HALF PAST NOON: Ronald Reagan and the rise of the American Conservative Party

Through a long series of shenanigans, the right wing in the US don't like Israel.
If I remember correctly, the US turned its back on Israel due to the influence of Secretary of State Jeane Kirkpatrick, and US anger towards Israel was solidified when it intervened in the last stage of the Egyptian-Libyan war to steal victory from the Egyptians. Is that the main reason why the US has such an adversarial policy towards Israel?
 
If I remember correctly, the US turned its back on Israel due to the influence of Secretary of State Jeane Kirkpatrick, and US anger towards Israel was solidified when it intervened in the last stage of the Egyptian-Libyan war to steal victory from the Egyptians. Is that the main reason why the US has such an adversarial policy towards Israel?
Well it's that, and the US being close friends with Islamists, the whole Triangle intelligence network, and the general anger between the two countries. Israel says the US basically just shoved her out the door, the US says that Israel forced its way out. It's a kinda ugly breakup but neither has really taken the other to task yet because they had other things to do.

The average person in the Conservative Party really does typically dislike Israel but the political class typically shies away from it. The political class really hasn't caught up with the electorate on the issue, iirc I mentioned Myerson as being firmly Pro-Israel for example. Hammond and Leland (you'll see in the next post) were not really interested in getting into a diplomatic quagmire in the Middle East so they both avoid doing anything wild. Libya of course being something of an exception.

There's also a few more incidents that occur that are covered in the next post that add even more fuel onto the proverbial fire. The story between the two powers isn't over though, there's still some who want to smack the other around and there's some who want to come to an understanding in the region. It's a saga that continues into Part II.
 
40 - Part 38: Folding the wings of an Eagle
Part 38: Folding the wings of an Eagle

One of Mickey Leland's most important contributions to American history, much more beyond his economic policies was his foreign policy. Coming into his presidential term, Leland was presented with a new opportunity. For the first time in American history America almost totally lacked rivals and had no real exterior threats. The Soviets and her allies were imploding, the Chinese were having elections and there was chatter of unification with Taiwan, the Koreas were just Korea now. Who was left that could even hope to stand before America? America was a world power and the closet runners up were on board as America's allies. Had such an incredible victory been won before? Certainly not on the world stage. The year was 1997 and America was the sole superpower.

Leland took this as an opportunity to change things. For decades now, American foreign policy had been dictated by outside events. He understood the internal logic of intervening in foreign nations, even if he disagreed with it. But with the Soviets on their death bed it was clear that now, now America could pull back from world affairs. Not totally, no Leland was not interested in isolationism – but it meant he could free up money in the budget. For the first time in a long time Leland could take the American military-industrial complex to task, the intelligence agencies too. He had the political capital. All that money, all that those resources, they all could be devoted elsewhere. To better things, to economic recovery. Leland had a mandate to rule, that much was true and he was determined to make the best of it.

The first thing Leland did was bring forward an audit of the DoD, CIA, FBI and several other choice agencies. Major cuts to programs that weren't essential were ordered. Bases in non-essential locations shut down. The bases in Okinawa and South Korea (new northern bases were established) were the first to close down. Several less than savory groups and programs in the CIA and FBI went up in (very much literal, in the case of most files) smoke and proof of their existence became unrecoverable. Leland wanted to go after them but they didn't get anywhere beyond grumbles. There were some things America needn't know, at least that's what the spooks in the CIA said. This was of course controversial although Paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan gave support for America's change of policy on the world change.

A great bundle of cash was freed up which could go towards important recovery policies. In this sense, the audit was a victory on the domestic front more than on the foreign front. Leland could not realistically raise taxes, lest he want to risk the ire of taxpayers. For the first time in a long time, American foreign policy was fully focused on multilaterialism and human rights. Leland got his win at home but abroad, perhaps not. This victory in budgetary matters freed up important monies that he later used in key parts of the American Dream Deal.

The conflict in the Balkans and the repression in East Germany and Romania mixed with Leland's lack of action on both accounts did little to engender good feelings towards his lack to intervention in Europe. This of course led to people realizing that America had to involve herself in world affairs. The world had long since become America's neighbor and America could not ignore her. How America should approach world affairs became a growing debate on the left and right, however the defined schools of thought only took root after 2000.

The Balkans were, as per usual, not a place of much stability. With the death of the autocrat Tito in 1980, Yugoslavia was on a path towards collapse. The state survived on an uneasy ethnic balancing act and with Tito gone nothing could prevent Yugoslavia's unequal ethnic power sharing from leading towards Civil War. Slovenia, and Croatia left Yugoslavia with Bosnia following not soon after. The whole of the former Yugoslavia was engulfed in an ugly ethnic violence that led to many innocents being killed. Leland had little interest in intervening in a unilateral fashion (or at all, as he was afraid of the response from the Conservatives) and instead passed the buck to the UN. The UN tried their best but without firm American support the UN intervention was largely toothless. This of course garnered a great deal of criticism and calls for a humanitarian intervention in the conflict increased to save the Bosnian Muslims at the very least and the intervention under Leland did go forward but with only an air based campaign to damage the ability for Serbia to make war rather than win the conflict for any one side outright. In the end the UN and the other European powers would step up.

300px-Evstafiev-sarajevo-building-burns.jpg

Sarajevo, 1997

Bulgaria had a similar but much more muted ethnic conflict. With the forced return of Todor Zhivkov to power, the situation between the Bulgarian majority and the Turkish minority came to a boiling point. Zhivkov had previously engaged in what effectively amounted to an ethnic cleansing campaign set on wiping out muslim cultures by way of forced assimilation in Bulgaria and upon his showed no signs of letting up upon his return to power. With the backing of Soviet troops, Bulgaria was somewhat stable and Zhivkov continued to administrate the country with the intent of reasserting control first and foremost. The Turks presented a strong challenge to authority and it all went from there. The Turkish minority expanded their already ongoing campaign of armed resistance against the government, moving from just bombings to shootings and suicide bombings. The Soviet and Bulgarian forces were low on supplies and even lower on morale, they were never going to be able to crack down on the Turks. When the Demichev Junta fell Soviet forces left Bulgaria and returned to the Soviet Union, in response to the news the Bulgarian dictator Zhivkov died of a heart attack almost immediately. The Bulgarian communist government fell later that week and a new democratic government took control. This new Republic of Bulgaria was eager to smooth over relations with the Turks and the other muslim minorities. They make quick work to rescind earlier measures by Zhivkov and as a result most ethnic violence ended but a small number of radicals carried on a campaign against the new government to create 2 Turkish autonomous districts, almost independent of Bulgarian control. The new government had little interest in bowing their heads to them, especially considering they were just a couple radicals on a goat farm after Zhivkov and his Soviet handlers left the scene.

