MotF 239: A House Divided

MotF 239: A House Divided

The Challenge


Make a map depicting a country on the brink of civil war.

The Restrictions

There are no restrictions on when the PoD of your map should be. Fantasy, sci-fi, and future maps are allowed.

If you're not sure whether your idea meets the criteria of this challenge, please feel free to PM me or comment in the main thread.
---
Entries will end for this round when the voting thread is posted on Monday, July 26, 2021.
---
PLEASE KEEP ALL DISCUSSION ON THE CONTEST OR ITS ENTRIES TO THE MAIN THREAD.
Any discussion must take place in the main thread. If you post anything other than a map entry (or a description accompanying a map entry) in this thread, you will be asked to delete the post.

Don't forget to vote on MotF 238!
 
indian civil war.png

India at Boiling Point: The Events Leading to the Indian Civil War
In 2040, India looked set to be the next global superpower. Many of its biggest rivals had succumbed to civil war: America in 2025, Russia in 2026, China in the early 2030s. However, there were troubles brewing in the subcontinent that would lead to India falling into the same fate.
Taliban Insurgencies in Pakistan
Having taken control of Afghanistan in 2024, the Taliban then set its sights on on the fellow Pashtuns of Pakistan. The former Federally Administered Tribal Areas (or FATA), now split between the Pashto-majority states of Pakhtunkhwa and Khorasan, provided manpower for the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (also known as the Pakistani Taliban), and the Taliban government provided guns and money. The Pakistani Taliban aimed to overthrow the Pakistani government, and as of June 2040, control several districts in the border areas, and conduct occasional terrorist attacks in major cities.
Disputes over Kashmir
Ever since Partition in 1947, Kashmir had always been a sour point between India and Pakistan. Both countries claimed all of the region, but each only controlled part: Pakistan controlled Gilgit, Baltistan, and Azad Kashmir (1 on map), while India controlled Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh (5). In addition, both claimed the uninhabited Siachen Glacier (3), but neither controlled it. India also claimed the Shaksgam Valley (2) and Aksai Chin (4, 6) from Uyghuristan and Tibet. Religion played a major part in the dispute: whilst all of Pakistani Kashmir was overwhelmingly Muslim, Indian Kashmir was more religiously divided. Kashmir proper was mostly Muslim, Jammu was more Hindu, and Ladakh was Buddhist. Given the religious disparities between Kashmir and the (mostly Hindu) rest of India, Kashmir has frequently tried to secede; however, this has backfired, resulting in crackdowns on religion and Kashmiri culture. In 2020, the state of Jammu and Kashmir (then including Ladakh) was dissolved and replaced by the two union territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Since then, Jammu has been intensely Hinduized, and in 2038 granted statehood. Many Muslims in Jammu and Kashmir were still bitter and would like to become independent or join Pakistan.
Workers' Strikes
India is a major source of cheap labor to the West, as large companies can take advantage of low wages to produce goods cheaply. However, not all workers were content with living in poverty. Across India, there have been many strikes and peaceful protests by workers calling for higher pay and better living conditions. In Jan 1 2040, workers in a factory in Moradabad, Paschim Pradesh, refused to work, demanding increased pay; their demands were accepted. This was followed by more strikes and protests around India, many unsuccessful. Many Indian workers awaited the day the Revolution will come; fortunately for them, that day came soon.
Bengali and Maldives Refugee Crises
Climate change, the invisible terror created by man and ignored for long, hit in the worst places. Bangladesh, being unfortunate enough to sit on the delta and floodplains of two major rivers, the Ganges and Brahmaputra, was one of the worst affected. Flooding has always been a frequent fact of life in Bangladesh, but the unpredictable side effects of global warming made floods more frequent, more severe and less predictable. In the Sundarbans, slowly rising sea levels have claimed some coastal settlements. With more and more people's houses being destroyed or rendered uninhabitable, many became displaced and had to flee elsewhere. Many settled in northern Bengal, the Brahmaputra Valley and Barak Valley to the east, and the Ganges Valley to the west. However, some states, such as Jharkhand and Assam, had become annoyed with the influx of Bengali refugees and wanted to enact anti-immigration laws to keep them out. Fortunately for the refugees, the Indian constitution prevented such laws. In response, those states considered secession from India to form their own country.
A similar situation occurred with the Maldives, which had many of its islands sink under the waves. In 2039, the remaining population of the archipelago voted overwhelmingly to be annexed into India. Many fled to India (primarily Kerala and Tamil Nadu) or Sri Lanka, and have formed sizable Dhivehi communities there.
 
