoping to reduce some of its own military commitments in Europe for other theaters. Increasingly paranoid about Europe’s direction, Switzerland’s AAA finalized its own nuclear program, having long suspected Germany would attempt the same.
In Eastern Europe, December brought mass uprisings in Eastern Germany and Poland. Surprisingly to some, it was the local governments of these states, rather than the USSR troops, which were most eager to put down resistance. For decades, Eastern European governments had bought into Molotov and Bulganin’s Stalinist system – securing independence would likely encourage democratization, and that would mean the end of their rule.
Japan amended its Constitution to allow military action in support of its allies in 1979, though it stopped short of pursuing its own nuclear weaponry. Nevertheless, a significant military buildup, fueled by Japan’s booming exports, would help Japan secure itself for the dark decades ahead. South Korea continued to struggle with democratization, but many were optimistic – with the Soviet Union never endeared to the DPRK and the PRC no longer capable of supporting it, hopes of reunification seemed within reach. The question, of course, was how to do it without giving Asia another war.
The fall of China committed the USSR to its partnership with India, resulting in significant military cooperation and the basing of Soviet forces in the latter half of the 1970s. The Indian Ocean was no longer an uncontested Western domain, and consequently the United States stepped up its support of Thailand and Pakistan. An open question was what to do with the Burmese socialist junta. Formerly a client of the PRC as a balancer against India, there were now concerns of its new position. India, increasingly paranoid about the ambitions of its neighbors and wary of secret talks between the US and Burma’s government, began preparing for a pre-emptive strike on the Burmese government, mobilizing soldiers to the Burmese border. As this occurred, the paranoid Burmese government blamed India for a variety of ethnically motivated uprisings in 1979. By 1980, exchanges of gunfire had become common across the border. It seemed only a matter of time before war broke out there. Meanwhile, India pondered taking advantage of lawlessness in China to take the areas it had lost during the war, despite the fact that the USSR had mediated that same dispute in the 1960s.
In Africa, the end of supply flows to Maoist insurgencies created ‘growth opportunities’ for the USSR’s African policy. Military equipment flowed in from the USSR and revolutionary movements now worked towards pro-Soviet ends. In Libya, the Jamahiriya waged a successful war of aggression against Chad and the Islamic Legion marched throughout the Sahel in hopes of creating the “Islamic Sahel state.” Algerian political destabilization brought about similar violence there. In response, France deployed troops to Francophone countries (though not Algeria itself) beginning in 1974, though not necessarily in frontline combat roles. Elsewhere in Africa, the Ambazonian region of Cameroon revolted, as Tuareg revolts sprung up in the Sahel. A resurgence in mercenary movements appeared due to the uptake in demand, drawing out the conflicts. Apartheid South Africa continued combat operations in Angola with some success, though the Soviets were likely to back another push to force the RSA back to Namibia. The South Africans also accelerated the pace of their nuclear program, and made secret appeals to the US about cooperating against communism, especially now that India had essentially joined COMDEF.
Back in the United States, the gears began turning for the 1980 elections. Westmoreland would likely face an energized Democratic party. Fears of economic trouble in the US had not materialized thanks mainly to the diligence of the Federal Reserve, but many felt 1980 could see the end of Westmoreland’s Presidency. Democratic contenders included Edward Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and a variety of others. Even if the Democrats did not win the Presidency, the nomination, it seemed, would be transformative in itself.
Minor quibble: Shouldn't this be the 2nd Chinese Civil War (at least in 20th Century)? Westmoreland and the USAF really have the explosive force to bomb the PRC out of extistence?...wow. So much for a One China Policy. Ironic that Portugal and the UK should resent the actions of the US, since the 2nd Civil War will probably let both countries retain Hong Kong and Macao for the foreseable future. I imagine there's some kind of peace movement in the USA: the bombing of China does seem to have been something of a human rights disaster.
Also...a Swiss bomb. What a gem!
I suspose that the Stevenson doctrine has held in South America...but weren't there some troubles in Argentina? (I may be mixing up my Dewey TLs, though). The Western Hemisphere should present a strong counterpoint of stability to Europe, Asia, and Africa (not to mention the Middle East). Is Mexico still a one-party state under the PRI? How is Canada fairing? Has the silent revolution taken place and BQ formed? I ask because I could see moves around a wider NAFTA / Pan-American Trade Union if the rest of the world seems to be falling apart. Though perhaps the USA will be more interested in restoring some semblance of European unity.
Also...a Swiss bomb. What a gem!
