I wouldn't characterize Reagan as a hawk, really. Compare him to Nixon or HW Bush-or Dubya for that matter-he's arguably the last dovish Republican President.
New Deal Coalition Retained: A Sixth Party System Wikibox Timeline
There was a limit to what he could do directly, given the Cold War was at its height at the time.
Bookmark1995
Banned
Remains to be seen.
Khrushchev was deposed by conservative Soviets.
If Semichastny is deposed, and replaced with a hardliner, a lot of those gains could be undone, and the Russian citizen would go back to waiting in line for bread.
@Bookmark1995
Semichastny's already stepped down, so it'd be his successor getting tossed out if that happened.
Also I don't think there's been mention of economic reforms so I think the return of bread lines, if they aren't still happening, is inevitable.
Semichastny's already stepped down, so it'd be his successor getting tossed out if that happened.
Also I don't think there's been mention of economic reforms so I think the return of bread lines, if they aren't still happening, is inevitable.
The Soviet Empire being larger has eased some of the economic hardship through increased trade. Grain shortages are mitigated by shipments from Argentina, which helps. But the underlying problems are still there, yes
Bookmark1995
Banned
Sorry, forgot about that part. If those structural problems are still there, then the inevitable geopolitical event is still upon is, even if has been delay by some geopolitical victories.
I'm not ruling out a Gorbachev figure gaining power
The future of the USSR will really depend on what they intend to do next. Stopping expansion now is a very good move, even from a pragmatic point of view, as they have already taken a lot of the low hanging fruits. It's time to consolidate. But they have to be careful. A hasty try to democratize or open the economy could cause a coup or a collapse similar to OTL. And as we can see with insight, it created a Russia open to the worst of both systems.
But military detente is good. It improves world stability, but also helps their economy and gives more attention to doing things right internally. If they're careful, we could see a reformation without it collapsing completely. I could see the moderates arguing for a more democratic state, simply because the people are more likely to be on their side.
It would be interesting to see how the USSR would react to a less bellicose communist uprising somewhere else. Have they completely given up on helping potential communists, even when they're opposing regimes the US would have a harder time defending in public? Will their views of "divergent" communist regimes change too?
But military detente is good. It improves world stability, but also helps their economy and gives more attention to doing things right internally. If they're careful, we could see a reformation without it collapsing completely. I could see the moderates arguing for a more democratic state, simply because the people are more likely to be on their side.
It would be interesting to see how the USSR would react to a less bellicose communist uprising somewhere else. Have they completely given up on helping potential communists, even when they're opposing regimes the US would have a harder time defending in public? Will their views of "divergent" communist regimes change too?
It's already mentioned in the Semichastny wikibox that the Soviets collapsed in 1991.
Argentina, Nigeria, and East Germany are currently the most hardline of the Communist governments. China under Jiang Qing is very pragmatic in its foreign policy, and I'm not ruling out some kind of outreach to the PRC
Afghanistan had begun to modernize under Zahir Shah, though so far this was confined to Kabul.
Meh. The countryside was as conservative as ever.
And it's true in stable third-world countries such as India.
It really shouldn't be seen as something special. It's just something that happens in the cities when countries go from poor to less poor.
Well we know the Taliban won't exist (though another group like them might pop up).