India on the verge of a red-on-red civil war

w9zsF4o.png

The USPR has always had, among the various socialist states, a particularly diverse set of ideological variations, coexisting more-or-less peacefully in the country, working together under the guise of the Delhi-centric Politburo to establish a socialist economy from the feudal mess that India once was. Among the most prominent are the native Gandhian and Jinnahist variations of socialism, the mostly-principled and always-loyal opposition from the Leftists and Rightists (less different than you might imagine), the various proponents of a more federal system, popular among the more tribal regions and among more distinctive cultures in the country who are depreciatively known as "nationalists", although no genuine separatist is allowed anywhere near power nowadays, and, for some forsaken reason, even a few Trotskyist nuclei around some major cities and railways, who are mostly inoffensive anyway.

The Centralists, the Moscow-aligned and faithfully Stalinist line in Delhi, have allowed these oppositions to exist, unlike their own Moscow patrons, knowing full well they are weak enough not to present a genuine threat yet regionally strong enough to be too much of a bother to dislodge. This peace under the Centralists has existed for more than a decade now, but it seems that, after the latest reshuffling of Panchayat delegates, a change might be coming to Red India.

The problems started brewing due to a split in the Communist Party, that is, the breaking of one faction into two (both continuing to be members of the Communist Party, the only legal political party in the country), one that, interestingly enough, didn't even spring from Indian affairs, but rather, as a by-product of the increasingly hostile relation between Khrushchev's USSR, the traditional beacon for all world socialist movements, India's included, and Mao's PRC who, unlike its Soviet counterpart, rejected the denouncement of Stalin's legacy and the attempts at normalizing relations with the West, and criticized Khrushchev for revisionism and for collaborating with Western imperialism. This bitter split would, inevitably, reach the ranks of the Communist Party of India, as it found itself divided between the stalwart Centralists, defenders of the Moscow line at all times, and the newly-fledged Maoists, who turned to Mao Zedong as the new face of socialism in the Third World.

It went beyond that small political matter, of course. The split had deeper roots, based on differences of opinion between country and city (with many farmers, criticizing what they saw as Delhi focusing all efforts on cities, rather than in the agriculture regions of the country, siding with the Maoists who put greater emphasis on the revolutionary spirit of the Indian peasantry), opinions on the need for militancy (with the Maoists attracting many young Indians who were extremely energetic and warlike in the outlook towards society and the world) and even resentments towards the Centralist policy of making Hindi the language for running business in the government, while other languages struggled to be understood. Even without the Sino-Soviet split, the possibilities for internal struggle, between regions, between generations, between different political outlooks, would inevitably caught up with the Centralists and their ever-narrower popular appeal, as bureaucrats focused on responsible industrialization. India's first generation coming of age after the Revolution was growing up, and they were about to change everything.

The 1964 elections to the All-India Panchayat only confirmed what was already unavoidable: the Centralist faction, for the first time, did not hold the majority of districts, showing that plenty of regions around the country were displeased with their rule. Now, if this were a strict parliamentary democracy, that wouldn't be a problem in itself: the Centralists held a good plurality of the votes and could certainly work with other currents, further from the Maoists than from themselves even, to continue governing. But of course, autocracy can sometimes be more fickle, depending on the strength of your social basis to continue operating fine. And the Maoists happened to have a great deal of popularity among the youth and the youth happened to man the armies. Adding to that their support among the farmers of the country, and they had a power greater than their number of seats in the Panchayat. And, considering their love for militancy and action, it was quite clear that they would not restrain themselves to the bonds of legality and party unity for what they genuinely saw as a need to save the socialist world from a tide of revisionism stemming from Khrushchev all the way to their countries.