I suspose that the Stevenson doctrine has held in South America...but weren't there some troubles in Argentina? (I may be mixing up my Dewey TLs, though). The Western Hemisphere should present a strong counterpoint of stability to Europe, Asia, and Africa (not to mention the Middle East). Is Mexico still a one-party state under the PRI? How is Canada fairing? Has the silent revolution taken place and BQ formed? I ask because I could see moves around a wider NAFTA / Pan-American Trade Union if the rest of the world seems to be falling apart. Though perhaps the USA will be more interested in restoring some semblance of European unity.
Good Installment Blochead...I 2 see the presidency slipping away from Westmoreland's grib. I loved the updates on OTL political figures...I am assuming that in TTL, there was no Chappaquidick incident with EMK? How might J.F.K.'s marriage with Jackie turn out with more or less stories coming out about his filanderings with women in the 70's? Also where are some of the more Prominent Black leaders in TTL like MLK, Malcolm X, Thurgood Marshall, Edward Brooke, Barbara Jordan,Andrew Young, Jesse Jackson and others in TTL?
Last edited:
Yes, it probably should be the second.
And really, Westmoreland hasn't bombed the PRC out of existence - it still retains virtually uncontested control over 3/5ths of the country, the other two being Tibet and part of Southern China. Westmoreland certainly incapacitated its military, however, and it cannot be everywhere at once - but it is likely the rebellions will fail without further external support.
Indeed it isironic, but the US did not consult either country beforehand so it's as much an issue of pride as of strategic interest.
Disaster is a good word. While it isn't quite as horrible as a "total war" campaign, destroying PLA infrastructure is also destroying a lot of the infrastructure civilians are reliant on - after so many power struggles and multiple purges of CCP officials, destroying any element of the government is going to severely worsen the welfare of the people. The Peace movement really is taking off, it's been waiting since Iraq for something big enough to get it rolling - this TL is in many ways a long 1960s and 1970s.
While I was researching about continental European nuclear programs I found out Switzerland intended to build them if Germany ever got them, so they would be able to maintain defensibility between multiple nuclear powers.
No, you're correct. In defense of the CIA, though, the coup was already in motion when the United States stepped in. The US is fearful that allowing Latin American conflict to proceed unchecked will breed communism and nationalism.
Yes, the US is likely to come out with much better Latin American relations. Europe is not so grim as it appears, but certainly not as miraculous. You're correct the US is more concerned about rebuilding bridges there, though - that will essentially be the main foreign policy gambit of the American left and moderate right.
Mexico is still under the PRI and has not fared too differently, Canada I'll go into separately, as there's a bit of backstory to fill in due to the alternate course of French history.
Yeah, Westmoreland is in quite a bit of trouble. It is tough to run on national security as your main (some would say only) credential, and then see so many reverses and crises.
Nope, he manages to avoid that although he still has a bit of a reputation. Nothing as bad as Chappaquidick, though.
It's a bit strained, but essentially he's trying to keep it under the table for Ted's sake. While RFK is a Supreme Court Justice and JFK hasn't done too badly either, the family is rather anxious to see one of the brothers take the Presidency.
I'm going to cover that more thoroughly in the post about social unrest regarding the conflict in China. However given the different political climate with regards to civil rights (and America's interactions with Islam), there will be some differences from OTL to be sure.
The Election of 1980
“… the time has come for a foreign policy of diplomatic confrontation and not military catastrophe. The first nuclear exchange of the Cold War fell on Quemoy, but what of the next? We hold the thunder of cannon neither out of weakness nor deference, but in strength and conviction that while our cause is just, we need not kill and die as first measure but instead as a last resort.”
-Edward Kennedy, 1980 DNC acceptance speech
Kennedy-Carter was at once an inevitability and an impossibility. The time was ripe for liberalism – economic growth had slowed, the power of the Southern conservatives in the Democratic and American parties was on the wane, and Americans had watched in revulsion the conduct of the Westmoreland administration in China. At the same time, it had been ages since a dovish candidate had performed well in a Presidential election. Jacksonian Democrats scoffed at Kennedy’s bold leftism.
But Kennedy won. While the Republicans maintained control of Congress and Kennedy technically only won on a plurality of the popular vote, he refused to short himself political legitimacy. Kennedy supporters had promised his election would have immediate ramifications in and of itself, for better or for worse.
The stock market slumped. Kennedy had promised government relief for the middle and lower classes, to be financed by taxes on the rich and corporations. While it was hardly a disaster, there was growing unease in American boardrooms as it seemed years of business-friendly policy were nearing their termination.