East Germany and Romania were also quick to attempt to regain full control of their respective nations. The Ceausescu family in Romania and the Honecker family in East Germany were both ready to violently crack down on dissidents but both nations had vastly different end results because of a number of different factors.

In East Germany the situation had already reached a boiling point and only through the intervention of the Soviets had East Germany been able to retake control of its armed forces and stifle the end of the wall. Even with a loyal military and support from the Soviet forces, they could not keep the wall safe forever nor could they keep the country safe from subversion. The country was falling apart around their ears. This was especially true in 1995 when after a long battle with liver cancer, Erich Honecker passed away. His wife, Margot Honecker took control of the state apparatuses following her husband's death and began a wave of repression on all levels of East German society via Statsi terror with the help of her new close political ally Erich Mielke. The terror swept thousands into prison camps and sent many running over the border. While it was becoming clear that for the time East Germany was unfortunately rather stable, it was also increasingly clear that the state was quite literally running out of people as the trained and educated of East Germany fled into exile in the West to escape capture. The DDR was stable but it was on a surefire path to become economically insolvent.

Romania was in a similar state. Racked with internal dissension, Romania had barely survived a series of uprisings against the government in the past. The state itself managed to stay alive largely through the strength of the state's security forces, but such forces were only useful against civilians, this strength could be easily negated if the army turned against the government. In 1996, with the regime on its death bed the Ceausescu family finally saw how hated they were and packed their bags and headed for the Soviet Union. Whatever was left of the old regime attempted to keep things in order but as soon as the people found out that the old dog and his terrible family turned tail there was little the stay behinds could do other than chose to surrender or fight back. Following their old master's initiative they ordered the military and the secret police to fight back – and found out neither were willing to suppress the fermenting uprising. The regime was over before the end of the the day following Ceausescu's flight.

This of course was not the end of the story for either Romania or East Germany, or indeed any of the former Warsaw Pact nations including the Soviet Union itself. The 90's had much excitement and anxiety to offer to the world and Europe was playing center stage.

The 90's in general were a time of change for American foreign policy and both the Democrats and the Conservatives saw shifts in their ideology.

The Democrats by and large came to prefer multilateralism and moderation in global affairs, following the example of Leland. The Democrats were also notably more cohesive than the Conservatives in foreign policy during the 90's although the Reformists did manage to buck the trend. The Reformists were somewhat inspired by Clinton's endorsement of American exceptionalism and supremacy. They followed a middle path, accepting multilateralism – but only when it suited them. Indeed the Reformists offered some of the strongest criticisms of Leland's foreign policy. In general the Democrats kept an ambivalent policy regarding Israel in reaction to the changing allegiances in the Middle East and were rewarded with the firm support of America's Jews as a result. Compared to the Conservatives, Democrats were practically Pro-Israeli although in the end the Conservatives were just out for blood.

The Conservatives were far more confused on foreign policy. Compared to the Democrats the Conservatives were just confused in general. On more than just foreign policy, the Conservative Party was in flux. The various factions (Mainstreamers, Hammondites, Populists, Paleoconservatives) were fighting for control over the party and indeed their own adhoc groups following the political decline of the Big 5. Only Newt Gingrich and a few others fought to keep the party together. For better or for worse they fought to keep differences from tearing the party apart.

This, combined with the economic issues America was facing made the party itself and ideological mess both in domestic and foreign policy. The two groups in ascendant, the Populists and the Paleoconservatives, were in outright conflict with each other. The Populists preferring to use America's power for self interest abroad whereas the Paleoconservatives demanding an end to America's affairs abroad and launching criticisms of the Populists' “messianic globalism.” The Hammondites and those in the more Mainstream (although not really the party's mainstream at this point, merely Gingrichian Reaganism) both largely staked out a policy of involvement in foreign affairs but without the zeal of the Populists. What did unite the factions however on the foreign front was their dislike of Israel.

gty_pat_Pat_Buchanan_thg_120109_wb.jpg

Pat Buchanan stumping, 1999: "Just leave forget about them and stop sticking our fingers in everyone's pies. Our national decline is detrimental for Western Civilization. Focus on the home front."

This dislike of Israel largely descended from the diplomatic issues that the US and Israel had but it was also resulting from the scandals of the late 90's that drove the point home. Investigations led by both the CIA and FBI into the infamous Triangle finally began to bare fruit and it soon became apparent that Israel's intelligence apparatus had far reaching influence in the American northeast. The spy ring, now known as the Haifa ring, dated back to the 1970's and its primary purpose was to acquire illicit funds through smuggling and other crimes for use in Israeli intelligence's black operations. These black operations for the most part were related to silencing critics of Israel but as the regime grew more authoritarian and more controlled by the military in the face of international challenges the operations began to encompass silencing not just Pro-Palestinian critics but critics of the regime itself.

It only got worse when an American freighter was struck by an Israeli fighter and killed a number of the freighter's sailors. The Israeli government claimed that the freighter was mistook for a military craft and did not respond to calls to identify herself. The American government wanted an apology and some sort of compensation for the freighter's owner and the families of the casualties. Others even still, wanted to go further against Israel. Leland refused to take aggressive action, claiming that it would only push Israel further away but this was poorly received and viewed as an excuse to let Israel get away with it. Senator Jim Inhofe led the charge against Leland on this and led a press campaign to “take Israel to task” alongside the Lobby of '76.

jim-inhofe-slideshow-051.jpg

Senator Jim Inhofe: The man for the new millennia?

It was no surprise then that American popular opinion had wildly swung against Israel during the late 80's and then the 90's. This did not necessarily mean a hatred for Israelis or Jews, but it is an unfortunate side effect of politics that anti-semitism began to become en vogue on the right and among certain sections of the left as well. The natural response for this new found dislike of Israel and in many cases Jews, was to support the Palestinians and by virtue of that, Islam itself. Islam's new status as America's favorite minority religion of course was represented best by the new influence that American Islamic leaders found as well as their fully filled coffers for their non-profits and advocacy groups. Another of course was the increasing conversions of Americans to Islam. This of course split the evangelicals in the Conservatives, the Moral Majority faction split damn near down the middle over the issue. Some quite rightly pointed out that Islam wasn't Christianity and was therefore terrible and wrong and a work of the devil, whereas others pointed to Islam's perceived admirable qualities such as a focus on tradition and public morality.

The Moral Majority was already faltering by that point so by no means did the Islam issue cause the end of the faction nor is it ever likely to become even a plurality in America and supplant Christianity but it was one of the various issues the faction faced that caused its demise. The group had effectively been absorbed by the Paleoconservatives by then but the issue of Islam and the decline of popularity of Buchanan is what really began to eat away at it.