India was about to fall to one of the world's largest civil wars, after the Russian and Chinese ones. But this time, it wouldn't be a civil war between the forces of socialism and those of autocracy, or those of liberalism, but rather, a civil war between the forces of socialism and themselves.

_____________________________________________

So basically I wanted a intra-communist civil war. You know, since the left has that whole thing about splitting up and fighting itself more than others). And since India does happen to have, shall we say, a healthy tradition of political fragmentation to the left, I thought it would be an ideal candidate for this. And since I had already had an idea for a United Raj - turned red, I decided to apply it here (the idea is that the various islands were just kept by the British or British-aligned forces and are sort of Taiwans, although I didn't really figure that into the election results)

This was a fun map to work, if a bit of a workload. I know some of the borders are silly, but what's a good map without some quirky borders, eh?

Anyway, I hope you all enjoy this map, as always comments and questions are welcomed
 
MOTF 239 - The fall of Austria.png

A Protestant Habsburg: The various causes of the Austrian Wars of Religion
On June 20, 1530, an Imperial Diet was inaugurated at Augsburg by Emperor Charles V. He hoped to address several issues: First and foremost, defense against the Ottoman Empire, which had laid siege to Vienna the year before; and also the growing Protestant faith and how to reconcile the differences in faith between the peoples of the Empire.

Later that week, many of the German rulers presented to Charles V, and to the world in general, a document known as the Augsburg Confession. This was, and is, the main confession of faith for the Lutheran church. Charles strongly rejected it, but his younger brother Ferdinand was, perhaps, more swayed. Nobody knows exactly why, but eighteen months later, after being elected King of the Romans and Charles V's successor, Ferdinand announced that he had converted to the Lutheran faith - fully understanding, it seems, that it would almost certainly result in losing his chance at the throne of the Holy Roman Empire.

Charles V would indeed probably have disinherited his brother had the Emperor not died a few days later of smallpox.

Three main candidates for the Imperial throne emerged: Archduke Ferdinand, on the basis that he had, after all, been appointed as the successor the year before; Philip II of Spain, the five-year-old son of Charles V; and William IV, Duke of Bavaria, a cousin of the Emperor. The Duke of Bavaria was thought to be the most likely choice, because he was a reasonably powerful adult Catholic ruler within the Empire, and neither of the other choices had all of those distinctions. An election was set for later that year, but in the meantime, Austria was in shambles.

All over Austria Proper and Inner Austria, the Catholics and the Protestants would disagree on both the question of who was now Holy Roman Emperor and who was Archduke of Austria. It was clear to see that there would not be a peaceful solution to these debates.

In the west - Tyrol and Further Austria - Protestantism had not seen very much success. There were a few people who claimed to be descended from the independent Counts of Tyrol, whose branch had been thought to have gone extinct in 1496. The most popular of these was Frederick 'von Habsburg', a noble in Innsbruck with a previously unknown father who was quite popular with the nobility. He stood a good chance of securing the County for himself, but he was not without opposition. The Great Peasants' War had been fought seven years earlier, and its cause was far from extinguished. The problems with the government in Austria led to a resurgence in popular sentiment for its cause. In addition to the non-negligible armies of Archduke Ferdinand, there would also likely be peasants fighting for the County of Tyrol.

Suleiman the Magnificent had been in the process of gathering his army for another attack on Austria when Charles V died. The Ottoman army was nearly ready, and they would not miss this chance to seize control of Hungary. They began to march north the moment the news reached Edirne.

Austria would very shortly be defending itself an Ottoman invasion, a pretender in Tyrol, thousands of peasants revolting also in Tyrol, and fighting a war in the homeland to finally settle the question of religion in Austria. It's unclear what Ferdinand had expected when he announced his conversion, but it hadn't been this.