Diplomatically, prospects were more complicated. Kennedy, in the great liberal tradition, had appealed to Atlanticism. On the whole, European countries were optimistic on his prospects. After all, he opposed Westmoreland’s plan to free up American manpower by deploying more battlefield nuclear weapons to Europe. He seemed likely to pursue real negotiations with the USSR on nuclear arms, something almost unheard of. There were some small sticking points, of course – for Britons, his supposed sympathies for the IRA. For the Germans, his plans to include nuclear proliferation as part of his talks with the USSR.
For some though, Kennedy’s election seemed to be a sign of American weakness. Once again, the United States, as it had after the Iranian Crisis, had rejected a hawkish Presidential candidate. Bulganin had felt the opportunity presented then was underutilized. Such was the general sentiment among hardline communists. COMDEF tacitly resolved that the strategic situation of 1980 would be exploited. This trend did not evade everyone in the Kennedy administration, but it would take a backseat to negotiations. Of course the USSR was not going to act out of saintliness. But Kennedy believed his administration possessed a diplomatic finesse long unknown to American politics and perhaps forgotten. Ted Kennedy was a man with something to prove – in his consultations with the ailing John, who had first attempted what Ted accomplished, he vowed to give the Kennedy family its proper place in history.
“… the time has come for a foreign policy of diplomatic confrontation and not military catastrophe. The first nuclear exchange of the Cold War fell on Quemoy, but what of the next? We hold the thunder of cannon neither out of weakness nor deference, but in strength and conviction that while our cause is just, we need not kill and die as first measure but instead as a last resort.”
-Edward Kennedy, 1980 DNC acceptance speech
Kennedy-Carter was at once an inevitability and an impossibility. The time was ripe for liberalism – economic growth had slowed, the power of the Southern conservatives in the Democratic and American parties was on the wane, and Americans had watched in revulsion the conduct of the Westmoreland administration in China. At the same time, it had been ages since a dovish candidate had performed well in a Presidential election. Jacksonian Democrats scoffed at Kennedy’s bold leftism.
But Kennedy won. While the Republicans maintained control of Congress and Kennedy technically only won on a plurality of the popular vote, he refused to short himself political legitimacy. Kennedy supporters had promised his election would have immediate ramifications in and of itself, for better or for worse.
The stock market slumped. Kennedy had promised government relief for the middle and lower classes, to be financed by taxes on the rich and corporations. While it was hardly a disaster, there was growing unease in American boardrooms as it seemed years of business-friendly policy were nearing their termination.
Diplomatically, prospects were more complicated. Kennedy, in the great liberal tradition, had appealed to Atlanticism. On the whole, European countries were optimistic on his prospects. After all, he opposed Westmoreland’s plan to free up American manpower by deploying more battlefield nuclear weapons to Europe. He seemed likely to pursue real negotiations with the USSR on nuclear arms, something almost unheard of. There were some small sticking points, of course – for Britons, his supposed sympathies for the IRA. For the Germans, his plans to include nuclear proliferation as part of his talks with the USSR.
For some though, Kennedy’s election seemed to be a sign of American weakness. Once again, the United States, as it had after the Iranian Crisis, had rejected a hawkish Presidential candidate. Bulganin had felt the opportunity presented then was underutilized. Such was the general sentiment among hardline communists. COMDEF tacitly resolved that the strategic situation of 1980 would be exploited. This trend did not evade everyone in the Kennedy administration, but it would take a backseat to negotiations. Of course the USSR was not going to act out of saintliness. But Kennedy believed his administration possessed a diplomatic finesse long unknown to American politics and perhaps forgotten. Ted Kennedy was a man with something to prove – in his consultations with the ailing John, who had first attempted what Ted accomplished, he vowed to give the Kennedy family its proper place in history.
Very interesting. So, EMK is the first Kennedy to take the White House, though RFK is a Justice of the SCOTUS.
You know, in some ways, you could compare negotiations between EMK and Bulganin to those between Gorbachev and Reagan, except the hard-line / soft-line reputations are reversed. I doubt EMK's domestic programs will have the effect of perestroika -- the US is more resilient than that -- but US weakness may give Bulganin the chance to hunker down and preserve the Soviet system.
I'm interested to see if you let EMK's efforts succeed and if so how. Could be quite Pyrrhic. I could see some harshly worded editorials from former Senator Nixon in the LA Times.
You know, in some ways, you could compare negotiations between EMK and Bulganin to those between Gorbachev and Reagan, except the hard-line / soft-line reputations are reversed. I doubt EMK's domestic programs will have the effect of perestroika -- the US is more resilient than that -- but US weakness may give Bulganin the chance to hunker down and preserve the Soviet system.
I'm interested to see if you let EMK's efforts succeed and if so how. Could be quite Pyrrhic. I could see some harshly worded editorials from former Senator Nixon in the LA Times.