In this sense, the foreign policy victory after the collapse of the Communists in Europe and Asia influenced American domestic policy as much as it influenced America's foreign policy.

------

Hopefully elucidating a little bit more regarding Israeli-American relations.
 
Wonderful update. Just a question, are Conservatives called "Tories" like in Canada and the UK?
 
Good post. You keep making mention of the "Reformist" wing of the Democratic Party, which I don't think exists as such within OTL's Democratic Party. Are you just using it as a substitute term for Progressive, as a reference to these politicians, or something new you've devised?
 
Wonderful update. Just a question, are Conservatives called "Tories" like in Canada and the UK?
Nah. Conservatives would never try to hearken back to the Brits. They drape themselves in the flag after all.

Good post. You keep making mention of the "Reformist" wing of the Democratic Party, which I don't think exists as such within OTL's Democratic Party. Are you just using it as a substitute term for Progressive, as a reference to these politicians, or something new you've devised?
I think I mentioned them before as being the political afterbirth of Proxmire. They're not people I'd term as Progressive really, it's more the centrist Democrats. Their political positions aren't totally uniform and some swing further to the right.
 
Okay, I have one question how big would Caseys political faction be in the Democratic party (socially conservative, economically liberal)?
As it stands now he'd be in the reformists for the most part but I want to change some things up regarding Proxmire and other things so Bob Casey Sr. will be playing a larger role in the redux.

Maybe, but do non-Conservatives call them that?
Maybe as a joke. I can't imagine it becoming common parlance however.
 
41 - Part 39: Czar
Part 39: Czar

In the 1990's Soviet politics had become a revolving door of juntas and general secretaries. The failures of the economy and the state itself manifest in the destruction of the Soviet Empire, with little more than Russia and her Central Asian SSRs being kept in line. It aroused questions of nationalism in the Soviet Union, more so than ever before. But it was no longer a question of independence, rather it was a question of how much shame could the Russian people endure and if the Soviet Union would continue to pretend to be anything other than a Russian entity.

By 1998 the Leningrad Junta had given up even more territory, that of Belarus. Russian Nationalists were sickened and could no longer stomach the regime but there was little they could do. Most Nationalists and Ultra-Nationalists were busy involving themselves in the fratricidal bloodletting occurring in the Balkan and Caucasian statelets, with some also going to former Soviet SSR of Ukraine or the increasingly unstable Tajikistan SSR.

BNF_Pazniak-Dziady-1988.jpg

Belorussian nationalist leader Zianon Pazniak speaking, 1996

The Soviet economy itself was ran almost entirely off of the energy sector of which the Leningrad Junta dedicated an disturbingly large amount of the military forces to defending the oil pumps and refineries. It didn't take long for the black market to make the connections with the commanders in charge and before long most shipments for export were only half full, assuming of course the Banditi didn't snag the shipment instead. There was simply no income anymore. The GDP per capita of the Soviet Union had fallen to a third world level of merely 2,000 USD.

Further economic and political degradation had created problems for the Leningrad Junta and it was clear that another change was coming, it was just that no one expected where from. Change ocurred from within at first. It started when after General Vladimir Lobov died of organ failure after hospitalization and Mikhail Moiseev's death from an assassin's bullet. Instead of adding new members to the junta's top rungs or spreading out influence equally, both Pavel Grachev and Dmitry Yazov teamed up together and began to coalesce power around themselves. It created a great strain on the junta and the others of the junta looked to find a new solution.

The only non-Russian of the junta, Ruslan Aushev, found his salvation in an outside source. The junta he believed was on its way to its death and so was the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union needed someone of great prestige to rally around to save the nation and prevent the bloodshed from spreading to what remained of the Soviet Union. Aushev put his faith in General Alexander Lebed. He was loved by Russian Nationalists and had come under fire from the junta for criticizing their failings, giving him respect from the anti-government types. Helping guarantee safety for the Russian minority in Moldavia was another great accomplishment of his. Lebed was approached and agreed to take part in a coup.

Aushev intended to use him as a puppet of sorts but Lebed naturally had no interest of taking part in anyone's plans. While it was widely known that Lebed was an independent sort, no one had expected to be the political operator he turned out to be. This was something only found out later, and so Aushev and new collaborator Kulikov planned their attack.

The junta was based in Leningrad, as per the name and was heavily defended in a cordoned off part of the city. A frontal assault was dangerous and deadly but the only method of assault. After the assassination of Moiseev the whole city went under a tight curfew and enhanced security measures, many times more restrictive (and effective) than the martial law outside Leningrad. The coup would have to be quick at both capturing the loyal elements of the Leningrad junta and seizing control of the media so as to prevent the media going rogue.

In the summer of 1998 Leningrad woke up to the sound of gunshots. Forces loyal to the coup plotters moved quickly and surrounded the district that the junta had set up for itself. Heavy weapons were relied on excessively to suppress the loyalist troops. The loyalist forces weren't push overs and while the media centers in both Leningrad and Moscow were seized by coup plotters (specifically those sympathetic or otherwise loyal to Lebed) the intense fighting continued.

It was only when Lebed's name was mentioned that loyalist forces began to surrender to the coup plotters. He was the only general without any black marks against him and was something of a celebrity across most of the Soviet Union. To the people on the ground, even those not involved in politics – Lebed as the one who rode in on a white stallion to save the day just made sense. It was why Aushev and Kulikov picked him after all.

After an hour or so it was clear that the junta would not win. Only the most fanatical loyalists of coup's generals remained. Even the security apparatus of the state, the weakened but fanatic group it was, stepped aside and provided no support for the Leningrad government. It was clear that there was something different about this coup. Something had to give. The Soviet Union was on it's last legs. There was nothing left after this.

General Yazov was a particularly worthless commander and man. His troops had little love for him. It made sense then that his troops deserted him. Yazov's troops shot him and several of his still loyal men and flew the white flag. They had no interest in fighting for a man that they hated.

Pavel Grachev, the most corrupt and power hungry of all the junta bosses tried to escape. Through a series of tunnels general Grachev and his most loyal confidants ran away with filled suitcases of valuables and his family in tow. At the end of the tunnel where Grachev was expecting a few cars to take everyone to Finland. Instead he was ambushed by his own troops and even after offering all of his money in his suitcases, all his ill gotten goods, they weren't going to let him escape. Grachev and those around him were killed.