This is actually the first MotF that I have done, so feedback is very welcome.
My goal was to show an Austrian parallel to the French Wars of Religion about to happen, and a religious map seemed to work best. I was more focused on the scenario than the map, but I think it ended up okay after all. The scenario is also perhaps not the most realistic, but I think it's an interesting idea.
 
pgWCc7w.png

The War of the Three Suits

The term “War of the Three Suits'' refers to a period of Vandalic history lasting from roughly 1320 to 1359 marked by extended periods of civil conflict and rebellion. The period takes its name from the three suits of cards used in medieval Vandalia, being the swords, scythes and crosses (representing, in general, the nobility, the peasantry and merchants, and the Arian Chruch).

The Vandal Kingdom had existed for several centuries with a form of government that was, to some degree, unique. Though the country was ruled by a king, it had a Senate comprised of hereditary noble Judges who ruled territory and administered legal proceedings within, as well as the more local, democratic peasant and merchant Curadorias, which often held de facto control over the territory the Judges occupied. A result of this relative freedom would ultimately be the fact that attempts by successive Vandal monarchs to reign in the power of the Curadoria would see fierce opposition and rebellion, and while Vandal historiography - particularly Vandal historiography in the period 1897-1940 - often styles these conflicts as entirely driven by peasant and mercantile forces against oppressive nobility, there is ample proof that the Curadorias would often receive the support of their governing Judge, since any king willing to curtail the rights of the merchants and peasantry would invariably be willing to curtail the rights of the nobility as well. This does not, however, mean that there were no primarily peasant-driven rebellions, as Merra (1987) notes - though Tatanian’s Revolt had limited Judicial support, its eponymous leader was a farmer.

Beyond the realms of peasant uprisings, however, the Vandal kingdom had slowly witnessed the growth of two separate “parties” within the Judiciary. Pro-monarch sentiment was generally sufficient to see someone termed a “Sword”, while those who took a more lenient and laissez-faire approach to the power of the Curadorias were termed “Scythes”. It is unknown where this particular appellation originates, beyond its obvious connection to the card game - Müller (2005) highlights that references to the card game precede the Sword/Scythe dichotomy by about 30 years, so it can safely be said the card game came first; she also notes that the first proper usage of the terms “Swords” and “Scythes'' comes from the 1299 comedic work of fiction The Card Game, generally perceived as being a satire of the at the time ongoing Ilvan Revolt - the conflict between the two sides is depicted as being about as consequential and relevant as a card game.

Other than the developing Judicial power struggle, two other important factions existed in the Vandal kingdom at this time - the Fournierists and the Peregrines. The Vandal Fournierist movement was a direct result of Narbonnic influence on northern Corsica. Like other Fournierist movements, it rejected the established norms of the Arian Church in favor of an adoptionist perspective, i.e. that of God as one indivisible being and Jesus Christ merely having been “adopted” into godhood. At the time the primary secular proponent of this theology was Narbonne, in large part due to the faith’s origins within Narbonnic territory; it is no surprise then that its primary areas of settlement were either in rural areas or areas close to Narbonne’s outposts on Corsica. Although there had been a Fournierist uprising in the north of Sardinia before the War of the Three Suits, it had been easily crushed; though as with many Vandal peasant conflicts, it did not resolve fully due to the Sardinian terrain allowing for sufficient hiding spots (Merra 1987).

The Peregrines, meanwhile, originate with Arab mercenaries who fought for the Vandals during the attempted Sicilian invasion of Sardinia, and who were as a result allowed to settle in a section of south-eastern Sardinia known as the Ilxadió. The Ilxadió had been the site of one major rebellion against the Vandal monarchy already in an attempt to secure their freedom; despite a defeat on this front, the Perergines continued to side firmly with the Scythes out of pragmatic reasons.

