In a scenario whereas the Soviet Union occupies and formally annexes Xinjiang/East Turkestan/Uyghurstan after WW2, and also one where China is politically divided between a communist, CCP-controlled north and a Kuomintang-controlled south (to ensure that neither of the two Chinas can properly object to peripheral regions getting annexed), how differently would the problems of Tibet and the partition of Kashmir play out?
Would the Soviets, like OTL China, get a slice of the Kashmiri pie in the form of Aksai Chin? If so, then how does this affect Indo-Soviet relations?
And Tibet? What sort of policy would the Soviets use in regards to the Dalai Lama's theocratic regime? Would Soviet authorities turn the other cheek to Tibetan communists hiding in southern Xinjiang? And, again, how would India react depending on what course of action the Soviet Union chooses involving Tibet? If the Soviets decide to be aggressive towards Tibet, could they end up supporting India's claim to Arunachal Pradesh to keep them sweet?
 
because this would mean a land border with India I can see an Indian civil funded war by Stalin to weaken a possible competitor.
 
OTL the PRC rapidly invaded Tibet from the east, moving from Sichuan and Xikang into Tibet. I think the ROC would try to do the same thing. The only reason I think they might not do this is fear that the communists might take advantage of the situation.
 
OTL the PRC rapidly invaded Tibet from the east, moving from Sichuan and Xikang into Tibet. I think the ROC would try to do the same thing. The only reason I think they might not do this is fear that the communists might take advantage of the situation.
I doubt that would happen because it would lead to ROC having a land border with the USSR which would complicate things heavily.
 
because this would mean a land border with India I can see an Indian civil funded war by Stalin to weaken a possible competitor.
Well, if Indo-Soviet relations are indeed this sour, i could see the Soviets supporting a *Naxalite insurgency in Indian territory, helped by the fact that the Maoists are less powerful ITTL, and, thus, more aligned with Soviet interests.
 
Well, if Indo-Soviet relations are indeed this sour, i could see the Soviets supporting a *Naxalite insurgency in Indian territory, helped by the fact that the Maoists are less powerful ITTL, and, thus, more aligned with Soviet interests.
Or a Soviet-aligned Pakistan, for that matter, assuming that India and Pakistan still have their dispute over Kashmir.
 
In a scenario whereas the Soviet Union occupies and formally annexes Xinjiang/East Turkestan/Uyghurstan after WW2, and also one where China is politically divided between a communist, CCP-controlled north and a Kuomintang-controlled south (to ensure that neither of the two Chinas can properly object to peripheral regions getting annexed), how differently would the problems of Tibet and the partition of Kashmir play out?

Kashmir wouldn't be too much of an issue for the USSR, as they'd be more focused on getting Xinjiang integrated into the USSR after annexation. In which case, in typical Stalinist style, Синьцзян (Sińczän/Sin’tszyan) would be due for some slicing and dicing. For example, Northern Синьцзян, for example, could be incorporated into the Kazakh SSR wholescale - or, if Mongolia joins the USSR or if Mongolia claims a stake, than Mongolia could get Eastern Синьцзян/the Turpan Depression. And that would only be the beginning - even without Mongolia, it could be possible to extend the boundaries of the Kazakh, Kyrgyz, and Tajik SSRs into Синьцзян, leaving the remainder of the Tarim Basin as its own Uyghur SSR, with or without the Синьцзян name.

Would the Soviets, like OTL China, get a slice of the Kashmiri pie in the form of Aksai Chin? If so, then how does this affect Indo-Soviet relations?

The Kremlin would not get Aksai Chin; Aksai Chin would remain disputed territory between India and Pakistan. All that would matter to the Soviet Union as far as Kashmir is concerned is that the conflict does not spill over the border.

And Tibet? What sort of policy would the Soviets use in regards to the Dalai Lama's theocratic regime? Would Soviet authorities turn the other cheek to Tibetan communists hiding in southern Xinjiang? And, again, how would India react depending on what course of action the Soviet Union chooses involving Tibet? If the Soviets decide to be aggressive towards Tibet, could they end up supporting India's claim to Arunachal Pradesh to keep them sweet?

Most likely, Tibet would be Finlandized as a neutral buffer between itself, China, and South Asia. Even more so due to the basically murky actual status of Tibet itself, which in this case the USSR could use it to its advantage by basically allowing Tibet to remain de facto independent with its own system as long as it does not antagonize the Kremlin too much.
 
Top