The final one of the junta left was Sergey Akhromeyev. Akhromeyev was a loyal supporter of the Soviet Union and was earnest in his attempt to save the Sovie Union. He was the Leningrad Junta's most ideologically loyal member and was the most firm in his support of the Soviet Union. His involvement in the junta was one of true support and it made men look up to him, at least among his own forces. From the junta only he and Aushev had interest outside of corruption and power on their mind so it made sense then that he lasted the longest. Akhromeyev's forces were surround in a small hospital that had been converted for government use as a supply warehouse. The warehouse had become encircled by the coup forces but the forces present there couldn't force the junta's forces to surrender nor could they overpower the well supplied and well barricaded defenders. Until more support came Akhromeyev's men would stand firm.

The warehouse had been surrounded for several hours by the time the rest of the coup plotter forces managed to join in the encirclement. It was then that tanks joined in on the firefight and some fires started in the warehouse. The fire spread to the ammo stores and Leningrad was filled with the sound of cracking and popping for the following day. The rest is history.

0000303494-006.jpg

Leningrad, 1998

With every supporter of the old Leningrad Junta dead or cowed into submission, the coup was successful. The people of the Soviet Union however was less assured. News spread quickly of a coup and the people prepared to roll with the punches of what the political chaos would inevitably bring. Up until that point the news just played classical music to calm the nerves of the viewers to encourage them to stay at home and not go out. Some rumors of Lebed leading the coup were spread around but no one believed it. Lebed himself didn't have enough men to take on all of Junta himself so it was considered either to be a suicidal attack on Lebed's part or just that rumors were merely rumors.

The opinion of the public changed when Lebed himself appeared on the television all over the Soviet Union. Such an appearance wasn't planned by the other coup plotters but it occurred nonetheless, Lebed wasn't one to take orders. Not anymore anyway.

Lebed gave a speech where he outlined his views of the Soviet Union and stated what his plans were for the future. He wasn't beating around the bush and was frank in his views. The most shocking statement was the famous sentence, a sentence every Eastern European remembers.

NVpIM2ptOHhYRzVmUk5rM1NrNlFxYVV6enV4aGk2UFRJMmxPckdDUUVNWkxPY0c5ZnB4Z2JCU1RvTDcwUTNUUUhuT1h0MTVJRkxBK1NGUUhWcERoa0NyZktoSjdWRWVtU0pQb0JscnZEMDFaNmRiTjFBdldMMFh5S24vbC9LeEdYa1l4TVZUVTZLK1lCTUJ0N2dJYlQwWEUyVjNDcnpUSVhadGNCY3pFWnVLM1lYRllRaW5tQXhpYUo2WXhSWkZjR0RJNVUwZnJlc0lHaEgxTjcwZVloRzRNNTNXcXQxK1NsM25mNC9rNzBvaG5iQ2xyS1VQQ3BxMnRjOXFQOXNPRG5RMk5QQXo1YnU0TjRHVXBCUU1nM0E9PQ==

General Lebed: “The Soviet Union is over."

What Lebed presented was definitive. It was the end of the Soviet Union and the end of Marxism-Leninism. The remaining states still officially following Marxism-Leninism was small, consisting only of Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, the GDR, Mongolia, and Somalia. By 2000 the only remaining Marxist-Leninist states remaining were Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and the GDR. Even then, only the GDR followed anything even remotely close to Orthodox Marxism-Leninism.

This wasn't the only thing Lebed spoke on. During his speech touched on many things, all of which were important to the new Russian state.

Lebed promised an end to the Soviet Union once new negotiations could be held, perhaps sapping some of the luster of his previous statement. All the leaders of the still remaining SSRs would meet in and design a new constitution for a new Union. This new Union would be, ostensibly, more equal and federative than the previous Soviet Union. The new union would be based off of the martyred Gorbachev's plans at least in part.

Furthermore, Lebed promised to help bring the various military struggles (The Caucasian Wars, Yugoslavian Wars, and the Bulgarian Turkish insurgency, etc) to an end via diplomacy and work to help the Russian minorities across Europe. This coincided with a new approach to foreign policy which looked to be more cooperative with the rest of the world while not being weak. The key phrase to this new foreign policy was “Respectability” and this phrase extended into economics as well.

One of the only benefits of the Soviet Union surviving so long past the collapse of her satellite states was that the Soviet Union was able to see what radical privatization wrought upon the nations which practiced it. Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungry, and the Baltic states all saw the economies fall into crisis as their respective economies began to stall and fail. Times were rough and privatization was unfair and cruel.

What Lebed promised was “Respectable Marketization” which made room for the market, much more so than Gorbachev, but at the same time keeping firm state controls where needed and slowly reforming the economy to a more market controlled economy. Part of this was the legalization and recognition of the black market. The idea was that if they were brought out of the dark and into the light that Viktor Bout and the other “Underground Kings” could be held legally responsible for any crimes and it would destroy the black market while also growing the legal economy itself.

Another initiative was the move from collectivized agriculture to beginning privatization. Kolkhozes and Sovkhozes were all privatized, doling out equal portions of land to all members. Half of the product would be bought by the government at the state price and the other half could be sold at whatever price desired. This would, theoretically, solve the very serious issue of agricultural shortfalls and allow for the birth of a private supply chain from private farms to new private grocery stores. In regards to other elements of the economy, privatization was to be limited to only insolvent or nonviable state enterprises. This of course would also necessitate a general committal to wiping out corruption in the economy which Lebed backed to the hilt. Additional research into creating state run companies in the French Dirigiste fashion rather than simply state run factories and businesses was also promoted but no major decisions were made as of the time of the speech or immediately afterward.

SYj6wwC.jpg

McDonald's in Russia, owned partially by the government itself

Obviously these proclamations were shocking for Kulikov and Aushev but they didn't have the strength or the interest in fighting against the now very popular Lebed. Kulikov was interested in money and power and Lebed could give that. Aushev wanted to keep violence in the Caucuses to a minimum, this too, was something Lebed could give.

In the weeks following Aushev and Kulikov lost influence in the new government as Lebed gained popular favor for his refusal to commit troops to shut down public gatherings and his work to rehabilitate/destroy the Banditi. The new Soviet Union, or rather the successor state came into being not much later on. The other SSRs had disliked the old Soviet system but the promise of a new more fair union was little issue for them, especially considering the numerous economic benefits of staying together there were. In this new nation known as the simply as the Union State or as the Eurasian Union each of the constituent nations would be free to act locally however there would be national elections as well as overseeing from Moscow in the typical Russian style. Things like free elections were of course much debated and like many other issues, there was much to be done and much to be decided in Europe's newest state.

------

Lebed is a serious looking man with a baritone voice. In case you're wondering what he sounds like. Seriously one of the deepest speaking voices I've ever heard.
 
I do wonder if we'll see new parties pop up in the future to transition the us into a multi party system.
It was something I thought would start with the remnants of the republicans but as that did not happen maybe it could be a future development?
 