All of these scenarios would have - and were - plenty of reasons for a major civil conflict, and the signs were clearly present in Vandal society at the time, as the repeated assassination of the Judges of Terraba showed. However, the immediate cause of the war would come on the 7th of February 1320, when following a meeting of the Vandal Senate the Scythe Judge Marku the Bald was murdered by Sword Judges in the Senate hall itself. The resulting outrage immediately caused a war to break out, not least worsened by major Fournierist uprisings across Corsica and central Sardinia - hence, the third suit, the Crosses. Numerous battles would be thought throughout the next almost four decades, and the War of the Three Suits remains notable as a civil war with a fundamentally naval character, with more than a third of all battles between the Swords and Scythes being fought at sea.

Though the war would end at the Slaughter of the Ghennarghentu in 1359, the results of the civil war had proven disastrous for the Vandal state. Most of Corsica had come under de facto Narbonnic influence and would be out of the control of the Vandal kingdom for some time - the southern, non-Fournierist sections of Corsica were rewarded back to the Vandals after the Council of Cartagena, while the northern sections would remain Narbonnic until that country’s defeat in the War of the Swabian Succession in 1793. The island of Ilva would remain de facto independent for several years after the end of the War, while the Peregrines would receive a considerable amount of autonomy in the Ilxadió.

Perhaps more importantly, however, the War of the Three Suits would become one of the defining historical events to the Vandal Republican movement. When the Vandal Revolution of 1867 overthrew the monarchy, the 7th of February would become known as the Day of Remembrance for the Martyrs of the Republican Cause, and the constitution of the Vandal Republic would be based on both the Curadoria system and a supposed Ghennarghentine Scythe manifesto dated to 1319, the authenticity of which has recently come under considerable more scrutiny following the opening of the Republican Archives in 2003 (Zhu 2014). This association with revolutionary republican fervor made the events of the War of the Three Suits almost toxic for foreign historians to handle, although this has died down somewhat - though Marku the Bald has since become a major figure in the Republican Canon as the Father of Resistance (Zhu 2014), the Day of Remembrance has since been retooled into a day of remembrance for all Vandal citizens killed in myriad conflicts across the globe, and a chance for the small country to showcase its pride in its peacekeeping abilities - as Prime Curator Pier Aramu noted in a 2010 speech, “the legacy of the War of the Three Suits is what drives us to aid wherever we can should such a conflict ever arise elsewhere.” (Zhu 2014).


It's been a while since I've done one of these but this felt like a subject i could actually make a map about! Decided to go for something that felt vaguely textbooky and probably one of my first attempts of trying one of those educational maps with maybe a few too many layers of what's going on. I'm aware this may be stretching the idea of a civil war just a little bit but I feel like there's enough here to consider it as such.
 
O8HFCkN.jpg


Krudain, this island was called. A land of primitives and savages, a hundred petty kings warring amongst themselves over the rotting corpse of a greater past. What was it good for but as a source of muddy wool and unreliable mercenaries? Such was the overriding view of Krudain over the past four centuries. Such was the overriding view of Krudain until sixty-two years ago.

Ozorkan. A giant of a man, literally and figuratively – a wiry, dark-eyed man of near six and a half feet tall. A prince of Mazur, that decadent and distant land where god-kings rule over fifteen million toiling subjects. Some say he was the rightful heir, unjustly usurped and forced to flee from the throne that was his right. According to others, he was that attempted usurper, his efforts foiled, running to the far end of the earth to escape the consequences of his own actions. It matters not. Ozorkan fled. He took his generals with him, and they took their armies with them.

They came to Krudain as an unrelenting tide, an unstoppable force. A horde of warriors, clad in iron, armed in iron, nothing to lose and everything to gain. How could the tribes and petty kingdoms of Krudain hope to stand against that? A king might field fifty good warriors, armed with rusting blades and armoured in scraps of leather. Against a force a hundred times his number and vastly better equipped, armoured and organised, he and his men were as good as dead already. There were confederations, towards the end: the combined manpower and effort of a multitude of kingdoms, enough to match the invaders in numbers and desperation, if nothing else. Even that, in the end, wasn't enough.