I do wonder if we'll see new parties pop up in the future to transition the us into a multi party system.
It was something I thought would start with the remnants of the republicans but as that did not happen maybe it could be a future development?
Well, I can say that it's not something that happens in Part I at the very least.

Third parties are pretty hard to get running in the US for a slew of factors so it's not something that's likely to happen.

I can say that in Part II I plan to have a little bit of electoral fusion going on though.
 
42 - Part 40: Anxieties and Missteps
Part 40: Anxieties and Missteps

On the precipice of the next millennium the Conservatives were lacking leadership and control. While Gingrich and others tried to keep things close to Reagan as they want him remembered, the party's voters took things in a different direction. The lack of centralized controls within the party bureaucracy, the torpedoing of the party consensus by Hammond, and the general reaction to President Leland did little to assist the party rank and file in keeping doctrinaire Reaganism as the party's guiding ideology. By 2000 it was beginning to take its toll on the party infrastructure.

Hammond's wing had largely fallen off as a result of Hammond's quickly waning political popularity. Even in the party's inner circles itself Hammond was considered lackluster. The victories of Korea and tax cuts was perhaps not enough when compared to Reagan's record. When you added on the Long Recession to his “achievements” under his administration things looked even worse for Hammond and his political allies. Hammond's party wing seemed out of step with the others. Hammondites had always been more optimistic and forward thinking than the other groups, it was their defining feature. In and age where anger was the most powerful emotion in the Conservative Party it was seeming more and more out of touch with the party itself. The Hammondites supported old Hammond VP Jack Kemp or they threw their support behind Barry Goldwater Jr. who was something of a Gingrichian Reaganite. Any victory in intra-party disputes won by Hammondites were reversed by 2000 as Gingrich and the others began to regain control over the party's control mechanisms.

1101950109_400.jpg

Slowly by surely Gingrich and his allies have begun to take control of the party mechanisms. They hope to create a party orthodoxy and bring the party in line with their own idealized version of Reagan's policies.
Goldwater Jr. was at the center of a growing split within the party of those with more libertarian economic views but not backing the more radical elements of the Paleoconservative's trade and social views. Like his father, Goldwater Jr. inherited a more nuanced and slightly moderate series of opinions on social policy and that put him at odds with the Paleoconservatives. His more Neoliberal free trade views also caused issue of the Buchananite portions of the Paleoconservatives. When combined with the faltering of the Hammondites it led to a unique situation where Goldwater Jr. was able to at least potentially resurrect the Libertarian section of the party, drawing in support from the Hammondites and the Paleoconservatives. At the very least he could graft a more libertarian flavor onto Gingrich's style of idealized Reaganism. Such a thing would require a victory in the primaries or a respectable finish as second at the very least.

Paleoconservatives of course had their own folks running. Pat Buchanan was representing the his section of the Paleoconservatives who formed the majority of the faction. Buchanan had been one of the big names talked up about running in 2000 by practically every big media figure because of his strong criticisms of President Leland from day one. Buchanan was initially thought to be someone who could take control of the reaction to Leland and make them into a viable force but as the reaction ran out of steam and criticism of Leland became more focused on Leland's less active foreign policy it did little to make Buchanan look good as he was an isolationist himself. Pat Robertson was another hopeful who was talked up quite a bit with many estimating his evangelical base would make him a powerful opponent but when 2000 came it appeared that the average America's religiosity had decrease and that the evangelicals that boosted Robertson before had lost interest. The old Moral Majority was no longer as powerful as it once was nor was it ever to be again, with Robertson's candidacy representing the proverbial death rattle of evangelical's massive influence in American politics.

Of course there was also James Buckley, the old idol of the party. Buckley himself flirted with a run and “kept it in consideration” despite his position as a sitting judge. Buckley's star had faded much over the years and he was no longer the old senator he once was so he campaign went no where early on. Another from out in the proverbial wilderness of the party was Clayton Williams, former Texas governor. Williams fought a hard campaign but Goldwater Jr. had already sucked up most of the support for more moderate or typical conservatives in the race. Williams of course had his cowboy appeal but it didn't resonate out of the Southwest – exactly where Goldwater Jr.'s support was its highest.

The Populists too had their fair share of people running. When it came down to it, the Populists had two major candidates in 2000. The first to announce was Oklahoma's Jim Inhofe who firmly backed Bill Clinton's run in 1996. Inhofe was not as much of a strong supporter of the American unilateralism that Clinton was but was more interested in Clinton's domestic agenda which played around with economic and social populism along with dog whistles and general social conservatism. The other of course was Bob Dornan.

DornanBob.jpg

Representative Bob Dornan

Bob Dornan was in many ways an almost facsimile copy of Bill Clinton's views from 1996 mixed in with an increased anger directed at Israel and a more frank or crude style of speaking. Dornan's “off the cuff” style of speech and his venomous rhetoric towards Democrats and President Leland was a great draw for his campaign. His former days as an actor certainly helped him give his speeches a certain dramatic quality other candidates lacked. He was one of the front runners from the start.

When Iowa and New Hampshire came around Dornan won Iowa but suffered a narrow loss at the hands of Inhofe. The other candidates took notice. Calyton Williams, Buckley, Kemp, and Robertson's campaigns all ended before Super Tuesday. They realized that they weren't the future of the Conservative Party. At least in 2000.

The Hammondites were done, they were broken in this election. The final candidate even remotely related to them, Goldwater Jr., had the endorsement of Kemp and kept strong in a respectable third place. Buchanan followed in fourth and the two populists led the pack. Other less important candidates remained but there was little to say of them and their campaigns.

Before Super Tuesday all the candidates realized how important that date would be. If either one of the Populists won a majority of the races it would likely clinch the race in their favor. If Buchanan or Goldwater Jr. manged a few victories it could flip the race on its head.

Bill Clinton's widow Hillary naturally came to become an important endorsement. She had a growing political career in her own right by 2000 and there were even calls for her to run that year. Madame Clinton, as she had come to be called, declined citing her desire to run for Governor of Arkansas after retiring from her seat in the House of Representatives. Both Inhofe and Dornan sought her endorsement and she weighed both. Inhofe was young and not totally on board with her deceased husband's platform. Dornan was older and ideologically closer to Bill. In the end Madame Clinton decided to endorse Bob Dornan ahead of Super Tuesday.

clinton-20-year-old-ap_96012602066-e7b3eb25daf902b7e1c255b84a9e8718a0e80cc3-s900-c85.jpg

"Out of any candidate, Bob Dornan best aligns with me and my late husband Bill's vision of what America could, should, and will be. So for that reason, I officially endorse Mr. Bob Dornan for the Presidency of the United States."

So Super Tuesday came and went, Clinton's endorsement made Dornan seem like the “official” Populist whereas Inhofe was an imitator. Dornan won big and Inhofe lost big. Inhofe's campaign stalled and collapsed afterwards, leaving Doran to rocket forward. Of course with Goldwater Jr.'s small victories coinciding with Inhofe's collapse made him a decent runner up to Dornan and lead to Goldwater Jr. being labeled as the “Anti-Dornan” candidate by some. He was not even remotely close enough to defeat Dornan but it did help give him some prestige.

When the convention came around and the economy began to pick up in earnest Dornan had already clinched the nomination. The race from that point became one of foreign policy and the Conservatives could no longer strongly critique the economics of Leland as his economic proposals were being seen as more and more successful by the general. The running mate spot was given to Wisconsin Congressman Scott L. Klug to balance out the ticket and provide a more traditional conservative on the ticket. Things were starting to look down but regardless of who won and who lost, the future was coming to the Conservatives and a fight between the party rank and file's mainstream headed by Gingrich and the diadochi of Bill Clinton seemed increasingly inevitable in the coming years. There much much unfinished business in the Conservative Party indeed.

------

Just one more post after this. I'm working on Part II and the redux faithfully on the weekends.
 
43 - Part 41: The Theories of a Georgian (Finale)
Part 41: The theories of a Georgian (Finale)

MsTYn3J.png

The study of nations and civilizations is an odd field. Many men have come up with many theories and hypotheses about the path of nations. Marx, Hegel, Spengler, Ibn Khaldun, the list rolls and rolls on of men who try to understand the direction of history itself. By no means is it a purely academic pursuit either – simply ask anyone on the street how they feel about things and you'll find that many people consider these things.

Even an odd Georgian man in his Dacha did a little theorizing one night. His theory was one of light and dark, stability and instability. He believed there was an inevitable march to history in a particular direction. He predicted the future of the world with an ugly little glint in his eyes,“But it will be dark soon. And the dawn waits.” is what he said all those years ago. His belief in this dawn was that there was a final dawn awaiting humanity that made all the evils he did justified. It was appropriately Hegelian, or perhaps Marxian if your prefer.

But has it really went in that direction? Perhaps not how he meant. Europe had swung hard against Stalin and the empire that he built. From the Spirit of '94 and the Revolutions of New October Europe had, for the most part, liberated themselves. There were no foreign armies marching, no secret paymaster schemes. The revolutions and uprisings in Europe were entirely domestic and grassroots affairs.

The vast majority of Europe was free. The only state which had not fallen to civil war or transitioned into Democracy was the GDR. Even the Soviet Union herself had collapsed and gone away, leaving little more than Russia, Belarus, and Central Asia as hanger-ons for the new state led by Lebed. Ukraine, the Baltic states, the Caucuses, they were all gone from Russia's grasp. Even Stalin's ancestral home of Georgia was living free albeit having to deal with the numerous issues of warring, banditry, terrorism, and economic stagnation that the region inherited from the Soviets even after leaving.

NbDJu86.png

The former Soviet states of the Caucuses, circa 1998

The GDR herself was falling apart just like the rest of the remaining Marxism-Leninist states were. Outside of GDR the only self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninist states left alive as of 2000 were the Indochinese states and Cuba. None of these groups looked like they had long to live, considering their economies were stalling and collapsing under the weight of economic mismanagement and opposition from the people themselves.

Even the supposedly dangerous Socialist giant under Wang collapsed into disrepair and faded away. Much to the surprise of everyone, the military even kept their promise of elections. After several hundred million dead or so because of Mao and Wang it was perhaps only understandable that the military would go ahead and allow China to try the democracy thing that they heard so much about.

Chinese Presidential elections of 1996, Round 1:
Wei Jingsheng (Independent), 36.3%
Lucie Cheng (Social Democratic Party of China), 23.7%
Xu Wenli (National Democratic Party), 21.1%
Bai Zhijian (Chinese Reformed Communist Party), 8.4%
Ren Wanding (Chinese Liberal Party), 6.1%
Others, 4.4%

Chinese Presidential Elections of 1996, Round 2:
Wei Jingsheng (Independent), 69.1%
Lucie Cheng (Social Democratic Party of China), 30.1%
Others/Blank Ballots, 0.8%


Wei and the reformers had won against the solid leftists, although their narrow victory pointed to the worrying fact that China was not fully behind this new economic system. Regardless the reformers planned to push forward and forge a capitalist democracy in a time when the global economy wasn't looking too hot. It would take a great deal of effort to create a culture of democracy and transition the economy but it wasn't something that the government could afford to put off. After all, the government might be free of military influence for now but if things go bad, who says the Warlord period is anything that China can't repeat?

wei6.jpg

Wei Jingsheng, China's first freely elected leader

Russia and the rest of the post-Communist states had many of those similar issues. They had to transition to a market economy and help foster a democratic environment. For Russia Lebed might not really have to abide by democracy, he had other things to contend with. This issue was instability which only begat more and more violence and then more and more instability. The former Marxist-Leninist states of Africa had this too. They had shifted away from Marxism-Leninism not from the people's demands but because it was no longer worthwhile to stay involved with Russia's sinking empire. Now they could transition to the market however they liked, just without Soviet subsidies and without Soviet backing. More than a few African nations, formerly Communist or not, fell into chaos following the end of the Cold War. In some parts of Africa, things looked bright of course. South Africa had her elections and they went well, Nelson Mandela won his election as mentioned previously and his government continued without much in the way of problems. Things were peaceful at least in South Africa.

So in the end, it appeared that Capitalism had won. It won the struggle against Marxism-Leninism. Does this mean that Marxism's criticisms were wrong? Does this mean that there is no future for the left? While one might be inclined to crow on and on about the various liberal capitalist lines of thought, the existence of people like Alexander Lebed and his insistence in engaging in the market economy on his own terms seems to promote the idea that perhaps things are not as solid as they think. Indeed South America herself is seeing the beginnings of something of a strongly leftist character now that the US isn't in the business of overthrowing democracies down south. Perhaps that's why the mutterings of a “Post-Cold War Consensus” are never much more than mutterings.

Anyone who followed politics knew that it wasn't the “end of history” no doubt much to the chagrin to Hegel or Fukuyama. There is no end of history in the physical sense, but 2000 saw no end to history in the philosophical sense either. There is more to be told. Much more blood and sweat must be shed on the earth's fertile clay before the story of the world – or even America would be over.