From what were once the domains of fifty kings, one king has ruled for the past half-century, and his name is Ozorkan.

It is a loose kingdom for sure. For the wretched peasants life is little different than it was before, still toiling in the mud, still struggling to scrape by as a local ruler takes the fruits of their labours as tribute. For that ruler, life's main change is that he is no longer sovereign of his own domain – he gives his own tribute to a domineering overlord, whose representatives arrive backed up by iron weapons and iron mail. Between these overlords – the generals who accompanied Ozorkan, or their descendants – the kingdom is carved up into several dominions, all running their own affairs and sending shipments of tribute to their king.

It cannot last, this stitched-up kingdom of blood and iron. A shaky agglomeration of tribute-takers, born from a violent horde of desperate men, united by nothing from a common sovereign. That it has lasted these sixty-two years at all is down to little but the sheer personal power of its long-lived ruler.

But Ozorkan is dying. Sixty-two years have passed since that great conquest, and now he is an aged and frail man well into his eighties, with no heir, no children, no designated successor at all. Soon enough he will die, and his vassals will be left with not even the slightest thread but for their shared heritage to unite them. Some will compete for the throne. Some will compete for independence. Some will take the opportunity to strike their rivals, and all will be forced to war against those vassals of theirs who see an opportunity to take back independence once again. The greatest kingdom Krudain has seen in centuries will descend into a civil war bloodier than even the conquest that created it – such is the fate that awaits this land but a few years from now at most.

With blood and iron this kingdom was forged, and with blood and iron this kingdom will collapse.
 
motf239.png

My entry. I'm including the text again below. The map was inspired by the thought of a slaveocratic US experiencing a revolt from Mexican states that created the Victoria 2 FSA. It is inspired to some degree by TFS (particularly in the fact that New England is independent and better off than the US) Ialso thank many people on discord for giving me ideas and assistance with this.

Less than a decade after the less northerly portions of the Thirteen Colonies achieved independence, the delegates of the constituent states of the United States assembled in Philadelphia to craft a new constitution for the loosely-federated nation. With only a few changes, the Constitutional Convention adopted the plan devised by the Virginian James Madison. Madison's Virginia Plan created two houses of Congress. The lower house, the House of Delegates, would be elected by the residents of each state, while the upper house, the Senate, would be elected by the Delegates from lists submitted by the states. The Senate would be responsible for the election of a National Executive. Rather than allocating Delegates to states by population, a complicated formula, known as the Contributory Quota, which took into account tax, military, and other contributions determined the number of Delegates assigned to each state.
Under the Madisonian Constitution, a strong central government emerged. Though Madison dreamed of a free and fair republic, the United States soon became an autocracy under the control of the planter class. States vied for control over the Executiveship so that they would come out on top after the next Contributory Quota was released. As the decades passed on, the Quota became increasingly unbalanced and worked in favor of Southern interests.
Though slavery appeared to be on the way out, the invention of the cotton gin breathed new life into the institution, and the Southern-dominated Congress approved wars of expansion and purchases to extend slavery across North America and into the Caribbean. These wars culminated with the Conquest of Mexico in 1853. Mexico, which equaled over a third of the pre-war US population, was put under the control of migrant American planters and the defunct institution of slavery was reintroduced. To keep control, Mexicans were disenfranchised by property requirements and poll taxes while the few free states were assessed low Contributory Quotas which gave them essentially no representation in Congress.
It is now 1877. A quarter century after the Conquest of Mexico, the United States is a republic in name only. In reality, it is a slaveocratic plutocracy with a political system ruled by the plantation-owners of Virginia and merchants of Baltimore and Biloxi. Though rumblings of discontent in Mexico are common, they have grown in intensity in the last few years. In the far south, the radical Delegate Santiago Benitez has advocated for revolt against the United States. Benitez's Septemberist Party has gained significant support across the Spanish-speaking states and it is only a matter of time before the Mexican powderkeg explodes.
 
Last edited:
Top