And at the same time, what of Spengler? What of the Western World's supposed Untergang, her downfall? Only the future could tell us if Spengler would be proven right. Spengler believed that the West would slowly lose its vigor and after 2000 the most popular form of government would be a sort of ad hoc Caesarism with governments ruling by executive fiat. Does that seem like the future from this point? Maybe not, but much can change in a few years. After all no one expected President Leland in 1988.

The future still has much in store, does it not?

It was these very important questions that the man thought about as he waited in the dacha. In a spartan room the man and a young confidant sat in chairs at a table, both their eyes transfixed upon a television blaring out news from America. The Americans recently finished up their elections and today the man they elected was being sworn in. It was, as the man had come to understand, an important election in American history.

lebed_3.jpg

"Any man who loves Communism has no brains; Any man who loves Capitalism has no heart." - Alexander Lebed, 2005

The man took a drag on a cigarette, “I thought they would have gotten rid of him. The Americans are different from what I had expected.”

The young confidant nodded in silent agreement. The two kept silently listening to the TV go on about the election and the signing in of the President. Such a thing had never happened in Russian history.

The man wasn't sure about democracy even if he liked to pretend to be heading in that direction in public.

“If we continue at the pace we're going it will be less than a decade before we have reincorporated the Ukraine and the Caucuses. From there we can begin to disrupt the Americans and what they have and we can move to incorporating other states into our Commonwealth. From there...” The man continued on about his plans for the future. To destroy the America, if you ask him, was as easy as taking what worked for them and then adapting it to your own position. A 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em' type of plan. Once America was gone then Russia could do as she wished. To do such a thing however was a great challenge that would assuredly take decades. The third Rome would not be built in a day! For now his machinations must lay undetected.

Then the TV flashed a different set of colors, different from the previous images showing DC's palette of greens, navy blues, and whites. A news alert. A local anchor, interrupting the dubbed over broadcast from the US. Both the men perked up in their chairs and stopped smoking.

What the text on the screen said was incredible news. This was most unexpected.

At that moment, a soldier bust through the wooden double doors into the room. “General Lebed!” the soldier's face was red and he was obviously exhausted. “The American President's been-”

“We saw.” said the smoking man in his baritone voice as he stood up. “The television told us. They just say 'shot' what is his status?”

“Dead perhaps...?” the young confidant lurched forward with wide eyes.

The soldier took a few hasty breaths and leaned his hand on the door frame. “Our sources say that he's heading towards the hospital now. They believe that the wounds aren't fatal.” The disappointment of the young confidant was obvious on his face. The older man, Lebed, kept his typical stony expression.

“So not dead. I see. I am starting to understand these Americans more.” Lebed blew out some smoke, “Is the meeting with Doosan still on then?”

The soldier regained his composure and was back in form once more, “They're already waiting in the conference room, sir.”

Lebed took one final drag and put the butt out on the wood table. As he exhaled he looked over to his confidant and shook his head. “You worry too much. We want him alive Maxim, not dead.” Lebed walked out of the room without looking back. He had more important things to do than wonder about the future any longer.

The soldier followed Lebed out of the room and towards the conference room where the South Korean businessmen were waiting. The young confidant was left alone, still taking drags and staring aimlessly out the open doors.

He turned back around and looked at the picture of the American President before the assassination being displayed on the TV. He looked happy just that morning. He went from feeling like the greatest man in America to being carted off to the emergency room in a matter of an hour.

The TV buzzed, “...We have just received news that the American President has arrived at George Washington University Hospital and is receiving emergency care as we speak...”

The young confidant shook his head, “History, she is a harsh mistress!”

------

I decided to finish this up early.

So, that's that for Part I. This is my first TL that I technically finished and I think it shows. There's some ideas that I wasn't able to fully articulate and show while there's also important stuff that I really dropped the ball on.

In the redux for Part I and Part II I'll be redoubling my efforts and I'll be adding onto and changing things to make it better. One particular aspect I'll be focusing in on will be abortion which I feel like I pretty much forgot about. I stepped into writing this without a 100% firm understanding of the period so that's something I got wrong. So I'm happy to say that I've planned the redux to weave abortion and the Supreme Court into the story as a major issue for America. That's just the beginning of the things I've planned to fix and readjust. Domestic issues in general are something I'll be focusing more on because I feel like I focuses too much on foreign stuff during the TL.

I think the theme I was going for also got jumbled up somewhere down the line so I'll be working on that as well.

As far as when I'll finish the redux and Part II, I'm not totally sure. There's a lot of stuff to write and I've restricted my side projects to only be worked on during the weekend so that I can finish more important stuff during the week.

Anyway, I hope you guys enjoyed this attempt. It certainly wasn't easy for me to write all of this (nearly 90,000 words) and sometimes I dropped the ball with the TL but I certainly enjoyed writing and posting it up on AH and on SV.
 
Well hot damn, that was a sprawling, original, and downright excellent timeline. It feels good to have stuck with a TL from beginning to end as it was actually being posted. You’ve managed to make a lot of changes to the world, so let me see if I can sum up the important bits:

-A tougher reaction against both Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan during the 1976 primaries leads Birch Bayh to be elected President, while Reaganite conservatives disaffected with the Republican Party form the Conservative Party to unite all the factions of the disparate right.
-After a term of little note (other than abolishing the Electoral college), Bayh is trounced in 1980 by Reagan, who presides in a very similar manner to OTL.
-The Iranian Revolution devolves into a civil war between the Islamists and Communists. The US helps the Islamists to victory, beginning a cordial relationship between Middle Eastern Muslims and America and catalyzing further chaos in the Middle East.
-The Arab War begins in the early 80s, a multi-sided quagmire that ravages a lot of the Arabian Peninsula and ends rather inconclusively (I’m probably missing a lot here).
-Gaddaffi attempts unsuccessfully to extend his dominion over Chad and then Egypt. His Libya is saved from Egyptian defeat only by a timely Israeli intervention, which solidified the break between Israel and the American right.
-The liberal wing of the Democratic Party goes dormant for about 12 years after the twin candidacies of William Proxmire, though it re-emerges later on.
-Reagan is followed by his VP, Jay Hammond, who leads a somewhat more moderate faction of the Conservative Party. His first term sees the Long Recession, an economic downturn that starts in Japan and spirals out to the rest of the world. After his VP is embroiled in a sex scandal, he takes the morally rather than the politically advantageous side.
-China comes under the control of the young Wang, who institutes a cult of personality and starts a campaign of revisionist history while reaffirming China’s commitment to Marxism-Leninism. When he dies of cancer in the mid-90s, his successor proves unable to keep a lid on the military or the Communist Party. There is a brief, civil war-like spat between the military and Party-backed “militias”, and after the military wins, the generals institute—surprisingly enough—an electoral democracy.
-After Kim Il-Sung dies in 1995, the younger Kim loses the confidence of his administration and a brief civil war ensues, which the US quickly gets involved in and which ends with the Koreas finally reunified.
- The Democrats, in the form of Mickey Leland, finally retake power in 1996. He embarks on a liberal economic program called the American Dream Deal, but has some trouble in an America where sixteen straight years of conservative rule have rendered much of the federal bureaucracy and national infrastructure moribund. He manages to bring the economy upward while embarking on a somewhat more insular foreign policy.
-Oh right, the Soviet Union. Gorbachev eventually ends up as General Secretary in 1988 and attempts to reform the rotten Soviet system as per OTL, but his reforms falter somewhat and he is removed by a hardline, Demichev-led junta. This government, however, proves extremely unpopular, and impotent as the CPSU and Army structures start to disintegrate pretty much everywhere outside Moscow. In 1993, the junta release Gorbachev and Yeltsin from captivity, but has the assassinated the following year after they prove too uppity. After that, the Soviet Union essentially begins to disappear—army units go AWOL en masse and people desert the CPSU by the millions. Anarchy ensues in most of the countryside, and opportunistic criminals (aka “бандиты», or bandity) use it to make profits via extortion and smuggling. Ukraine, the Baltics and the Caucasus breakaway, and in 1998, the last remnant of Soviet power, a junta controlling Leningrad, is wiped out after a coup led by Alexander Lebed, who begins privatization programs and has secret ultranationalist ambitions.
-By the 90s, the Middle East has quieted down from the perennial warfare, with radical Islamic armies coexisting alongside authoritarian regimes like that if Saddam Hussein.
-After lots of tension between the government and anti-apartheid activists, South Africa abandons apartheid by the end of the 1990s and transitions peacefully away from minority rule.
-Leland is re-elected in 2000, but shot at his inauguration—possibly killed, possibly just wounded.

Did I miss anything important? By the way, I commend you for a) finding original individuals to serve as President (Jay Hammond is perhaps the pinnacle of a hipster President, and I loved it) and b) creating a very original way for the Soviet Union to disintegrate. Unceremonious breakaways is too obvious, Civil War is cliche and rather unrealistic, but the concept of the bandity is right on the money.

I eagerly await part 2!
 
I can't wait for Part 2!
Good to hear!

Yeah, well done TransUral Empire. Fantastic story and I'm keen for more. Also poor Mickey Leland.
Thanks, the redux and Part II will come eventually.

Well hot damn, that was a sprawling, original, and downright excellent timeline. It feels good to have stuck with a TL from beginning to end as it was actually being posted. You’ve managed to make a lot of changes to the world, so let me see if I can sum up the important bits:

-A tougher reaction against both Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan during the 1976 primaries leads Birch Bayh to be elected President, while Reaganite conservatives disaffected with the Republican Party form the Conservative Party to unite all the factions of the disparate right.
-After a term of little note (other than abolishing the Electoral college), Bayh is trounced in 1980 by Reagan, who presides in a very similar manner to OTL.
-The Iranian Revolution devolves into a civil war between the Islamists and Communists. The US helps the Islamists to victory, beginning a cordial relationship between Middle Eastern Muslims and America and catalyzing further chaos in the Middle East.
-The Arab War begins in the early 80s, a multi-sided quagmire that ravages a lot of the Arabian Peninsula and ends rather inconclusively (I’m probably missing a lot here).
-Gaddaffi attempts unsuccessfully to extend his dominion over Chad and then Egypt. His Libya is saved from Egyptian defeat only by a timely Israeli intervention, which solidified the break between Israel and the American right.
-The liberal wing of the Democratic Party goes dormant for about 12 years after the twin candidacies of William Proxmire, though it re-emerges later on.
-Reagan is followed by his VP, Jay Hammond, who leads a somewhat more moderate faction of the Conservative Party. His first term sees the Long Recession, an economic downturn that starts in Japan and spirals out to the rest of the world. After his VP is embroiled in a sex scandal, he takes the morally rather than the politically advantageous side.
-China comes under the control of the young Wang, who institutes a cult of personality and starts a campaign of revisionist history while reaffirming China’s commitment to Marxism-Leninism. When he dies of cancer in the mid-90s, his successor proves unable to keep a lid on the military or the Communist Party. There is a brief, civil war-like spat between the military and Party-backed “militias”, and after the military wins, the generals institute—surprisingly enough—an electoral democracy.
-After Kim Il-Sung dies in 1995, the younger Kim loses the confidence of his administration and a brief civil war ensues, which the US quickly gets involved in and which ends with the Koreas finally reunified.
- The Democrats, in the form of Mickey Leland, finally retake power in 1996. He embarks on a liberal economic program called the American Dream Deal, but has some trouble in an America where sixteen straight years of conservative rule have rendered much of the federal bureaucracy and national infrastructure moribund. He manages to bring the economy upward while embarking on a somewhat more insular foreign policy.
-Oh right, the Soviet Union. Gorbachev eventually ends up as General Secretary in 1988 and attempts to reform the rotten Soviet system as per OTL, but his reforms falter somewhat and he is removed by a hardline, Demichev-led junta. This government, however, proves extremely unpopular, and impotent as the CPSU and Army structures start to disintegrate pretty much everywhere outside Moscow. In 1993, the junta release Gorbachev and Yeltsin from captivity, but has the assassinated the following year after they prove too uppity. After that, the Soviet Union essentially begins to disappear—army units go AWOL en masse and people desert the CPSU by the millions. Anarchy ensues in most of the countryside, and opportunistic criminals (aka “бандиты», or bandity) use it to make profits via extortion and smuggling. Ukraine, the Baltics and the Caucasus breakaway, and in 1998, the last remnant of Soviet power, a junta controlling Leningrad, is wiped out after a coup led by Alexander Lebed, who begins privatization programs and has secret ultranationalist ambitions.
-By the 90s, the Middle East has quieted down from the perennial warfare, with radical Islamic armies coexisting alongside authoritarian regimes like that if Saddam Hussein.
-After lots of tension between the government and anti-apartheid activists, South Africa abandons apartheid by the end of the 1990s and transitions peacefully away from minority rule.
-Leland is re-elected in 2000, but shot at his inauguration—possibly killed, possibly just wounded.

Did I miss anything important? By the way, I commend you for a) finding original individuals to serve as President (Jay Hammond is perhaps the pinnacle of a hipster President, and I loved it) and b) creating a very original way for the Soviet Union to disintegrate. Unceremonious breakaways is too obvious, Civil War is cliche and rather unrealistic, but the concept of the bandity is right on the money.

I eagerly await part 2!
Pretty much got everything I guess. There'll be much more to recap next time heh.

And thanks, happy to hear you've enjoyed it.
 
Top